DERR-2024-012272

The business of sustainability

Final OU-1 Baseline Human
Health Risk Assessment
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1,
Rowley, Utah

April 2022
Project No.: 0508502

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
Signature Page

28 April 2022

Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk
Assessment

US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah

David Abranovic, P.E.
Project Coordinator

Judy Nedoff
Human Health Risk Assessment Leader

ERM-West, Inc.
7272 E Indian School Road
Suite 108
Scottsdale, AZ 85251

© Copyright 2022 by The ERM International Group Limited and/or its affiliates (“ERM”).
All Rights Reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form,
or by any means, without the prior written permission of ERM

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page i
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 1
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 6
1.1 Site Description and Background .......................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Overview of the Risk Assessment Approach ........................................................................................ 8
1.3 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................ 8
2. DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION ........................................................... 9
2.1 Data Collection ..................................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Data Quality Evaluation ...................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.1 Analytical Sensitivity .......................................................................................................... 11
2.2.2 Accuracy of Analytical Data ............................................................................................... 11
2.2.3 Representativeness ........................................................................................................... 12
2.2.4 Completeness .................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.5 Preliminary Data Adequacy Evaluation .............................................................................. 12
2.3 Development of 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxic Equivalent and Total PCBs ...................................................... 13
2.4 Dataset Selection ................................................................................................................................ 13
2.4.1 Air ...................................................................................................................................... 13
2.4.2 Solids ................................................................................................................................. 13
2.4.3 Plant Tissue Data ............................................................................................................... 17
2.4.4 Surface Water .................................................................................................................... 17
2.4.5 Background Data ............................................................................................................... 18
3. CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN SELECTION AND REFINEMENT ........................ 19
3.1 Initial COPC Selection ........................................................................................................................ 19
3.2 Refinement of COPC Selection and Datasets .................................................................................... 19
4. EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................ 22
4.1 Environmental Setting ......................................................................................................................... 22
4.1.1 Geology and Soils .............................................................................................................. 22
4.1.2 Hydrology ........................................................................................................................... 22
4.1.3 Land Use and Condition .................................................................................................... 24
4.2 Conceptual Site Model ........................................................................................................................ 24
4.3 Human Receptors of Concern ............................................................................................................ 25
4.4 Human Health Exposure Parameters ................................................................................................. 26
4.5 Determination of Representative Exposure Concentrations ............................................................... 27
4.5.1 Exposure Point Concentrations for Ambient Air ................................................................. 27
4.5.2 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids .......................................................................... 27
4.5.3 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water............................................................. 27
4.5.4 Exposure Point Concentrations for Plant Tissue and Game .............................................. 28
4.5.5 Exposure Point Concentrations for Soil Particulates from Mechanical Disturbance .......... 28
4.6 Dose Estimation .................................................................................................................................. 29
5. HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY ASSESSMENT ................................................................................. 30
5.1 Toxicity Values for Dermal Exposure .................................................................................................. 30
5.2 Evaluation of Dioxins/Furans .............................................................................................................. 30
5.3 Application of Chromium Toxicity Values ............................................................................................ 30
6. RISK CHARACTERIZATION ........................................................................................................... 31

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page ii
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
6.1 Overview of Risk Characterization ...................................................................................................... 32
6.2 USM Worker Risk Characterization .................................................................................................... 32
6.2.1 PRI 1 – Ditches .................................................................................................................. 32
6.2.2 PRI 2 – Landfill................................................................................................................... 32
6.2.3 Cumulative Risk Characterization for USM Worker ........................................................... 32
6.2.4 Groundwater Risk Characterization for Worker ................................................................. 33
6.3 Nearby Worker Risk Characterization ................................................................................................. 34
6.4 Resource Manager Risk Characterization .......................................................................................... 35
6.5 Brine Shrimp Worker .......................................................................................................................... 35
6.6 Recreational Visitor Risk Characterization .......................................................................................... 35
6.7 Rancher Risk Characterization ........................................................................................................... 36
6.8 Risk Characterization Summary ......................................................................................................... 36
6.8.1 Noncancer Risks ................................................................................................................ 36
6.8.2 Cancer Risks ..................................................................................................................... 36
6.8.3 Hypothetical Future Risk for the Worker from Groundwater Ingestion ............................... 36
7. UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................. 37
7.1 Uncertainty in Environmental Sampling and Analyses ........................................................................ 37
7.1.1 Data Quality and Usability .................................................................................................. 37
7.1.2 Data Representativeness ................................................................................................... 37
7.2 Uncertainty in Fate-and-Transport Modeling ....................................................................................... 38
7.3 Uncertainty in Exposure Assessment ................................................................................................. 38
7.3.1 Uncertainties in Selection of Exposure Factors ................................................................. 38
7.3.2 Exposure Concentrations ................................................................................................... 40
7.4 Uncertainty in Toxicity Assessment .................................................................................................... 43
7.4.1 TEQ Toxicity Values .......................................................................................................... 43
7.4.2 PCB Toxicity Values .......................................................................................................... 44
7.4.3 Chromium Toxicity Values ................................................................................................. 44
7.5 Summary of Uncertainty Analysis ....................................................................................................... 45
8. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................................................... 47
8.1 Noncancer Risk Summary .................................................................................................................. 47
8.2 Cancer Risk Summary ........................................................................................................................ 47
8.2.1 USM Worker ...................................................................................................................... 47
8.2.2 Nearby Worker ................................................................................................................... 47
8.2.3 Brine Shrimp Worker .......................................................................................................... 47
8.3 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................ 48
9. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................. 49

FIGURES
TABLES
APPENDIX A BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT TECHNICAL
MEMORANDUM
APPENDIX B GROUNDWATER BHHRA
APPENDIX C BHHRA DATA TABLES (EXCLUDING GROUNDWATER)
APPENDIX D COPC REFINEMENT (EXCLUDING GROUNDWATER)

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page iii
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
APPENDIX E FINAL DATASETS FOR BHHRA (EXCLUDING GROUNDWATER)
APPENDIX F PROUCL OUTPUTS AND EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONS
(EXCLUDING GROUNDWATER)
APPENDIX G RISK CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX H RESPONSES TO AGENCY COMMENTS

List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Site Location Map
Figure 1-2 Revised Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
Figure 2-1 Ambient Air Phase 1A Sampling Locations
Figure 2-2 PRIs 2 and 3 Sampling Locations
Figure 2-3 PRIs 4, 5, and 6 Sampling Locations
Figure 2-4 PRI 7 Sampling Locations
Figure 2-5 PRIs 8 and 10 Sampling Locations
Figure 2-6 PRI 9 Sampling Locations
Figure 2-7 PRIs 11 and 12 Sampling Locations
Figure 2-8 PRI 13 Sampling Locations
Figure 2-9 PRI 14 Sampling Locations
Figure 2-10 PRI 15 Sampling Locations
Figure 2-11 PRI 16 Sampling Locations
Figure 3-1 COPC Refinement Steps
Figure 4-1 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure, USM Worker
Figure 4-2 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure, Workers at Nearby Facilities
Figure 4-3 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure, Resource Managers
Figure 4-4 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure, Brine Shrimp Workers
Figure 4-5 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure, Recreational Visitors
Figure 4-6 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure, Ranchers
Figure 6-1 Mammalian TEQ Point Concentrations for PRI 13

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page iv
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Summary of Analyses in BHHRA - Air
Table 2-2 Summary of Analyses in BHHRA - Solids, Surface Water, Groundwater, and Tissue
Table 2-3 Samples Collected in Each PRI Area by Matrix and RI Phase
Table 2-4 PRI 8 Dataset Selection for BHHRA
Table 3-1 Summary of COPCs – Solids
Table 4-1 Receptor and Exposure Pathway Matrix by PRI
Table 4-2 Receptor Exposure Parameters, USM Worker
Table 4-3 Receptor Exposure Parameters, Nearby Worker
Table 4-4 Receptor Exposure Parameters, Resource Manager
Table 4-5 Receptor Exposure Parameters, Brine Shrimp Worker
Table 4-6 Receptor Exposure Parameters, Recreational Visitor Adult
Table 4-7 Receptor Exposure Parameters, Recreational Visitor Child 0-6
Table 4-8 Receptor Exposure Parameters, Recreational Visitor Child 6-16
Table 4-9 Receptor Exposure Parameters, Rancher
Table 4-10 Table Notes and References for Tables 4-2 to 4-9
Table 4-11 Site-wide Air Exposure Point Concentrations
Table 4-12 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 2
Table 4-13 Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 3
Table 4-14 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 4
Table 4-15 Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 4
Table 4-16 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 5
Table 4-17 Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 5
Table 4-18 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 6
Table 4-19 Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 6
Table 4-20 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 7
Table 4-21 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 8
Table 4-22 Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 8
Table 4-23 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 9
Table 4-24 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 10
Table 4-25 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 11
Table 4-26 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 12
Table 4-27 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 13

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page v
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
Table 4-28 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 14
Table 4-29 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 15
Table 4-30 Plant Tissue Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 15
Table 4-31 Solids Exposure Point Concentrations – PRI 16
Table 4-32 Background – Upland Exposure Point Concentrations
Table 4-33 Background – Lakebed Exposure Point Concentrations
Table 4-34 Particulate Emission Factors for Construction Scenario
Table 4-35 Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Notes
Table 4-36 Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Assumptions and Equations
Table 4-37 Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
Table 5-1 Summary of Toxicity Data for Constituents of Potential Concern (All Media)
Table 6-1 Summary of Risk Assessment Results
Table 6-2 Pathway Specific Summary of Hazard Indices and Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risks for
PRI 2
Table 6-3 Cumulative Risk Calculations – USM Worker
Table 6-4 Pathway Specific Summary of Hazard Indices and Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risks for
PRI 12 - Nearby Worker
Table 6-5 Pathway-Specific Details of Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risks for PRI 13 Brine Shrimp
Worker
Table 7-1 Toxic Equivalence Exposure Point Concentration Comparison
Table 7-2 Comparison of USM Worker ILCRs using 100% and 38% TEQ Relative Bioavailability
Table 7-3 Surface and Subsurface Samples Comparison
Table 7-4 Comparison of ILCRs for PRI 13 Brine Shrimp Worker and PRI 12 Nearby Worker
Assuming 10 Percent Hexavalent Chromium in Solids

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page vi
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
Acronyms and Abbreviations
95UCL 95 percent upper confidence limit on the mean
µg/L Micrograms per liter
µg/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter
ADC Average daily concentration
ADD Average daily dose
AOC Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent
ATI ATI Titanium, LLC
ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
BERA Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment
bgs Below ground surface
BHHRA Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
BRA Baseline Risk Assessment
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
COPC Constituent of potential concern
COPEC Constituent of potential ecological concern
Cr(III) Trivalent chromium
Cr(VI) Hexavalent chromium
CSM Conceptual site model
CTE Central tendency exposure
CWP Current Waste Pond
DL Detection limit
DLC Dioxin-like compound
DMA Demonstration of Method Applicability
ED Exposure duration
EPC Exposure point concentration
ERM ERM-West, Inc.
FAQ Frequently Asked Questions
FS Feasibility study
GSL Great Salt Lake
GSLIC Great Salt Lake Intake Canal
HCB Hexachlorobenzene

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page vii
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
HE Human Exposure
HHRAP Human Health Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities
HI Hazard index
kg Kilogram
ILCR Incremental lifetime cancer risk
IRIS Integrated Risk Information System
ITER International Toxicity Estimates for Risk Assessment
IUR Inhalation unit risk
LADC Lifetime average daily concentration
LADD Lifetime average daily dose
LAZ Lower aquifer zone
MDL Method detection limit
mg/kg Milligrams per kilogram
mg/kg-d Milligrams per kilogram per day
mg/L Milligrams per liter
MRL Method reporting limit
ND Nondetect
ng/m3 Nanograms per cubic meter
NTP National Toxicity Program
OCDD Octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
OCDF Octachlorodibenzofuran
OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
OU Operable Unit
OWP Old Waste Pond
PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
PCB Polychlorinated biphenyl
PCDD Polychlorinated dibenzodioxins
PCDF Polychlorinated dibenzofurans
pg/g Picograms per gram
PM10 Particulate material less than 10 micrometers in diameter
PRI Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RAGS Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund
RBA Relative bioavailability

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page viii
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
RBSL Risk-based screening level
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RfC Reference concentration
RfD Reference dose
RI Remedial investigation
RME Reasonable maximum exposure
RSL Regional Screening Level
RWP Retrofitted waste pond
SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan
SFO Slope factor, oral
SLRA Screening-Level Risk Assessment
SVDD Skull Valley Diversion Ditch
SVOC Semivolatile organic compound
TCDD 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TDS Total dissolved solids
TEF Toxic equivalency factor
TEQ Toxic equivalence
TM Technical Memorandum
TSP Total suspended particulates
UAZ Upper aquifer zone
UCL Upper confidence limit
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USM US Magnesium LLC
VOC Volatile organic compound

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 1
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Site Overview
US Magnesium LLC (USM) operates a large commercial facility in Rowley, Tooele County, Utah, adjacent
to the shore of the Great Salt Lake. The Site is located in the Lakeside Valley, a north-south-trending
valley bordered by the Great Salt Lake to the east and the Lakeside Mountains to the west. The facility
produces magnesium and magnesium alloys by purifying magnesium from water from the Great Salt
Lake. The facility includes solar evaporation ponds used to concentrate the water, a series of process
buildings where magnesium purification and production occurs, and a number of disposal areas where
solid or liquid wastes are stored.
The USM facility is currently active and the land is zoned as industrial. Land surrounding the facility
includes public areas managed by the United States Bureau of Land Management, the Great Salt Lake
lakebed managed by the State of Utah, and private ranch land and other industrial facilities. The
foreseeable future uses do not include residential land use; rather, continued industrial, commercial,
and/or recreational uses are projected.
Basis for Concern
Processes at the facility release a number of chemicals into the environment. This includes chlorine,
hydrochloric acid, polychlorinated dioxins and furans, polychlorinated biphenyls, a range of other
chlorinated organic chemicals, and some metals and other inorganics. If people come into contact with
these chemicals in the environment in areas around the Site, the chemicals have the potential to cause
adverse cancer and/or noncancer health effects, depending on the level and duration of exposure.
Because of the concern for potential health effects in people exposed at the Site, the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and USM have performed a Remedial Investigation to collect
data to characterize the nature and extent of environmental contamination around the Site. The USEPA
defined the Study Area for the Remedial Investigation as the area within a 5-mile radius centered on
USM’s main stack. The active USM facility itself is not included in the investigation because it is overseen
by other USEPA programs and government agencies.
USEPA divided the Remedial Investigation Study Area into 18 Preliminary Remedial Investigation (PRI)
Areas. PRIs 1 through 12 are located in and around the industrial facility, and represent discrete waste
disposal areas or adjacent industrial facilities. PRIs 13 through 16 are large non-industrial “buffer areas”
that surround the inner industrial zone. These PRI Areas are shown on Figure 1-2. PRI 17 is defined as
Site waters, and PRI 18 is defined as ambient air.
Purpose and Scope of this Document
This document is a Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment (BHHRA) that characterizes the nature and
likelihood of adverse health effects that may occur in people who are exposed to chemicals released from
the Site into the environment. This information is used by risk managers to determine if any actions are
needed to protect people from adverse health effects of these chemicals.
This BHHRA evaluates the potential for adverse effects in humans from all Site-related chemicals except
for chlorine and hydrochloric acid in air. The potential adverse effects from these two chemicals are
evaluated in a separate risk assessment (ERM 2022).

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 2
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Risk Assessment Approach
The risk assessment was performed in general accord with standard methods and procedures that have
been developed by USEPA for human health risk assessment. Each of the main steps in the risk
assessment procedure at this Site is summarized below.
Site Characterization
This step consisted of collection of numerous samples of Site media (soil, sediment, surface water,
groundwater, and air) at various locations around the Site and at background locations, followed by
chemical analysis of the samples.
All sampling activities were carefully planned and documented in Quality Assurance Project Plans to
ensure the samples would be representative and the data would be reliable and adequate. Each Project
Plan specified the types, number, and locations of samples to be collected; the chemicals to be analyzed;
the required sensitivity for each analysis; and the steps taken to allow evaluation of the data quality. Most
of the samples of soil, sediment, or water at this Site are high in salts, and many of the water samples are
acidic (conditions that can reduce the sensitivity of some laboratory analytical methods); thus, studies
were conducted prior to sampling and analysis activities to optimize analytical methods and to reduce
matrix interference where possible.
Most samples were analyzed for a wide range of different types of chemicals to ensure that any
chemicals released into the environment by the facility would be identified. After chemical analyses were
complete, all results were validated to ensure that any results that were unreliable were identified. The
majority of data collected (ranging from 96 to 99 percent of the data collected in each medium) were
deemed to be reliable and suitable for use in the BHHRA. All data that were rejected during validation
were excluded from use.
COPC Selection
Not all chemicals that are detected in Site samples are necessarily of concern to human health. In order
to focus attention on the chemicals that might be of concern, the data were reviewed to identify a subset
of chemicals referred to as Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs). The COPCs selection process was
intentionally conservative, so that all chemicals that could be of concern were selected, but most
chemicals that are clearly not of concern were eliminated.
Exposure Assessment
In this step, people who may be exposed in the Study Area were identified, and pathways by which they
may be exposed to COPCs in Site media were listed. Next, the amount of chemical exposure was
calculated for each group of people for each exposure pathway at each exposure location.
Exposed People
Based on current and potential future land use at and near the Site, groups of people (“receptors”) most
likely to be exposed include:
 USM Workers: This group includes workers at the USM facility. They are primarily exposed to Site
solids, surface water, and air that occur in solid and liquid waste disposal areas near the production
facility.
 Nearby Workers: Workers at facilities in PRIs 11 and 12, including workers employed at the ATI
Titanium, LLC, facility (now closed) and Hill Brothers Chemical, exposed to off-Site surface solids
and air.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 3
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 Resource Managers: This group includes state and federal land managers, including wildlife and
environmental workers from agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management, Utah State (natural
resource workers), United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and others. They are generally exposed
in undeveloped areas away from the active production facility, but may also visit areas of PRI 8.
 Brine Shrimp Harvesters: This group includes seasonal workers who harvest brine shrimp from the
Great Salt Lake and the Great Salt Lake Intake Canal. These workers are present during the harvest
season (October thru January). Most camp near the shore of the lake, generally in the northeast
sector of the Site.
 Recreational Visitors: This group includes area residents who may visit the federal and state lands
neighboring the facility for activities such as bird watching, hiking, all-terrain vehicle riding, hunting,
and other activities.
 Ranchers: These individuals manage cattle that graze on lands neighboring the USM facility.
Exposure Pathways
Each group of receptors may be exposed to COPCs by one or more pathways, as follows:
 Incidental Ingestion of Soil or Sediment. Most people do not intentionally ingest soil or sediment, but
small amounts may be ingested due mainly to hand-to-mouth contact. This pathway applies to all
receptor groups in all PRI Areas.
 Dermal Contact with Soil or Sediment. Most people working or recreating in a PRI Area are likely to
get soil or sediment on exposed skin, and some COPCs in the soil can be absorbed across the skin
into the body. This pathway applies to all receptor groups in all PRIs.
 Inhalation of COPCs Released from the Facility into Air. Some COPCs are released into air thru the
main stack at the facility. This pathway applies to all receptor groups in all PRI Areas.
 Inhalation of Particles Released from Soil into Air by Machines. Heavy machinery activity in a PRI
Area can release dust into the air, and this can be inhaled by the machine operator. This pathway
applies to USM Workers in PRI Areas where heavy machinery is used. In addition, truck and other
vehicle traffic on unpaved roads can release dust into air in the non-industrial PRI Areas, which may
affect receptors in buffer areas.
 Dermal Contact with Surface Water. Surface water is not present in all PRI Areas. However, when it
does exist, workers may occasionally get surface water on their skin or clothing, and COPCs in the
water can be absorbed across the skin into the body. This pathway applies to USM Workers.
Ingestion of surface water is not thought to occur.
 Ingestion of Game. Game animals such as deer and chukar that live around the Site may take up
COPCs by ingesting soil or vegetation, and hunters who harvest game animals near the Site may be
exposed when eating the meat. This pathway applies only to hunters.
 Hypothetical Future Ingestion of Groundwater. Groundwater beneath the Site contains high levels of
dissolved minerals, and is not suitable for use as drinking water. Consequently, it is not a source of
exposure for any population under current conditions. While not expected, it is plausible that in the
future, the water might be desalinated in order to create a source of drinking water. For this BHHRA,
it was assumed that this water would only be used by workers.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 4
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Exposure Estimation
The amount of exposure to each COPC in each medium requires information on a number of factors,
including a) the concentration of the COPC in the medium, b) the amount of contact between the receptor
and the medium, and c) the amount of chemical absorbed into the body.
Calculation of Exposure Concentrations
The amount of exposure due to contact with a COPC in an environmental medium depends on the
average concentration of the COPC in the area where exposure is occurring. Because the true average
(or mean) concentration in an area cannot be known with certainty from a limited number of samples,
USEPA uses the 95 percent upper confidence limit on the mean (95UCL) for each COPC to help ensure
that risks will not be underestimated. If the data are insufficient to compute a 95UCL, the maximum
detected value is used.
All calculations of exposure concentrations for soil, sediment, water, and ambient air were based on the
data collected during the Remedial Investigation. Exposure to soil, sediment, or surface water was
evaluated on a PRI-by-PRI basis. Exposure to ambient air assumed exposure concentrations were similar
on a Site-wide basis. Concentrations in air due to mechanical disturbance of dust and concentrations in
game tissue were not measured directly, but were estimated from the Site data using mathematical
models. Hypothetical future exposure to groundwater was evaluated on a well-by-well basis.
Dioxins, furans, and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls were not evaluated individually, but were
combined into a single value referred to as the dioxin Toxic Equivalence (TEQ).
Human Contact Factors
A survey of Site workers and other groups of exposed people was conducted to help establish how often
and how long people in each receptor group are present in various PRI Areas, and what media (soil,
sediment, surface water) they have contact with. To the extent possible, the survey gathered responses
directly from representatives of each receptor group. When this was not possible, information was
collected from other sources such as job descriptions, hunting license data, grazing permit information, or
from State workers familiar with brine shrimp harvester activity patterns. Where Site-specific information
was unavailable, USEPA default values or best professional judgement was used.
For each group of receptors, there is normally substantial variation in exposure patterns between different
individuals in the group. For this reason, two sets of human exposure factors were developed:
 Central Tendency Exposure (CTE) factors describe exposure that is typical or average for individuals
in the group
 Reasonable Maximum Exposure (RME) describes the exposure of individuals who are near the high
end of the exposure range for the group
COPC Absorption
The relative bioavailability (RBA) of a COPC affects the amount of COPC that is absorbed when soil is
ingested. To be conservative, the RBA was assumed to be 100 percent for all COPCs except arsenic. An
RBA of 60 percent for arsenic was used, as recommended by USEPA.
Toxicity Assessment
In this step, data are collected on the nature of the adverse effects each COPC can cause in humans,
and how the occurrence of those effects depends on the level of exposure. Most of these toxicity values
used in this BHHRA were developed by scientists at USEPA, and are available in a database that is

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 5
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

updated each year. When USEPA has not developed toxicity factors for a COPC, values proposed by
California Environmental Protection Agency or other agencies were used, in accord with the hierarchy
established by USEPA.
Risk Characterization
In this step, estimates of human exposure are combined with the toxicity data for each COPC to identify
the likelihood of cancer and/or noncancer effects in the exposed people.
For noncancer adverse health effects, risk is characterized using a Hazard Quotient (HQ), which is the
ratio of the dose at the Site divided by a dose that is safe. If exposure occurs to more than one COPC or
by more than one pathway, HQ values are summed to obtain a Hazard Index (HI). If the HI value is less
than 1, that indicates noncancer effects are not of concern. If the HI exceeds 1, noncancer effects may
occur, with the likelihood and/or severity tending to increase as the value of the HI increases.
For cancer effects, risk is characterized as the probability that exposure will result in occurrence of cancer
in an exposed person. Total cancer risk is calculated by summing across all carcinogenic COPCs and all
pathways. USEPA usually considers that action to protect humans is needed when the total cancer risk
for an RME receptor reaches or exceeds 1 in 10,000 (1 × 10-4).
Risk results for the USM Site are summarized below.
 Noncancer HI values are less than 1 for all receptor groups in all PRI Areas. The HI values for four
scenarios estimating cumulative exposure for USM Workers visiting several PRI Areas are 1 or less.
This indicates that noncancer effects are not of significant concern for any of the exposure scenarios
evaluated.
 Total cancer risks are below 1 in 10,000 (1 × 10-4) for all receptor groups in all PRI Areas, including
cumulative ILCRs for USM Workers. Most risks are below 1 in 100,000 (1 × 10-5), and many are
below 1 in 1,000,000 (1 × 10-6).
Uncertainties
There are often a number of steps in the risk assessment process where uncertainty is present. This
includes uncertainty in exposure assessment, toxicity assessment, and risk characterization. A review of
each of the major sources of uncertainty in this BHHRA indicates that none of the uncertainties
encountered are likely to result in an important underestimation of risk, and the majority are likely to result
in an overestimation of risk. This is especially true for risks from TEQ, which is the main risk driver at the
Site. The uncertainty review concluded that the findings of this BHHRA are more likely to be high than
low, and that the findings are adequate to support reliable and informed decision-making by risk
managers.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 6
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
INTRODUCTION
1. INTRODUCTION
US Magnesium LLC (USM) operates a commercial facility in Rowley, Tooele County, Utah, that produces
magnesium and magnesium alloys, as well as chlorine gas (Figure 1-1). On 4 August 2011, an
Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent (AOC) for a remedial investigation (RI) and
feasibility study (FS) was entered into by USM and the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) Region 8. The AOC (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
Docket No. CERCLA-08-2011-0013) requires USM to complete an RI/FS for the USM Site (Site) and
defines the roles, responsibilities, schedule, and administration of the RI/FS to be performed. ERM-West,
Inc. (ERM) has been retained by USM to perform RI/FS services at the Site.
1.1 Site Description and Background
The Site surrounds the active primary magnesium production facility, which has been in operation since
1972. Magnesium is refined from brine obtained from the Great Salt Lake (GSL). The facility includes
employee offices, process buildings, and ancillary structures and facilities. Surrounding the process
buildings are a series of evaporation ponds, a concentrator pond, a landfill, and smut and calcium sulfate
(gypsum) disposal areas. A series of earthen, open-air ditches formerly conveyed liquid waste from the
process facility to earthen wastewater evaporation ponds. These ditches have been mostly filled in during
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) closure activities at the Site. An engineered disposal
site for cast house residues containing barium sulfate, and an inactive wastewater evaporation pond are
located northwest and northeast of the facility, respectively. During 2020, USM constructed and began
operation of its lithium production facility that processes electrolytic cell salt (“smut”) to produce lithium
carbonate product.
The investigation history for the Site dates back to 1969 and the early 1970s, when investigations were
conducted to collect geotechnical data for facility design and to evaluate regional groundwater conditions.
Between 1972 and 2001, there were several investigations performed by National Lead, AMAX, and
MagCorp (previous owners of the facility); USEPA; and the Utah Division of Air Quality; which included
collection of samples from process streams and wastes, solids, and sediment for analysis of
contaminants including hexachlorobenzene (HCB) and other semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs),
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans (PCDDs/PCDFs),
metals, and/or volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Between 2001 and 2006, multiple investigations were
performed by USEPA and USM in association with an RCRA complaint filed by the United States
Department of Justice on behalf of USEPA.
The AOC defines the roles, responsibilities, schedule, and administration of the RI/FS to be performed.
For project planning purposes, the RI/FS Study Area (Site) was defined in the AOC as the area within a
5-mile radius centered on USM’s main stack, excluding the majority of USM production facilities. The
RI/FS Study Area is located in the Lakeside Valley, a north-south-trending valley bordered by the GSL
and solar evaporation ponds to the east and the Lakeside Mountains to the west. Note that the RI/FS
Study Area encompasses the active magnesium production facility, but the active magnesium production
facility is not included in the RI/FS.
For planning purposes, the USEPA originally divided the Site into 18 Preliminary Remedial Investigation
(PRI) Areas, with PRI Area 18 (PRI 18) being ambient air. The Site was subsequently divided into two
Operable Units (OUs), each covering a 5-mile radius from the main magnesium production facility.
Operable Unit 1 (OU-1) is composed of 17 PRI Areas that include areas of solids, sediment, groundwater/
surface water, and wastewater that may be affected by waste streams. Operable Unit 2 (OU-2, formerly
PRI 18) was designated by USEPA to include ambient air. Chlorine and hydrogen chloride were
designated a priori as constituents of potential concern (COPCs) to be evaluated in a standalone Human
Health and Ecological Baseline Risk Assessment. The USEPA also stipulated that due to the similar risk

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 7
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
INTRODUCTION
assessment methods, and to evaluate cumulative risk from exposure to all Site media in the Baseline
Human Health Risk Assessment (BHHRA), stack and fugitive emissions of air toxicants that were
determined to be COPCs (excluding chlorine and hydrogen chloride) would be included in the OU-1
BHHRA exposure and risk evaluation1. Evaluation of chlorine and hydrogen chloride gas stack emissions
is included in the Final Combined OU-2 Problem Formulation and Human Health and Ecological Risk
Assessment for Chlorine and Hydrogen Chloride in Air (OU-2 BRA, ERM 2022).
PRIs 1 through 17 are listed below, and PRIs 1 through 16 are shown on Figure 1-2.
 PRI 1: Ditches
 PRI 2: Landfill
 PRI 3: Sanitary Lagoon
 PRI 4: Gypsum Pile
 PRI 5: Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon (Current Waste Pond [CWP])
 PRI 6: Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon (CWP)
 PRI 7: Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon (Old Waste Pond [OWP])
 PRI 8: Northwest Lagoon Overflow
 PRI 9: Smut Area
 PRI 10: Barium Sulfate Disposal Area
 PRI 11: ATI Titanium, LLC (ATI) and USM Parking Lots
 PRI 12: Ancillary Worker Exposure Area
 PRI 13: Buffer Area Northeast
 PRI 14: Buffer Area Southeast
 PRI 15: Buffer Area Alluvial Upland
 PRI 16: Buffer Area Lakeside Mountains
 PRI 17: Site-Wide Surface Water and Groundwater
Pursuant to Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Quality Ground Water
Discharge Permit No. UGW450012, effective 19 December 2018; and the Consent Decree (Case
No. 2:01CV0040B) lodged by the United States in the United States District Court, District of Utah on
19 January 2021 and entered by the Court on 30 June 2021 (the “Effective Date”); PRIs 5, 6, and 7 will
be merged to create a retrofitted waste pond (RWP). The RWP will receive the current wastewater stream
that includes wastewater from the new lithium facility constructed to re-process smut material in PRI 9.
The projected final elevation of wastewater within the RWP has been evaluated as part of the engineering
design process. Based on the dynamic water balance modeling, little of the upland area currently present
in PRI 5 and PRI 6 will remain due to operation of the RWP, but actual water levels and the extent of
sediment inundation are not known with certainty, and are expected to vary as a function of both weather
conditions and USM facility production rates.

1 The decision to include exposure to air COPCs other than chloride and hydrogen chloride gas is documented in a memo dated
12 April 2018 from ERM to USEPA (ERM 2018a).

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 8
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
INTRODUCTION
1.2 Overview of the Risk Assessment Approach
The risk assessment process is used to systematically evaluate and organize data, assumptions, and
uncertainties to help understand the magnitude of risk at a site, and the primary causes of that risk, and
contributes to the subsequent development, evaluation, and selection of appropriate response
alternatives (USEPA 1989). This BHHRA, in support of the USM RI/FS, is consistent with USEPA and
State of Utah guidance, and the AOC (USEPA 2011a).
Consistent with guidance (USEPA 1989, 2001a), a phased risk assessment process was employed, as
described in Attachment 5 to the cover letter accompanying the Phase 1A Sampling and Analysis Plan
(SAP; USEPA 2013). As described in the Final Screening Level Risk Assessment Technical
Memorandum (SLRA TM, ERM 2014b), the phased approach from the Phase 1A SAP was simplified,
with the Final OU-1 Screening-Level Risk Assessment Report (OU-1 SLRA, ERM 2017b) and Final
Operable Unit 2 Screening-level Risk Assessment Report (OU-2 SLRA, ERM 2017d) combining for the
first phase of the risk assessment. These reports document the initial selection of COPCs and supported
development of the scope of subsequent investigations and/or risk assessment efforts, as described in
the SLRA TM. This BHHRA includes a refinement of COPC selection and evaluation of risk to on- and off-
Site receptors. The BHHRA methodology is described in the Revised Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health
Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum (ERM 2019).
1.3 Purpose
The purpose of the BHHRA is to evaluate the potential for adverse human health impacts that may occur
as a result of potential exposures to concentrations of COPCs in Site solids (including wastes, soil, and
sediments); surface water; groundwater; and air. To this end, the BHHRA presents the selected COPCs
and results of the COPC refinement, evaluates risk from exposure of receptors to COPCs in Site media,
and includes a discussion of the uncertainty associated with the methods and results. The BHHRA
evaluates average or central tendency exposure (CTE) and reasonable maximum exposure (RME) for
current land use conditions and reasonable future land use conditions, which are assumed to be
consistent with current conditions.
The BHHRA is structured as follows:
 Section 1 – Introduction
 Section 2 – Data Collection, Evaluation, and Preparation
 Section 3 – Constituents of Potential Concern Selection and Refinement
 Section 4 – Exposure Assessment
 Section 5 – Human Health Toxicity Assessment
 Section 6 – Risk Characterization
 Section 7 – Uncertainty Analysis
 Section 8 – Summary of Findings
 Section 9 – References
Figures, tables, and appendices follow the report text.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 9
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
2. DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
Data used in the BHHRA were collected during several phases of the RI. Collection, evaluation, and
preparation of the data for risk assessment are summarized in this section. Although Site-wide surface
water and groundwater were originally designated collectively as PRI 17, surface water risk is evaluated
within each PRI Area according to the PRI-specific exposure, and hypothetical future groundwater
exposure is evaluated on a well-by-well basis in Appendix B. Site-wide ambient air COPCs selected in the
Final Operable Unit 2 Screening-level Risk Assessment Report (ERM 2017d) are evaluated in this
BHHRA. Human health risk from chlorine and hydrochloride gases are evaluated in a separate risk
assessment (ERM 2022). Most of the wastewater ditches that made up PRI 1 were filled and capped in
2020 as part of the required projects completed pursuant to the RCRA AOC (USEPA 2016a) and are
therefore not evaluated quantitatively in this BHHRA. Similarly, solids in PRI 3 have been addressed
under the RCRA AOC, and only surface water and ambient air exposures are quantitatively evaluated for
PRI 3.
2.1 Data Collection
The primary objective of data collection at the Site is to develop a dataset of sufficient quality and quantity
to adequately evaluate the potential adverse health impacts of Site-related contaminants on human
receptors who may be exposed within the Study Area. In order to help ensure that data would be
adequate for this purpose, all data collection efforts were carefully planned in accordance with USEPA’s
Quality Assurance Project Plans guidance (USEPA 2001c, 2005c). Each Project Plan included a detailed
list of the data quality objectives, estimated the number of samples needed to meet those objectives,
specified the sampling locations to ensure representativeness, and identified the analytical methods and
target detection limits. Most samples were analyzed for a very wide range of potential contaminants,
including volatile organics, semi-volatile organics (including dioxins, furans, and PCBs), metals, and other
inorganics. In addition, each Project Plan specified a number of steps to collect data needed to evaluate
the quality of the data. Once a sampling and analysis project was completed, a detailed report was
prepared that summarized what was done, presented the data, and performed a data quality evaluation.
These reports are described below.
 Draft Phase 1A Laboratory Demonstration of Method Applicability Technical Memorandum for Solids,
Sediment, Waste, and Water (ERM 2013a). This investigation included collection of data from
selected PRIs (1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 14, and 15). Only solids data from the Demonstration of Method
Applicability (DMA) are included in the BHHRA. Surface water data from this study will not be used
because those data are superseded by the more comprehensive data collected in the Phase 1A and
Phase 2B investigations.
 Final Phase 1A Data Report for PRIs 2 and 8 through 17 (ERM 2016a). This investigation included
collection of solids, surface water, and groundwater data from PRIs 2 and 8 through 17 during 2013
and 2014. Surface water data were collected from PRIs 1 and 3 through 7 during 2013, 2014, and
2015. These include areas that may be affected by waste streams and air emissions from the USM
facility and/or secondary releases. Data for solids, surface water, and groundwater from Phase 1A
are included in the BHHRA.
 Final Phase 1A-B Remedial Investigation Data Report (ERM 2016c). This investigation included
collection of solids data from PRIs 1 and 3 through 7 during 2015, including areas known to have
directly received waste streams from the USM facility and where existing data indicated high
chemical concentrations. In addition, background samples for preliminary organic COPCs
(dioxins/furans, HCB, and PCBs) and metals were collected from reference areas.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 10
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
 Final Phase 1A Data Report for Operable Unit 2 – Air (ERM 2016b). This investigation included
collection of air data from three monitoring locations for selection of COPCs in air. Constituents
tested included dioxins/furans, PCBs, SVOCs, VOCs, metals, and particulates. Each sample was
collected over a duration of 3 days.
 Final Phase 2A Representative Prey Investigation Data Report (ERM 2018b). This investigation was
conducted in 2016 primarily to support the baseline ecological risk assessment. Solids data collected
in the Study Area are included in the BHHRA dataset. Plant tissue data from samples collected in
PRI 15 are used for modeling game meat concentrations, as detailed in Section 4.4.4 of the Revised
Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum [BHHRA TM] in
Appendix A.
 Draft Phase 2B Hydro Data Remedial Investigation Report (ERM 2020a). Surface water and
groundwater samples were collected quarterly for four quarters from 2018 to 2019 for the Phase 2B
Hydro RI. An objective of the Phase 2B Hydro RI was to spatially and temporally characterize the
nature and extent of constituents of potential ecological concern (COPECs) in groundwater in the
upper aquifer zone (UAZ) and lower aquifer zone (LAZ) and in surface water from groundwater
discharges and discharges/releases of facility wastewater. Because the analyte lists were based on
COPECs, not all COPCs were analyzed in Phase 2B; however, the main COPCs (those that tend to
contribute the most to risk) were analyzed, and the data are included in the BHHRA.
 Draft Phase 1A-B SAP Modifications Data Report (ERM 2020b). Solids samples were collected from
various PRI Areas in 2019 and 2020 under a series of Phase 1A-B RI SAP Modifications. These
Phase 1A-B SAP Modifications included:
 SAP Modification 4, which included collection of solids in PRIs 5, 7, and 14 to characterize
concentrations of COPECs, main COPCs, and waste thickness and in PRI 8 to evaluate whether
wastewater releases that occurred after the 2014 Phase 1A RI sampling have resulted in
significantly changed concentrations of COPECs and main COPCs. These samples are included
in the BHHRA.
 SAP Modification 5, which included collection of solids in PRIs 8, 13, and 14 to fill data gaps for
the Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment (BERA) and provide preliminary nature and extent
information for the RI. As in SAP Modification 4, analyses were selected based on COPECs,
which also captured the main COPCs. The majority of these samples were included in the
BHHRA. Samples from the Skull Valley Diversion Ditch (SVDD) were not included based on the
results of the Human Exposure (HE) Survey (ERM 2015a), in which no receptors reported direct
contact with the SVDD.
 SAP Modifications 6 and 7, which included collection of surface solids/sediment/solid waste
samples in PRI 8 to evaluate changed conditions resulting from the placement of gypsum
material in PRI 8 to construct truck turnarounds or as a result of inundation of the area by
wastewater releases that occurred after the Phase 1A sampling. PRI 8 COPCs and COPECs
were analyzed in samples collected for SAP Modifications 6 and 7. The list of samples from PRI
8 that are included in the BHHRA are detailed in Section 2.4.2.9.
Analyses conducted in each phase of the RI that were included in the OU-1 BHHRA are presented in
Tables 2-1 (air) and 2-2 (solids, surface water, and groundwater).
2.2 Data Quality Evaluation
Methods for evaluation of data quality are described in the SAPs for each phase of data collection:

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 11
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
 Remedial Investigation Sampling and Analysis Plan to Identify Chemicals of Potential Concern in
Soils, Sediment, Solid Waste, Water and Air, and Receptor Surveys (USEPA )
 Phase 1A-B Remedial Investigation Sampling Plan for: 1) Chemicals of Potential Concern in Soil,
Sediment, and Solid Wastes in PRI Areas 1 and 3 through 7; 2) Preliminary Site Characterization
Mapping of PRI Areas 1 and 3 through 7; and 3) Background Chemical Assessment of Biotic
Reference Areas for Sitewide Ecological Risk Assessment (ERM 2015b)
 Final Phase 2A Remedial Investigation Quality Assurance Project Plan: Representative Prey
Investigation (ERM 2017a)
 Phase 2B Hydrologic Remedial Investigation Sampling and Analysis Plan (ERM 2018c)
Data collected at the Site were subject to third-party validation, and data validation reports are included in
an appendix to each data report. A data quality evaluation is provided in each data report that includes a
review and summary of the precision, accuracy, representativeness, completeness, and comparability of
the results. Data usability is evaluated through review of the method quality objectives specified in
Worksheets #11 and #37 of the applicable SAPs for data collected since 2012. The majority of data
collected (from 96 to 99 percent of the data collected in each RI phase) were deemed usable in the
BHHRA. Any data that were rejected (R qualifier applied at validation) were excluded from the dataset.
2.2.1 Analytical Sensitivity
To improve sensitivity of the selected analytical methods, a DMA was performed for solids and surface
water (ERM 2013a) and for air (ERM 2014a) because Site matrices are typically acidic and high in salts.
During preparation of each SAP, a target quantitation limit was selected for each constituent. These
target quantitation limits were risk-based screening levels (RBSLs) selected from the USEPA Regional
Screening Levels (RSLs) available at the time. Analytical methods were selected that had the best
chance of detecting analytes if the sample concentration approached or exceeded the RBSL.
The RBSLs were compared to the laboratory’s expected method reporting limit (MRL) and method
detection limit (MDL) for each constituent in each matrix. In general, the laboratory expected to meet the
RBSL with the MDL (if not the MRL) in undiluted samples with minimal matrix interference. Although
adjustments made by the laboratories based on the DMAs improved sensitivity, some sample MRLs
(which reflect sample-specific adjustments) were greater than RBSLs. As noted, sample concentrations
were reported to the MDL, and any detected concentrations greater than the MDL were included in the
datasets. In most cases, the MDL met the associated RBSL.
Constituents that were never detected, but with MDLs exceeding the RBSLs, were not carried through the
risk assessment.
Some constituents were analyzed and reported by more than one analytical method in the same sample.
If the analyte was detected by both methods, the result from the method with the lower MDL was used. If
the analyte was detected by one method, but not detected by the other, the detected result was used. If
the analyte was not detected by either method, the lower MDL of the two results was used.
2.2.2 Accuracy of Analytical Data
The accuracy of analytical data was assessed through analysis of laboratory control samples and Site
matrix spike samples. Field and laboratory blank samples were also evaluated for the presence of target
constituents that interfered with sample results. Measurement quality objectives for accuracy in each SAP
were used to evaluate results during data validation. Few data points were rejected based on accuracy
measurement quality objectives. Sample concentrations were reported to the MDL by the analytical

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 12
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
laboratory; results qualified as estimated (J-qualified) by the laboratory, because the concentration was
less than the reporting limit, but equal to or greater than the MDL, were included in BHHRA datasets.
2.2.3 Representativeness
Representative data were obtained by the following means:
 Collecting samples at the locations specified in the SAP or, when necessary, at modified locations
that were approved by the USEPA
 Analyzing samples by the analytical methods specified in the SAP
 Collecting and handling samples to avoid interference and minimize contamination
 Analysis of field blank quality control samples (equipment blanks and trip blanks) and laboratory
blanks to verify the absence of contaminants
 Consistent application of established field and laboratory Standard Operating Procedures
Locations for solids and surface water samples were preferentially chosen using a systematic (grid)
sampling design to ensure that the PRI Area is fully and uniformly represented by the set of samples
collected. In addition, judgmental samples were placed at known features in some PRI Areas in Phase 1A
and 1A-B to support COPC selection and preliminary characterizations of nature and extent. If field
conditions mandated that a planned solids, surface water, or groundwater sampling location be changed,
a SAP modification was prepared for USEPA review and approval prior to sample collection at the
alternate location. Air sampling stations were intentionally located to capture high-biased concentrations
within the study area. Some groundwater monitoring wells were present before the RI. Locations of
additional wells and piezometers installed during Phase 2B were selected to enhance characterization of
upgradient, cross-gradient, and Site groundwater quality.
2.2.4 Completeness
Completeness criteria were established for solids and air data in the Phase 1A SAP (USEPA 2013). The
method for evaluation of whether the dataset was adequate to assess risk to Site receptors depends on
the sample medium. For ambient air data, a set of conditions described in the Phase 1A SAP were met
and adequate data were obtained. Details are provided in the Final Phase 1A Data Report for Operable
Unit 2 – Air (ERM 2016b). At least 14 solids samples were collected from each PRI Area, which is the
minimum number needed to provide adequate data for risk assessment, as determined in the Phase 1A
SAP. A greater number of solids samples were collected from several PRI Areas. For surface water and
groundwater, the Phase 1A SAP evaluation concluded that up to 30 samples of each matrix were needed
for risk assessment, because of the greater potential variability across the Site in these media. One or
more samples were collected from more than 30 surface water locations during the RI investigation. One
or more groundwater samples were collected from 43 monitoring wells and piezometers in the UAZ and
eight wells and piezometers in the LAZ in Phase 1A and Phase 2B.
2.2.5 Preliminary Data Adequacy Evaluation
Even if all data quality objectives are achieved in a dataset, there is still a small chance that the data
might not yield risk calculations that are adequate to support confident risk management decision-making.
Conversely, even if some data quality objectives are not met, the data may still be adequate for decision-
making. Consequently, as a final check, the data were used to perform an initial set of risk calculations
using the methods and procedures detailed below in Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6. The results were examined
to identify any cases where risk estimates for major risk drivers were close to typical decision thresholds,
a situation that often indicates more data might be needed. In most cases, the Phase 1A and Phase 1A-B

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 13
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
data were adequate, but it was judged that additional surface water and groundwater data were needed,
as well as some additional solids sampling in areas of contamination that had not been anticipated. Once
the additional sampling was completed, the data were judged to be adequate to support risk calculations
that would support confident risk management decision-making.
2.3 Development of 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxic Equivalent and Total PCBs
For all matrices, risks from dioxins/furans and coplanar PCB congeners reported in each sample are
evaluated as the 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) toxic equivalence (TEQ). The TEQ is
developed by multiplying an individual toxic equivalency factor (TEF) with the concentration of each
2,3,7,8-substituted dioxin/furan and coplanar PCB congener in a sample and summing the results. TEFs
are estimates of the toxicity of dioxin-like compounds relative to the toxicity of 2,3,7,8-TCDD, which is
assigned a TEF of 1.0. For human health risk assessment, mammalian TEFs (from USEPA 2010) are
used. TEQs are calculated two ways: substituting zero for nondetected congeners [TEQ (ND=0)] and
substituting one-half the detection limit [TEQ (ND=1/2)]. In this risk assessment, the term “TEQ” refers to
the 2,3,7,8-TCDD TEQ developed by substituting one-half the detection limit for all nondetected
congeners.
PCBs are also evaluated as Total PCBs, as summed by the analytical laboratory. These methods of data
preparation are consistent with other uses of the data for the Site.
2.4 Dataset Selection
The samples collected for each matrix in each RI phase are summarized in Table 2-3. For each matrix,
data were collected during one or more phases of data collection in the RI. Field and laboratory duplicate
sample results were used for quality assurance purposes, but were not used in risk calculations.
Although Site-wide surface water and groundwater were originally designated collectively as PRI 17,
surface water risk is evaluated within each PRI Area according to the PRI-specific exposure, and
hypothetical future groundwater exposure is evaluated on a well-by-well basis in Appendix B. Most of the
wastewater ditches that made up PRI 1 were filled and capped in 2020 as part of the RCRA activities
occurring under the RCRA AOC (USEPA 2016a) and are, therefore, not evaluated quantitatively in this
BHHRA. Similarly, solids in PRI 3 have been addressed under the RCRA AOC, and only surface water
and ambient air exposures are quantitatively evaluated for PRI 3.
2.4.1 Air
The locations of the sampling stations are shown on Figure 2-1. A summary of the air data used in the
BHHRA is provided in Appendix C. Ambient air data from the Phase 1A Air Data Report (ERM 2016b) are
included in the BHHRA for evaluation of exposure to ambient air. Field duplicates were not included in the
dataset.
2.4.2 Solids
Sample locations are shown on Figures 2-2 through 2-11. Data included in the dataset for each PRI Area
are detailed below. Data summary tables for solids in each PRI Area are provided in Appendix C. Solids
data used in the BHHRA included surface samples collected at a depth of 0 to 6 inches below ground
surface (bgs), inclusive of samples collected to shallower final depths. Field duplicates and solids
samples collected deeper than 6 inches bgs are not included in the dataset.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 14
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
2.4.2.1 PRI 1 – Ditches
The Western Ditch historically received non-contact cooling water and water from the cast house that was
not acidic — however, there was some backflow of acidic water into the Western Ditch from the Main
Ditch. The other wastewater ditches (Central Ditch, Chlorine Ditch, and Main [combined flow] Ditch)
historically received acidic wastewater. A total of 14 sediment samples were collected from PRI 1 (ERM
2016c). The ditches have been closed and capped as per the RCRA AOC (USEPA 2016a), except for the
distal eastern portion of the Main Ditch, so most of these samples are no longer representative of current
exposure conditions. A short section of the Main Ditch continues to convey wastewater to PRI 5, and
three samples from this segment remain uncapped with potential for receptors to be exposed.
2.4.2.2 PRI 2 – Landfill
The landfill is operated under a Tooele County permit and reportedly receives solid wastes including cell
rebuild debris (refractory, salts, graphite, magnesium, and castable ceramics); packaging; metal parts;
and solid waste (rubbish) from USM facility operations. No hazardous or special wastes have reportedly
been disposed at the landfill. The landfill includes a designated area, including required signage, which
historically received asbestos waste. Waste is placed on the working bench of the landfill. Soil cover
materials, including dried-granular gypsum, are applied as needed. The cover material on exposed
working faces is subject to wind dispersal. The landfill disposal area extends from the area immediately
east of the closed Chlorine Ditch, and now is encroaching on the western edge of the Southwest Ponded
Waste Lagoon (PRI 5).
Samples collected in PRI 2 during Phase 1A are included in the BHHRA (Figure 2-2). Additional samples
were not collected from PRI 2 in later phases of the RI.
2.4.2.3 PRI 3 – Sanitary Lagoon
The Sanitary Lagoon area occupies approximately 2 acres. The Sanitary Lagoon received sanitary
wastewater from USM facility operations following treatment by a bacteriological process. Dredged spoils
from ditch maintenance historically washed into the sanitary lagoon. It has steep sidewalls and a flat
bottom. Solids samples from PRI 3 are not included in the BHHRA because the exposure pathway is no
longer complete following PRI 3 being refurbished per the RCRA AOC (USEPA 2016a).
2.4.2.4 PRI 4 – Gypsum Pile
The gypsum pile receives slurry from the USM facility that consists of (1) calcium sulfate (gypsum)
derived from the desulfation process, where sulfate is removed as gypsum solids (CaSO4) from the
concentrated brine via addition of calcium chloride solution; (2) the unreacted calcium carbonate and
other solids from calcium chloride production; and (3) raw USM facility water. The current footprint of the
gypsum pile has expanded to within the footprint of the Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon (PRI 6). The
boundary between PRI 4 and PRI 6 varies over time due to fluctuating water levels in the pond and the
increasing size of the gypsum pile.
Samples collected from PRI 4 during the Phase 1A DMA, Phase 1A-B, and Phase 2A are included in the
BHHRA (Figure 2-3).
2.4.2.5 PRI 5 – Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon (Current Waste Pond)
The Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon (PRI 5, also referred to as the CWP) is an active wastewater
impoundment that receives acidic process wastewater via the wastewater collection and conveyance pipe
system installed in 2019 to replace the wastewater ditch system and has a surface connection to PRI 6.
The CWP was constructed in 1986 by enhancing an existing mudflat area to the west of the OWP

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 15
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
(PRI 7). The continuously ponded area within PRI 5 (and PRI 6) and wastewater depths within PRI 5 (and
PRI 6) have increased in recent years, due to variable wastewater discharges resulting from
increased/decreased magnesium production, variability in precipitation, variability in seasonal evaporation
rates, and a reduction in overall wastewater pond capacity due to gypsum in-filling of the PRI 6 lagoon.
These changes have been accompanied by acid dissolution of oolitic sand substrate within the waste
lagoons. Wastewater from the PRI 5 lagoon has intermittently discharged to the OWP (PRI 7) through the
formation of sinkholes and preferential flow paths through the berm separating PRIs 5 and 7. An overflow
pipe with an invert elevation of 4,214 feet above mean sea level was installed in November 2018 to
facilitate controlled discharges of wastewater from the CWP to the OWP.
Solids samples collected in PRI 5 during the Phase 1A DMA, Phase 1A-B and Phase 1A-B SAP
Modification 4, and Phase 2A are included in the BHHRA (Figure 2-3).
2.4.2.6 PRI 6 – Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon (Current Waste Pond)
The Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon (PRI 6, also referred to as the CWP) is an active wastewater
impoundment that receives acidic process wastewater via the Main Ditch and circum-neutral wastewater
from gypsum slurry seepage from the gypsum pile (PRI 4) and has a surface connection to PRI 5. As
described above for PRI 5, the continuously ponded area and wastewater depths within PRI 6 have also
generally increased in recent years. Wastewater from the PRI 6 lagoon has intermittently discharged to
Northwest Lagoon Overflow Area (PRI 8) through the formation of sinkholes and preferential flow paths
through the berm separating PRIs 6 and 8.
Solids samples collected in PRI 6 during the Phase 1A DMA, Phase 1A-B, and Phase 2A are included in
the BHHRA (Figure 2-3).
2.4.2.7 PRI 7 – Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon (Old Waste Pond)
PRI 7 is the former wastewater disposal pond, also referred to as the OWP. It is approximately 800 acres
in size and was constructed shortly after the initial construction of the USM facility in the early 1970s. In
1984, it was flooded by the GSL and closed to discharges. Currently, the OWP seasonally has standing
water during winter and springtime due to accumulated precipitation and groundwater discharge.
Groundwater seepage into the pond occurs at multiple locations along the southeastern edge of the pond
adjacent to the berm separating the CWP and OWP. The OWP receives controlled discharge of acidic
wastewater from the CWP through the overflow pipe constructed in November 2018 (see
Section 2.4.2.5).
Solids samples collected in PRI 7 during the Phase 1A DMA, Phase 1A-B and Phase 1A-B SAP
Modification 4, and Phase 2A are included in the BHHRA (Figure 2-4).
2.4.2.8 PRI 8 – Northwest Lagoon Overflow
PRI 8 is north of the Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon (PRI 6) and borders the eastern and northern
sides of PRI 10 (Barium Sulfate Area). Acidic wastewater (pH less than 1 based on Phase 1A data and
subsequent observations) from PRI 6 formerly flowed into PRI 8 on limited occasions, prior to the
installation of the overflow pipe from the CWP to the OWP. The surface water feature in a former barrow
area north of the new berm (referred to as the "angel wing") is assumed to experience similar conditions
as water features south of the berm since the angel wing area has been occasionally flooded by acidic
wastewater, which migrates beneath the new northwest berm. This migration no longer occurs due to
installation of the overflow pipe. Sample locations included in the dataset are shown on Figure 2-5.
Solids samples were collected from PRI 8 during Phase 1A in 2013 and 2014 and during Phase 2A in
2016. However, a portion of PRI 8 was inundated by wastewater overflow during the winters of 2015/16

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 16
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
and 2016/17, so solid samples from the inundated area are not considered to be representative of current
conditions and are excluded from the data used in the risk calculations. To account for this change in
conditions, several of the Phase 1A locations in the area of inundation were resampled during the Phase
1A-B SAP Modifications 4, 5, and 6/7, and some new locations were sampled because some previous
sampling locations were inaccessible due to the inundation. In addition, samples were collected from
locations where truck turnaround extensions to the PRI 6 embankment had been constructed of gypsum
and then removed. Table 2-2 provides a list of samples collected in PRI 8 during all phases and indicates
which samples are included and which are excluded from the BHHRA PRI 8 dataset.
2.4.2.9 PRI 9 – Smut Area
Smut Piles are where electrolytic cell salt and salts that settle to the bottoms of the melt/reactor cells are
stockpiled. The southern portion of the Smut Area is an “older” stockpile area where smut is more
weathered.
Solids samples collected in PRI 9 during the Phase 1A DMA and Phase 1A are included in the BHHRA
(Figure 2-6).
2.4.2.10 PRI 10 – Barium Sulfate Disposal Area
Waste disposed of at the Barium Sulfate Disposal Area (PRI 10) is cast-house residue from historical use
of a barium-containing flux during casting. The Barium Sulfate Area is a permitted, closed repository
where process material containing barium was treated and disposed of during the early 1990s.
Engineered earthen disposal cells were constructed to contain waste material containing barium. The
waste was flooded with brine (which contains high concentrations of sulfate) to immobilize any barium
present by conversion to insoluble barium sulfate. After treatment, the cells were capped with 3 feet of
soil.
PRI 10 sample locations are shown on Figure 2-5. Solids samples were collected during Phase 1A, and
are included in the BHHRA. No additional samples were collected in subsequent RI phases.
2.4.2.11 PRIs 11 and 12 – ATI and USM Parking Lots, and Ancillary Worker Exposure
Area
The ATI and USM Parking Lots (PRI 11) occupy a large area southwest of the USM facility. The Ancillary
Worker Exposure Area (PRI 12) includes the Hill Brothers Chemical Plant south of the USM facility, as
well as an area adjacent to and southeast of the USM facility that appears largely unused.
Sample locations are shown on Figure 2-7. Solids samples were collected in PRIs 11 and 12 during
Phase 1A. These samples are included in the BHHRA. No additional samples were collected from these
PRI Areas in subsequent RI phases.
2.4.2.12 PRI 13 – Buffer Area Northeast
This PRI Area is situated in the bed of the GSL to the north and east of the OWP and to the north of the
north dike of the USM solar evaporation ponds. The GSL Intake Canal (GSLIC) runs through PRI 13 and
supplies brine from GSL to the USM solar evaporation ponds.
Shoreline area samples were collected from PRI 13 during Phase 1A. Samples were collected from the
GSLIC during Phase 2A and Phase 1A-B SAP Modification 5 (Figure 2-8). All sample locations are near
the PRI 7 berm, and these areas are more likely to be impacted by Site operations than the rest of
PRI 13. Concentrations of some COPCs are noticeably higher in many GSLIC samples compared to the
shoreline samples. Three samples (IC-6, IC-7, and IC-8) were collected from a small historical borrow
area adjacent to the GSLIC. In discussions with the agency team and USM, it was determined that it is

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 17
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
unlikely that receptors in PRI 13 would enter this area. These samples were therefore not included in the
PRI 13 dataset.
2.4.2.13 PRI 14 – Buffer Area Southeast
Buffer Area Southeast (PRI 14) is situated in the bed of the GSL and associated shore and berm areas to
the south of the CWP and OWP and south of the north dike of the USM solar evaporation Pond 1 North.
PRI 14 includes a portion of Solar Evaporation Pond 1 North and a former solar evaporation pond
(sometimes referred to as "Pond 1 West"), which received wastewater discharges between 1984 and
1985. A groundwater seepage area is present at the north edge of Pond 1 West.
Samples were collected from PRI 14 during the Phase 1A DMA, Phase 1A, Phase 2A, and Phase 1A-B
SAP Modifications 4 and 5 (Figure 2-9). The majority of Phase 1A samples were collected within or
adjacent to Solar Pond 1 West. The Phase 1A RI sample design (ERM 2013b) for PRI 14 included a grid
pattern that “was restricted to areas relatively close to the waste impoundments, based on the
expectation that concentration levels would likely be higher nearer the impoundments than at distances
farther removed.” Additional sampling was conducted in Phase 1A-B SAP Modifications 4 and 5 to
determine the extent of the impact of Pond 1 West. The majority of the samples were collected within a
small portion of PRI 14, mostly near PRI 5 and the Solar Pond 1 West. Therefore, there is likely bias in
the dataset toward higher concentrations. A few samples were collected in the PRI 14 canals during the
Phase 1A-B SAP Modifications; however, no contact with the canals was reported during the HE Survey,
and the canal samples are not included in the dataset. The rest of the PRI 14 samples were retained for
use in the PRI 14 calculations.
2.4.2.14 PRI 15 – Buffer Area Alluvial Upland
Buffer Area Alluvial Upland includes the alluvial upland or grassland from the bed of the GSL to the
Tooele County Road along the foot of the Lakeside Mountains west of the Site.
Samples were collected from PRI 15 during the Phase 1A DMA, Phase 1A, and Phase 2A (Figure 2-10),
and all are retained for use in the PRI 15 calculations.
2.4.2.15 PRI 16 – Buffer Area Lakeside Mountains
Buffer Area Lakeside Mountains include the foothills and Lakeside Mountains west of the Tooele County
Road.
Solids samples collected in PRI 16 during Phase 1A are included in the BHHRA (Figure 2-11). All of
these are used in the PRI 16 calculations.
2.4.3 Plant Tissue Data
Six plant tissue samples were collected in PRI 15 during Phase 2A. Concentrations of bioaccumulative
COPCs (TEQ, PCBs, HCB, and mercury) in these plant tissue samples were used to develop exposure
point concentrations (EPCs) for use in the modeling of game tissue concentrations in the PRI Areas
where hunting is a potential recreational activity (PRIs 14, 15, and 16). Plant tissue sample locations are
shown on Figure 2-10. A plant tissue data summary table is provided in Appendix C.
2.4.4 Surface Water
Surface water data used in the BHHRA were collected during Phase 1A and Phase 2B. PRI-specific data
were used in the risk calculations. Surface water (wastewater) that formerly flowed through the ditches to
PRI 5 is now conveyed in a High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) pipeline. PRI 3 is used as an infiltration
basin for sanitary wastewater from the USM facility. PRI 4 surface water is the discharge from the slurry

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 18
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND PREPARATION
line. The CWP (PRIs 5 and 6), OWP (PRI 7), and Northwest Lagoon Overflow (PRI 8) receive USM
facility wastewater. Surface water sample locations included in the datasets for PRIs 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8
(where there is potential receptor exposure) are shown on Figures 2-2, 2-3, and 2-5. Data summary
tables for surface water in each PRI Area are provided in Appendix C.
2.4.5 Background Data
Understanding the background concentrations of inorganic and organic COPCs in the Upland and
Lakebed areas helps interpret the risk estimates developed for the Site. Solids samples were collected
from reference areas for analysis of dioxins/furans, PCBs, HCB, and metals during Phase 1A-B and
summarized in the Phase 1A-B Data Report (ERM 2016c). The Phase 1A-B reference area sample
results for COPCs were incorporated into background datasets representative of Upland and Lakebed
exposure units. In order to ensure that the samples collected from upland and lakebed areas that were
judged to be suitable for background had not been significantly impacted by Site-related releases, an
outlier analysis and a “fingerprint” analysis were performed. The outlier analysis identified one sample
(LBSE-07) that appeared to be clearly higher than others for levels of several organic contaminants (TEQ,
HCB, PCBs). Consequently, all results from this sample were excluded. In the fingerprint analysis, the
congener pattern of dioxins, furans, and PCBs in candidate background samples was compared to Site
samples (ERM 2016c). This analysis revealed the presence of elevated levels of octachlorodibenzofuran
(OCDF) and PCB-109, which are chemical markers of Site-related releases. However, the magnitude of
the impact on TEQ and total PCBs was small, so it was determined that any potential overestimation of
background levels would not significantly influence risk characterization and that the samples could be
used in the risk assessment (USEPA 2019).
The Upland exposure unit is representative of PRIs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, and 16; the
Lakebed exposure unit is associated with PRIs 7, 13, and 14. The data incorporated into the Upland and
Lakebed background datasets are summarized in Appendix C.
Site-specific background data are not available for surface water, and offsite ambient air data were not
collected during the RI. Based on a search of existing data sources, other applicable ambient air data
collected in the vicinity of USM were not found.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 19
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN SELECTION AND
REFINEMENT
3. CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN SELECTION AND
REFINEMENT
Typically, not all contaminants present at a site pose health risks or contribute significantly to overall site
risks. USEPA guidelines (Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund [RAGS] A, USEPA 1989)
recommend focusing on a group of COPCs based on inherent toxicity, site concentration, and the
behavior of the constituents in the environment. The COPC selection process and subsequent refinement
of datasets to account for concentrations of constituents detected in blanks are described in the following
sections.
3.1 Initial COPC Selection
Initial COPCs for solids, surface water, and groundwater were selected in the OU-1 SLRA (ERM 2017b),
and COPCs in air were selected in the OU-2 SLRA (ERM 2017d) using data collected in Phase 1A and
Phase 1A-B for air, solids (surface and subsurface samples), surface water, and groundwater. Air,
surface water, and groundwater COPCs were selected on a Site-wide basis, and solids COPCs were
selected on a PRI Area basis. COPCs were identified by comparing the maximum detected concentration
of an analyte in a given medium against its respective RBSL. For this screening step, maximum detected
concentrations in solids were “corrected” to account for differences in concentration between bulk and
fine fractions in accordance with the Bulk vs. Fine Technical Memo for OU-1 RI Phase 1A (Appendix J to
ERM 2016a). If the corrected maximum detected concentration exceeded the RBSL (Max Detect / RBSL
ratio > 1), the constituent was identified as a COPC. Exceptions to this were:
 Bioaccumulative compounds (mercury, hexachlorobutadiene, hexachlorobenzene,
pentachlorobenzene, 1,2,4,5- tetrachlorobenzene, PCBs, TCDD and other polychlorinated dioxins
and furans) were carried through as COPCs in all PRI Areas even if the maximum detected
concentration was less than the RBSL
 Essential nutrients, which were excluded from consideration as COPCs
RBSLs used in the OU-1 SLRA were taken from the May 2016 RSL tables distributed by USEPA (2016b),
and RBSLs used in the OU-2 SLRA were taken from the June 2017 RSL tables (USEPA 2017). RBSL
values were based on the lesser of the hazard quotient = 0.1 and cancer risk level of 10-6 for the
following:
 Ambient air – USEPA Industrial Air RSLs
 Solid media (soil/sediment) – USEPA Industrial Soil RSLs
 Aqueous media (surface water and groundwater) – USEPA Residential Tap Water RSLs
Additional solids, surface water, and groundwater data were collected after the SLRA was conducted, and
applicable data were incorporated into the BHHRA datasets as described in Section 2.4. A complete
matrix of data collection by PRI Area and phase is found in Appendix D, Table D-1. The BHHRA datasets
described in Section 2.4 were compiled into summary statistics tables, and these tables were used for
COPC selection. COPCs were selected using the updated BHHRA datasets using the method described
above, with RBSLs updated as needed using the RSLs distributed by USEPA in November 2020 (USEPA
2020a). These pre-refinement COPC tables (Tables D-2 through D-17) for air, solids, and surface water
are found in Appendix D. Groundwater COPC selection and refinement are included in Appendix B.
3.2 Refinement of COPC Selection and Datasets
During a review of the data to be included in the BHHRA, some analytes were observed to be detected in
field and/or laboratory blank samples. In particular, chromium is a common contaminant of the filters used

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 20
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN SELECTION AND
REFINEMENT
to collect air samples for metals, and Site sample results were of similar magnitude to blank filter
concentrations. When COPCs are detected in field and laboratory blank analyses, sample results may be
biased high. As a result, field and laboratory blank data were reviewed for all selected COPCs in air,
solids, surface water, and groundwater. This review indicates:
 A number of COPCs were detected in field and laboratory blank samples during Phase 1A (air,
solids, surface water, and groundwater); Phase 1AB (solids); Phase 2A (solids); and Phase 2B
(surface water and groundwater) sampling events; few were detected in blank samples during the
SAP Modification data collection
 Some blank concentrations are comparable to sample concentrations for COPCs
Because of this, once datasets were compiled for the BHHRA, these datasets underwent a refinement
process, as summarized on Figure 3-1, to account for laboratory interference affecting sample results.
Details of the COPC refinement steps are provided in Appendix D, and the effects of blank contamination
on COPC datasets are summarized in Tables D-18 through D-20. The specific changes to COPC
datasets for each PRI Area in air, solids, and surface water are shown in Tables D-21 through D-40.
 Final Ambient Air COPCs:
- Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian
- Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
- Total PCBs
- Arsenic
- Manganese
- Mercury
- Hexachlorobenzene
- Hexachlorobutadiene
 Table 3-1 provides final COPCs in solids for each PRI Area.
 Final Site-wide Surface Water COPCs:
- Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian
- Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
- Total PCBs
- Aluminium
- Antimony
- Arsenic
- Barium
- Beryllium
- Cadmium
- Chromium, Hexavalent
- Cobalt
- Copper
- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
- Bromochloromethane
- Bromodichloromethane
- Bromoform
- Bromomethane
- Carbon tetrachloride
- Chloroform
- Chloromethane
- Dibromochloromethane
- Dichloroacetic Acid
- Fluoride
- Hexachlorobenzene

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 21
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN SELECTION AND
REFINEMENT
- Iron
- Lead
- Manganese
- Mercury
- Molybdenum
- Nickel
- Thallium
- Vanadium
- Zinc
- 1,4-Dichlorobenzene
- 2-Methylnaphthalene
- Hexachlorobutadiene
- m,p-Xylenes
- Naphthalene
- Nitrate as N
- o-Xylene
- Pentachlorophenol
- Perchlorate
- Tetrachloroethene
- Cyanide
- Trichloroacetic acid

Final COPCs in surface water for each PRI Area are shown in Table D-20. COPCs that are not detected
in any surface water sample within a PRI Area are not carried forward in the BHHRA. COPC selection
and refinement in groundwater is described in Appendix B.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 22
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
4. EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
The following sections summarize Site receptors, exposure pathways, derivation of exposure
concentrations, exposure parameter development, and application of exposure units in the BHHRA.
Additional detail can be found in the BHHRA TM (Appendix A).
4.1 Environmental Setting
The USM operating facility is located in Lakeside Valley adjacent to Stansbury Bay of the GSL, as shown
on Figure 1-1. Lakeside Valley is a north-trending valley typical of the Basin and Range physiographic
province. The RI/FS Study Area includes portions of Lakeside Valley, the Lakeside Mountains to the
west, the GSL to the north and northeast, and solar evaporation ponds in Stansbury Bay to the southeast.
Elevation across the Site ranges from about 4,210 feet above mean sea level in the GSL lakebed and
playa to over 6,500 feet above mean sea level in the Lakeside Mountains. The climate at the Site is semi-
arid.
4.1.1 Geology and Soils
The Lakeside Mountains are typical of the block-faulted mountains in the Basin and Range province.
Rocks in the Lakeside Mountains are of Paleozoic age, spanning the Devonian to Cambrian periods.
Quaternary alluvium and colluvium are present within alluvial aprons of the mountains. With the exception
of a few outcrops of Cambrian formations to the west-northwest of the USM facility, the GSL lakebed,
playa, and lowlands and adjacent upland areas are composed of Quaternary mud and salt flat deposits,
and Quaternary Lake Bonneville deposits (Hintze et al. 2000).
Surface soils across the Site are variable; however, soil conditions are generally similar within the three
predominant topographic features: (1) the bed of the GSL and lowland mudflats adjacent to the GSL;
(2) southeast-trending beach ridges; and (3) upland areas. Within the lowland mudflats, surface soils are
composed of silty clays, sandy silts, clayey silts, and fine-to-medium sands. Southeast-trending beach
ridges are typically formed of fine to medium oolitic sands. In upland areas, surface soils are generally
classified as silty fine sands, clayey silts, and silts with fine sand (Dames & Moore 1970).
4.1.2 Hydrology
Surface water is present at the Site within PRIs 5 and 6 (CWP), PRI 7 (OWP), in areas of surface
expression of groundwater seepage or seepage from wastewater ponds, and in non-wastewater earthen
ditches such as the SVDD and GSLIC.
Surface water is perennially present in a former barrow area in PRI 8 (referred to as the “angel wing”).
The dates over which soil was removed from this area are not known, but based on the historical
photographs included as Appendix C to the OWP-CWP Hydro CSM Report (ERM 2017c), this barrow
area was undeveloped in 1978 and fully developed in 1985. Based on its chemistry, surface water in the
PRI 8 former barrow area appears to be commingled wastewater and groundwater. Historically, periodic
wastewater releases from PRI 6 have flowed into the PRI 8 former barrow area, resulting in temporary
acidic conditions in surface water. Wastewater in PRIs 5 and 6 is acidic, with measurements in most
samples at less than 1 standard pH unit. Wastewater releases from PRI 6 into PRI 8 have not occurred
since the installation of an overflow pipe from the CWP (PRIs 5 and 6) into the OWP (PRI 7) in November
2018.
The SVDD seasonally conveyed surface water runoff from Skull Valley south of Interstate 80 to the GSL.
The SVDD was constructed and operated by USM to divert surface water around the solar evaporation
ponds located in Stansbury Bay of GSL. This ditch was along the edge of and generally parallel to the
southern and eastern areas of the USM facility and the outer side of the CWP and OWP levees. In 2017,

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 23
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
USM permanently ceased use of the SVDD adjacent to the CWP and OWP for conveying surface water
diverted from Skull Valley. Other surface water that is not related to Site wastewater includes GSL water
in the GSL lakebed and playa, in solar evaporation ponds, or as accumulated precipitation in low-lying or
excavated areas. There are no perennial streams in the Study Area. Ephemeral flows of surface water
originating from seasonal springs and snowmelt that discharge into canyons along the eastern flank of the
Lakeside Mountains either evaporate or infiltrate to groundwater prior to reaching the immediate Site
vicinity.
The distance from the GSL open water shoreline to the northeastern corner of the OWP (PRI 7) fluctuates
as a function of lake elevation and is on the order of 2 miles. Because of the broad, shallow nature of
GSL, small changes in lake level result in large changes in lake area. The lake typically reaches its
highest level between May and June as a result of spring and summer runoff. The annual low lake level
typically occurs in October or November, following the high evaporation summer season (Utah
Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry, Fire, and State Lands 2013). Based on the
bathymetric map of the southern portion of GSL (Baskin and Allen 2005), the distance from the open
water shoreline to the northeastern corner of the OWP as a function of lake elevation can change by
2 miles with a change of 10 feet in elevation. This fluctuation in the lake shoreline affects the accessible
area of PRI 13, resulting in a larger accessible area during shrimping season in late fall and winter.
A connection between GSL and the Site is maintained via the GSLIC, which typically supplies some of
the GSL brine volume to the USM solar evaporation ponding complex. Salinity levels in surface water are
mostly hypersaline (greater than 35 parts per thousand salinity), but there are certain areas that may be
considered brackish, as reported in the Phase 1A Data Report (ERM 2016a).
Groundwater in the GSL basin generally occurs within four types of basin-fill aquifers. From deepest to
shallowest, these aquifers include (1) a deep confined aquifer in central valley areas; (2) a deep
unconfined aquifer adjacent to mountain recharge zones; (3) a shallow unconfined aquifer overlying the
deep confined aquifer; and (4) local perched aquifers (Hely et al. 1971). The shallow unconfined aquifer,
which is generally defined as the uppermost saturated permeable unit within the unconsolidated lake
sediments, extends across the Site from near the bedrock front of the Lakeside Mountains, eastward into
the GSL. In the vicinity of the USM facility and wastewater ponds, the shallow aquifer comprises (1) an
upper unconfined zone (referred to as the UAZ) that occurs from near ground surface to about 25 to
35 feet bgs; (2) a 10 to 20-foot-thick silty clay layer separating upper and deeper shallow zones; and (3) a
deeper confined or semi-confined zone below about 45 to 50 feet bgs (referred to as the LAZ). The RWP
Phase 2 design includes installation of a vertical hydraulic barrier wall. The barrier wall will be keyed into
the silty clay layer separating the UAZ and LAZ, which will minimize downward migration of wastewater
into the underlying aquifer.
In shallow groundwater underlying the USM facility and associated wastewater ponds, total dissolved
solids (TDS) content is greater than 10,000 milligrams per liter (mg/L), and qualifies as State of Utah
Class IV, saline groundwater. Some areas closer to the Lakeside Mountains and hydraulically upgradient
from the USM operating facility in the eastern area of PRI 15 qualify as Class III (limited use) groundwater
with TDS concentrations between 5,000 and 10,000 mg/L.
The presence of a deep unconfined aquifer has not been confirmed adjacent to the Lakeside Mountains
recharge zone south of the Site, and no information is available regarding the presence or extent of the
deep confined aquifer in the central valley area. Local perched aquifers at the Site may be present in
association with recharge areas in the Lakeside Mountains and adjoining upland areas, or in association
with the operating facility. These perched aquifers are expected to occur at shallow depth, generally less
than 20 feet bgs to the west of the USM facility and less than 10 feet bgs in the vicinity of the facility and
wastewater ponds.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 24
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
4.1.3 Land Use and Condition
The facility is currently active and zoned as industrial. The surrounding land consists of land owned by the
United States Department of the Interior–Bureau of Land Management, the State of Utah, ranch land,
other industrial facilities, and the GSL.
The current plan for the USM facility is for continued operation, and it is anticipated that land uses in the
foreseeable future will be similar to current uses. Currently, several PRI Areas support an industrial use
(e.g., Landfill, Gypsum Pile, Smut Pile) that is characterized by frequent physical anthropomorphic
disturbance and/or management of waste streams from the active facility. At the same time, the buffer
area PRI Areas include abundant open space supporting habitats, biota, and recreational uses. Some
commercial use (including seasonal collection of brine shrimp cysts) occurs at the GSL, north and east of
the active facility. The foreseeable future uses do not include residential land use; rather, continued
industrial, commercial, or recreational uses are projected.
4.2 Conceptual Site Model
Historical and ongoing USM facility operations have generated three main types of wastes:
 Gases and fine particulate materials released to air
 Solid materials placed in piles on the ground or released from buildings as fugitive dusts that fall to
the ground
 Liquid wastes discharged into waste impoundments, historically through ditches (now closed and
capped) and more recently through pipes, and slurries discharged to the gypsum pile
These processes have led to the presence of Site-related chemical contaminants in air, soil, waste piles,
surface water, sediments, and groundwater. Contaminants in soil and waste piles may disperse through
the environment by wind (airborne contaminants), and contaminants in ponds may disperse in surface
water. In some instances, breaches of impoundment berms have resulted in unintended releases of
wastewater or sediment; the potential for future uncontrolled releases has been minimized by installation
of an overflow pipe to regulate controlled discharges of wastewater from the CWP to the OWP.
Contaminants in sediments and possibly surface soils may be transported to groundwater by surface
water infiltration.
The preliminary Site-wide conceptual site model (CSM) for the current and future land use at the Site
presented in the SLRA TM (ERM 2014b) established the initial scope of receptors and exposure
pathways considered for the project. Qualitative information collected during the HE Survey (ERM 2015a)
helped define the characteristics of the receptor groups and where and how they use the Site. This
information supported development of the CSM for each of the PRI Areas. Data collected for the HE
Survey supported development of Site-specific exposure parameters for the BHHRA. These exposure
parameters and their recommended values were defined in the BHHRA TM (Appendix A).
A CSM, sometimes referred to as a conceptual exposure model, is a schematic representation of the
collective current knowledge of possible chemical source areas, possible chemical release and transport
mechanisms, surfaces/media of concern, potential human exposure pathways and routes (e.g., ingestion,
inhalation, dermal contact), and potential receptors. Only complete exposure pathways, which must
comprise all the following elements (USEPA 1989), are evaluated in the BHHRA:
 Source/source area
 Mechanism of contaminant release and transport
 Contact with media (e.g., air, solids [soil and sediment], water)

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 25
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
 An exposure point where a potential receptor could contact the contaminated media
 An exposure (intake) route (e.g., incidental dermal contact)
The absence of any one of these elements results in an incomplete exposure pathway. A CSM has been
prepared for each receptor for each PRI, as shown on Figures 4-1 through 4-6. If no respondents within a
receptor group indicated contact with a particular medium (such as surface water or game meat), this
pathway is shown as incomplete or negligible on the CSM. Site conditions (such as absence of surface
water) were also used to determine which exposure pathways are not applicable.
Though PRI 17 was originally defined as groundwater and surface water combined, the media are
addressed separately in the SLRA and BHHRA. Surface water is not present in all PRI Areas, and
contact was not reported in all PRI Areas where surface water is present. Because of this, surface water
exposure is evaluated on a PRI-specific basis, with exposure parameters as developed in the BHHRA TM
(Appendix A). Site groundwater is classified by the State of Utah Division of Water Quality as Class IV
water (Saline Groundwater). Even though Site groundwater is not a potable drinking water source and the
exposure pathway is not complete (i.e., there is no realistic current or future exposure point or exposure
[intake] route), groundwater ingestion is evaluated as a hypothetical complete exposure pathway in
Appendix B. Chemicals may reach animals used for human food through ingestion of plants near the Site
that are impacted by contaminants in soil and through incidental ingestion of contaminated soil during
feeding or grooming.
4.3 Human Receptors of Concern
The exposure scenarios illustrated in the CSMs establish the scope of the BHHRA and ensure that
receptors likely to be exposed and exposure scenarios most likely to contribute to risk are evaluated.
Based on current and potential future land use at and near the Site, human receptors most likely to be
exposed include:
 USM Workers: Full-time workers at the USM facility. For this population, the primary focus is on
exposures to Site solids, surface water, and air that occur in solid and liquid waste disposal areas
near the production facility. USM Worker exposure to the SVDD was not reported during the HE
Survey and is not quantitatively evaluated.
 Nearby Workers: Workers at facilities in PRIs 11 and 12, including workers employed at the ATI
facility (now closed) and Hill Brothers Chemical, exposed to off-Site surface solids and air.
 Resource Managers: These are state and federal land managers, including wildlife and
environmental workers from agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management, Utah State natural
resource workers, United States Fish and Wildlife Service workers, and others. Exposures of these
receptors generally occur in undeveloped areas somewhat removed from the Site, but may include
areas of PRI 8. Some Resource Managers oversee brine shrimp harvesting, and may be exposed in
PRI 13 and along the GSLIC.
 Brine Shrimp Workers: This population includes seasonal workers who harvest brine shrimp from the
GSL and potentially the GSLIC during the State-specified harvest season (October thru January).
This population usually establishes camps near the shore of the GSL, generally northeast of the Site.
The occupants of the camps are adults performing or supporting the harvest activities.
 Off-Site Recreational Visitors: This includes area residents who may visit the federal and state lands
neighboring the facility for activities such as bird-watching, hiking, all-terrain vehicle riding, hunting,
and other activities.
 Ranchers: This includes individuals who manage cattle that graze on lands neighboring the facility.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 26
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
Table 4-1 provides a summary of the complete exposure pathways for each receptor in each PRI Area
that are evaluated quantitatively.
The following exposure pathways are considered incomplete or negligible:
 Incidental ingestion of surface water is incomplete or negligible based on HE Survey responses
indicating a lack of significant or routine contact that would facilitate incidental ingestion of water.
 Ingestion of groundwater is an incomplete pathway under current conditions because groundwater
beneath the Site is very high in TDS and is not potable. Appendix B evaluates a hypothetical future
scenario where groundwater is used for drinking water by onsite workers.
 Dermal contact with Site groundwater under the future hypothetical groundwater use scenario is
negligible because it is an industrial exposure scenario; groundwater will not be used for bathing.
 Based on HE Survey responses, Ranchers do not consume livestock, and this is an incomplete
exposure pathway.
4.4 Human Health Exposure Parameters
All receptors are evaluated on a PRI Area-specific basis for all media except groundwater. Exposure
parameter values are shown in Tables 4-2 through 4-9. Table 4-10 references the source of each value.
The HE Survey (ERM 2015a) collected data on complete exposure pathways for each receptor and each
PRI Area, as applicable. To the extent possible, the survey gathered responses directly from
representatives of each receptor group. When this was not possible, information from other sources such
as job descriptions, hunting license data, grazing permit information, and from GSL Ecosystems (for
information on the activities of brine shrimp harvesters) was used.
Where sufficient data were available, Site-specific exposure rates were derived from the HE Survey.
Recommended CTE values for each pathway, scenario, receptor, and PRI Area are based on the mean
(average) value. Due to the relatively small amount of data collected in the Phase I HE Survey, per
receptor, per PRI Area, the RME values are based on the maximum observed value considered reliable.
In some cases, the CTE and RME values are the same and are based on one survey response. The
results of the HE Survey (ERM 2015a) identified specifics regarding the time spent by workers in the
individual PRI Areas, surface water exposures, skin contact, recreational activities, and ingestion of game
meat. These Site-specific results for these parameters are used preferentially over other sources. Both
CTE and RME estimates are evaluated for all receptors except the seasonal Brine Shrimp Worker. Where
Site-specific information is unavailable, USEPA default values (USEPA 2014a, 2011b) are used.
Facility workers at the USM facility are required to wear long-sleeve shirts, long pants, and hard hats, and
the exposed skin surface area is less than the default exposure parameter used for the worker. In the HE
Survey (ERM 2015a), USM Workers reported both total hours at each PRI Area, as well as any time
spent outside the vehicle (ground hours). For all solids and water exposures, ground hours are used. If a
worker reported surface water contact, an exposure time of 1 hour was assumed. Based on the low pH (2
or less) of much of the surface water present at the Site, this length of unprotected dermal contact is likely
to be an overestimate.
Based on information from Utah Department of Wildlife Resources (Commercial Harvesting of Brine
Shrimp and Brine Shrimp Eggs, 2006), the Brine Shrimp Worker is at or near the Site during an
approximately 4-month period in the winter and reported to camp there for the shrimping season, leaving
only occasionally to replenish supplies. No information indicating that workers only stayed for a portion of
the season or less than 24 hours per day was obtained, and a CTE scenario was not developed.
For several Recreational Visitor exposure parameters where Site-specific or default values are
unavailable, best professional judgement was used.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 27
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
4.5 Determination of Representative Exposure Concentrations
An EPC is a COPC-specific and media-specific concentration value used in the dose equation for each
receptor and each exposure pathway. The methods, rationale, and assumptions employed in deriving
EPCs are consistent with USEPA guidance and reflect Site-specific conditions. These methods, rationale,
and assumptions, as well as further information for the derivation of EPCs, can be found in Appendix A.
The EPC is the recommended 95 percent upper confidence limit on the mean (95UCL) for each detected
chemical selected as a COPC, if calculable, or the maximum detected concentration in the dataset (after
COPC refinement) where insufficient detected results are available or when the 95UCL exceeds the
maximum. USEPA has developed software (ProUCL Version 5.1, USEPA 2015b) that computes a series
of alternative estimates of the upper confidence limit (UCL) for any given dataset, and identifies which
value is recommended for use. Final datasets after COPC refinement are provided in Appendix E. The
ProUCL output and EPC selection process for each COPC dataset (including the method used to derive
the selected UCL and where the maximum concentration was used) are found in Appendix F. EPCs are
summarized for each medium in each PRI Area (as applicable) in Tables 4-11 through 4-33.
4.5.1 Exposure Point Concentrations for Ambient Air
Byproducts of magnesium refinement from GSL brine include chlorine, hydrogen chloride, organic
chemicals, and particulates. Air emissions released from the USM facility are subject to the operating
permit requirements in the 1990 Clean Air Act and are regulated via Utah Department of Environmental
Quality Title V Operating Permit # 4500030003. This permit covers emissions of gases and particulates
from both point sources (stack emissions) and non-point sources (fugitive emissions). Emissions from the
facility regulated by the permit include chlorine, hydrogen chloride, VOCs, PCDDs/PCDFs, total
suspended particulates (TSP), and particulate material less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10). The
TSP and PM10 limits indirectly regulate metals, SVOCs, and PCBs bound to particulate materials.
Concentrations of Site-related contaminants in air are expected to vary as a function of distance and
direction from the Site, and also as a function of time, depending on short- and long-term (seasonal)
meteorological conditions, as well as variations in release rates associated with production process
operations. Chlorine and hydrogen chloride emissions are addressed in the OU-2 BRA (ERM 2022) and
are not included in this BHHRA.
EPCs for COPCs in ambient air are derived on a Site-wide basis and summarized in Table 4-11.
4.5.2 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
EPCs for solids COPCs are derived for each PRI Area. EPCs were also derived for the upland and
lakebed background solids datasets and applied as noted in Section 2.4.5. The relative bioavailability
(RBA) of a COPC affects the amount of COPC that is absorbed when soil is ingested. For most COPCs,
100 percent bioavailability is assumed, with the exception of arsenic. An RBA of 60 percent for arsenic is
used, as recommended by USEPA (2012b). Several studies have shown that the TEQ RBA for soil is less
than 100 percent; however, the RBA is not consistent across the studies and appears to be highly
influenced by Site soil characteristics. In accord with USEPA guidance, TEQ RBA is assumed to be
100 percent in the risk calculations. Section 7.4.2.3 discusses how risks would change if a lower RBA that
is based on a Site-specific study were used.
4.5.3 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water
EPCs for surface water COPCs are derived for each PRI Area for the Site-wide surface water COPCs,
although some surface water COPCs were not detected in some of the PRI Areas.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 28
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
4.5.4 Exposure Point Concentrations for Plant Tissue and Game
Collection of tissue samples from game animals (e.g., deer, chukar) was not conducted. Therefore, to
quantitatively evaluate this exposure pathway, modeling of tissue concentrations was conducted,
incorporating EPCs for the PRI 15 plant tissue dataset. Game (deer and chukar) tissue concentrations
are estimated by incorporating the PRI-specific solids EPC and the plant EPC for bioaccumulative
COPCs into the models in USEPA’s Human Health Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste
Combustion Facilities (HHRAP, USEPA 2005b). The HHRAP provides models to calculate concentrations
in beef and chicken tissue on the basis of the amount of COPCs in the animal’s diet, as shown below.
The model for beef tissue was used to estimate deer tissue concentrations, and the model for chicken
tissue was used to estimate chukar tissue concentrations. Consistent with the BERA for the Site, the deer
hunted in the buffer areas is assumed to be similar to the pronghorn. Plant intake rate (Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department 2016) and soil intake rate (Beyer et al. 1994) for the deer are those used in the
BERA. The plant and soil intake rates for the chukar are found in Nagy (2001) and the USEPA Ecological
Soil Screening Levels (USEPA 2005a), respectively.
From the HHRAP:
Abeef = (Ʃ(Fi × Qpi × Pi) + Qs × Cs × Bs) × Babeef × MF
Achicken = (Ʃ(Fi × Qpi × Pi) + Qs × Cs × Bs) × Bachicken
Where:
Abeef = Concentration in beef (milligrams per kilogram [mg/kg]), as surrogate for deer
Achicken = Concentration in chicken (mg/kg), as surrogate for chukar
Fi = Fraction of plant type (i) grown on contaminated soil and ingested by the animal (assumed = 1.0,
unitless)
QPi = Quantity of plant ingested (kilogram [kg] plant/day, dry weight)
Pi = COPC concentration in plant type i ingested by the animal (mg/kg, dry weight for PRI 15 plant data)
Qs = Quantity of soil ingested by the animal (kg/day)
Cs = Soil EPC (mg/kg)
Bs = Soil bioavailability factor (assumed = 1.0, unitless)
Babeef and Bachicken = Biotransfer factor (day/kg fresh weight tissue), from Appendix A-2 of the HHRAP
MF = Metabolism factor (assumed = 1.0, unitless)
4.5.5 Exposure Point Concentrations for Soil Particulates from Mechanical
Disturbance
Mechanical disturbance of solids (such as earthmoving activities or vehicles traveling over unpaved
roads) generates dust particles that may carry COPCs into the breathing zone. Exposure to dust particles
is evaluated using the USEPA’s Particulate Emission Factor approach (USEPA 2002). The Particulate
Emission Factor relates concentrations of semi-volatile and non-volatile chemicals adsorbed to soil to the
concentration of these chemicals in dust particles in the air. Input soil concentrations for the model are the
solids EPCs developed for each PRI Area. Other model input parameters for each PRI Area, and the
associated assumptions, are provided in Tables 4-34 and 4-35, respectively. The basis for each of the
model scenarios for each PRI Area is provided in Table 4-36.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 29
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
4.6 Dose Estimation
Noncancer average daily dose (ADD) and cancer lifetime ADD (LADD) for ingestion and dermal exposure
and average daily concentration (ADC) and lifetime ADC (LADC) are calculated for each receptor with
exposure in a specific PRI Area using standard dose calculations presented in Section 4.5 of the BHHRA
TM (Appendix A). Exposures based on RME and CTE (as applicable) are calculated for each relevant
exposure pathway for each medium (air, solids, water, and game) and for each exposure route
(inhalation, oral, and dermal). Chemical-specific dermal absorption values (ABSd) from the RSL tables
(USEPA 2020a) were used in dose estimates of absorption from solids. USEPA does not recommend
absorption factors for VOCs based on the rationale that they are volatilized from the solids on skin and
exposure is accounted for via inhalation routes (USEPA 2004). Per RAGS E, absorption of some COPCs
from surface water (including TEQ, PCBs, HCB, and benzo(a)pyrene) is not estimated because their
permeability coefficient is outside the Effective Predictive Domain.
ADDs/ADCs and LADDs/LADCs are also calculated using Upland and Lakebed background EPCs. The
total dose of each COPC is the sum of doses across all applicable exposure routes. The ADDs/ADCs and
LADDs/LADCs for each receptor for each PRI Area are provided in Appendix G. Uncertainty in exposure
parameters that have significant impact on the results are discussed in Section 7.4.2.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 30
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
5. HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
Toxicity values, when available, are published by the USEPA in the on-line Integrated Risk Information
System (IRIS; USEPA 2020b). Cancer slope factors (SFOs [oral], in units of reciprocal dose [milligram per
kilogram per day (mg/kg-d)-1]) and inhalation unit risk (IURs, in units of reciprocal concentration
[micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3)-1) are chemical-specific and experimentally derived potency values
that are used to calculate the risk of cancer resulting from exposure to potentially carcinogenic chemicals.
A higher value implies a more potent carcinogenic potential. Reference doses (RfDs) and reference
concentrations (RfCs) are experimentally derived “no-effect” levels used to quantify the extent of toxic
effects other than cancer due to exposure to chemicals (in units of mg/kg-d and milligrams per cubic
meter, respectively). With RfDs/RfCs, a lower value implies a more potent toxicant. USEPA’s hierarchy of
sources (USEPA 2003) was followed to select toxicity values. Some chemicals detected in media at the
Site lack agency-derived toxicity values. Surrogate toxicity values were not selected for these chemicals.
The lack of toxicity data for these chemicals is addressed in the Uncertainty Analysis. Toxicity values
used in the BHHRA are summarized in Table 5-1.
5.1 Toxicity Values for Dermal Exposure
Although USEPA has developed toxicity criteria for the oral and inhalation routes of exposure, it has not
developed toxicity criteria for the dermal route of exposure. USEPA has proposed a method for
extrapolating oral toxicity criteria to the dermal route in the Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund,
Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk
Assessment) (RAGS E, USEPA 2004). USEPA states that the adjustment of the oral toxicity factor for
dermal exposures is necessary only when the oral-gastrointestinal absorption efficiency of the chemical of
interest is less than 50 percent (due to the variability inherent in absorption studies).
5.2 Evaluation of Dioxins/Furans
Toxicity values developed for 2,3,7,8-TCDD are used to evaluate the exposure to the mixture of dioxins,
furans, and coplanar (dioxin-like) PCBs in media tested at the Site. Concentrations of dioxin, furan, and
PCB congeners in a sample are evaluated as the 2,3,7,8-TCDD TEQ, as described in Section 2.3. Of the
toxicity values used for TEQ risk evaluation, only the RfD is from the USEPA IRIS (USEPA 2020b).
Although 2,3,7,8-TCDD is classified as a Group 1 human carcinogen, there is enough uncertainty in the
available studies that IRIS has not yet developed an oral slope factor [SFO] or IUR, as discussed in
Section 7.5.1. Therefore, the RfC, SFO, and IUR developed by the California Office of Environmental
Health and Hazard Assessment were selected based on the USEPA hierarchy of sources (USEPA 2003).
5.3 Application of Chromium Toxicity Values
Chromium may exist in the environment either in the trivalent form Cr(III) or the hexavalent form Cr(VI). At
this Site, samples of solids (soils, sediments, waste piles) were analyzed for total chromium, which
includes both Cr(III) and Cr(VI), but does not provide information on the relative amount of each. Because
Cr(VI) is more toxic than Cr(III), risk calculations for exposures to solids conservatively assumed that
100 percent of total chromium was Cr(VI), even though it is likely that much of the total chromium is
Cr(III). Section 7.5.3 presents a discussion on why this approach is conservative (i.e., likely overestimates
risk from chromium), and presents the risks that would be obtained if it is assumed that 90 percent of total
chromium is Cr(III) and 10 percent is Cr(VI). Chromium was speciated in aqueous samples and is
evaluated accordingly where it is a COPC.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 31
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
6. RISK CHARACTERIZATION
Risk characterization integrates the exposure assessment with the selected measures of toxicity (toxicity
assessment). The cancer risk and/or noncancer hazard is calculated for each COPC and for complete
exposure pathway for each receptor. Cancer risks and noncancer health hazards are characterized
separately.
The cancer risk is defined as “the risk, or theoretical probability of developing cancer from that chemical
upon exposure to that medium” (California Environmental Protection Agency [CalEPA] 1994). An
incremental lifetime cancer risk (ILCR) is calculated for compounds identified as probable human
carcinogens. Carcinogenic risks for chemicals are evaluated by multiplying the estimated average
exposure rate (i.e., LADD/LADC calculated in the exposure assessment) by the chemical’s SFO/IUR. The
SFO/IUR converts estimated daily exposure averaged over a lifetime to incremental risk of an individual
developing cancer. It is assumed that cancer risks for different chemicals and from multiple exposure
routes are additive. According to USEPA (1989), this approach is appropriate for theoretical upper-bound
ILCRs of less than 1 × 10-2.
For cancer effects, USEPA generally seeks to ensure that the ILCR value is within or below a risk range
of 1 × 10-6 to 1 × 10-4 (USEPA 1991a). USEPA policy indicates that a response action to protect public
health is generally not warranted if the RME ILCR value is less than 1 × 10-4 (USEPA 1991b). Although
1 × 10-4 is generally used as the upper limit of acceptable risk, it is not a discrete line; ILCR results slightly
greater than 1 × 10-4 may be considered acceptable in some cases, and certain situations may warrant
management of risks that are less than 1 × 10-4.
Noncancer adverse health effects are estimated by comparing the estimated average exposure rate
(i.e., ADDs/ADCs estimated in the exposure assessment) with an exposure level at which no adverse
health effects are expected to occur for a long period of exposure (i.e., the RfDs/RfCs). If a person’s
estimated exposure does not exceed the RfD or RfC (i.e., if the hazard quotient [ADD/RfD or ADC/RfC] is
less than 1), the chemical is considered unlikely to pose a significant noncarcinogenic health hazard to
individuals under the given exposure conditions. If exposure to a COPC occurs by more than one
pathway, the hazard quotients for that COPC are summed across all applicable pathways. This sum of
the hazard quotients is known as a hazard index (HI). If the HI that includes all COPCs and all exposure
pathways is less than or equal to one, further characterization of noncancer risk is not necessary. For any
HI that exceeds one, the potential for adverse health effects are further evaluated by considering the
target organs upon which each chemical could have an adverse effect. The segregation of HI by target
organ is consistent with USEPA guidance for noncarcinogens, including metals (USEPA 1989, 2001b,
2005).
Unlike carcinogenic risk estimates, a hazard quotient is not expressed as a probability. Therefore, while
both cancer and noncancer risk characterizations indicate a relative potential for adverse effects to occur
from exposure to a chemical, a noncancer adverse health effect estimate is not directly comparable with a
cancer risk estimate.
Risk characterization equations and additional details are provided in the BHHRA TM in Appendix A.
It should be noted that the HI and ILCR risks that are calculated are based on the total concentration of
COPCs present at the Site, which in some cases may include a contribution from non-Site-related
(“background”) sources, either natural and/or anthropogenic. The risk associated with background
concentrations of COPCs is typically characterized using data from unimpacted or other areas
representative of background concentrations (see Section 2.4.5). As previously noted, background
concentrations are not available for surface water or ambient air.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 32
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
To understand how background concentrations contribute to overall risk estimates, risks related to
background concentrations of COPCs were also estimated, as most of the COPCs are metals and
ubiquitous anthropogenic constituents (e.g., dioxins). Lakebed background concentrations are applicable
to PRIs 7, 13, and 14; upland background values apply to the remaining PRI Areas. These results are
discussed in the risk characterization where they help to clarify the results. Lacking ambient air
background concentrations limits the discussion to the influence of solids background concentrations,
which can be problematic. If background ambient air concentrations were available for the main risk
drivers such as arsenic and TEQ, the background contributions would be higher.
6.1 Overview of Risk Characterization
All risks calculated for each receptor scenario are presented in Appendix G. The results are summarized
in Table 6-1. The noncancer HIs for all receptors are less than 1. Cancer risk (ILCR) results for the
Resource Manager, Recreational Visitor in all age cohorts, and the Rancher are less than 1 × 10-5, and
most are less than or equal to 1 × 10-6. The ILCR for the USM Worker in PRI 2 is 2 × 10-5, primarily driven
by TEQ and Cr(VI). Similarly, the ILCR for the Nearby Worker in PRI 12 is 1 × 10-5 and is driven by
arsenic, TEQ, and Cr(VI). The ILCR for the Brine Shrimp Worker in PRI 13 ranges from 1 × 10-5 to 2 × 10-
5 depending on how much exposure to the GSLIC is assumed, as detailed in Section 6.5. The main
contributors to cancer risk of 1 × 10-5 or greater are arsenic, TEQ, and Cr(VI). Receptors with ILCRs
greater than 1 × 10-5 are discussed further below.
6.2 USM Worker Risk Characterization
As detailed in Section 4, USM Workers spend some of their work time in PRIs 2 through 12, and it varies
by PRI Area. The majority of PRI 1 has been remediated, and residual risk is evaluated semi-
quantitatively in Section 6.2.1. The HI does not exceed 1 in any PRI Area. The ILCR is at or greater than
1 × 10-5 only in PRI 2, and all are less than 1 × 10-4. Some workers may work in more than one PRI Area,
and the risks from cumulative exposures are discussed in Section 6.2.3.
6.2.1 PRI 1 – Ditches
As discussed in Section 2.4.2.1, 14 sediment samples from PRI 1 were collected during Phase 1A-B.
Analytical results indicate that most of the samples contained high concentrations of a number of COPCs,
especially TEQ. Because most of PRI 1 has been filled and capped, worker exposure to these
contaminated sediments is no longer a complete pathway, except for a short segment where the main
ditch enters the current waste ponds. Of the three samples that remain exposed, two exceed one or more
default worker RBSLs by more than 100-fold. Although direct worker contact with exposed sediments in
this open segment is not expected because any work in this segment is performed using excavators or
similar equipment, if direct contact were to occur, it is possible that health risks could approach or exceed
a level of concern.
6.2.2 PRI 2 – Landfill
The cancer risk for the USM Worker in PRI 2 ranges from 3 × 10-6 (CTE) to 2 × 10-5 (RME). As shown in
Table 6-2, the majority of the ILCR (up to 73 percent) is due to TEQ from ingestion of solids and
chromium from particulates inhalation. The background contribution is minor.
6.2.3 Cumulative Risk Characterization for USM Worker
As described previously, PRI-specific exposure factors were developed for the USM Worker. A worker
may visit more than one PRI Area and be exposed to COPCs present in various media; however, the HE
Survey did not specifically collect data on which PRI Areas are visited by the same worker and the

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 33
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
amount of time spent in each. To address potential cumulative exposure, risks are estimated based on
four cumulative scenarios proposed in the BHHRA TM (Appendix A). Two CTE alternative estimates were
calculated:
 CTE-1: The sum of CTE risks across the five most heavily occupied PRI Areas (2, 4, 9, 11, and 12)2
 CTE-2: The sum of CTE risks across all PRI Areas
Two RME alternative estimates were calculated:
 RME-1: The RME risks from the two PRI Areas that have the highest risk values, plus the CTE risks
from each of the other three most heavily used PRI Areas
 RME-2: The RME risks from the two PRI Areas that have the highest risk values, plus the CTE risks
from all other PRI Areas
This set of estimates provides a conservative sense of the range of cumulative risks that could plausibly
occur, depending on work patterns.
Table 6-3 summarizes the cumulative risk estimates using these combinations. The table also shows the
percent ground hours (outside a vehicle) and percent total hours spent working in PRI Areas out of a total
of 2,000 work hours per year for each of the scenarios based on the PRI Areas included. As shown, even
at the lowest estimate of cumulative ground and total hours (CTE hours for five most heavily occupied
PRI Areas), a worker would be spending more than half his time in the PRI Areas, with about 20 percent
of total annual working time outside the vehicle in these areas (400 hours per year).
The HI for all cumulative exposure scenarios is 1 or less, while the ILCR for RME-1, RME-2, and CTE-2
exceed 1 × 10-5. Arsenic and TEQ are the primary drivers in these scenarios (especially in PRI 2), as well
as pentachlorophenol in surface water in PRIs 5 and 6, Cr(VI) in soil in several PRI Areas, and HCB in air.
Although background concentrations contribute 28 to 49 percent of the overall Site risk In PRIs 9 through
12, these PRI Areas do not contribute significantly to cumulative risk. As a result, background does not
contribute significantly to estimated cumulative risks for the USM Worker, as shown in Table G-38.
As noted in Section 4.5.2, several studies have shown that the RBA for TEQ is substantially less than
100 percent. Cumulative risk results using an RBA of 38 percent from a site-specific, peer-reviewed study
are discussed in Section 7.4.2.3.
6.2.4 Groundwater Risk Characterization for Worker
As noted above, groundwater quality at the Site is currently unacceptable for drinking water due to the
high TDS, which are at least an order of magnitude greater than the Secondary Maximum Contaminant
Limit for TDS of 500 mg/L in both the UAZ and LAZ. Unless the groundwater is desalinated, it cannot be
used as a drinking water source. Because the State of Utah considers all groundwater to be a potential
source of drinking water, Appendix B presents a risk evaluation for a hypothetical future exposure
scenario in which Site groundwater is assumed to be desalinated (without changing contaminant levels)
and used as drinking water by workers at the Site. Significant findings are summarized below.
6.2.4.1 Noncancer Risk from Hypothetical Future Groundwater Exposure
The HI exceeds a value of 1 in all 39 UAZ wells (including background wells), ranging from 2 to 73 in
wells without dilution issues. Dilutions by the laboratory affected UAZ wells MW-8B (fluoride not

2 In the 2019 Revised Final OU-1 BHHRA TM (provided as Appendix A), the five most heavily occupied PRIs included PRI 1. PRI 1
has since undergone closure and capping consistent with the RCRA Carve-out Cleanup AOC; therefore, the next most heavily
occupied PRI (PRI 12) is included in its place.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 34
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
detected), MW-29A (several metals not detected, including arsenic in some cases), and PMW-1S (arsenic
not detected).
In LAZ wells, the HI ranges from 1 to 3, and the HI for the LAZ background well without dilution issues
(MW-24B) is 1. Dilutions by the laboratory affected LAZ well MW-30B and background wells MW-25B and
PMW-1D (arsenic not detected).
The HI tends to increase with increased salinity (TDS) along the gradient from the Lakeside Mountains
(upgradient) toward the GSL, which corresponds to increased concentrations of the main contributors to
the HI:
 In the UAZ, the main contributors are arsenic, manganese, and fluoride (averaging 25, 23, and
29 percent, respectively)
 In the LAZ, the main contributors are arsenic and fluoride (averaging 60 and 33 percent, respectively)
The range of HIs is similar among the groups of wells (outside the RWP, in western area of the RWP, and
in the eastern area); however, closer to the GSL, contributions to the noncancer risk is somewhat less
dominated by arsenic, with greater contributions from fluoride and manganese.
6.2.4.2 Cancer Risk from Hypothetical Future Groundwater Exposure
The ILCR for the worker is greater than 1 × 10-4 in 33 of the 39 UAZ wells and in three of the five LAZ
wells without sample dilution issues. Arsenic dominates the contribution to the ILCR (greater than
80 percent in all but three wells) in the area outside the RWP and in the western area of the RWP. In six
of the 12 more eastern wells, arsenic contributes more than 70 percent of the ILCR. In the other six wells
in this area, haloacetic acids make up 41 to 75 percent of the ILCR, with trihalomethanes contributing up
to 15 percent.
6.2.4.3 Discussion of Hypothetical Future Risk from Groundwater Ingestion
The risk characterization results indicate that noncancer hazards are at or above an HI of 1 in all wells
without sample dilution issues, and cancer risks are greater than the risk management range for all but
eight wells in the UAZ and LAZ combined.
 HIs in background wells and LAZ wells (assumed to be unimpacted by Site operations) are
influenced mainly by arsenic and fluoride concentrations; all HI values are at or above 1 in wells
without sample dilution issues
 For most UAZ wells upgradient and outside the RWP area, arsenic is the most significant driver of
the ILCR; inside the RWP area, organics including trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids frequently
contribute to the ILCR
 Arsenic concentrations in background and LAZ wells contribute to ILCRs that are at or above 1 × 10-4
These results indicate that although Site groundwater quality in the UAZ is likely affected by COPCs
present in the wastewater ponds, increased noncancer and cancer risk along the gradient from the
Lakeside Mountains is driven at least partially by naturally occurring concentrations of arsenic that
increase with proximity to the GSL.
6.3 Nearby Worker Risk Characterization
Nearby Workers are evaluated in PRI 11 (ATI workers) and PRI 12 (Hill Brothers workers) only. The ILCR
for the Nearby Worker in PRI 11 ranges up to 6 × 10-6. In PRI 12, the ILCR ranges from 5 × 10-6 (CTE) to
1 × 10-5 (RME). As shown in Table 6-4, the main contributors to the ILCR in PRI 12 are arsenic, Cr(IV),
and TEQ (ND=1/2) from the ingestion of solids, Cr(VI) from solids inhalation, and arsenic and TEQ in

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 35
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
ambient air. It should be noted that background concentrations contribute 48 to 53 percent of the ILCR in
PRI 12, as shown in Table G-39, and that Site-related RME cancer risk is less than 5 × 10-6.
6.4 Resource Manager Risk Characterization
Resource Managers from state and federal agencies may access areas of PRIs 8 and 11, and PRIs 13,
14, 15, and 16 buffer zone areas for fieldwork, firefighting, and other activities. The estimated noncancer
HI values for Resource Managers are all less than 1, and most estimated ILCR values do not exceed
1 × 10-6, with the highest ILCR of 2 × 10-6 in PRI 8 under the RME scenario. Background concentrations
contribute at least 40 to 80 percent of the ILCR, depending on the PRI Area and exposure scenario.
6.5 Brine Shrimp Worker Risk Characterization
As described in Section 4.3, Brine Shrimp Workers work mainly along the shoreline of PRI 13, and some
workers also collect shrimp along the GSLIC. Because the sediments of the GSLIC have higher COPC
levels than the shoreline (Figure 6-2), the level of exposure and risk from COPCs depends on the relative
amount of time spent in each location. Therefore, three scenarios were evaluated:
The Brine Shrimp Worker spends 80 percent of the time in the shoreline area and 20 percent working
in the canal (80/20 scenario). This is considered to be the RME scenario for contact with the GSLIC,
based on information provided by a representative of the Great Salt Lake Ecosystem Program.
The Brine Shrimp Worker spends 90 percent of the time in the shoreline area and 10 percent in the
canal (90/10 scenario). This is considered to be the CTE scenario for contact with the GSLIC.
The Brine Shrimp Worker spends 100 percent of the time in the shoreline area and does not go to
the GSLIC.
EPCs were derived separately for solids samples collected in the shoreline area and for samples
collected from the GSLIC, and risks were computed as a time-weighted average for each of the three
scenarios. Results are shown in Table 6-5, along with details on main contributions by COPC and
pathway. Cancer risks for the three scenarios range from 1 × 10-5 to 2 × 10-5, increasing with the amount
of time spent in the GSLIC. The main contributors to risk are Cr(VI) from solids exposure via dermal and
inhalation pathways (at least 33 to 38 percent of total ILCR), arsenic (ingestion of solids and ambient air
inhalation), and TEQ (from ingestion of solids).
Solids background ILCR is 7 × 10-6, primarily due to Cr(VI) and arsenic. Background COPC
concentrations contribute 49 to 65 percent of the total ILCR. Using an assumption of 100 percent
chromium in the hexavalent state increases the ILCR values as compared to a more plausible
assumption, such as 10 percent as Cr(VI) and 90 percent Cr(III). Risk values using this proportion of
Cr(VI) are discussed in Section 7.5.3.
6.6 Recreational Visitor Risk Characterization
Recreational Visitors may visit the Buffer Areas – PRIs 13, 14, 15, or 16 – for recreational activities
including hunting, hiking, and using all-terrain vehicles. Only Adult Recreational Visitors (over 16 years
old) are evaluated in PRI 13, and were evaluated under two exposure scenarios regarding time spent in
the GSLIC: 1) no time spent in the GSLIC, and 2) 20 percent of time spent in the GSLIC and the
remainder in the Shoreline area. EPCs were derived separately for solids samples collected in the
shoreline area and for samples collected from the GSLIC, and risks were computed as a time-weighted
average for the two scenarios. Of all the Recreational Visitor exposure scenarios evaluated, only the
Recreational Visitor aged 0 to 6 years old in PRI 16 results in an estimated ILCR greater than 1 × 10-6.
Because all HIs for all age ranges are significantly less than 1, an age-weighted HI was not calculated.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 36
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
ILCRs were summed over the age ranges within each PRI Area and are shown in Table 6-1 as
Recreational Visitor (all ages). All CTE ILCRs are less than 1 × 10-6, and all RME ILCRs are less than
5 × 10-6. As shown in Table G-39, background concentrations account for at least 40 to 80 percent of the
total ILCR.
6.7 Rancher Risk Characterization
Ranchers spend some time in PRIs 15 and 16. All HIs are less than 1 and all ILCRs are less than
1 × 10-6, with background concentrations accounting for over 50 percent of risk values.
6.8 Risk Characterization Summary
As shown in Table 6-1, the PRI Areas with the highest HI and ILCR values are PRIs 2, 12, and 13. When
background contributions to risk are taken into account, the risks in PRI 13 are much lower.
6.8.1 Noncancer Risks
The HI does not exceed 1 for any receptor in any PRI Area. Cumulative HI values for USM Workers are 1
or below, indicating that noncancer risks are not of significant concern.
6.8.2 Cancer Risks
ILCR values are at the low end or below the usual risk range for many scenarios, and do not exceed
1 × 10-4 for any scenario. ILCR values that approach or exceed 1 × 10-5 are discussed below.
In PRI 2 (Landfill), the ILCR for the USM Worker is 3 × 10-6 for the CTE scenario and 2 × 10-5 for the RME
scenario. The risk driver is TEQ. The RME scenario assumes the worker spends 10 percent of his annual
work time in PRI 2 outside of a vehicle or equipment (200 hours), and 25 percent of his annual work time
in PRI 2 (500 hours).
Cumulative risks for the USM Worker exposed to COPCs in PRIs 2 through 12 range from 8 × 10-6 to
5 × 10-5.
In PRI 12, the ILCR for the Nearby Worker ranges from 5 × 10-6 to 1 × 10-5. Background COPC
concentrations make up at least 50 percent of the ILCR.
In PRI 13, the Brine Shrimp Worker ILCR values are estimated to range from 1 × 10-5 to 2 × 10-5,
depending on how much time they spend along the GSLIC. The risk drivers are chromium, TEQ, and
arsenic, at least half of which is from natural background sources.
Risk values for Site receptors incorporate many conservative assumptions, which are discussed in the
uncertainty evaluation in Section 7. This practice tends to result in an overestimate of risk.
6.8.3 Hypothetical Future Risk for the Worker from Groundwater Ingestion
Groundwater beneath the Site is very high in TDS, and is not suitable for use as drinking water. If the
water were desalinated in the future in order to be available for drinking, HI values and ILCR values would
both be above a level of concern. The risk is due to a variety of organic and inorganic COPCs, some of
which are partly natural in origin.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 37
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
7. UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
Risk assessment is a means of estimating the theoretical upper-bound probability that an adverse health
effect (e.g., cancer, impaired reproduction) might occur in a receptor as a result of either actual or
assumed chemical exposures. The multitude of conservative assumptions inherent in the risk assessment
process guards against underestimation of risks. Risk estimates have uncertainties that can arise at
multiple steps of the risk assessment process. This section identifies and evaluates the most important
sources of uncertainty in this BHHRA to provide an indication to risk managers of the relative degree of
uncertainty associated with a risk estimate. Some sources of uncertainty may be evaluated quantitatively,
while others are discussed qualitatively.
7.1 Uncertainty in Environmental Sampling and Analyses
This risk evaluation relies on the sampling results obtained from the phased RI investigations conducted
at the Site. Although a large amount of sampling was conducted over several years, very few errors in
sampling and analyses were documented. Careful tracking of sampling and quality control activities
supports the assumption that few, if any, additional undocumented issues occurred, and the data
generated are deemed appropriate for use in site decision-making.
7.1.1 Data Quality and Usability
Any uncertain or unreliable data generated by laboratory analysis procedures are usually found during
data review and validation, and data that do not meet data quality standards established in the quality
assurance project plan incorporated into each SAP (data qualified as “R”/rejected) are not included in the
risk assessment dataset.
Because Site solids and water samples are generally high in salt and often acidic, higher levels of
interference may occur in laboratory analyses of Site samples than are typically seen. A DMA was
conducted for solids and water analyses (ERM 2013a) to test adjustments to the analytical methods and
improve data quality. As described in the DMA TM (ERM 2013a), several project-specific techniques were
incorporated into a set of laboratory work instructions for inclusion in the SAP for each sampling phase.
These techniques allowed for adjustments to be made for high concentration samples as well as different
cleanup and analytical techniques for improved quantitation of SVOCs, metals, perchlorate, and anions. A
DMA was also conducted for collection and analysis of air samples (ERM 2014a). Results of the air DMA
supported selection of appropriate sample collection media, analytical method for VOCs, and sampling
duration. Application of this information to sample collection and analysis improved data quality and
reduced uncertainty in the data used in the risk assessment.
7.1.2 Data Representativeness
All sampling that was performed during the RI was based on carefully developed Quality Assurance
Project Plans that focused on assuring all data collected would represent the range of conditions in each
relevant medium and to address all potentially relevant compounds to ensure that the nature and extent
of constituent impacts at the Site were adequately characterized. Consequently, there is confidence that
the data used in the risk assessment are generally representative of Site conditions, and this is not a
significant source of uncertainty.
In some cases, sampling locations were selected within areas of known impacts and not evenly across an
exposure area. For example, in PRI 14, most samples were collected in an area that was known to have
been impacted by overflows of the OWP. Much of PRI 14 was not impacted, and the unimpacted area
was underrepresented in the dataset, which likely resulted in an overestimate of risk in this PRI Area.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 38
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
The sampling and analysis data are sufficient to characterize the impacts and the associated potential
risks.
7.2 Uncertainty in Fate-and-Transport Modeling
Fate and transport modeling was used to predict two types of EPCs: 1) the concentration of COPCs in air
due to mechanical disturbance of soils causing release of soil particles into air, and 2) the uptake of
COPCs into game tissue from the ingestion of contaminated soil and food items by game animals
harvested by hunters. In general, use of mathematical models to predict such complex processes is
expected to yield only approximations of actual concentrations, and results are often somewhat higher
than actual. Because the risks to receptors from these two pathways are generally small, any error due to
overestimation is not a significant source of uncertainty in this BHHRA.
7.3 Uncertainty in Exposure Assessment
Uncertainties can arise from the types of exposures examined, the points of potential human exposure,
the concentrations of COPCs at the points of human exposure, and the intake assumptions. The risks
calculated depend largely on the assumptions used to calculate the rate of COPC intake.
7.3.1 Uncertainties in Selection of Exposure Factors
Individuals can come into contact with chemicals via a number of different exposure pathways. As
described in Section 4.3, the HE Survey (ERM 2015a) collected data on complete exposure pathways for
each receptor and each PRI Area, as applicable, directly from representatives of each receptor group
where possible.
When survey data were lacking, USEPA default exposure factors (USEPA 2014a, 2011b) were used. For
CTE scenarios, some Site-specific values were used, such as for skin adherence factor and exposed skin
area. For surface water exposure, RME and CTE scenarios used Site-specific values from the HE
Survey.
7.3.1.1 Development of Site-Specific Exposure Factors
Site-specific exposure factors were developed based on the responses of workers at the facility,
Resource Managers, Ranchers, and Recreational Visitors or workers who participate in recreational
activities in the buffer areas. Responses relied on the individual respondent’s recollections; responses for
some exposure pathways were quite variable. Some workers, particularly maintenance workers, found it
difficult to estimate how much time they spent working outside of the plant because they were only in the
field on an as-needed basis when equipment malfunctioned or broke down. Of the 24 participants in the
survey focus groups, six indicated no time spent in the PRI Areas. Exposure factors are based on
responses of the 18 participants who reported time spent in at least one PRI Area. One respondent’s
responses were not included in the data because the responses were anomalous (ERM 2015a).
Site-specific CTE values are based on the mean (average) value, and RME values are based on the
maximum observed or reported value considered reliable. In some cases, the CTE and RME value are
the same and are based on one survey response.
7.3.1.2 Total and Ground Hours
Total hours and ground hours (time outside a vehicle or equipment) spent in each PRI Area used for dose
estimates are the maximum hours reported (RME) and the average hours reported (CTE). Using the
maximum reported value reported by one respondent as the RME likely is an overestimate of the typical
exposure of receptors. For some PRI Areas, the total and ground hours reported represent a majority of

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 39
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
working time and are an overestimate of exposure time, such as for Nearby Workers in PRI 12. Resource
Managers are assumed to spend all their time in a PRI Area outside a vehicle (ground hours equal total
hours).
Data collected in the HE Survey were not sufficient to verify which PRI Areas would be visited by the
same individual USM Worker, and the relative amounts of time spent in each. Given some assumed
pattern of multiple PRI Area exposures, calculation of cumulative RME risk cannot be reliably derived by
summation of RME risks. There is low probability of simultaneous RME exposure at all PRI Areas. The
methods used assume RME exposure at the two PRI Areas showing highest risk, which is relatively
unlikely.
Thus, cumulative risks are likely to be overestimated, at least for most individuals. Because most
estimates of cumulative risk are within USEPA's usual risk ranges, this is a relatively small source of
uncertainty.
7.3.1.3 Surface Water Exposure Factors
According to HE Survey responses, most workers report never contacting surface water. Generally,
surface water is infrequently contacted, only once or twice a year by few workers. Responses to the HE
Survey regarding exposure to surface water specified body parts that came in contact with water, but had
little information for most PRI Areas on the amount of time exposed or how long clothes were wet, if at all.
None of the workers who reported contact with water also reported having wet clothes, but some
indicated the ‘time to change,” which may indicate some period of skin contact with damp clothing. Based
on the limited and inconsistent responses, the dermal exposure time was set at 1 hour (residential
bathing time, USEPA 2011c). Given the low pH of the surface water in the wastewater ponds (often less
than 2), an exposure of 1 hour is unlikely, leading to overestimated risk. Surface water contact does not
contribute significantly (more than 10 percent of total) to the overall risk to a receptor in most cases.
However, it is the main contributor to risk for the USM Worker in PRI 6 and to the USM Worker and
Resource Manager in PRI 8.
The overall risk in PRI 8 for both receptors is 2 × 10-6 (RME), and surface water contributes 46 to
74 percent. The PRI 6 ILCR ranges from 5 × 10-6 (CTE) to 9  10-6 (RME), and surface water accounts for
68 to 81 percent of the ILCR. Of note regarding PRI 6 exposure:
 The maximum frequency of contact is based on the response of one worker who reported contact; no
other workers reported contact with PRI 6 surface water.
 Because only one worker reported contact, the CTE and RME exposure frequencies are the same
and are much higher than contact reported for other PRI Areas.
 The pH of surface water in PRI 6 samples was generally 2 or less, and sometimes too low to
measure.
 The worker reported “Time to Change” wet clothes as 0.25 hour, much less than the assumed default
1 hour of exposure (consistent with the assumption that a worker who contacted such low pH water
would immediately seek to remove any wet clothing and rinse their skin).
 The exposed area is unlikely to include the head, and would more likely only include the hands
(assuming the worker is not wearing gloves, though they are standard protective equipment at the
Site) and possibly the feet and arms if shoes and sleeves became wet, so the skin surface area
exposed is also overestimated for this pathway.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 40
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
Assuming a 0.25-hour exposure time as reported for “Time to Change,” but keeping all other exposure
factors the same, would reduce the ILCR by about half. PRI 6 ILCRs would still exceed 1 × 10-6, but
ILCRs for both receptors in PRI 8 would not.
7.3.1.4 Brine Shrimp Worker Exposure Duration
Only an RME scenario was developed for the Brine Shrimp Worker, which assumes an exposure duration
(ED) of 25 years. Although that may be the case for some workers, it is not unreasonable to assume that
many workers will remain in this occupation for only a few years. A reduced ED (to less than 50 percent of
the RME) is a reasonable CTE scenario, and the CTE ILCR for these workers would be proportionately
lower.
7.3.2 Exposure Concentrations
Several assumptions made in developing exposure concentrations and estimating doses are discussed in
the following subsections.
7.3.2.1 Estimating EPCs
As discussed previously, exposure is proportional to the true average concentration in an exposure area.
Because the true average cannot be known with certainty based on a limited number of samples, USEPA
uses the 95UCL on the average as the EPC. This strategy minimizes the chances of underestimating risk,
but increases the chances of overestimating risk. One approach for recognizing when this strategy might
limit confidence in risk management decision-making is to identify cases where risk based on the 95UCL
is above a level of concern, but the risk based on the average is below a level of concern. At this Site,
because most risks based on the 95UCL are below USEPA’s usual level of concern, this is not a
significant source of uncertainty in this BHHRA.
In estimating EPCs, the maximum detected concentration is used when the variability in the data is high
and sample numbers are low, or, when there are few detects for a COPC. This results in an overestimate
of risks for receptors in PRI Areas where this occurs. EPC summary tables in Section 4 (Tables 4-11 to
4-31) show which EPCs are maximum concentrations and which are UCLs. In this BHHRA:
 In solids datasets, the maximum concentration is used for HCB and mercury in several PRI Areas,
due to few detects and some results becoming ND during COPC refinement.
 In PRI 5, the maximum solids HCB concentration was the EPC, and HCB contributed 10 percent of
the ILCR.
 In surface water, few samples are available for PRI 3 and PRI 4, and the maximum is used for
surface water exposure.
 In PRI 5, four surface water COPCs have few detects and the maximum is used.
 In PRI 6, four surface water COPCs have few detects and the maximum is used, including for
pentachlorophenol, which contributes the majority of the ILCR.
 In PRI 8, three surface water COPCs have few detects and the maximum is used, including for
pentachlorophenol, which contributes the majority of the ILCR.
Also, for pentachlorophenol in PRIs 6 and 8, there is only one detect driving the majority of the ILCR. In
both cases, the reported concentration was significantly less than the reporting limit and close to the
MDL, and the samples were diluted 10:1, increasing the uncertainty in the quantitation. The data were
validated and are deemed usable, but the uncertainty in the quantitation contributes significant

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 41
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
uncertainty to the ILCR. One detect out of several samples indicates exposure is infrequent, if it ever
occurs, and the ILCR may be biased high.
7.3.2.2 TEQ EPC Selection
As described in Section 2.3, mammalian TEQs were calculated two ways in each air and solid sample
included in the BHHRA: substituting 0 (TEQ [ND=0]) and substituting one-half the detection limit (TEQ
[ND=1/2DL]) for nondetected dioxin, furan, and PCB dioxin-like congeners (TEQ components). EPCs
were developed for each matrix in each PRI Area for both TEQ datasets, and the EPCs were compared
to evaluate the variation between the values. Table 7-1 provides a comparison of the two sets of EPCs for
air and solids datasets.
The TEQ (ND=0) EPC is within 10 percent (if not the same, then lower) of the TEQ (ND=1/2DL) in solids
for 10 of the 14 PRI Areas and in air. In a few cases (PRIs 8, 14, and 15), the (ND=1/2DL) EPC is 20 to
27 percent lower than the TEQ (ND=0); and in PRI 10 and the GSLIC, it is approximately 20 percent
higher. These results indicate that the substitution choice of the value for ND congeners generally does
not affect the risk characterization. However, exposure of the Brine Shrimp Worker to the GSLIC is
somewhat influenced by use of the higher TEQ value.
7.3.2.3 Bioavailability of COPCs
The toxicity of an ingested COPC is dependent in part on the proportion that is absorbed from the
gastrointestinal tract. Because RfDs and SFOs are generally expressed in terms of ingested rather than
absorbed dose, the potential difference in absorption between different exposure media can have an
impact on the risk characterization (USEPA 1989). The ratio of the bioavailability of a COPC in Site media
and its bioavailability in the test matrix is the RBA. This is of special importance for metals as well as for
some lipophilic COPCs.
A metal ingested via contaminated soil may be absorbed to a lesser or greater extent than if it were
ingested in food or water and may not be comparable to the level of absorption seen in toxicity studies. In
the BHHRA, it is assumed that most COPCs are 100 percent bioavailable, which likely results in an
overestimate of risk for metals. The main exception is arsenic, which is assumed to have 60 percent soil
RBA (USEPA 2012b).
Assuming that soil-bound chemicals are as bioavailable as the pure chemical also may not be accurate
for chemicals that are lipophilic and bind tightly to soil particles, such as dioxins/furans. A number of
studies support a lower bioavailability for 2,3,7,8-TCDD and dioxin/furan mixtures, as discussed in the
Final Report Bioavailability of Dioxins and Dioxin-Like Compounds in Soil (Bioavailability Report, USEPA
2010b). In this report, six studies that evaluated soil contaminated with dioxins and dioxin-like congeners
(DLCs) in situ (not freshly spiked soil) were selected to evaluate RBA of dioxins and DLCs in soil. RBA
estimates for TEQ in all test materials were less than 100 percent, indicating the assumption in this
BHHRA overestimates risk from TEQ.
Although the Bioavailability Report did not propose an RBA that could be applied generally to sites, data
in the reviewed studies “suggest that RBA values of less than 100 percent can be expected,” and USEPA
recommends the collection of site-specific data for assessment of RBA at sites with soil impacted by
dioxins and DLCs. The findings can be summarized briefly as follows:
 RBA for dioxin/furan mixtures in soils assayed in swine and rats is less than 100 percent as
compared to a lipid or organic solvent vehicle as the reference material (i.e., the material used in the
toxicity study to develop the RfD and SFO).
 RBA varies with the level of congener chlorination, and swine and rat assays differ. Swine assay data
indicate an increase in RBA with increasing chlorination (Budinsky et al. 2008; Wittsiepe et al. 2007),

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 42
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
while rat assay data indicate a decrease in RBA with increasing chlorination (Budinsky et al. 2008;
Finley et al. 2009).
 The effect of congener chlorination on RBAs suggests the soil RBA is dependent on the congener
composition in the affected soil, in addition to the bioassay used to estimate RBA. Different
composite RBAs will result when calculated based on total congener mass or when based on TEQ:
 If the swine bioassay is used, octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (OCDD) and OCDF have a higher
RBA than congeners with fewer chlorines. For soil with high concentrations of OCDD and OCDF
(higher RBA and lower TEF), the RBA based on total congener mass will be higher than the
RBA based on total TEQ.
 If the rat bioassay is used, OCDD and OCDF have a lower RBA than congeners with fewer
chlorines. Soil with high concentrations of OCDD and OCDF would result in higher TEQ RBAs
compared to RBAs for total congener mass.
 A systematic evaluation of the influence of abiotic constituents, compound aging, and other soil
factors on soil RBA has not been conducted. Bioavailability appears to decrease with aging and may
decrease with increased organic carbon content.
Of the studies included in USEPA (2010b), one (Finley et al. 2009) was conducted using soil from the
USM Site with rats as the test species. This study meets most of the experimental design requirements
developed later by USEPA (USEPA 2015c), the main exception being measurement of dioxins only in the
liver and not additional tissues such as adipose in the test animals.
In the Finley et al. (2009) study, individual congener and total hepatic TEQ concentrations in the soil-
dosed rats generally fell within the linear dose-response curve for the three reference groups (low-, mid-,
and high-dose). Bioavailability was independent of initial soil TEQ concentrations, which is consistent with
other studies reviewed in the Bioavailability Report. Using the median TEQ RBA of 38 percent from the
Site-specific Finley et al. study may be a more realistic assumption than the default of 100 percent, which
likely tends to result in an overestimate of TEQ risk from soil ingestion.
Table 7-2 provides a comparison of ILCRs for the USM Worker in each PRI Area, using 100 and
38 percent RBA, as well as for cumulative risks. As shown, in most cases, use of an RBA of 38 percent
results in an average change in ILCR of approximately 2 x 10-6, although the difference is higher for PRIs
with the highest ILCRS (at least 1 x 10-5 in PRI 2 and for cumulative scenarios RME-1 and RME-2).
Cancer risks estimated using this site-specific RBA underscore that ILCRs are well within the lower end of
the risk management range. .
7.3.2.4 Comparison of Surface and Subsurface Soil Concentrations
All exposure point concentrations for solids used in this BHHRA are based on surface solids data
collected from 0 to 6 inches bgs. This is because it is expected that human exposure to soils and
sediments will be mainly restricted to surficial materials. However, if workers perform excavation activities
in a region of contaminated subsurface soil, or if subsurface materials that are more contaminated than
surface solids are brought to the surface, then risk values based on surface solids might be too low.
A comparison of COPC concentrations in surface solids and subsurface solids samples is shown in
Table 7-3.
Surface sample mean concentrations are greater than the mean concentrations for subsurface samples
for most COPCs in PRIs 4, 8, and 14. The only exception is arsenic in PRI 14, and the concentrations are
similar to background. In PRI 2, sample mean concentrations are higher in surface samples for the main
contributor to risk (TEQ).

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 43
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
In PRIs 5, 6, 7, and 10, mean subsurface concentrations are generally two to three times greater than
mean surface concentrations of COPCs. Note that in PRIs 6 and 7, only three and two subsurface
samples were collected, respectively, which provide limited data for comparison. Also, ditch sediments in
PRI 1 that have been buried and capped with clean soil are known to have high levels of TEQ and other
COPCs.
In locations where subsurface sample concentrations significantly exceed surface concentrations, use of
EPCs based on surface samples will tend to underestimate risk if exposure to subsurface material does
occur. Based on current and foreseeable future Site operations, it is considered relatively unlikely that
receptors will be exposed to significant amounts of subsurface solids, so this is not considered to be a
major source of uncertainty. These conditions should be considered in the future if excavations occur in
areas of contaminated subsurface material or if contaminated subsurface solids become exposed in the
future.
7.4 Uncertainty in Toxicity Assessment
Most of the toxicity values developed by USEPA and other agencies that were used in this BHHRA are
based on studies in laboratory test animals. In general, extrapolation of toxicological data from animal
tests is one of the largest sources of uncertainty in a risk assessment. There may be important, but
unidentified, differences in uptake, metabolism, and distribution of chemicals in the body between the test
species and humans.
Typically, animals are administered doses of a chemical in a standard diet or in air that are higher than
would be experienced in an environmental setting. Humans may be exposed to much lower doses in a
highly variable diet, which may affect the toxicity of the chemical. Because of these differences, it is not
surprising that extrapolation error is a large source of uncertainty in a risk assessment.
These uncertainties are typically addressed through use of an uncertainty factor of 10 to account for
potential differences in toxicity between humans and animals. Because there is usually no data to show
that humans are 10-fold more sensitive than animals, this strategy is more likely to overestimate than
underestimate toxicity in human receptors.
Additional sources of uncertainty in the toxicity factors for TEQ, PCB, and chromium are discussed below.
7.4.1 TEQ Toxicity Values
TEQ is the main contributor to cancer risk for Site receptors. The risk assessment used CalEPA toxicity
criteria (per USEPA’s hierarchy; USEPA 2003) for both the oral and inhalation routes to calculate cancer
risks. The values developed by CalEPA assume there is no level of exposure that is without risk.
However, there is evidence put forward by the International Toxicity Estimates for Risk Assessment (ITER
database3; Simon et al, 2009), that TCDD meets USEPA cancer evaluation guidance (USEPA 2005) as
causing cancer via a “threshold” mode of action. This indicates that TCDD carcinogenicity would be better
characterized using an RfD approach, as there will be threshold dose below which cancers would be
unlikely to occur. The Simon et al, 2009 paper calculated an oral intake value of 1 × 10-7 mg/kg/day as
protective of liver cancer. The Netherlands (RIVM agency) also determined that a threshold approach
was protective to evaluate TCDD-induced cancer. RIVM estimated an oral intake value of 2 × 10-9 mg/kg-
day (Tiesjema B and AJ Baars. 2009). The analyses done by ITER and RIVM focused on the oral route,
and CalEPA and other agencies assume that the oral and inhalation routes are equivalent. This assumes
the route of exposure does not affect absorption, and there is no difference in metabolism and
pharmacokinetics between animals and humans, which is unlikely to be true. The oral RfD from IRIS used

3 https://tera.org/sseus/iternew/searchres.php, search on dioxin.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 44
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
in this assessment was 7 × 10-10 mg/kg-day, lower than either of the cancer-based oral intake values.
This indicates that, if TEQ acts by a threshold mode of action, the IRIS RfD is likely protective of both
cancer and noncancer toxicity. Because TEQ was below a hazard quotient of 1 for all areas/scenarios,
cancer risks that are driven primarily by TEQ could be much lower than estimated herein, or even not a
concern, at the Site.
TEQ is one of the most important COPCs at the Site. TEQ is not measured directly, but is a calculated
value that combines the reported concentration of 17 dioxin and furan congeners and 12 coplanar PCB
congeners by applying a congener-specific TEF (developed by the World Health Organization in 2005
and summarized in USEPA 2010). TEFs are estimates of the toxicity of dioxin-like compounds relative to
the toxicity of 2,3,7,8-TCDD, which is assigned a TEF of 1.0. All studies upon which animals were
exposed (the basis of the CalEPA, ITER, and RIVM criteria) exposed animals only to 2,3,7,8-TCDD, not a
congener mix. 2,3,7,8-TCDD makes up a very small amount of the dioxins/furans present at the Site. The
congener pattern at the Site consists primarily of OCDF and hexa- and hepta-CDFs. TCDD is detected
infrequently, and other dioxin congeners are detected at much lower concentrations than the furans. In
determining TEFs, experts made decisions about a TEF value based on expert judgment and point
estimates (World Health Organization 2006). There are uncertainties associated with the development
and application of TEFs. The direction of bias is unknown.
7.4.2 PCB Toxicity Values
The SFO and IUR used for total PCBs are the high risk Aroclor values from IRIS (USEPA 2020b). Total
PCB concentrations were not quantified against an Aroclor standard, but are the sum of individual
congeners detected in a sample. The congener pattern in solids samples at USM is significantly different
from Aroclor mixtures such as 1254. Total PCBs at USM are dominated by PCB-209
(decachlorobiphenyl) and nonachlorobiphenyls, which generally make up 90 percent or more of the total.
Because of the difference in congener composition, using the high risk Aroclor toxicity values (similar to
Aroclor 1254) likely yields only an approximation of the risk from Site samples. Estimated risks from total
PCBs are low, and this is not a significant source of uncertainty.
7.4.3 Chromium Toxicity Values
Site processes do not use or generate Cr(VI), and it is detected in only a few surface water samples at
low concentrations. Because Cr(VI) is readily reduced to Cr(III) in the environment, it is unlikely that Cr(VI)
is present in solids at the Site at levels of concern. Because Cr(VI) was not specifically measured in solids
(only total chromium), toxicity values for Cr(VI) were used for evaluation of risk from Site solids as a
conservative measure. To evaluate how using different toxicity values may affect the risk results, risks
were calculated assuming 90 percent Cr(III) and 10 percent Cr(VI) for the Brine Shrimp Worker in PRI 13
and the Nearby Worker in PRI 12. These receptors were chosen because overall ILCRs were at least
1 × 10-5, with chromium in solids contributing greater than 25 percent of the ILCR. Table 7-4 provides a
comparison of ILCRs for these receptors assuming 100 percent Cr(VI) versus 10 percent Cr(VI) in solids.
For the Brine Shrimp Worker, chromium contributes 32 percent of the ILCR if 100 percent Cr(VI) is
assumed, as compared to contributing only 5 percent if Cr(VI) is assumed to be 10 percent of total
chromium when it assumed that the worker spends 20 percent of the time in the GSLIC. The difference is
even greater when assuming the worker spends only 10 percent of the time in the GSLIC, and the total
ILCR decreases to less than 1 × 10-5.
For the PRI 12 Nearby Worker, chromium contributes 27 percent of the CTE ILCR if 100 percent Cr(VI) is
assumed, as compared to contributing only 4 percent if Cr(VI) is assumed to be 10 percent of total
chromium. For the RME scenario, the contributions are 26 and 3 percent assuming 100 versus
10 percent Cr(VI), and the total ILCR decreases to less than 1 × 10-5.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 45
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
These calculations show that the difference in ILCR between the assumption of 100 percent Cr(VI) vs.
10 percent Cr(VI) is about 1 × 10-6 to 5 × 10-6, depending on the exposure scenario. While this may
occasionally constitute a significant difference in the total ILCR for some scenarios, the absolute
difference is relatively small and is not a significant source of uncertainty in risk-management decision-
making.
7.5 Summary of Uncertainty Analysis
Based on the review above, the most important source of uncertainty in this risk assessment is the level
of cancer risk from exposure to TEQ. This is due to the following:
 Calculations of both CTE and RME risk are based on the 95UCL rather than the observed average
concentration. This strategy helps ensure that risk will not be underestimated, but implies risks will be
overestimated in many cases.
 Dose calculations assume 100 percent absorption of all congeners contributing to TEQ, while a
number of studies indicate dioxin and dioxin-like compounds are usually absorbed to a significantly
lesser degree when ingested in soil or sediment. This likely results in an overestimate of risk,
possibly by several-fold.
 TEFs used to calculate TEQ are uncertain, and TEQ values computed with these TEFs might
overestimate or underestimate the true toxicity equivalency level.
 Calculations assume that dioxin and dioxin-like compounds cause cancer via a mode of action with
no threshold. However, there is evidence that TEQ may cause cancer by a threshold mechanism. If
so, cancer estimates for TEQ would be substantially reduced.
Other less substantial sources of uncertainty include the following:
 Toxicity values are not available for every detected analyte. This could result in a small
underestimate of total risk, but it is unlikely to be meaningful compared to risks from COPCs with
toxicity values.
 Analytical detection limits are higher than a level of concern for some analytes in some samples. This
could result in a small underestimate of risk for a few COPCs in a few PRI Areas, but it is unlikely to
be meaningful compared to risks from COPCs with adequate detection limits.
 Some human exposure parameters are based on limited Site-specific data, and some are based on
USEPA guidance that was not developed for this setting and activities. Thus, risks based on these
values may not be accurate. It is considered likely that the values used in the calculations do not
underestimate risk and tend to overestimate risk in some cases.
 Estimates of exposure from two pathways (inhalation of soil particles in air due to mechanical
disturbances and ingestion of contaminants that have been taken up from soil or diet by game
animals) are not based on measurements, but on mathematical models that are only expected to
yield approximate values. These modeled values are more likely to be high than low because the
models use conservative assumptions.
 Toxicity factors for most COPCs are derived from studies in laboratory animals, and extrapolation of
these values to humans generally involves application of one or more default uncertainty factors. This
tends to result in overestimation of risk in some cases.
 There is no exact way to calculate an estimate of RME cumulative risk to USM Workers who may be
exposed in more than one PRI. The method used is intentionally conservative and is more likely to
overestimate than underestimate actual cumulative risk.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 46
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
Because calculated risk values are generally within or below USEPA’s usual risk range, the level of
uncertainty due to each of these issues is judged to be relatively small. Consequently, it is concluded that
uncertainty from these sources does not pose a significant limitation to the use of these findings by risk
managers.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 47
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
8. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
This BHHRA evaluated noncancer and cancer risk to Site receptors who may be exposed to COPCs in
ambient air, solids, surface water, and groundwater in PRIs 2 through 16. Significant findings are
summarized below.
8.1 Noncancer Risk Summary
Noncancer risk as represented by the HI does not exceed 1 for any Site receptor based on exposure to
any of the PRI Areas. Cumulative HI values for USM Workers are 1 or below. As conservative
assumptions were made for cumulative exposure, the actual cumulative HI for most workers is unlikely to
be as high as 1. These results indicate that noncancer risks are not of significant concern at the Site.
8.2 Cancer Risk Summary
No ILCR value for any scenario reaches or exceeds 1 × 10-4. The ILCR values (both CTE and RME) for
most receptors are less than 1 × 10-5; and for many, it is less than 1 × 10-6. ILCR values that equal or
exceed 1 × 10-5 are observed for USM Workers, Nearby Workers, and Brine Shrimp Workers, as
discussed below.
8.2.1 USM Worker
The only ILCR at or above 1  10-5 for the USM Worker is in PRI 2 for the RME scenario. Risks are
mainly due to TEQ concentrations in solids and assume an RBA of 100 percent. Most studies indicate
that the RBA for TEQ in soil is much lower, meaning actual risks are likely to be lower.
Cumulative ILCR risk to a USM Worker who visits more than one PRI Area was evaluated under four
scenarios (Section 6.2.3). ILCRs range from 8 x 10-6 to 5 × 10-5. Because the scenarios evaluated are
conservative and ILCRs were calculated assuming an RBA of 100 percent, actual cumulative risks are
likely to be lower.
Hypothetical future risk to a worker from groundwater ingestion (Appendix B) shows that even if the water
were desalinated in the future in order to be available for drinking, HI values and ILCR values would both
be above a level of concern. The risk is due to a variety of organic and inorganic COPCs, some of which
are partly natural in origin.
8.2.2 Nearby Worker
The ILCR for the Nearby Worker in PRI 12 under the RME scenario is 1 × 10-5, mainly due to arsenic and
chromium in solids at concentrations that are similar to Upland background EPCs, as well as some
contribution from TEQ. Using an assumption that 10 percent of chromium is in the hexavalent form
(instead of 100 percent) reduces the CTE ILCR to 4 × 10-6.
8.2.3 Brine Shrimp Worker
In PRI 13, ILCRs for the Brine Shrimp Worker range from 1 × 10-5 to 2 × 10-5, depending on the relative
amount of time spent at the shoreline of the GSL and at the GSLIC. At least a third of the ILCR is
contributed by ambient air exposure, with arsenic as the main contributor. Arsenic is also a significant
contributor to the solids ILCR, as is chromium when assumed to be 100 percent Cr(VI). The arsenic and
chromium EPCs in the shoreline and GSLIC datasets are the same or less than their EPCs in the
Lakebed background dataset. Using an assumption that 10 percent of chromium is in the hexavalent form
(instead of 100 percent) reduces the ILCRs to 1 × 10-5 or less.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 48
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
8.3 Conclusions
Calculations performed in this risk assessment indicate that noncancer hazards to people are below a
level of concern and that cancer risks are within or below the usual risk management range. The main
contributor to noncancer and cancer risks is TEQ in solids in the PRI Areas where wastes are stored
(PRIs 2 through 10), with some contribution from arsenic and HCB in solids and air. In PRIs 11 and 12,
arsenic and chromium are the main contributors to risk, and concentrations are similar to Upland
background concentrations. In the buffer area PRI Areas (13 through 16), arsenic in solids is generally
the main contributor and concentrations are comparable to background. These results indicate that Site-
related COPCs are unlikely to pose a significant noncancer or cancer risk under the given exposure
conditions. These risk findings are based on the assumption that land use will remain industrial into the
foreseeable future and that human exposure patterns will remain similar to those under current
conditions. If land use or human exposure patterns were to change in the future, then a re-evaluation of
risks may be needed.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 49
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
REFERENCES
9. REFERENCES
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1998. Toxicological Profile for Chlorinated
Dibenzo-p-Dioxins. US Department of Health and Human Services. December.
ATSDR. 2000. Toxicological Profile for Polychlorinated Biphenyls. US Department of Health and Human
Services. November.
ATSDR. 2007. Toxicological Profile for Arsenic. US Department of Health and Human Services. August.
ATSDR. 2012. Addendum to the Toxicological Profile for Chlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins. US Department
of Health and Human Services. November.
ATSDR. 2015. Toxicological Profile for Hexachlorobenzene. US Department of Health and Human
Services. August.
Baskin, R.L. and Allen, D.V. 2005. Bathymetric Map of the South Part of Great Salt Lake, Utah. U.S.
Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 2894.
Budinsky, R.A, Rowlands, J.C., Casteel, S., Fent, G., Cushing, C.A., Newsted, J., Giesy, J.P., Ruby,
M.V., and Aylward, L.L. 2008. A pilot study of oral bioavailability of dioxins and furans from
contaminated soils: Impact of differential hepatic enzyme activity and species differences.
Chemosphere 70:1774-1786.
Beyer et al. 1994. Estimates of Soil Ingestion by Wildlife. The Journal of Wildlife Management 58:375-
382. Value for western sandpiper.
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 1994. Preliminary Endangerment Assessment
Guidance Manual. Revised October 2015.
CalEPA. 2011. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Technical Support Document for Cancer Potencies.
Appendix B. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.
CalEPA. 2007. Public Health Goal for TCDD in Drinking Water - Draft. Pesticide and Toxicology Branch,
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. June
Dames & Moore. 1970. Report of Comprehensive Investigation, Oolitic Sand Deposits, Magnesium
Project, Tooele County, Utah, For National Lead Company, 23 January.
ERM-West, Inc. (ERM). 2013a. Draft Phase 1A Laboratory Demonstration of Method Applicability
Technical Memorandum for Solids, Sediment, Waste, and Water. January.
ERM. 2013b. Final Data Management Plan, Version 3. September.
ERM. 2014a. Draft Air Quality PRI (OU-2) Demonstration of Method Applicability – Technical
Memorandum. June.
ERM. 2014b. Final Screening Level Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum. July.
ERM. 2015a. Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report Final. August.
ERM. 2015b. Final Phase 1A-B RI SAP for (1) COPCs in Solids, Sediment, and Solid Wastes in PRI
Areas 1 and 3 through 7; (2) Preliminary Site Characterization Mapping of PRI Areas 1 and 3
through 7; and (3) Background Chemical Assessment of Biotic Reference Areas for Sitewide
Ecological Risk Assessment. September.
ERM. 2016a. Final Phase 1A Data Report for PRI Areas 2 and 8 through 17. March.
ERM. 2016b. Final Phase 1A Data Report for Operable Unit 2 – Air. October.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 50
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
REFERENCES
ERM. 2016c. Final Phase 1A-B Remedial Investigation Data Report. October.
ERM. 2017a. Final Phase 2A Remedial Investigation Quality Assurance Project Plan: Representative
Prey Investigation. US Magnesium RI/FS, Rowley, Utah. January.
ERM. 2017b. Final OU-1 Screening-Level Risk Assessment Report. April.
ERM. 2017c. Final Old Waste Pond/Current Waste Pond Area Hydrologic Conceptual Site Model. April.
ERM. 2017d. Final Operable Unit 2 Screening-level Risk Assessment Report. September.
ERM. 2018a. Proposed Revisions to Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical Memo
Revisions and Notes of 22 February Call. April.
ERM. 2018b. Final Phase 2A Representative Prey Investigation Data Report. August.
ERM. 2018c. Phase 2B Hydrologic Remedial Investigation Sampling and Analysis Plan. Prepared for US
Magnesium. Salt Lake City, UT. October.
ERM. 2019. Revised Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum.
March.
ERM. 2020a. Draft Phase 2B Hydro Remedial Investigation Data Report. May.
ERM. 2020b. Draft Phase 1A-B SAP Modifications Data Report. August.
ERM. 2022. Final Combined OU-2 Problem Formulation and Human Health and Ecological Baseline Risk
Assessment. Pending.
Finley, B., Fehling, K., Warmerdam, J., and Morinello, E. J. 2009. Oral Bioavailability of Polychlorinated
Dibenzo-p-Dioxins/Dibenzofurans in Industrial Soils. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment.
15:1146-1167.
Hely, A.G., R.W. Mower, and C.A. Horr. 1971. Water Resources of Salt Lake County, Utah. Utah
Department of Natural Resources Technical Publication No. 31, 244 p.
Hintze, L.F., G.C. Willis, D.Y.M. Laes, D.A. Sprinkel, and K.D. Brown. 2000. Digital Geologic Map of Utah.
Utah Geologic Survey.
Hood, J.W., and K.M. Waddell. 1968. Hydrologic reconnaissance of Skull Valley, Tooele County, Utah.
Utah Department of Natural Resources Technical Publication No. 18. Prepared by U.S.
Geological Survey in cooperation with Utah Department of Natural Resources Division of Water
Rights.
Nagy, K.A. 2001. Food requirements of wild animals: Predictive equations for free-living mammals,
reptiles, and birds. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews, Series B 71, 21Rꞏ31R.
National Toxicity Program (NTP). 1980. Bioassay of 1,2,3,6,7,8-and 1,2,3,7,8,9- hexachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin (gavage) for possible carcinogenicity. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
Publ. No. (NIH) 80-1754. Carcinogenesis Testing Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda,
MD, and National Toxicology Program, Research Triangle Park, NC.
NTP. 1982. Bioassay of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin for possible carcinogenicity (gavage study).
DHHS Publ No. (NIH) 82-1765. Carcinogenesis Testing Program, National Cancer Institute,
Bethesda, MD, and National Toxicology Program, Research Triangle Park, NC.
NTP. 2004. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) in
female Harlan Sprague-Dawley rats (gavage study). NIH 04-4455. NTP TR 521. National
Toxicology Program, Research Triangle Park, NC.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 51
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
REFERENCES
Simon T., Aylward L.L., Kirman C.R., Rowlands J.C. and Budinsky R.A. 2009. Estimates of Cancer
Potency of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo(p)dioxin Using Linear and Nonlinear Dose-Response
Modeling and Toxicokinetics. Toxicol. Sci. 112(2): 490-506.
Tiesjema B and AJ Baars. 2009. Re-evaluation of some human-toxicological Maximum Permissible Risk
levels earlier evaluated in the period 1991 - 2001. RIVM report no. 711701092. National Institute
for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands, p 41-48.
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 2016. The Mammals of Texas. 7th Edition.
https://www.depts.ttu.edu/nsrl/mammals-of-texas-online-edition/index.php
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance for
Superfund: Volume I—Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part A). Interim Final. Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. USEPA/540/1-89/002. December.
USEPA. 1991a. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume I- Human Health Evaluation Manual
(Part B, Development of Risk-based Preliminary Remediation Goals). EPA540/R-92/003.
December.
USEPA. 1991b. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) Directive 9355.0-30, Role of
the Baseline Risk Assessment in Superfund Remedy Selection Decisions. 22 April.
USEPA. 1992. Guidelines for Exposure Assessment. Federal Register, 57(104):22888-22938. 29 May.
USEPA. 1999a. Compendium of Methods for the Determination of Toxic Organic Compounds in Ambient
Air - Second Edition. EPA/625/R-96/010b. January.
USEPA. 1999b. Compendium of Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Compounds in Ambient Air.
EPA/625/R-96/01a. July.
USEPA. 2001a. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume III - Part A, Process for Conducting
Probabilistic Risk Assessment. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C.
Publication 9285.7-45. December.
USEPA. 2001b. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume I Human Health Evaluation Manual—
Part D, Standardized Planning, Reporting, and Review of Superfund Risk Assessments. Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. Publication 9285.7-47. December.
USEPA.2001c. EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/R-5. Office of
Environmental Information. Washington, D.C. EPA/240/B-01/003. March.
USEPA. 2002. Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites. Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C. OSWER 9355.4-24. December.
USEPA. 2003. Memorandum on Human Health Toxicity Values in Superfund Risk Assessments, from
Michael B. Cook, Director, Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation to
Superfund Remediation Policy Managers, Regions 1-10, dated 5 December. OSWER Directive
9285.7-53.
USEPA. 2004. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual
(Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment) Final. Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response, Washington, DC. EPA/540/R/99/005. July.
USEPA. 2005a. Guidance for Developing Ecological Soil Screening Levels (Eco-SSLs). Table 3 in
Attachment 4-1. Wildlife Exposure Factors and Bioaccumulation Models. March.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 52
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
REFERENCES
USEPA. 2005b. Human Health Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities.
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington D.C. EPA530-R-05-006.
September.
USEPA. 2005c. Uniform Federal Policy for Quality Assurance Project Plans, Evaluating, Assessing, and
Documenting Environmental Data Collection and Use Programs, Part 1: UFP-QAPP Manual.
Final. Version 1. Intergovernmental Data Quality Task Force. EPA-505-B-04-900A. March.
USEPA. 2010a. Recommended Toxicity Equivalence Factors (TEFs) for Human Health Risk
Assessments of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds. EPA/100/R-
10/005. Risk Assessment Forum. Washington, D.C.
USEPA. 2010b. Final Report Bioavailability of Dioxins and Dioxin-Like Compounds in Soil. December.
USEPA. 2011a. Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study. CERCLA Docket No. CERCLA-08-2011-0013.
USEPA. 2011b. Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Chlorinated
Dioxin/Furan Data Review. EPA-540-R-11-016. September.
USEPA. 2011c. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition. National Center for Environmental
Assessment, Washington, DC; EPA/600/R-09/052F. Available online at
http://www.epa.gov/ncea/efh.
USEPA. 2012a. 2,3,7,8-TCDD-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Chemical Assessment Summary. IRIS.
February.
USEPA. 2012b. Recommendations for Default Value for Relative Bioavailability of Arsenic in Solids.
OSWER Directive 9200.1-113. December.
USEPA. 2013. Phase 1A Remedial Investigation Sampling and Analysis Plan to Identify Chemicals of
Potential Concern in Solids, Sediment, Solid Waste, Water and Air, and Receptor Surveys,
Revision 0 for PRI Areas 2 and 8 through 17. September.
USEPA. 2014a. Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Update of Standard Default
Exposure Factors. OSWER Directive 9200.1-120. February.
USEPA. 2014b. National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Organic Methods Data Review (SOM02.2).
OSWER 9355.0-132. EPA 540-R-014-002. August.
USEPA. 2015a. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Update of Standard Default Exposure
Factors. OSWER Directive 9285.6-03. (Originally dated 6 February 2014; FAQs updated
14 September 2015.)
USEPA. 2015b. ProUCL Version 5.1 Technical Guide and Software. October.
USEPA. 2015c. Soil Dioxin Relative Bioavailability Assay Evaluation Framework. OSWER 9200.2-136.
February.
USEPA. 2016a. Administrative Order on Consent. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Docket No. RCRA-08-2016-004.
USEPA. 2016b. Regional Screening Levels. USEPA on-line database: https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-
screening-levels-rsls. May.
USEPA. 2017. Regional Screening Levels. USEPA on-line database: https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-
screening-levels-rsls. June.
USEPA. 2019. US Magnesium – Background Sample Evaluation. Memo from USEPA. October.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page 53
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
US Magnesium LLC – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
REFERENCES
USEPA. 2020a. Regional Screening Levels. USEPA on-line database: https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-
screening-levels-rsls. November.
USEPA. 2020b. Integrated Risk Information System. USEPA on-line database: https://www.epa.gov/iris.
van den Berg, M., L.S. Birnbaum, M. Denison, M. DeVito, W. Farland, M. Feeley, H. Fiedler, H.
Hakansson, A. Hanberg, L. Haws, M. Rose, S. Safe, D. Schrenk, C. Tohyama, A. Tritscher, J.
Tuomisto, M. Tysklind, N. Walker, and R.E. Peterson. 2006. The 2005 World Health Organization
Reevaluation of Human and Mammalian Toxic Equivalency Factors for Dioxins and Dioxin-Like
Compounds. Toxicol. Sci. 93:223-241.
Wittsiepe, J., Erlenkämper, B., Welge, P., Hack, A., Wilhelm, M. 2007. Bioavailability of PCDD/F from
contaminated soil in young Goettingen minipigs. Chemosphere. 2007:355-364.
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
FIGURES
TOOELE
BOX ELDER WEBER
DAVIS
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

1
-
1
.

S
i
t
e

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

M
a
p
_
A
e
r
i
a
l
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
5
/
2
1
/
2
0
2
1

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
1
6
8
,
0
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 14,000 28,000
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 UTM Zone 12N
ERM
Figure 1-1Site Location Map
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 30 60
Miles
¯
Legend
Operating Facility
US Magnesium Property
US Magnesium Wastewater Ponds
US Magnesium Solar Evaporation
Ponds
RI/FS Study Area Boundary
County Boundary
Great Salt Lake
StansburyBay
CarringtonBay
TimpieSpringsWMASkullValley
Inte
r
s
t
a
t
e

8
0
GilbertBay
CargillSalt
Hill AirForceRange
GSLIC
SVDD
PRI 10BariumSulfate Area
PRI 7Northeast PondedWaste Lagoon
PRI 11ATI Titanium Plant AND USMagnesium Parking Lots
PRI 4GypsumPilePRI 9Smut Area
PRI 13BufferArea Northeast
PRI 14BufferArea Southeast
PRI 15Buffer AreaAlluvial Upland
PRI 16Buffer AreaLakeside Mountains
PRI 8Northwest PondedLagoon Overflow
PRI 12Ancillary WorkerExposure Area
PRI 5Southwest PondedWaste Lagoon
PRI 6Northwest PondedWaste Lagoon
Figure 1-2Revised Preliminary RemedialInvestigation Areas
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Environmental Resources Management101 SW Main St, Suite 804Portland, Oregon 97204 ERM
Operating Facility
RI/FS Study Area Boundarys
US Magnesium Property
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
PRI-1: Closed Ditches
PRI-2: Landfill
PRI-3: Sanitary Lagoon
PRI-4: Gypsum Pile
PRI-5: Southwest Ponded Waste Lagoon (CWP)
PRI-6: Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon (CWP)
PRI-7: Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon (OWP)
PRI-8: Northwest Lagoon Overflow
PRI-9: Smut Area
PRI-10: Barium Sulfate Disposal Area
PRI-11: ATI Titanium and USM Parking Lots
PRI-12: Ancillary Worker Exposure Area
PRI 13: Buffer Area Northeast
PRI-14: Buffer Area Southeast
PRI-15: Buffer Area Alluvial Uplands
PRI-16: Buffer Area Lakside Mountains
GSLIC
SVDD
0 5,000 10,000
Feet
³
Notes: SV DD – Sk ull V alley Diversion Ditch GSLIC – Great Salt Lak e Intak e Canal All boundaries approxim ate, orig inally provided by EPA Revised Buffer Areas - April 2012. Aerial Photo: NAIP (USDA) June 29, 2009
File: M:\Projects\0132320_USMagnesium _Confidential\m aps\BHHRA 2020\Decem ber2020\1-2 RevisedPRIs.m xd By: Mik e Appel Date: 4/1/2021 1:33:12 PM
PRI 17: Site-Wide Surface and Groundwater
(Not Shown)
PRI 18: Site-Wide Ambient Air (Not Shown)
PRI 2Landfill
PRI 1ClosedDitches
PRI 4Gypsum Pile
PRI 9SmutArea PRI 3SanitaryLagoon
PRI 12Ancillary WorkerExposure Area
PRI 11ATI Titanium Plantand USM Parking Lots
PRI 5SouthwestPonded WasteLagoon
PRI 15Buffer Area Alluvial Upland
#
!.
!.!.
--
PRI18-003
PRI18-001
PRI18-002
PRI 6
Northwest Ponded
Waste Lagoon
PRI 3
Sanitary
Lagoon
PRI 2
Landfill
PRI 7
Northeast Ponded
Waste Lagoon
PRI 5
Southeast Ponded
Waste Lagoon
PRI 11
ATI Titanium Plant and US
Magnesium Parking Lots
PRI 4
Gypsum Pile
PRI 9
Smut Area
PRI 14
Buffer
Area South
PRI 15
Buffer
Area West
PRI 9
Smut Area
PRI 12
US Magnesium Ancillary
Worker Exposure Area
PRI 1
Site
Ditches
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
1
_
U
p
d
a
t
e
d
A
e
r
i
a
l
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
3
/
0
4
/
2
0
2
1

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
9
,
6
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 800 1,600
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure 2-1Ambient Air Phase 1ASampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
!.Phase 1A Air Sample Locations
#ATI Meteorological Monitoring Tower
Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Areas
Operating Facility
Notes:
All boundaries approximate, originally provided by
EPA.
Adapted from September 2013 USEPA Final Phase
1A SAP Figure 14-15.
Phase 1A Location ID Northing Easting
PRI18-001 4,530,864 353,295PRI18-002 4,560,476 353,787PRI18-003 4,530,414 354,188
STACK
")
")
")
")
")
")")")")")")")")")
")
")
")")")")")")")")")
")
")
")
")
")")")")")")")")
#*#*
#*#*
PRI2-001
PRI2-002
PRI2-003
PRI2-004
PRI2-005
PRI2-006
PRI2-007
PRI2-008 PRI2-009
PRI2-010
PRI2-011PRI2-012
PRI2-013
PRI2-014
PRI 6: Northwest
Ponded Waste Lagoon PRI 6: Northwest
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 3:
Sanitary
Lagoon
PRI 2:
Landfill
PRI 7: Northeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 5: Southeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 4:
Gypsum Pile
PRI 9:
Smut Area
PRI 9:
Smut
Area
PRI 9:
Smut Area
PRI 12: US Magnesium
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Area
PRI 1: Site
Ditches
PRI3-003
PRI3-009
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
2
_
U
p
d
a
t
e
d
A
e
r
i
a
l
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
3
/
0
4
/
2
0
2
1

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
4
,
3
2
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 360 720
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure 2-2PRIs 2 and 3 Sampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
#*Surface Water Sample Location
")Solid Sample Location
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
Operating Facility
#*#*
#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*
#*#*
#*#*
")")")
")")")")")")")")
")")")")
")")
")
")")")
")
")
")")")")")
")")")
")")
")")")")")
")")
")")
")
")")
")")")
")")")
")")")")")
")")")
")
")")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
4-01 4-02 4-03
4-04 4-05 4-06 4-07
4-08 4-09 4-10 4-11
4-12 4-13 4-14
5-01 5-02 5-03 5-04 5-05
5-06 5-07 5-08 5-09 5-10
5-11 5-12 5-13
5-14 5-15
5-16
5-175-18 5-19
5-20
5-215-22 5-23
6-01 6-02 6-03
6-04 6-05 6-06
6-07 6-08 6-09 6-10 6-11
6-12 6-13 6-14
6-15
6-16
DMA-Sed/W-PRI05-1
DMA-Sed/W-PRI06
DMA-Soil-PRI05
DMA-Soil-PRI06
PRI4-008
PRI4-013
PRI5-002
PRI5-008
PRI5-010PRI5-017
PRI5-018
PRI5-501
PRI6-002/002A
PRI6-004 PRI6-006
PRI6-008
PRI6-017
SH-01-A
SH-02-B
SH-03-A
SM-X-A
SM-X-B
UH-01-AUH-01-B
UH-02-A
UH-02-B (ALT)
UH-03-A
UM-06-A
UM-07-A
UM-09-A
UM-X-A
PRI 10: Barium
Sulfate Area PRI 6: Northwest
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 3:
Sanitary
Lagoon
PRI 2:
Landfill
PRI 7: Northeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 5: Southeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 11: ATI Titanium
Plant and US Magnesium
Parking Lots
PRI 4:
Gypsum Pile
PRI 9:
Smut
Area
PRI 13: Buffer
Area North
and East
PRI 14:
Buffer
Area South
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 8: Northwest
Ponded Waste
Lagoon Overflow
PRI 9:
Smut Area
PRI 12: US Magnesium
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Area
PRI 1:
Closed
Ditches
DMA-Gyp-PRI04-1
DMA-Gyp-PRI04-2
DMA-Sed-PRI05-2
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
3
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
2
/
0
3
/
2
0
2
2

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
1
2
,
0
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure 2-3PRIs 4, 5, and 6 Sampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
#*Surface Water Sample Location
")Solid Sample Location
Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Operating Facility
")
")")
")")")
")")")")
")")")")")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
PRI 10: Barium
Sulfate
Area
PRI 6: Northwest
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 3:
Sanitary
Lagoon
PRI 2:
Landfill
PRI 7: Northeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 5: Southeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 4:
Gypsum Pile
PRI 9:
Smut
Area
PRI 13: Buffer
Area North
and East
PRI 14:
Buffer
Area South
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 15:
Buffer Area
West
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 8: Northwest
Ponded Waste
Lagoon Overflow
PRI 9:
Smut Area
PRI 12: US Magnesium
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Area
PRI 1: Site
Ditches 7-01
7-02 7-03
7-04 7-05 7-06
7-07 7-08 7-09 7-10
7-11 7-12 7-13 7-14 7-15
7-16 7-17
7-22
7-23
7-24
DMA-Sed/W-PRI07-1
SM-06-B
DMA-Sed-PRI07-2
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
4
_
U
p
d
a
t
e
d
A
e
r
i
a
l
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
3
/
0
4
/
2
0
2
1

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
1
2
,
0
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure 2-4PRI 7 Sampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
")Solid Sample Location
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
Operating Facility
")
#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*
#*#*
#*#*#*#*
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")")")")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")")
")")
")")
")")
")")")
")")")")")
")
")")
")")
")
")
")
8-22 8-23
8-24
8-25
8-26
8-27
8-28
8-29
PRI10-001
PRI10-002
PRI10-003
PRI10-004
PRI10-005
PRI10-006
PRI10-007
PRI10-008
PRI10-009
PRI10-010
PRI10-011
PRI10-012
PRI10-013
PRI10-014
PRI8-002 PRI8-003
PRI8-004 PRI8-005
PRI8-005A
PRI8-005B
PRI8-006 PRI8-007
PRI8-008 PRI8-009 PRI8-011 PRI8-012
PRI8-013
PRI8-018
PRI8-019
PRI8-020PRI8-021
SL-09-A
TTGP-ATTGP-A-OW
TTGP-B
TTGP-B-OW
TTGP-C
PRI6-002A
PRI 10: Barium
Sulfate Area
PRI 6: Northwest
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 7: Northeast
Ponded Waste
Lagoon
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 8: Northwest
Ponded Waste
Lagoon Overflow
PRI8-001
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
5
_
U
p
d
a
t
e
d

A
e
r
i
a
l
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
3
/
0
4
/
2
0
2
1

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
4
,
8
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 340 680
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure 2-5PRIs 8 and 10 Sampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
#*Surface Water Sample Location
")Solid Sample Location
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
Operating Facility
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
PRI 6: Northwest
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 3:
Sanitary
Lagoon
PRI 2:
Landfill
PRI 11: ATI Titanium
Plant and US Magnesium
Parking Lots
PRI 4:
Gypsum Pile
PRI 9:
Smut
Area
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 9:
Smut Area
PRI 12: US Magnesium
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Area
PRI 1: Site
Ditches
DMA-Smut-PRI09-1
DMA-Smut-PRI09-2
PRI9-001
PRI9-002
PRI9-003
PRI9-004 PRI9-005
PRI9-006
PRI9-007 PRI9-008
PRI9-009
PRI9-010
PRI9-011
PRI9-012
PRI9-013
PRI9-014
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
6
_
U
p
d
a
t
e
d
A
e
r
i
a
l
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
3
/
0
4
/
2
0
2
1

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
5
,
2
8
2

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 440 880
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure 2-6PRI 9 Sampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
")Solid Sample Location
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
Operating Facility
")")")
")")
")
")
")")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
PRI 3:
Sanitary
Lagoon
PRI 2:
Landfill
PRI 5: Southeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 11: ATI Titanium
Plant and US Magnesium
Parking Lots
PRI 9:
Smut Area
PRI 14:
Buffer
Area South
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 9:
Smut Area
PRI 12: US Magnesium
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Area
PRI 1: Site
Ditches
PRI 1:
Site
Ditches
PRI11-001 PRI11-002 PRI11-003
PRI11-004 PRI11-005
PRI11-006
PRI11-007
PRI11-008 PRI11-009
PRI11-010 PRI11-011
PRI11-012
PRI11-013
PRI11-014
PRI12-001
PRI12-002
PRI12-003
PRI12-004
PRI12-005
PRI12-006
PRI12-007 PRI12-008
PRI12-009
PRI12-010
PRI12-011
PRI12-012
PRI12-013
PRI12-014
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
7
_
U
p
d
a
t
e
d
A
e
r
i
a
l
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
3
/
0
4
/
2
0
2
1

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
7
,
2
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 600 1,200
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure 2-7PRIs 11 and 12 Sampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
")Solid Sample Location
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
Operating Facility
")")
")")
")")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
IC-1 IC-1OB
IC-2IC-2OB
IC-3IC-3OB
IC-4
IC-4OB
PRI13-001
PRI13-002
PRI13-003
PRI13-004
PRI13-005
PRI13-006
PRI13-007 PRI13-008
PRI13-009
PRI13-010
PRI13-011
PRI13-012
PRI13-013
PRI13-014
SL-11-A
SL-11-A-OB
SL-11-B
SL-11-B-OB
PRI6-002A
PRI 6: Northwest
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 3:
Sanitary
Lagoon
PRI 2:
Landfill
PRI 7: Northeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 5: Southeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 4:
Gypsum Pile
PRI 9:
Smut
Area
PRI 13: Buffer
Area North
and East
PRI 14:
Buffer
Area South
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 8: Northwest
Ponded Waste
Lagoon Overflow
PRI 12: US Magnesium
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Area
PRI 1: Site
Ditches
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
8
_
U
p
d
a
t
e
d
A
e
r
i
a
l
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
3
/
0
4
/
2
0
2
1

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
1
4
,
4
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 1,200 2,400
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure 2-8PRI 13 Sampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
")Solid Sample Location
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
Operating Facility
")")")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")")")")")
")")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")")
14-1614-17 14-18
14-19
14-20
14-21
14-2214-23 14-24
14-25
14-26
14-2714-28
14-29
14-30
14-31
14-32
14-33 14-34
14-35
14-36
14-37
DMA-Sed/W-PRI14
PRI14-001
PRI14-002
PRI14-003
PRI14-004
PRI14-005 PRI14-006
PRI14-007
PRI14-008
PRI14-009
PRI14-010
PRI14-011
PRI14-012
PRI14-013
PRI14-014
PRI14-015
PRI14-CANALS-1
SH-04-A
SM-08-ASM-08-B
PRI 3:
Sanitary
Lagoon
PRI 2:
Landfill
PRI 7: Northeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 5: Southeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 11: ATI Titanium
Plant and US Magnesium
Parking Lots
PRI 4:
Gypsum Pile
PRI 9: Smut
Area
PRI 13: Buffer
Area North
and East
PRI 14:
Buffer
Area South
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 9:
Smut
Area
PRI 12: US Magnesium
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Area
PRI 1:
Site
Ditches
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
9
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

1
2
/
1
8
/
2
0
2
0

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
2
6
,
4
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 2,200 4,400
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; WGS 1984 UTM Zone 12N
ERM
Figure 2-9PRI 14 Sampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
")Solid Sample Location
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
Operating Facility
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
XW
XW
XW
XW
XW
XW
")")
DMA-Soil-PRI15
PRI15-001 PRI15-002
PRI15-003
PRI15-004
PRI15-005
PRI15-006
PRI15-007
PRI15-008 PRI15-009
PRI15-010
PRI15-011
PRI15-012 PRI15-013
PRI15-014
UL-10-B
UL-10-C
UL-10-D
UL-10-E
UL-10-G (ALT)
UM-05-A
PRI 10:
Barium
Sulfate Area
PRI 6: Northwest
Ponded Waste
Lagoon
PRI 2:
Landfill
PRI 7: Northeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 5:
Southeast Ponded
Waste Lagoon
PRI 11: ATI Titanium
Plant and US Magnesium
Parking Lots
PRI 4:
Gypsum Pile
PRI 9:
Smut Area
PRI 13: Buffer
Area North
and East
PRI 14:
Buffer
Area South
PRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 8: Northwest
Ponded Waste
Lagoon Overflow
PRI
9: Smut
Area
PRI 12: US Magnesium
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Area
PRI 16: Lakeside
Mountain
Buffer Area
PRI 1: Site
Ditches
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
1
0
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

1
2
/
2
2
/
2
0
2
0

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
4
5
,
6
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 3,800 7,600
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure 2-10PRI 15 Sampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
XW Plant Tissue Sample Location
")Solid Sample Location
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
Operating Facility
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")")")
")
")
")
PRI 10:
Barium
Sulfate Area
PRI 6: Northwest
Ponded Waste
Lagoon
PRI 2:
Landfill
PRI 7: Northeast
Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 5: Southeast
Ponded Waste
Lagoon
PRI 11: ATI Titanium
Plant and US Magnesium
Parking Lots
PRI 4:
Gypsum Pile
PRI 9:
Smut Area
PRI 13: Buffer
Area North
and East
PRI 14:
Buffer
Area SouthPRI 15:
Buffer
Area West
PRI 8: Northwest
Ponded Waste
Lagoon Overflow
PRI
9: Smut
Area
PRI 12: US Magnesium
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Area
PRI 16: Lakeside
Mountain
Buffer Area
PRI 1: Site
Ditches
PRI16-001
PRI16-002
PRI16-003
PRI16-004
PRI16-005
PRI16-006
PRI16-007 PRI16-008
PRI16-009 PRI16-010 PRI16-011
PRI16-012 PRI16-013
PRI16-014
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

2
-
1
1
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

1
2
/
1
8
/
2
0
2
0

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
4
5
,
6
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

K
.

B
a
t
d
o
r
f
f

a
n
d

D
.

H
a
r
n
s
b
e
r
g
e
r
0 3,800 7,600
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Utah AGRC Imagery Webservice, NAIP 2016; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure 2-11PRI 16 Sampling Locations
OU-1 BHHRA Report
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
0 10 20
Miles
¯
Legend
")Solid Sample Location
Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Operating Facility
Figure 3-1
COPC Refinement Process
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
For each PRI (solids)
or for all GW or SW,
is the analyte a COPC per
OU-1 SLRA1?
Was the analyte detected
in any blank 3?
Is the FOD < 5%?
KEY
1 Consituents of potential concern (COPCs) identified based on maximum detected concentration ≥ RBSL
2 RAGS Part A, 5.9.3: Consider the chemical as a candidate for elimination from the quantitative risk assessment if:
(1) it is detected infrequently in one or perhaps two environmental media, (2) it is not detected in any other sampled
media or at high concentrations, and (3) there is no reason to believe that the chemical may be present.
3 Per RAGS Part A, 5.5, all blanks for a sample set (Remedial Action Phase) will be included.
4 Common lab contaminants include acetone, 2-butanone, methylene chloride, toluene, and the phthalate esters.
FOD = Frequency of detects
GW = Groundwater
ND = Nondetect
RAGS = Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund
RBSL = Risk-based screening level
SLRA = Screening-Level Risk Assessment
SW = Storm water
Not detected at high
concentration or in other media
and not expected to be site-
related 2?
Yes
Yes Eliminate
as COPC
NoNo
Retain as
COPC
No
Treat sample results as ND
if < 5X max. blank
detection (10X for common
lab contaminants) 3
Is maximum detected result
≥ RBSL?
Is the FOD < 5%?
Not detected at high
concentration in other PRIs/
media and not expected to be
site-related 3?
Yes Yes Eliminate
as COPC
No
No Eliminate
as COPC
Retain as
COPC
Yes
Is the COPC considered
bioaccumulative?
No
Retain as
COPC
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
●●●●●●●●●●●
● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●
●●●●●●
●●●
oooooo
oooooo●●●●o ●
◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊
ooooooooooo
ooooooooooo
KEY
● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.
o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-1
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater is evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).USM Worker
* Ditches formerly present in PRI 1 have mostly been filled; wastewater is conveyed through a pipeline to wastewater ponds. US Magnesium LLC
A stretch of ditch still present is evaluated as PRI 5 (see text).Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI/receptor
Minor transport or exposure pathway
Pathway PRI 2PRI 3PRI 4PRI 5PRI 6PRI 7PRI 8PRI 9PRI 10PRI 11PRI 12
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates Inhalation
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Dermal
Pond Sediments*
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Historical
and Current
Plant
Operations
Liquid Waste*
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Pond Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Direct Contact
Runoff, 
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct Contact
Inhalation ●●
Oral ●●
Inhalation (PM10s)●●
Dermal ●●
KEY
● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.Figure 4-2
o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Workers at Nearby Facilities
* Ditches formerly present in PRI 1 have mostly been filled; wastewater is conveyed US Magnesium LLC
through a pipeline to wastewater ponds. Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI/receptor
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Liquid Waste* Pond Sediments*
PRI 11 PRI 12
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Pathway
Runoff, 
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion, 
Erosion Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
●●●●●●
●●●
●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●
o
o●
KEY
● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.
o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-3
* Ditches formerly present in PRI 1 have mostly been filled; wastewater is conveyed Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
through a pipeline to wastewater ponds. Resource Managers
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI/receptor.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Pathway PRI 8 PRI 11 PRI 13 PRI 14 PRI 15 PRI 16
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates Inhalation
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Game Oral
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Pond Sediments*
Liquid Waste*
Pond Water
Runoff, 
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion, 
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Inhalation ●
Oral ●
Inhalation (PM10s)●
Dermal ●
KEY
● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.Figure 4-4
o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Brine Shrimp Workers
* Ditches formerly present in PRI 1 have mostly been filled; wastewater is conveyed US Magnesium LLC
through a pipeline to wastewater ponds. Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI/receptor
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Pathway PRI 13
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Liquid Waste* Pond Sediments*
Runoff, 
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion, 
Erosion Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
●●●●●●●
●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●
●●●
KEY
● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.
o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-5
* Ditches formerly present in PRI 1 have mostly been filled; wastewater is conveyed Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
through a pipeline to wastewater ponds. Recreational Visitors
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI/receptor
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
PRI 14
(Child 0-6)
PRI 15
(Child 0-6)
PRI 16
(Child 0-6)
PRI 16
(Adult and
Child 6-16)
Liquid Waste*
Pond Water
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates Inhalation
Game Oral
Pond Sediments*
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Pathway PRI 13
(Adult)
PRI 15
(Adult and
Child 6-16)
PRI 14
(Adult and
Child 6-16)
Runoff, 
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion, 
Erosion
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct
●●
●●
●●
●●
oo
KEY
● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.
o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-6
* Ditches formerly present in PRI 1 have mostly been filled; wastewater is conveyed Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
through a pipeline to wastewater ponds. Ranchers
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI/receptor
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Pathway PRI 15 PRI 16
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates Inhalation
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation
(PM10s)
Dermal
Game Oral
Liquid Waste*
Pond Water
Pond Sediments*
Runoff, 
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion, 
Erosion
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
IC-1 29 Oct 2019
16
IC-1OB 29 Oct 2019
10
IC-2 31 Oct 2019
390
IC-2OB 29 Oct 2019
47
IC-3 31 Oct 2019
13
IC-3OB 05 Nov 2019
8.9
IC-4 31 Oct 2019
8.8
IC-4OB 31 Oct 2019
< 7.2
PRI13-001 (1A)06 Dec 2013
2.3
PRI13-002 (1A)07 Dec 2013
3.7
PRI13-003 (1A)06 Dec 2013
2.6
PRI13-004 (1A)07 Dec 2013
17
PRI13-005 (1A)07 Dec 2013
0.9
PRI13-006 (1A)07 Dec 2013
0.41
PRI13-007 (1A)07 Dec 2013
0.55
PRI13-008 (1A)06 Dec 2013
7.4
PRI13-009 (1A)06 Dec 2013
0.8
PRI13-010 (1A)05 Dec 2013
1
PRI13-011 (1A)05 Dec 2013
0.42 PRI13-012 (1A)06 Dec 2013
1.8
PRI13-013 (1A)05 Dec 2013
2.2
PRI13-014 (1A)05 Dec 2013
7
SL-11-A (2A)08 Aug 2016
880
SL-11-A-OB 05 Nov 2019
46
SL-11-B (2A)08 Aug 2016
120
SL-11-B-OB 05 Nov 2019
79
GS
L
I
C
GS
L
I
C
2,000 feet to Great Salt Lake
GS
L
I
C
PRI 6
PRI 7
PRI 5
PRI 4
PRI 13
PRI 14
PRI15
PRI 12
PRI 1
Legend
!(0-10 pg/g
!(>10 - 100 pg/g
!(>100 - 200 pg/g
!(>200 pg/g
Preliminary Remedial
Investigation Areas
Operating Facility
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
B
H
H
R
A

2
0
2
0
\
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

6
-
1

P
R
I

1
3

-

T
E
Q
_
C
o
l
o
r
C
o
d
e
_
U
p
d
a
t
e
d
A
e
r
i
a
l
.
m
x
d

|

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
3
/
1
0
/
2
0
2
2

|

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
1
0
,
8
0
0

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

G
I
S
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Esri - World Imagery Flown 8/2018; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
¯
0 870 1,740
Feet
ERM0105
Miles
¯Figure 6-1Mammalian TEQ PointConcentrations for PRI 13
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
1) GSLIC = Great Salt Lake Intake Canal
2) All results shown are for surface solids samples
collected 0-6 inches below ground surface.
3) Result values shown in this figure are for Calculated
Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2), Mammals
4) Results Box Explanation:
Location ID (Phase)Sample Date
Analytical Result in pg/g
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
TABLES
Table 2-1
Summary of Analyses in BHHRA - Air
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
P
M
10
P
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
t
e
-
b
o
r
n
e

M
e
t
a
l
s
V
O
C
s
P
A
H
s
,

S
V
O
C
s
,

H
C
B
P
C
B
s
D
i
o
x
i
n
s
/
F
u
r
a
n
s
M
e
t
a
l
s

(
e
x
c
e
p
t

M
e
r
c
u
r
y
)
M
e
r
c
u
r
y
Study Name Report Title Phase
Sample
Collection
Year
I
O
-
2
.
1
I
O
-
2
.
1
,

I
O
-
3
.
5
T
O
-
1
7
,

T
O
-
1
5
T
O
-
1
3
A
U
S
E
P
A

E
1
6
6
8
C
T
O
-
9
A
I
O
-
3
.
1
,

I
o
_
3
.
5
U
S
E
P
A

7
4
7
0
Phase 1A Final Phase 1A Data Report for
Operable Unit 2 – Air Initial 2014 X X X X X X X X
Notes:
BHHRA = Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
PAH = Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PM 10 = Particulate matter less than 10 microns
SVOC = Semi-volatile organic compound
VOC = Volatile organic compound
USEPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency
ERM Page 1 of 1 USM / PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 2-2
Summary of Analyses in BHHRA - Solids, Surface Water, Groundwater, and Tissue
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
V
O
C
s
S
V
O
C
s

-

H
e
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
b
e
n
z
e
n
e

o
n
l
y
P
A
H
s
A
n
i
o
n
s
C
h
r
o
m
i
u
m

V
I
T
o
t
a
l

D
i
s
s
o
l
v
e
d

S
o
l
i
d
s
C
y
a
n
i
d
e

(
T
o
t
a
l
)
H
a
l
o
a
c
e
t
i
c

a
c
i
d
s
p
H
Study Name Phase
Sample
Collection
Year(s) Sample Media
U
S
E
P
A

82
6
0
B

-

H
i
g
h

a
n
d

L
o
w

L
e
v
e
l
U
S
E
P
A

82
7
0

S
I
M
U
S
E
P
A
8
2
7
0
C
U
S
E
P
A

80
8
1
B
/
8
2
7
0
C
U
S
E
P
A

82
7
0
C

S
I
M
U
S
E
P
A

E
16
6
8
/
E
1
6
6
8
A

-

H
R
M
S
U
S
E
P
A

82
7
0
D
-
S
I
M
/
6
8
0

-

L
R
M
S
U
S
E
P
A

S
W

82
7
0
D
M
-
S
I
M
U
S
E
P
A

82
8
0
/
8
2
8
0
A

-

L
R
M
S
U
S
E
P
A

S
W
82
9
0
/
8
2
9
0
A

-

H
R
M
S
U
S
E
P
A

60
1
0
B
/
C
U
S
E
P
A

S
W6
0
2
0
/
6
0
2
0
A
U
S
E
P
A

16
3
1
/
1
6
3
1
E

-

T
i
s
s
u
e
U
S
E
P
A

S
W
7
4
7
0
/
7
4
7
0
A
U
S
E
P
A

S
W7
4
7
1
A
U
S
E
P
A

30
0
.
A
U
S
E
P
A

S
W

7
1
9
9
-
M
O
D
U
S
E
P
A

S
M2
5
4
0
C
U
S
E
P
A

E
3
1
4
.
0
U
S
E
P
A
6
8
5
0
U
S
E
P
A
9
0
1
2
U
S
E
P
A

55
2
.
2
U
S
E
P
A
9
0
4
5
D
Phase 1A
DMA Initial 2012
Surface Soil/
Surface Sediment X -- X -- XX--XXXXX----X----------X----
Phase 1A Initial 2013-2014
Surface Solids,
Subsurface Solids X X X -- XX------XXX----X------X--X--X
Phase 1A Initial and
Addendum 2013-2015 Surface water,
Groundwater X X X -- XX------XXX--X--XXX--XXX--
Phase 1A-B Initial 2015
Surface and
Subsurface Solids,
Background Solids
X X X -- XXX--XXXX----X------XXX--X
SAP MOD 4
SAP MOD 5
SAP MOD 6
SAP MOD 7
Phase 2A Initial 2016-2017 Plants/ Solids X X X -- X -- -- --XXXX--X----------------
Phase 2B Initial 2017-2019
Surface water,
Groundwater X X X -- XXX----XXX--X--XXX--XXX--
Notes:
BHHRA = Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
Solid Matrix includes soil, sediment, and solid waste SIM - Selective Ion Monitoring
HRMS = High-Resolution Mass Spectroscopy SVOC = Semi-volatile organic compound
LRMS = Low-Resolution Mass Spectrometry VOC = Volatile organic compound
PAH = Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon USEPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency
X------ -- -- -- --X-- -- X X -- -- X -- X -- --Phase 1A-B 2019-2020
S
V
O
C
s
XXXSurface Solids
P
C
B
s
D
i
o
x
i
n
s
/
F
u
r
a
n
s
M
e
t
a
l
s
M
e
r
c
u
r
y
P
e
r
c
h
l
o
r
a
t
e
ERM Page 1 of 1 USM / PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 2-3
Samples Collected in Each PRI Area by Matrix and RI Phase
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI
Phase
1A Air
Phase
1A DMA
Solids
Phase
1A
Solids
Phase
1A-B
Solids
Phase
2A
Solids
Phase 1A-B
SAP Mod 4
Solids
Phase 1A-B
SAP Mod 5
Solids
Phase 1A-B
SAP Mod 6/7
Solids
Total
Solids
Phase 1A
Surface
Water
(Total)
Phase 1A
Surface
Water
(by PRI)
Phase 2B
Surface
Water
(Total)
Phase 2B
Surface
Water
(by PRI)
Total
Surface
Water
Site-wide 32-34 20 929
214 14
3 22
42141 17 2 2
5 3 20 9 3 35 5 4 9
62154 21 5 38
7 2 17 1 3 23
8 7 3 3 14 27 5 2 7
9214 16
10 14 14
11 14 14
12 14 14
13 14 2 10 26
14 1 15 3 9 14 42
15 1 14 6 21
16 14 14
Notes:
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
SAP Mod = Sampling and Analysis Plan Modification
Ambient air samples were collected at three air monitoring stations in 2014. At least 32 samples were analyzed for each analytical suite.
Solids sample count for PRI 5 includes three Phase 1A-B samples collected in PRI 1 (1-11, 1-12, and 1-13)
Surface water count for PRI 5 includes one Phase 1 sample collected in PRI 1 (PRI1-003)
The count for Phase 1A groundwater samples includes samples collected in 2015 from wells MW-20A and MW-20B after a release from the Ferric Chloride tank.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 ‐ April 2022
Table 2-4
PRI 8 Dataset Selection for BHHRA
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Sampling Phase Location Sample ID Included or Excluded from Dataset
Phase 1A PRI8-001 PRI8-001-SS01-121713 Visual inspection in 2019 (No sample) - Included Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A PRI8-002 PRI8-002-SS01-121713 Included
Phase 1A PRI8-003 PRI8-003-SS01-121713 Excluded (Resampled)
Phase 1A PRI8-004 PRI8-004-SS01-121813 Excluded (Resampled)
Phase 1A PRI8-005A PRI8-005A-SS01-050814 Excluded (Resampled)
Phase 1A PRI8-005B PRI8-005B-SS01-050814 Excluded (Resampled)
Phase 1A PRI8-006 PRI8-006-SS01-032514 Excluded (Resampled)
Phase 1A PRI8-007 PRI8-007-SS01-121813 Included
Phase 1A PRI8-008 PRI8-008-SS01-121813 Included
Phase 1A PRI8-009 PRI8-009-SS01-121813 Excluded (Resampled)
Phase 1A PRI8-010 PRI8-010-SS01-032614 Inaccessible in 2019 - Excluded Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A PRI8-011 PRI8-011-SS01-121713 Included
Phase 1A PRI8-012 PRI8-012-SS01-121713 Included
Phase 1A PRI8-013 PRI8-013-SS01-121813 Included
Phase 1A PRI8-014 PRI8-014-SS01-032614 Inaccessible in 2019 - Excluded Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A PRI8-015 PRI8-015-SS01-032514 Inaccessible in 2019 - Excluded Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A PRI8-016 PRI8-016-SS01-121913 Not sampled (2019) - Excluded Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A PRI8-017 PRI8-017-SS01-032514 Inaccessible in 2019 - Excluded Phase 1A sample
Phase 2A SL-09A SL09A-SD-01-081216 Excluded (Resampled)
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 4 PRI8-003 PRI8-003-SS-01-052119 Included
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 4 PRI8-005B PRI8-005B-SS-01-052119 Included
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 4 PRI8-009 PRI8-009-SS-01-052119 Included
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 5 8-22 8-22-SS-01-101019 Included
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 5 8-23 8-23-SS-01-101019 Included
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 5 8-24 8-24-SS-01-100919 Included
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 6 8-25 8-25-SS-01-011320 Included - replaced Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 6 8-26 8-26-SS-01-011320 Included - replaced Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 6 8-27 8-27-SS-01-011320 Included - replaced Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 6 8-28 8-28-SS-01-011420 Included - replaced Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 6 8-29 8-29-SS-01-011420 Included - replaced Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 6 PRI8-004 PRI8-004-SS-01-110619 Included - replaced Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 6 PRI8-005A PRI8-005A-SS-01-110619 Included - replaced Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 6 PRI8-006 PRI8-006-SS-01-110619 Included - replaced Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 6 SL-09A SL-09-A-SS-01-110619 Included - replaced Phase 1A sample
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 7 TTGP-A TTGP-A-SS-01-112519 Included
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 7 TTGP-A TTGP-A-OW-SS-01-112519 Included
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 7 TTGP-B TTGP-B-SS-01-121819 Included
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 7 TTGP-B TTGP-B-OW-SS-01-112519 Included
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 7 TTGP-C TTGP-C-SS-01-121819 Included
Notes:
BHHRA = Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
TTGP = Truck Turnaround Gypsum Pile
SAP Mod = Sampling and Analysis Plan Modification
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 3-1
Summary of COPCs – Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte Bioaccumulative PRI 2 PRI 4 PRI 5 PRI 6 PRI 7 PRI 8 PRI 9 PRI 10 PRI 11 PRI 12
PRI 13 PRI 14 PRI 15 PRI 16
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian ●XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian ●XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Total PCBs ●XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Total Arsenic XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Total Chromium XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Total Iron X
Total Manganese X
Total Mercury XXXXXX XX X
Total Thallium X
Hexachlorobenzene ●XXXXXXX XXXXX
Pentachlorobenzene ●XXX
Benzo(a)pyrene X
Bromodichloromethane X
Notes:
Bioaccumulative constituents not detected in solids (Hexachlorobutadiene and 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene) are not evaluated in BHHRA
Blank cell = Not a COPC in this PRI
X = COPC
BHHRA = Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-1
Receptor and Exposure Pathway Matrix by PRI
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI Area
US Mag
Worker
Resource
Manager
Nearby
Worker
Recreational
Visitor
Adult
Recreational
Visitor
Child (0-6)
Recreational
Visitor
Child (6-16)
Brine Shrimp
Worker Rancher
2 A, O, D, I
3 A, SW
4 A, O, D, I, SW
5 A, O, D, I, SW
6 A, O, D, I, SW
7 A, O, D, I
8 A, O, D, I, SW A, O, D, I, SW
9 A, O, D, I
10 A, O, D, I
11 A, O, D, I A, O, D, I A, O, D, I
12 A, O, D, I A, O, D, I
13 A, O, D, I A, O, D, I A, O, D, I
14 A, O, D, I A, O, D, I, G A, O, D, I A, O, D, I, G
15 A, O, D, I A, O, D, I, G A, O, D, I A, O, D, I, G A, O, D, I
16 A, O, D, I A, O, D, I, G A, O, D, I A, O, D, I, G A, O, D, I
Notes:
Pathways:
A = Ambient Air (Phase 1A Air Data)
D = Dermal contact with solids
G = Game (ingestion)
I = Inhalation of soil particulates; PRI-specific PEFs
O = Oral (ingestion of solids)
SW = Surface water (dermal exposure only)
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-2
Receptor Exposure Parameters
USM Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor PRI 2 PRI 2 PRI 3 PRI 3 PRI 4 PRI 4 PRI 5 PRI 5 PRI 6 PRI 6 PRI 7 PRI 7
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer) ATc days 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550
Averaging Time (noncancer) ATnc days 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125
Body Weight BW kg 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
Exposure Time ET hours/day 888888888888
Exposure Duration ED years 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 100 50 100 50 100 50 100 50 100 50 100
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm² 2,230 3,527 2,230 3,527 2,230 3,527 2,230 3,527 2,230 3,527 2,230 3,527
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA 1 1 4 10 1 1 10 10 NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm² NA NA 3,800 5,460 3,800 5,460 3,800 5,460 3,800 5,460 NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA 11111111NANA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 51 200 35 100 22 50 11 13 15 20 19 25
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.026 0.10 0.018 0.05 0.011 0.025 0.0055 0.0065 0.0075 0.01 0.0095 0.013
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 141 500 64 200 287 800 44 100 76 250 49 50
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.071 0.25 0.032 0.1 0.14 0.4 0.022 0.05 0.038 0.13 0.025 0.025
Particulate Emission Factor PEF
m3/kg 4.48E+07 4.48E+07 1.48E+08 1.48E+08 7.26E+07 7.26E+07 5.79E+07 5.79E+07 7.29E+07 7.29E+07 5.84E+07 5.84E+07
* Reference applies to PRIs with surface water exposure.
See Table 4-10 for notes and abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-2
Receptor Exposure Parameters
USM Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer) ATc days
Averaging Time (noncancer) ATnc days
Body Weight BW kg
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr
Exposure Time ET hours/day
Exposure Duration ED years
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr
Survey Fraction SR unitless
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr
Survey Fraction SR unitless
Particulate Emission Factor PEF
m3/kg
* Reference applies to PRIs with surface water exposure.
See Table 4-10 for notes and abbreviations.
PRI 8 PRI 8 PRI 9 PRI 9 PRI 10 PRI 10 PRI 11 PRI 11 PRI 12 PRI 12 Reference
CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE* RME
25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 1,b 1,b
9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 1,b 1,b
80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 1 1
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 10 10
88888888881010
25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 1 1
50 100 50 100 50 100 50 100 50 100 3 1
2,230 3,527 2,230 3,527 2,230 3,527 2,230 3,527 2,230 3,527 12 1
0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12 11 1
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
1.3 2 NANANANANANANANA 4* 4*
3,800 5,460 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4* 4*
1 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 5* 5*
9 12 67 250 17 48 192 1438 77 250 2 2
0.0045 0.006 0.034 0.13 0.0085 0.024 0.096 0.72 0.039 0.13 6 6
99 250 293 1,250 19 48 211 1,500 115 500 2 2
0.05 0.13 0.15 0.63 0.0095 0.024 0.11 0.75 0.058 0.25 6 6
7.28E+07 7.28E+07 4.75E+07 4.75E+07 9.39E+07 9.39E+07 6.98E+07 6.98E+07 4.62E+07 4.62E+07
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-3
Receptor Exposure Parameters
Nearby Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor PRI 11 PRI 11 PRI 12 PRI 12 Reference Reference
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer) ATc days 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 1,b 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer) ATnc days 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 1,b 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 80 80 80 1 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 250 250 250 10 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8888 10 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 25 25 25 1 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 100 50 100 3 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm² 2,230 3,527 2,230 3,527 12 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12 11 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm² NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 530 1,060 1,410 2,000 2 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.27 0.53 0.71 1.0 6 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 530 1,060 1,410 2,000 2 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.27 0.53 0.71 1 6 6
Particulate Emission Factor PEF
m3/kg 6.98E+07 6.98E+07 4.62E+07 4.62E+07
See Table 4-10 for notes and abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-4
Receptor Exposure Parameters
Resource Manager
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor PRI 8 PRI 8 PRI 11 PRI 11 PRI 13 PRI 13 PRI 14 PRI 14 PRI 15
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125
Body Weight BW kg 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 88888888
Exposure Duration ED years 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 100 50 100 50 100 50 100 50
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm² 3,527 3,527 3,527 3,527 3,527 3,527 3,527 3,527 3,527
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr 1.3 2 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm² 3,800 5,460 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day 1 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 10 28 12 30 10 25 9 20 31
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0050 0.014 0.0060 0.015 0.0050 0.013 0.0045 0.010 0.016
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 10 28 12 30 10 25 9 20 31
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.005 0.014 0.006 0.015 0.005 0.013 0.0045 0.01 0.016
Particulate Emission Factor PEF m3/kg 7.28E+07 7.28E+07 6.98E+07 6.98E+07 3.58E+07 3.58E+07 4.73E+07 4.73E+07 4.37E+07
* Reference applies to PRIs with surface water exposure.
See Table 4-10 for notes and abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-4
Receptor Exposure Parameters
Resource Manager
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days
Body Weight BW kg
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr
Exposure Time ET hours/day
Exposure Duration ED years
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr
Survey Fraction SR unitless
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr
Survey Fraction SR unitless
Particulate Emission Factor PEF m3/kg
* Reference applies to PRIs with surface water exposure.
See Table 4-10 for notes and abbreviations.
PRI 15 PRI 16 PRI 16 Reference Reference
RME CTE RME CTE RME
25,550 25,550 25,550 1,b 1,b
9,125 9,125 9,125 1,b 1,b
80 80 80 1 1
250 250 250 10 10
888 10 10
25 25 25 1 1
100 50 100 3 1
3,527 3,527 3,527 1 1
0.12 0.12 0.12 1 1
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
NA NA NA 4* 4*
NA NA NA 4* 4*
NA NA NA 5* 5*
288 36 288 2 2
0.14 0.018 0.14 6 6
288 36 288 2 2
0.14 0.018 0.14 6 6
4.37E+07 4.65E+07 4.65E+07
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-5
Receptor Exposure Parameters
Brine Shrimp Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor PRI 13
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units RME Reference
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 123 1,c
Exposure Time ET hours/day 24
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm² 1,523 7
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.12
1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
chemical-
specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm² NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr NA
Survey Fraction SR unitless 1
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr NA
Survey Fraction SR unitless 1
Particulate Emission Factor PEF m3/kg 3.58E+07
See Table 4-10 for notes and abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-6
Receptor Exposure Parameters
Recreational Visitor Adult
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor PRI 13 PRI 13 PRI 14 PRI 14 PRI 15 PRI 15 PRI 16 PRI 16 Reference Reference
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 1,b 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 3,650 3,650 3,650 3,650 3,650 3,650 3,650 3,650 1,b 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 1 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 10 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 888888881010
Exposure Duration ED years 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 BPJ BPJ
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 100 50 100 50 100 50 100 BPJ BPJ
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm² 6,032 6,032 6,032 6,032 6,032 6,032 6,032 6,032 1,f 1,f
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 1 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific ----
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm² NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day 0.039 0.058 0.047 0.12 0.050 0.12 9 9
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 35 120 43 160 104 650 81 650 2 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.012 0.041 0.015 0.055 0.036 0.22 0.028 0.22 6 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 35 120 43 160 104 650 81 650 2 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.012 0.041 0.015 0.055 0.036 0.22 0.028 0.22 6 6
Particulate Emission Factor PEF m3/kg 3.58E+07 3.58E+07 4.73E+07 4.73E+07 4.37E+07 4.37E+07 4.65E+07 4.65E+07
See Table 4-10 for notes and abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-7
Receptor Exposure Parameters
Recreational Visitor Child 0-6
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor PRI 14 PRI 14 PRI 15 PRI 15 PRI 16 PRI 16 Reference Reference
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 1,b 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 2,190 2,190 2,190 2,190 2,190 2,190 1,b 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 15 15 15 15 15 15 1 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 365 365 365 365 365 365 10 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8888881010
Exposure Duration ED years 666666BPJBPJ
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 100 200 100 200 100 200 BPJ BPJ
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm² 2,727 2,727 2,727 2,727 2,727 2,727 8,d,f 8,d,f
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 1 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm² NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day NA NA NA NA NA NA 9 9
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 16 40 19 40 53 336 2 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0055 0.014 0.0065 0.014 0.018 0.12 6 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 16 40 19 40 53 336 2 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0055 0.014 0.0065 0.014 0.018 0.12 6 6
Particulate Emission Factor PEF m3/kg 4.73E+07 4.73E+07 4.37E+07 4.37E+07 4.65E+07 4.65E+07
See Table 4-10 for notes and abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-8
Receptor Exposure Parameters
Recreational Visitor Child 6-16
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor PRI 14 PRI 14 PRI 15 PRI 15 PRI 16 PRI 16 Reference Reference
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 1,b 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 3,650 3,650 3,650 3,650 3,650 3,650 1,b 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 47 47 47 47 47 47 7 7
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 365 365 365 365 365 365 10 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8888881010
Exposure Duration ED years 10 10 10 10 10 10 1,BPJ 1,BPJ
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 100 50 100 50 100 BPJ BPJ
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm² 5,454 5,454 5,454 5,454 5,454 5,454 8,e,f 8,e,f
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 1 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific -- --
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm² NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day 0.043 0.065 0.053 0.13 0.056 0.13 9,g 9,g
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 9 10 17 30 59 336 2 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0031 0.0034 0.0058 0.010 0.020 0.12 6 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year TH hours/yr 9 10 17 30 59 336 2 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0031 0.0034 0.0058 0.01 0.02 0.12 6 6
Particulate Emission Factor PEF m3/kg 4.73E+07 4.73E+07 4.37E+07 4.37E+07 4.65E+07 4.65E+07
See Table 4-10 for notes and abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-9
Receptor Exposure Parameters
Rancher
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor PRI 15 PRI 15 PRI 16 PRI 16 Reference Reference
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE RME CTE RME CTE RME
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 25,550 25,550 25,550 1,b 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 9,125 9,125 9,125 1,b 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 80 80 80 1 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 250 250 250 10 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 88881010
Exposure Duration ED years 25 25 25 25 1 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 100 50 100 3 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm² 3,470 3,470 3,470 3,470 1 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 1 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
chemical-
specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm² NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA NA NA
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day NA NA NA NA 9,g 9,g
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 48 120 48 120 2 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.024 0.060 0.024 0.060 6 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 48 120 48 120 2 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.024 0.06 0.024 0.06 6 6
Particulate Emission Factor PEF m3/kg 4.37E+07 4.37E+07 4.65E+07 4.65E+07
See Table 4-10 for notes and abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-10
Table Notes and References for Tables 4-2 to 4-9
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
References [ref]:
1 USEPA (2014). OSWER Directive 9200.1-120.
2 Table 5-6 for the Inhalation pathway; Table 5-7 for other pathways. Final Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report (ERM 2015).
3 Table 5-1, CTE values. USEPA (2011). Exposure Factors Handbook.
4 Table 6-1. Final Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report (ERM 2015).
5 Text (Section 6.1.3). Final Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report (ERM 2015).
6 A ratio of CTE and RME hours per year shown in Table 5-6 (inhalation) or Table 5-7 (Final Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report [ERM 2015]) for USM Workers and other
receptors, to default worker hours (250 day/year x 8 hr/day) or for the recreator (365 day/year x 8 hr/day).
7 USEPA (2011). Exposure Factors Handbook. Table 8-3. Weighted average calculated for 6-16 year-olds.
8 USEPA (2011). Exposure Factors Handbook. Table 7-2.B15
9 ERM 2015. Human Health Survey. Table 6-3.
10 Assumed default in determination of the Survey Ratio (from USEPA [2014]).
11 Finley (2007). Site-specific dermal adherence factor study.
12 CTE skin surface area includes head and hands only (mean of male and female values from USEPA 2011). Protocol for workers at USM is to wear long sleeves.
13 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Update of Standard Default Exposure Factors (OSWER Directive 9285.6-03, originally dated 6 February 2014; FAQs updated 14 September 2015).
Notes:
a The exposure assumptions presented are used to assess cancer and non-cancer risk. Exposure parameters were selected preferentially from the Final
Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report (ERM 2015).
b The averaging period for cancer risk is the expected lifespan of 70 years expressed in days. The averaging period for non-cancer risk is the total exposure
period expressed in days.
c Default exposure values for residents adjusted for an exposure frequency of approximately 4 months per year.
d Value for 3- to 6-year-olds used.
e Value for 11- to 16-year-olds used.
f Recreational visitor (mean values of head, forearms, hands, lower legs, feet).
g The meals consumed were calculated using the calculation and data presented in Table 6-3 of the Human Health Survey; however, the portion size (weighted
average for 6- to 11- and 12- to 19-year-olds) was revised using a comparable value for total chicken and turkey obtained from USEPA 2011, Table 11-21.
* = No reference needed for PRIs without surface water exposure
BPJ = Best Professional Judgement:
cm² = Square centimeters
CTE = Central Tendency Exposure
DMA = Demonstration of Method Applicability
g = grams
kg = Kilograms
mg = Milligrams
NA = Not applicable
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
yr = Year
USM = US Magnesium LLC
A CTE scenario was not developed for Brine Shrimp Workers because they camp near the Great Salt Lake throughout the shrimping season with minimal time away to replenish supplies.
Recreational visitor exposure durations are based on a total of 26 years of residence in the area and the age ranges for each receptor.
Adult soil ingestion values were used for the 6- to 16- year-old child. Child values were used for the 0- to 6-year-old based upon
the OSWER Directive (USEPA 2014) and the CTE values from Table 5-1 (USEPA 2011; Exposure Factors Handbook).
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-11
Sitewide Air Exposure Point Concentrations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS# Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/m3 32 32 4.2E-10 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/m3 32 32 4.5E-10 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/m3 32 32 2.1E-07 95% Student's-t UCL
Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/m3 33 31 4.4E-06 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL
Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/m3 33 31 2.2E-08 95% KM (t) UCL
Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/m3 33 22 1.4E-05 95% KM (t) UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/m3 34 33 1.3E-05 95% KM (t) UCL
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/m3 34 23 1.6E-06 95% KM (t) UCL
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/m 3 = Milligram(s) per cubic meter
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-12
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 2
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 14 14 4.1E-03 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 14 14 4.1E-03 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 14 14 3.7E+00 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 7.8E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 2.5E+01 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 14 13 2.3E+01 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-13
Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 3
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/L 2 2 1.10E-07 Maximum*
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/L 2 2 1.10E-07 Maximum*
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/L 2 2 9.00E-05 Maximum*
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/L 2 2 7.40E-01 Maximum*
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/L 2 2 9.50E-03 Maximum*
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/L 2 2 3.10E-01 Maximum*
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/L 2 1 2.40E-03 Maximum*
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/L 2 2 2.60E-02 Maximum*
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/L 2 2 6.60E+00 Maximum*
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/L 2 1 7.60E-03 Maximum*
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/L 2 2 6.10E-01 Maximum*
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/L 2 1 1.30E-04 Maximum*
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/L 2 2 1.80E-02 Maximum*
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/L 2 2 1.50E-02 Maximum*
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/L 2 1 6.10E-03 Maximum*
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/L 2 2 5.60E-02 Maximum*
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 mg/L 2 1 6.30E-03 Maximum*
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/L 2 2 7.90E-06 Maximum*
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/L 2 1 3.00E-03 Maximum*
Chloroform 67-66-3 mg/L 2 1 7.40E-04 Maximum*
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 mg/L 2 1 1.00E-03 Maximum*
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 mg/L 2 1 1.10E-03 Maximum*
o-Xylene 95-47-6 mg/L 2 1 1.00E-03 Maximum*
Fluoride 16984-48-8 mg/L 2 1 1.20E+00 Maximum*
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 mg/L 2 1 8.70E-01 Maximum*
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/L 2 1 5.70E-04 Maximum*
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 mg/L 2 1 6.70E-03 Maximum*
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 mg/L 2 1 3.30E-03 Maximum*
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-14
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 4
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 17 17 5.2E-03 95% Student's-t UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 17 17 5.2E-03 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 17 17 1.5E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 17 17 2.0E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 17 17 9.0E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 17 10 9.3E-02 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 17 15 2.6E+01 95% KM (t) UCL
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-15
Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 4
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/L 2 2 8.9E-07 Maximum*
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/L 2 2 9.1E-07 Maximum*
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/L 2 2 6.6E-04 Maximum*
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/L 2 2 9.4E+00 Maximum*
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/L 2 2 3.9E-01 Maximum*
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/L 2 2 2.9E+00 Maximum*
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/L 2 2 1.8E-03 Maximum*
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/L 2 2 4.7E-03 Maximum*
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 mg/L 2 1 3.6E-03 Maximum*
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/L 2 2 1.4E-02 Maximum*
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/L 2 2 2.8E-02 Maximum*
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/L 2 2 3.0E+02 Maximum*
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/L 2 2 5.3E+00 Maximum*
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/L 2 2 3.7E-01 Maximum*
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/L 2 2 7.3E-03 Maximum*
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/L 2 2 5.7E-01 Maximum*
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/L 2 2 7.4E-01 Maximum*
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/L 2 1 4.0E-01 Maximum*
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/L 2 2 2.1E-01 Maximum*
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/L 2 2 9.9E-01 Maximum*
Chloromethane 74-87-3 mg/L 2 1 2.4E-03 Maximum*
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 mg/L 2 2 3.4E-01 Maximum*
Fluoride 16984-48-8 mg/L 2 2 1.5E+01 Maximum*
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 mg/L 2 2 4.0E+00 Maximum*
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/L 2 2 8.2E-04 Maximum*
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 mg/L 2 2 1.4E+00 Maximum*
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 mg/L 2 2 7.2E-01 Maximum*
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-16
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 5
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg
35 35 1.1E-02 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg
35 35 1.2E-02 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg
35 35 1.5E+01 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg
35 35 1.3E+01 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg
35 35 1.2E+01 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg
32 32 1.2E+04 95% H-UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg
32 21 3.8E+00 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg
32 21 1.0E-01 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg
35 26 2.2E+02 99% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg
23 2 3.7E+00 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg
23 3 3.7E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/kg
23 8 2.0E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-17
Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 5
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/L 9 9 2.3E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/L 9 9 2.5E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/L 9 9 3.1E-05 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/L 9 8 9.2E+01 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/L 9 9 2.1E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/L 9 9 3.8E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/L 9 9 8.2E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/L 9 8 4.0E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/L 9 4 2.0E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 mg/L 8 5 4.6E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/L 9 9 3.2E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/L 9 9 1.5E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 mg/L 9 8 5.9E-02 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/L 9 9 9.1E+02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/L 9 8 6.3E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/L 9 9 7.2E+00 95% H-UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/L 9 7 1.0E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/L 9 9 2.3E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/L 9 9 2.2E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/L 9 4 2.3E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/L 9 8 1.2E+00 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/L 9 9 4.8E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/L 9 6 1.6E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/L 9 1 1.4E-01 Maximum*
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 mg/L 5 1 7.8E-04 Maximum*
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/L 9 9 1.1E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/L 9 9 7.7E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-17
Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 5
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Bromomethane 74-83-9 mg/L 9 1 2.2E-03 Maximum*
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 mg/L 9 5 5.7E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Chloroform 67-66-3 mg/L 9 7 5.7E-03 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 mg/L 9 9 2.0E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 mg/L 5 1 1.7E-03 Maximum*
Fluoride 16984-48-8 mg/L 9 9 8.3E+00 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 mg/L 9 8 4.2E+00 95% KM (t) UCL
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/L 5 5 2.4E-03 95% Student's-t UCL
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 mg/L 9 8 9.0E-01 95% KM (t) UCL
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 mg/L 9 8 7.7E-01 95% KM (t) UCL
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-18
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 6
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 21 21 3.6E-03 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 21 21 3.6E-03 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 21 21 2.7E+00 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 21 21 1.5E+01 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 21 21 1.5E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 21 7 9.8E-02 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 21 13 6.5E+01
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1
and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 15 1 3.5E+00 Maximum*
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-19
Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 6
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/L 8 8 5.5E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/L 8 8 5.8E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/L 8 8 9.8E-03 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/L 8 8 1.6E+02 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/L 8 8 1.8E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/L 8 8 5.1E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/L 8 8 1.8E+00 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/L 8 5 6.0E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/L 8 5 2.0E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 mg/L 8 4 6.6E-03 Maximum*
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/L 8 8 4.8E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/L 8 8 2.0E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 mg/L 6 3 1.5E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/L 8 8 1.2E+03 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/L 8 8 9.5E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/L 8 8 5.0E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/L 8 7 2.6E-03 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/L 8 8 2.8E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/L 8 8 2.9E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/L 8 6 2.7E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/L 8 8 1.6E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/L 8 8 6.1E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/L 8 6 1.3E-01 Maximum*
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/L 8 1 2.9E-02 Maximum*
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/L 8 8 5.6E-03 95% Student's-t UCL
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/L 8 8 3.3E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 mg/L 8 3 9.4E-04 95% KM (t) UCL
Chloroform 67-66-3 mg/L 8 6 2.1E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 mg/L 8 8 1.2E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 mg/L 8 8 9.6E-01 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL
Fluoride 16984-48-8 mg/L 8 8 6.5E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 mg/L 6 6 3.4E+00 Maximum*
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/L 5 5 2.1E-03 95% Student's-t UCL
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 mg/L 8 8 8.8E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-20
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 7
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS# Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 23 23 7.2E-03 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 23 23 7.2E-03 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 23 23 7.2E-01 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 23 23 1.9E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 23 23 2.9E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 20 7 4.4E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 23 17 1.7E+01 97.5% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 20 1 5.6E+00 Maximum*
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-21
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 8
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 27 27 9.8E-04 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 27 27 7.2E-04 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 27 27 4.6E-01 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 24 24 1.5E+01 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 24 24 3.7E+01 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 24 6 1.4E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 27 12 4.3E+00
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1
and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
kg = Kilogram
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-22
Surface Water Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 8
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/L 7 7 1.1E-07 Maximum*
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/L 7 7 6.1E-08 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/L 7 7 1.5E-04 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/L 7 5 2.2E+01 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/L 7 7 9.1E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/L 7 2 1.1E+00 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/L 7 5 2.0E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/L 7 4 2.6E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/L 7 7 1.3E-01 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/L 7 5 4.8E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/L 7 6 2.0E+02 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/L 7 7 1.2E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/L 7 2 4.7E-02 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/L 7 7 2.4E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/L 7 4 2.8E-01 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/L 7 7 2.2E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/L 7 1 2.7E-02 Maximum*
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/L 7 4 1.7E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/L 7 5 3.7E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Chloroform 67-66-3 mg/L 7 2 6.8E-03 Maximum*
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 mg/L 7 4 2.8E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Fluoride 16984-48-8 mg/L 7 7 4.3E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 mg/L 5 4 1.4E+00 95% KM (t) UCL
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/L 5 5 7.1E-04 95% Student's-t UCL
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 mg/L 7 5 1.0E+00 95% KM (t) UCL
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 mg/L 7 7 1.2E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-23
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 9
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 16 16 4.9E-05 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 16 16 4.6E-05 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 16 16 4.8E-02 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 16 15 4.2E+00 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 16 16 2.4E+01 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 16 16 2.8E+03 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 16 1 1.6E-01 Maximum*
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 16 4 1.4E-01
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when
k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-24
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 10
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 14 14 9.4E-07 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 14 14 1.1E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 14 14 1.8E-03 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 9.3E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 1.5E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-25
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 11
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 14 14 6.2E-06 95% H-UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 14 14 6.6E-06 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 14 14 6.2E-02 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 9.3E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 1.4E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 14 2 6.7E-02 Maximum*
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-26
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 12
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 14 14 6.0E-05 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 14 14 6.0E-05 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 14 14 5.4E-02 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 5.2E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 9.1E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 14 1 1.1E-01 Maximum*
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 14 3 5.9E-02 Maximum*
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-27
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 13
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 14 14 6.8E-06 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 14 14 6.6E-06 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 14 14 4.7E-03 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 1.2E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 1.2E+01 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 14 0 ----
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 14 1 3.2E-02 Maximum*
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 12 11 7.5E-04 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 12 11 9.0E-04 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 12 12 2.9E-01 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 11 11 9.4E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 11 11 1.1E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 2 1 2.6E-02 Maximum*
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 11 5 5.1E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
GSLIC = Great Salt Lake Intake Canal
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
KM = Kaplan Meier
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
Shoreline
GSLIC
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-28
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 14
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 42 42 2.1E-04 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 42 42 1.7E-04 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 42 42 2.5E-01 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 20 20 1.1E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 20 20 9.0E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 19 1 2.9E-02 Maximum*
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 42 1 1.5E+00
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when
k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-29
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 15
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 21 21 1.9E-06 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 21 21 1.4E-06 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 21 21 6.7E-03 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 21 21 5.0E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 21 21 1.3E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 21 7 1.7E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 21 2 3.5E-02 Maximum*
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-30
Plant Tissue Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 15
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 60 ----
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 606.8E-06 Highest Detection Limit
PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 mg/kg 5 5 2.6E-04 95% Student's-t UCL
Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 6 6 2.5E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 6 6 8.7E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 6 6 6.5E-03 95% Student's-t UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 5 5 8.5E-04 95% Student's-t UCL
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-31
Solids Exposure Point Concentrations - PRI 16
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 14 14 4.7E-07 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 14 14 5.1E-07 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 14 14 7.4E-04 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 5.9E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 1.3E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-32
Background - Upland Exposure Point Concentrations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 18 18 2.3E-07 95% Student's-t UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 18 18 3.4E-07 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 18 18 5.0E-04 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 30 30 6.6E+00 or 95% Modified-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 30 30 1.3E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 30 30 1.4E+04 or 95% Modified-t UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 30 30 5.4E+02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 30 30 4.1E-02 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 30 30 1.8E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 18 0 1.2E-03 Median*
Notes:
*Hexachlorobenzene was not detected in upland background samples. One-half the method detection limit was used to represent
the concentration for each sample, and the median value was selected to represent background for upland areas.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-33
Background - Lakebed Exposure Point Concentrations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS Units
Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detects EPC EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 mg/kg 17 17 1.2E+00 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 mg/kg 17 17 1.1E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 mg/kg 29 29 1.0E-03 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 29 29 1.2E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 29 29 1.6E+01 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 29 28 4.8E-02 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 17 2 5.0E-03 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Notes:
*Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates, median adopted.
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan Meier
mg/kg = Milligram(s) per kilogram
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Sd = Standard deviation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-34
Particulate Emission Factors for Construction Scenario
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 1 PRI 2 PRI 3 PRI 4 PRI 5 PRI 6 PRI 7 PRI 8 PRI 9 PRI 10 PRI 11 PRI 12 PRI 13 PRI 14 PRI 15 PRI 16
Parameter Abbrev.Units Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value
Wind Erosion and Construction Activities
Fugitive dust from wind erosion(1)Mwind g 9.9E+06 1.1E+07 5.5E+05 5.4E+07 1.0E+08 5.2E+07 2.5E+08 5.3E+07 3.3E+07 8.6E+06 5.9E+07 2.1E+07 4.1E+09 2.6E+09 4.4E+09 3.2E+09
Fraction of vegetative cover(2)V --0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mean annual wind speed(3)Um m/s 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12
Equivalent threshold value of wind speed(2)Ut m/s 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32 11.32
Function dependent on U/Ut(2)F(x)--0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194
Areal Extent of site surface contamination(4)Asurf m2 134,000 144,000 7,500 728,000 1,357,000 708,000 3,375,000 715,000 445,000 117,000 805,000 280,000 54,956,000 35,450,000 59,954,000 43,585,000
Exposure duration(5)ED year 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Fugitive dust from excavation soil dumping(6)Mexcav g NA 4.3E+02 NA 2.4E+02 NA NA NA NA 5.5E+01 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
In situ wet soil bulk density(7)rsoil mg/m3 NA 2 NA 2 NA NA NA NA 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Gravimetric Soil Moisture Content %(8)M %NA 16 NA 30 NA NA NA NA 25 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Areal extent of site excavation(9)Aexcav m2 NA 10,000 NA 700 NA NA NA NA 200 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Average depth of site excavation(2)dexcav m NA 0 NA 3 NA NA NA NA 3 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Number of times soil is dumped(2)NA --NA 2 NA 2 NA NA NA NA 2 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Fugitive dust from dozing(10)Mdoz g NA 6.4E+04 NA 7.0E+04 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Soil silt content %(7)s %NA 49 NA 95 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Gravimetric Soil Moisture Content %(8)M %NA 16 NA 30 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Average dozing speed(2)Sdoz km/hr NA 11 NA 11 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Number of times area is dozed Ndoze --NA 5 NA 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Length of dozer blade Bd m NA 2 NA 2 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Sum dozing kilometers traveled(11)VKTdoz km NA 295.08 NA 298.36 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Fugitive dust from grading(12)Mgrade g NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Average grading speed(2)Sgrade km/hr NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Number of times area is graded Ngrade --NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Length of grading blade Bg m NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Sum grading kilometers traveled(12)VKTgrade km NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Fugitive dust from tilling(13)Mtill g NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Soil silt content %(7)s %NA 48.91 NA 95.01 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Areal extent of site tilling(9)Atill acre NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Number of times soil is tilled(2)NA --NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Total Time Averaged PM10 Emission(14)J'T g/m2-sec 4.10E-07 4.12E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07 4.10E-07
Duration of construction(2)T sec 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08 1.80E+08
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for Area Source(15)Q/Csa g/m2-sec per kg/m3 6.99 6.91 11.21 5.52 5.09 5.54 4.57 5.53 5.89 7.13 5.44 6.28 3.46 3.59 3.43 3.53
Constant A(2)A --2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45
Constant B(2)B --17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57
Constant C(2)C --189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04 189.04
Areal Extent of site surface contamination(4)Asurf acres 33.1 35.6 1.9 179.9 335.3 175.0 834.0 176.7 110.0 28.9 198.9 69.2 13579.9 8759.9 14814.9 10770.1
Dispersion correction factor(16)FD --0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185 0.185
Duration of construction (time period during which construction activities occur) tc hr 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 50000
Subchronic PEF for Construction Activities(17)PEFsc m3/kg 9.21E+07 9.05E+07 1.48E+08 7.26E+07 6.71E+07 7.29E+07 6.02E+07 7.28E+07 7.76E+07 9.39E+07 7.17E+07 8.27E+07 4.55E+07 4.73E+07 4.52E+07 4.65E+07
Unpaved Road Traffic
Length of road segment(18)LR m 1,650 1,400 NA NA 4,600 NA 5,200 NA 2,100 NA 3,650 4,700 100 NA 87,950 NA
Width of road segment(2)WR m 6.1 6.1 NA NA 6.1 NA 6.1 NA 6.1 NA 6.1 6.1 6.1 NA 6.1 NA
Surface area of contaminated road segment(19)AR m2 10,065 8,540 NA NA 28,060 NA 31,720 NA 12,810 NA 22,265 28,670 610 NA 536,495 NA
Road surface silt content %(20)s%82 49 NA NA 63 NA 73 NA 72 NA 83 82 59 NA 83 NA
Mean vehicle weight(2)W tons 8 8 NA NA 8 NA 8 NA 8 NA 8 8 8 NA 8 NA
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-34
Particulate Emission Factors for Construction Scenario
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 1 PRI 2 PRI 3 PRI 4 PRI 5 PRI 6 PRI 7 PRI 8 PRI 9 PRI 10 PRI 11 PRI 12 PRI 13 PRI 14 PRI 15 PRI 16
Parameter Abbrev.Units Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value
Percent moisture in dry road surface(20)M%37 16 NA NA 28 NA 45 NA 25 NA 9 13 22 NA 7 NA
Number of days/year with at least 0.01 inches of precipitation(3)p days 33 33 NA NA 33 NA 33 NA 33 NA 33 33 33 NA 33 NA
Number of vehicles for duration of construction NV vehicles 20 22 NA NA 5 NA 5 NA 10 NA 1 18 5 NA 3 NA
Length of road traveled per day LD m/day 785 550 NA NA 1,500 NA 380 NA 1,050 NA 560 1,150 100 NA 10,500 NA
Sum of fleet vehicle kilometers traveled during the exposure duration(21)VKTroad km 2041.00 1573.00 NA NA 975.00 NA 247.00 NA 1365.00 NA 72.80 2691.00 65.00 NA 4095.00 NA
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for road segment(22)Q/Csr g/m2-sec per kg/m3 13.87 13.81 18.64 12.99 12.94 12.99 13.11 12.99 13.13 13.99 12.97 13.35 15.78 15.11 15.93 15.41
Constant A(2)A 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94
Constant B(2)B 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74
Constant C(2)C 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77
Subchronic PEF for Unpaved Road Traffic(23)PEFsc_road m3/kg 6.92E+07 8.85E+07 NA NA 4.25E+08 NA 1.99E+09 NA 1.23E+08 NA 2.64E+09 1.05E+08 1.68E+08 NA 1.29E+09 NA
Total construction-related PEF(24)PEFsc_total m3/kg 3.95E+07 4.48E+07 1.48E+08 7.26E+07 5.79E+07 7.29E+07 5.84E+07 7.28E+07 4.75E+07 9.39E+07 6.98E+07 4.62E+07 3.58E+07 4.73E+07 4.37E+07 4.65E+07
Total outdoor ambient air dust concentration(25)Dconstruct kg/m3 2.53E-08 2.23E-08 6.77E-09 1.38E-08 1.73E-08 1.37E-08 1.71E-08 1.37E-08 2.10E-08 1.06E-08 1.43E-08 2.17E-08 2.79E-08 2.11E-08 2.29E-08 2.15E-08
Notes:
See Table 4‐35 for Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Notes
% = Percent
g = Gram
hr = Hour 
kg/m 3  = Kilogram per cubic meter
km = Kilometer
m 2  = Square meter
m/day = Meters per day
m 3 /kg = Cubic meter per kilogram
m/s = Meters per second
g/m 2  = Grams per square meter
PEF = Particulate Emission Factor
sec = Second
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-35
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Notes
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
Road Width = 6.1 meters (20 feet)
All road lengths are approximated from Google Earth, June 2015 images.
All surface areas approximated from .kmz file (Feb. 2015).
Aerial extent of site surface contamination = PRI surface area (m^2)
Length of road segments = all road lengths in PRI. Length of road traveled per day = actual travel distance in PRI
(1)From USEPA. (2002b). Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Washington, DC. OSWER 9355.4-24. December. - Mwind = 0.036 × (1-V) × (Um/Ut)3 × F(x) × Asurf × ED × 8760hr/yr.
(2) Assumed value for the site based upon USEPA (2002b).
(3) Derived by averaging data from the Las Vegas Airport and Nellis AFB stations.
(4) Site area.
(5) Construction worker ED
(6) From USEPA 2002b - Mexcav = 0.35 ´ 0.0016 ´ [(Um/2.2)
1.3/(M/2)1.4] ´ rsoil ´ Aexcav ´ dexcav ´ NA ´ 103g/kg.
(7) This value can change based on site specific characteristics
(8) Based on the average of percent moisture across the site.
(9) Assumed value of one fifth of the site based upon USEPA (2002b).
(10) From USEPA 2002b - Mdoz = 0.75 ´ [(0.45 ´ s 1.5)/(M)1.4] ´ ∑VKTdoz/Sdoz ´ 103g/kg.
(11) From USEPA 2002b - VKTdoz = [(Asurf
0.5/2.44m) ´ Asurf
0.5 ´ 3]/1,000 m/km.
(12) From USEPA 2002b - Mgrade = 0.60 ´ (0.0056 ´ S2.0) ´ ∑VKTgrade ´ 103g/kg.
(13) From USEPA 2002b - Mtill = 1.1 ´ s0.6 ´ Atill ´ 4,047m2/acre ´ 10-4ha/m2 ´ 103g/kg ´ NA.
(14) From USEPA 2002b - J'T = (Mwind + Mexcav + Mdoz + Mgrade + Mtill)/(Asurf ´ T).
(15) From USEPA 2002b - Q/Csa = A ´ exp[(ln(Asurf) - B)2/C].
(16) From USEPA 2002b - FD = 0.1852 + (5.3537/t c)+(-9.6318/tc
2), tc = T/(3,600sec/hour).
(17) From USEPA 2002b - PEFsc = Q/Csa ´ (1/FD) ´ (1/J'T).
(18) Assumed value of the square root of the site area, based upon USEPA (2002b).
(19) From USEPA 2002b - AR = LR ´ WR * 0.092903 m2/ft2
(20) Average of surface soil percent moisture results.
(21) From USEPA 2002b - VKTroad = 30 vehicles ´ L R ´ [(52 wks/yr)/2] ´ (5 days/week) / (1000 m/km).
(22) From USEPA 2002b - Q/Csr = A ´ exp[(ln(Asurf) - B)2/C].
(23) From USEPA 2002b - PEFsc_road = Q/Csr ´ (1/FD) ´ T ´ AR / {[2.6 × (s/12)0.8 × (W/3)0.4/(M/0.2)0.3] × [(365-p)/365] × 281.9 × ∑VKTroad}.
(24) PEFsc_total = {1/[(1/PEFsc)+(1/PEFsc_road)]}.
(25) Dconstruct = 1/PEFsc_total.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-36
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Assumptions and Equations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI PRI-Specific Assumptions
20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip on top of landfill - 550 meters. 2 vehicles/day travel one way on road south of landfill/north of star pond - 550 meters.
Estimated landfill covered once per day with average 6 inches of gypsum/gravel across an average area of 10,000 square meters
3 No activity
4 Approximately 700 square meters of active excavation. No other vehicle activity.
5 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road. Waste pond road negligible to dust generation.
20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road during shrimping operations.
6 Negligible vehicle traffic in PRI 6
5 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road. Other dikes negligible to dust generation.
20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road during shrimping operations.
8 No activity
10 vehicles/day travel roundtrip to dump in smut piles.
Assume each load covers 20 square meters to depth of 3 meters.
10 No activity
1 vehicle/day travels ATI perimeter. perimeter approx 3650 meters
Length of road traveled = sqrt(ATI perimeter) + 500 m on US Mag property
1 vehicle/day travels inside Hill Bros. (sqrt(perimeter))
10 vehicles/day enter/exit Hill Bros. facility (250 meter driveway)
5 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road (1150 meters)
2 vehicles/day travel one way on road around east side of star pond
20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road during shrimping operations
5 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road during non-shrimp season.
30 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across lakebed from pump station to ditch inlet at GSL shoreline.
14 Pump road traffic accounted for in PRIs 5 and 7.
3 vehicles/day travel roundtrip on county road. Negligible vehicle traffic on other roads in PRI 15.
20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip on county road during shrimping operations
16 Negligible vehicle traffic in PRI 16. County road accounted for in PRI 15.
Unpaved roads and plant operations in "plant footprint" accounted for in OU2.
Activities associated with Wasatch Regional Landfill operations not accounted for.
Quarry in PRI 16 no longer in use. Not accounted for.
Grading/dozing/dumping activities in ATI not accounted for.
12
13
15
OTHER
2
5
7
9
11
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-37
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Excavation / Soil Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road Traffic
2
Landfill
Excavation - No known or
suspected excavation at PRI
Area 2. A limestone stockpile
(for Mg production process) is
located in PRI Area 2.
Soil dumping - Gypsum is
used as cover on the landfill,
and gravel is placed on the
landfill top.
Dozing is possible on
landfill top and/or faces.
No known or suspected
grading at this PRI
area.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
Heavy traffic to access landfill
face and limestone stockpile.
Occasional traffic along
unpaved road S of landfill
(between landfill and Star
Pond). Less frequent traffic to
access gypsum piles and to
travel between E and W areas
of Plant.
Phase 1A soil data should be
adequate for characterizing dust
from traffic on landfill.
3
Sanitary Lagoon
Excavation - Limited excavation
may be required on an as-
needed basis for maintenance
of discharge line(s) to the
Sanitary Lagoon.
Soil dumping - No known or
suspected soil dumping at this
PRI area.
No known or suspected
dozing at this PRI area.
No known or suspected
grading at this PRI
area.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
None Historical sample locations were
from sidewalls. Phase 1A-B
sample locations were within
lagoon floor. Ditch dredge spoils
/ gypsum have washed into the
lagoon from sidewalls. Lagoon
floor is heavily vegetated and
wet.
4
Gypsum Pile
Excavation & Soil Dumping -
A tracked excavator is
regularly used on the gypsum
pile to manage gypsum waste
and slurry flows.
A bulldozer may be used
in association with
gypsum management
described under
Excavation/Soil Dumping
No known or suspected
grading at this PRI
area.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
None No special considerations for
soil concentration data.
5
SE Current
Waste Pond
Excavation - No known or
suspected ongoing excavation
at this PRI area.
Soil Dumping - Soil dumping on
an as-needed basis for berm
enhancements/wastewater
management.
No known or suspected
dozing at this PRI area.
Limited grading may be
performed occasionally
to maintain unpaved
roads or maintain
berms present within
this PRI area.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
The N dike road (to P-0 pump
station, solar pond 1N, and
brine shrimp area) is unpaved
and has moderate to high
(relative) traffic volume. Low
traffic volume on other dike
roads present at this PRI area.
The unpaved road along the
NE edges of the waste pond in
this PRI area has been
partially capped with gravel.
While most sampling has been
performed in the waste pond
area, a subset of historical/DMA
and Phase 1A-B may be
representative of soils along
dike/road areas.
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations and Other
Notes
Scenario
ERM Page 1 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-37
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Excavation / Soil Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations and Other
Notes
Scenario
6
NW Current
Waste Pond
Excavation - No known or
suspected ongoing excavation
at this PRI area.
Soil Dumping - Soil dumping on
an as-needed basis for berm
enhancements/wastewater
management.
No known or suspected
dozing at this PRI area.
Limited grading may be
performed occasionally
to maintain unpaved
roads or maintain
berms present within
this PRI area.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
Low traffic volume at this PRI
area. The unpaved road along
the N edges of this PRI area has
been partially capped with
gravel.
While most sampling has been
performed in the waste pond
area, a subset of historical/DMA
and Phase 1A-B may be
representative of soils along
dike/road areas.
PRI
Area
Excavation - No known or
suspected ongoing excavation
at this PRI area.
Soil Dumping - Soil dumping on
an as-needed basis for berm
enhancements/ wastewater
management.
No known or suspected
dozing at this PRI area.
Limited grading may be
performed occasionally
to maintain unpaved
roads or maintain
berms present within
this PRI area.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
The N dike road (to P-0 pump
station, solar pond 1N, and
brine shrimp area) is unpaved
and has moderate to high
(relative) traffic volume. Low
traffic volume on other dike
roads present at this PRI area.
Soil/sediment samples have
been collected from the OWP
floor, not from the road areas
along dikes.
8
Overflow Area
Excavation - No known or
suspected ongoing excavation
at this PRI area.
Soil Dumping - Soil dumping on
an as-needed basis for berm
enhancements/ wastewater
management.
No known or suspected
dozing at this PRI area.
Limited grading may be
performed occasionally
to maintain unpaved
roads or maintain
berms present within
this PRI area.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
Low traffic volume at this PRI
area. The major unpaved road
crossing this PRI area has been
capped with gravel. Unimproved
roads along fence lines are
native soil.
Phase 1A soil data would not be
representative of dust from the
major unpaved road at this PRI
area, which has been capped
using imported gravel. Fence
line roads (which are
presumably travelled
infrequently) may be better
represented by a subset of
Phase 1A locations: PRI8-001, -
002, -008, and -013.
9
Smut Piles
Excavation - No known or
suspected excavation at this
PRI area.
Soil Dumping - Smut piles are
placed by end dumping.
No known or suspected
dozing at this PRI area.
Limited grading may be
performed occasionally
to maintain unpaved
roads present within
this PRI area.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
Moderate to heavy traffic on
unpaved roads to access
Smut piles and travel along
the Western Ditch. Unpaved
roads at PRI Area 9 are
constructed on native soil, not
Smut.
Phase 1A soil data from
locations PRI9-001 through -006
and PRI9-008 through -014
would be representative of
dumped Smut. Dust from
unpaved road travel would
characterized by location PRI9-
007 and/or samples from PRI
Area 15.
ERM Page 2 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-37
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Excavation / Soil Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations and Other
Notes
Scenario
10
Barium Sulfate
Area
Excavation - A borrow pit
located W of the barium sulfate
disposal cells is used
occasionally as a source of clay
and soil.
Soil Dumping - No known or
suspected ongoing soil dumping
at this PRI area.
No known or suspected
dozing at this PRI area.
Limited grading may be
performed occasionally
to maintain unpaved
roads present within
this PRI area.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
Low traffic volume at this PRI
area. The unpaved road
crossing this PRI area has been
capped with gravel.
Phase 1A soil data would be
representative of excavation at
borrow area but would not be
representative of dust from
unpaved road, which has been
capped using imported gravel.
11
USM Parking
Lot / ATI
No known or suspected ongoing
soil excavation or dumping at
this PRI area.
No known or suspected
dozing at this PRI area.
Grading possible on an
as-needed basis to
maintain unpaved
roads at ATI.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
Low /insignificant traffic in
unpaved (gravel) lot west of
USM parking lot. Some
unpaved roads are present at
ATI.
Phase 1A soil data likely
adequately representative for
unpaved roads at this PRI area.
12
Hill Bros
No known or suspected ongoing
soil excavation or dumping at
this PRI area. Soil
excavation/dumping may be
performed during construction of
lined holding/mixing ponds.
No known or suspected
ongoing soil excavation or
dumping at this PRI area.
Dozing may be performed
during construction of lined
holding/mixing ponds.
Grading possible on an
as-needed basis to
maintain unpaved
roads.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
Unpaved roads are used to
access Hill Bros and access
process ponds.
Phase 1A soil data likely
adequately representative for
unpaved roads at this PRI area.
13
Buffer Area N &
E
Excavation/Soil dumping on an
as-needed basis to maintain
GSL intake canal & P-0 pump
station (infrequent - every 10
years). Limited excavation
dumping may also be required
to maintain dikes.
No known or suspected
dozing at this PRI area,
although dike maintenance
may include dozing.
Grading on an as-
needed basis to
maintain dikes and
associated unpaved
roads.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
Heavy ATV traffic in lakebed
during brine shrimp harvest.
The N dike road (to P-0 pump
station, solar pond 1N, and
brine shrimp area) is unpaved
and has moderate to high
(relative) traffic volume.
Phase 1A sample location within
the lakebed would be
representative of dust from
travel by ATVs (shrimpers)
within the lakebed, and may be
adequately representative for
unpaved roads which are
located on dikes in this PRI
area.
ERM Page 3 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 4-37
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Excavation / Soil Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations and Other
Notes
Scenario
14
Buffer Area S
Limited excavation / soil
dumping may be required to
maintain dikes on an as-needed
basis.
No known or suspected
dozing at this PRI area,
although dike maintenance
may include dozing.
Grading on an as-
needed basis to
maintain dikes and
associated unpaved
roads.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
The N dike road (to P-0 pump
station, solar pond 1N, and
brine shrimp area) is unpaved
and has moderate to high
(relative) traffic volume.
Phase 1A sample location within
the lakebed may not be
representative of dust from
unpaved roads, which are
located on dike roads in this PRI
area. No significant vehicle
travel in lakebed at this PRI
area. High concentrations of
COPCs detected at this PRI
area (presumably due to
wastewater/waste releases)
seem inappropriate to apply to
roadways.
15
Buffer Area W
No known or suspected ongoing
soil excavation or dumping at
this PRI area other than
operations at Wasatch Regional
Landfill.
No known or suspected
ongoing dozing at this PRI
area other than operations
at Wasatch Regional
Landfill.
Grading performed in
association with
maintenance of the
County Road.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
Most unpaved road traffic
occurs on the County Road
(PRI 15 - 16 boundary).
Unpaved spur roads may be
used for ranching or
accessing USM / ATI facilities.
Unpaved road traffic also
likely at Wasatch Regional
Landfill.
Dust from County Road probably
more similar to PRI Area 15
soils than soils of PRI Area 16.
16
Lakeside Mtns
Buffer Area
No known or suspected ongoing
soil excavation or dumping at
this PRI area. Craner Canyon
quarry within Lakeside
Mountains appears to be
inactive.
No known or suspected
ongoing dozing at this PRI
area. Craner Canyon
quarry within Lakeside
Mountains appears to be
inactive.
Grading performed in
association with
maintenance of the
County Road.
No known or suspected
tilling at this PRI area
Most unpaved road traffic
occurs on the County Road
(PRI 15 - 16 boundary).
Unpaved spur roads may be
used for ranching or
accessing Lakeside
Mountains.
Dust from County Road probably
more similar to PRI Area 15
soils than soils of PRI Area 16.
ERM Page 4 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 5-1
Summary of Toxicity Data for Constituents of Potential Concern (All Media)
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
RfDo RfCi SFO IUR IARC
Analyte CAS # mg/kg-day Source
mg/m3 Source (mg/kg-day)-1 Source (mg/m3)-1 Source Group
Calculated TEQ, Mammalian CALC_DX_0 7.0E-10 I 4.0E-08 C 1.3E+05 C 3.8E+04 C 1
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 ----2.0E+00 I 5.7E-01 I 1
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.0E+00 P 5.0E-03 P -----
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 4.0E-04 I -------
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.0E-04 I 1.5E-05 C 1.5E+00 I 4.3E+00 I 1
Total Barium 7440-39-3 2.0E-01 I 5.0E-04 H -----
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.0E-03 I 2.0E-05 I - - 2.4E+00 I 1
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0E-03 I 1.0E-05 A - - 1.8E+00 I 1
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 1.5E+00 -------
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 3.0E-03 I 1.0E-04 I 5.0E-01 C 8.4E+01 G 1
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.0E-04 P 6.0E-06 P - - 9.0E+00 P 2B
Total Copper 7440-50-8 4.0E-02 H -------
Total Iron 7439-89-6 7.0E-01 P -------
Total Lead 7439-92-1 ---------
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 1.4E-01 I 5.0E-05 I -----
Total Mercury1 7439-97-6 3.0E-04 3.0E-04 I -----
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5.0E-03 I -------
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 2.0E-02 I 9.0E-05 A -- 2.6E-01 C 2B
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 1.0E-05 X -------
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 5.0E-03 G 1.0E-04 A -----
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 3.0E-01 I -------
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 3.0E-04 I -------
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 ----1.1E+00 I 3.3E-01 I 3
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 2.0E-02 I -- 1.4E-02 I 2.4E-03 C 2B
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 8.0E-04 I -- 1.6E+00 I 4.6E-01 I 2B
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 1.0E-03 P -- 7.8E-02 I 2.2E-02 I 3
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 8.0E-04 I -------
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 5.0E-03 I -- 4.0E-01 I 5.1E-03 C 1
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 4.0E-03 I -------
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 2.0E-01 P -- 5.7E-03 C 1.6E-03 C CA
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 6.0E-03 X 7.0E-03 P 9.1E-02 I 2.6E-02 I 2B
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 4.0E-02 P 4.0E-03 I 3.7E-02 P 3.7E-02 P 1
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene* 10061-02-6 3.0E-02 I 2.0E-02 I 1.0E-01 I 4.0E-03 I 2B
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 7.0E-02 A 8.0E-01 I 5.4E-03 C 1.1E-02 C 2B
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 1.0E-02 I 2.0E-03 P 2.9E-02 P -- -
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 2.0E-02 I -- 2.0E-01 I 5.8E-02 C 2B
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 8.0E-05 X -------
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 3.0E-04 I 2.0E-06 I 1.0E+00 I 6.0E-01 I 1
Benzene 71-43-2 4.0E-03 I 3.0E-02 I 5.5E-02 I 7.8E-06 I 1
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 -- 4.0E-02 X -----
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 2.0E-02 I -- 6.2E-02 I 3.7E-02 C 2B
Bromoform 75-25-2 2.0E-02 I -- 7.9E-03 I 1.1E-03 I 3
Bromomethane 74-83-9 1.4E-03 I 5.0E-03 I -----
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 4.0E-03 I 1.0E-01 I 7.0E-02 I 6.0E-03 I 2B
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 2.0E-02 I -- 8.4E-02 I -- -
Chloroform 67-66-3 1.0E-02 I 9.8E-02 A 3.1E-02 C 2.3E-02 I 2B
Chloromethane 74-87-3 -- 9.0E-02 I -----
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 1.0E-01 I 1.0E+00 I 1.1E-02 C 2.5E-06 C 2B
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 6.0E-03 I 4.0E-02 I 2.1E-03 I 2.6E-04 I 2A
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 5.0E-04 I 2.0E-03 I 4.6E-02 I 4.1E-06 I 1
o-Xylene 95-47-6 2.0E-01 G 1.0E-01 G -----
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 2.0E-01 G 1.0E-01 G -----
Naphthalene 91-20-3 2.0E-02 I 3.0E-03 I -- 3.4E-02 C 2B
Monochloroacetic Acid 79-11-8 ---------
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 4.0E-03 I -- 5.0E-02 I -- -
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 2.0E-02 I -- 7.0E-02 I -- -
Fluoride 16984-48-8 4.0E-02 C 1.3E-02 C -----
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 1.6E+00 I -------
Nitrite as N 14797-65-0 1.0E-01 I -------
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 7.0E-04 I -------
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 6.0E-04 I 8.0E-04 I -----
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 5-1
Summary of Toxicity Data for Constituents of Potential Concern (All Media)
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern
IARC = International Agency for Research on Cancer
IUR = Inhalation Unit Risk
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
mg/m 3 = milligrams per cubic meter
PCBs = Polychlorinated Biphenyls
RfCi = Chronic Inhalation Reference Concentration
RfDo = Chronic Oral Reference Dose
SFO = Oral Slope Factor
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Toxic Equivalence
Data sourced from USEPA Regional Screening Levels, HQ = 0.1, May 2020
* 1,3-Dichloropropene toxicity values are used for trans-1,3-Dichloropropene; 1,3-Dichloropropene is classified as a Group 2B carcinogen
1 = The CAS# presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (7439-97-6), as reported by the
laboratory. The toxicity values used in the BHHRA are for mercuric salts (7487-94-7).
IARC Group Classifications:
1 = Carcinogenic to humans
2A = Probably carcinogenic to humans
2B = Possibly carcinogenic to humans
3 = Not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans
CA = Not classified as a carcinogen by IARC; SFO and IUR developed by California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Sources
I = Integrated Risk Information System (https://www.epa.gov/iris)
P = Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTV) (https://www.epa.gov/pprtv)
H = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (https://epa-heast.ornl.gov/)
A = Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/)
G = See Regional Screening Levels User's Guide (https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls-users-guide)
X = PPRTV Screening Level
C = California Environmental Protection Agency
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 6-1
Summary of Risk Assessment Results
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Appendix
Table PRI Receptor CTE RME CTE RME
G-1 2 USM Worker 8E-02 6E-01 3E-06 2E-05
G-2 3 USM Worker 4E-03 1E-02 1E-07 3E-07
G-3 4 USM Worker 6E-02 3E-01 2E-06 9E-06
G-4 5 USM Worker 5E-02 1E-01 4E-06 7E-06
G-5 6 USM Worker 5E-02 1E-01 5E-06 9E-06
G-6 7 USM Worker 5E-02 1E-01 2E-06 5E-06
G-7 8 USM Worker 1E-02 3E-02 9E-07 2E-06
G-8 9 USM Worker 6E-02 3E-01 1E-06 5E-06
G-9 10 USM Worker 1E-03 4E-03 7E-08 2E-07
G-10 11 USM Worker 2E-02 1E-01 8E-07 8E-06
G-11 12 USM Worker 1E-02 5E-02 4E-07 2E-06
G-12 11 Nearby Worker 4E-02 9E-02 2E-06 6E-06
G-13 12 Nearby Worker 1E-01 2E-01 5E-06 1E-05
G-14 8 Resource Manager 5E-03 2E-02 6E-07 2E-06
G-15 11 Resource Manager 9E-04 2E-03 5E-08 2E-07
G-16 13 Resource Manager (Shoreline) 8E-04 2E-03 5E-08 2E-07
G-17 (CTE)
G-18 (RME)13 Resource Manager (80/20)2E-03 6E-03 1E-07 3E-07
G-19 14 Resource Manager 1E-03 4E-03 6E-08 2E-07
G-20 15 Resource Manager 2E-03 2E-02 1E-07 1E-06
G-21 16 Resource Manager 3E-03 2E-02 1E-07 1E-06
G-22 13 Brine Shrimp Worker (Shoreline)NA 2E-01 NA 1E-05
G-23 13 Brine Shrimp Worker (90/10)NA 3E-01 NA 1E-05
G-24 13 Brine Shrimp Worker (80/20)NA 3E-01 NA 2E-05
G-25 13 Recreational Visitor - Adult (Shoreline) 3E-03 1E-02 7E-08 3E-07
G-26 (CTE)
G-27 (RME)13 Recreational Visitor - Adult (80/20)6E-03 3E-02 2E-07 7E-07
G-28 14 Recreational Visitor - Adult 7E-03 5E-02 1E-07 7E-07
G-29 15 Recreational Visitor - Adult 2E-02 7E-02 2E-07 1E-06
G-30 16 Recreational Visitor - Adult 6E-03 5E-02 1E-07 1E-06
G-31 14 Recreational Visitor - Child (0-6)1E-02 6E-02 1E-07 7E-07
G-32 15 Recreational Visitor - Child (0-6)2E-03 6E-03 6E-08 2E-07
G-33 16 Recreational Visitor - Child (0-6)6E-03 5E-02 2E-07 2E-06
G-34 14 Recreational Visitor - Child (6-16)1E-02 2E-02 1E-07 2E-07
G-35 15 Recreational Visitor - Child (6-16)1E-02 3E-02 3E-08 8E-08
G-36 16 Recreational Visitor - Child (6-16)5E-03 3E-02 1E-07 9E-07
14 Recreational Visitor (All Ages)4E-07 2E-06
15 Recreational Visitor (All Ages)3E-07 1E-06
16 Recreational Visitor (All Ages)4E-07 4E-06
G-37 15 Rancher 3E-03 9E-03 2E-07 5E-07
G-38 16 Rancher 3E-03 9E-03 2E-07 6E-07
HI Value Color ILCR Value Color
≤ 1 ≤ 1E-6
> 1 - ≤2 > 1E-6 - < 1E-5
≥3 1E-5 - < 1E-4
≥ 1E-4
HI ILCR
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 6-1
Summary of Risk Assessment Results
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
90/10 = 90% Shoreline/10% GSLIC GSLIC = Great Salt Lake Intake Canal
80/20 = 80% Shoreline/20% GSLIC ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
Chromium is assumed to be 100% hexavalent. PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Bolded values exceed 1 (HI) or 10 -6 (ILCR)RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
CTE = Central Tendency Exposure USM = US Magnesium LLC
DNR = Department of Natural Resources
NA = A CTE scenario was not developed for Brine Shrimp Worker; Utah DNR information indicates workers camp for the season
and only leave occasionally.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 6-2
Pathway Specific Summary of Hazard Indices and Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risks for PRI 2
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
CTE RME
Matrix Pathway
Sum of
ILCR % ILCR
COPC Drivers
(CTE)
Sum of
ILCR % ILCR
COPC Drivers
(RME)
Solids Dermal 2.E-07 6%2.E-06 10% TEQ (9%)
Solids Ingestion 2.E-06 77% TEQ (69%)2.E-05 82% TEQ (73%)
Solids Inhalation 3.E-07 9% Chromium (9%) 1.E-06 5% Chromium (4%)
Water Dermal NA NA NA NA
Air (Facility) Inhalation 2.E-07 8%9.E-07 4%
Site Sum 3.E-06 100%2.E-05 100%
Notes:
Bolded values exceed 10 -6 (ILCR)
Chromium is assumed to be 100% hexavalent.
COPC = Constituents of potential concern
CTE = Central Tendency Exposure
ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxic Equivalent
USM = US Magnesium LLC
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 6-3
Cumulative Risk Calculations - USM Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Cumulative Time (%)
CTE HI ILCR Ground Total Drivers
CTE-1: CTE risk across five most occupied
PRIs (2, 4, 9, 11, 12)2E-01 8E-06 20 52
Arsenic, Cr(VI),
HCB, and TEQ
CTE-2: CTE risk across all PRI Areas 4E-01 2E-05 26 70
Arsenic, Cr(VI), HCB,
Pentachlorophenol, and TEQ
RME
RME-1: RME risk for PRIs 2 and 4 (highest
risk) plus CTE risk for PRIs 9, 11, and 12 9E-01 3E-05 29 96
Arsenic, Cr(VI),
Pentachlorophenol, and TEQ
RME-2: RME risk for PRIs 2 and 4 plus CTE
risk for all other PRI Areas 1E+00 5E-05 33 91
Arsenic, Cr(VI),
Pentachlorophenol, and TEQ
Notes:
Bolded values exceed 1 (HI) or 10 -6 (ILCR)
Chromium is assumed to be 100% hexavalent.
CTE = Central Tendency Exposure
HI = Hazard Index
ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxic Equivalent
USM = US Magnesium LLC
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 6-4
Pathway Specific Summary of Hazard Indices and Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risks for PRI 12 - Nearby Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
CTE RME
Matrix Pathway
Sum of
ILCR % ILCR COPC Drivers (CTE)
Sum of
ILCR % ILCR COPC Drivers (RME)
Solids Dermal 1.E-07 3%6.E-07 6%
Solids Ingestion 2.E-06 34% Arsenic (9%) Chromium (9%) TEQ (16%)5.E-06 49% Arsenic (13%) Chromium (13%) TEQ (22%)
Solids Inhalation 1.E-06 18%Chromium (18%)1.E-06 13%Chromium (13%)
Air (Facility) Inhalation 2.E-06 44.9%Arsenic (20%) TEQ (18%)3.E-06 32%Arsenic (14%) TEQ (13%)
Site Sum 5.E-06 100%1.E-05 100%
Solids Dermal 8.E-08 3%4E-07 7%
Solids Ingestion 1.E-06 48%
Arsenic (24%) Chromium (24%)4E-06 62%Arsenic (31%) Chromium (31%)
Solids Inhalation 1.E-06 48%
Chromium (47%)2E-06 31%Chromium (30%)
BG Sum 3E-06 100%6E-06 100%
Notes:
Bolded values exceed 10 -6 (ILCR)
Chromium is assumed to be 100% hexavalent.
COPC = Constituents of potential concern
CTE = Central Tendency Exposure
ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxic Equivalent
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 6-5
Pathway-Specific Details of Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risks for PRI 13 Brine Shrimp Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
100% Shoreline 90% Shoreline/10% GSLIC 80% Shoreline/20% GSLIC Background
Matrix Pathway
Sum of
ILCR % ILCR COPC Drivers
Sum of
ILCR % ILCR COPC Drivers
Sum of
ILCR % ILCR COPC Drivers
Sum of
ILCR % ILCR COPC Drivers
Solids Dermal 2.E-07 1%2.E-06 14% Chromium (12%)2.E-06 13% Chromium (11%) 1.E-07 2%
Solids Ingestion 3.E-06 23%Arsenic (14%)
Chromium (8%)3.E-06 21%Arsenic (7%) TEQ
(14%)5.E-06 31%Arsenic (7%) TEQ
(24%)3.E-06 37%Arsenic (21%)
Chromium (16%)
Solids Inhalation 4.E-06 31% Chromium (30%)4.E-06 26% Chromium (25%)3.E-06 23% Chromium (22%)5.E-06 61% Chromium (59%)
Air (Facility) Inhalation 5.E-06 44%Arsenic (20%)
TEQ (18%)5.E-06 38%Arsenic (17%)
TEQ (16%)5.E-06 33%Arsenic (15%)
TEQ (14%)NA NA
Site Sum 1.E-05 100%1E-05 100%2.E-05 100%7.E-06 100%
Notes:
Bolded values exceed 10 -6 (ILCR)
Chromium is assumed to be 100% hexavalent.
COPC = Constituents of potential concern
GSLIC = Great Salt Lake Intake Canal
ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxic Equivalent
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table 7-1
Toxic Equivalence Exposure Point Concentration Comparison
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Air Air Ratio Solids Solids Ratio
TEQ EPC
(ND = 1/2DL)
TEQ EPC
(ND = 0)
ND=0 /
ND=1/2DL
TEQ EPC
(ND = 1/2DL)
TEQ EPC
(ND = 0)
ND=0 /
ND=1/2DL
mg/m3 mg/m3 pg/g pg/g
2 ------4.1E+03 4.1E+03 0.99
3------NANA NA
4 ------5.2E+03 5.2E+03 1.00
5------1.2E-02 1.1E-02 1.03
6 ------3.6E+03 3.6E+03 1.00
7 ------7.2E+03 7.2E+03 1.00
8 ------7.2E+02 9.8E+02 0.74
9 ------4.6E+01 4.9E+01 0.93
10 ------1.1E+00 9.0E-01 1.22
11 ------6.6E+00 6.2E+00 1.06
12 ------6.0E+01 6.0E+01 1.00
13-Shoreline ------6.6E+00 6.8E+00 0.98
13-GSLIC ------9.0E+02 7.5E+02 1.20
14 ------1.7E+02 2.1E+02 0.79
15 ------1.4E+00 1.9E+00 0.73
16 ------5.1E-01 4.7E-01 1.09
Site-wide 4.5E-10 4.2E-10 1.09 ------
Notes:
pg/g = picograms per gram
mg/m 3 = milligrams per cubic meter
DL = Detection limit
EPC = Exposure point concentration
GSLIC = Great Salt Lake Intake Canal
NA = Not applicable; exposure to this matrix is not a complete exposure pathway in this PRI area
ND = Non-detect congener
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Site-wide = Air EPCs were developed using data collected from three sampling stations and are consistent for all PRI Areas.
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
PRI
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - Apeil 2022
Table 7-2
Comparison of USM Worker ILCRs using 100% and 38% TEQ Relative Bioavailability
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
CTE ILCR RME ILCR
RBA 38% 100%38% 100%
PRI 2 2E-06 3E-06 1E-05 2E-05
PRI 4 2E-06 2E-06 6E-06 9E-06
PRI 5 3E-06 4E-06 5E-06 7E-06
PRI 6 5E-06 5E-06 8E-06 9E-06
PRI 7 9E-07 2E-06 2E-06 5E-06
PRI 8 9E-07 9E-07 2E-06 2E-06
PRI 9 1E-06 1E-06 5E-06 5E-06
PRI 10 7E-08 7E-08 2E-07 2E-07
PRI 11 8E-07 8E-07 8E-06 8E-06
PRI 12 4E-07 4E-07 2E-06 2E-06
Cumulative Risk
RBA 38% 100%38% 100%
CTE-1 6E-06 8E-06 RME-1 2E-05 3E-05
CTE-2 2E-05 2E-05 RME-2 3E-05 5E-05
Notes:
Bolded values exceed 10 -6
CTE-1: CTE risk across five most occupied PRIs (2, 4, 9, 11, 12)
CTE-2: CTE risk across all PRI Areas
RME-1: RME risk for PRIs 2 and 4 (highest risk) plus CTE risk for other three most occupied: PRIs 9, 11, and 12
RME-2: RME risk for PRIs 2 and 4 plus CTE risk for all other PRI Areas
CTE = Central Tendency Exposure
ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RBA = Relative Bioavailability
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxic Equivalent
USM = US Magnesium LLC
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 -April 2022
Table 7-3
Surface and Subsurface Samples Comparison
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detects
Frequency
of Detection
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detects
Frequency
of Detection Surface Subsurface
2 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals calc-dx-0 pg/g 15 15 100% 29 29 100% 3250 2600 1.3
2 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals calc-dx-2 pg/g 15 15 100% 29 29 100% 3270 2610 1.3
2 PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 mg/kg 15 15 100% 29 29 100% 2.25 2.31 1.0
2 Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 15 15 100% 29 29 100% 7.47 8.76 0.85
2 Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 15 15 100% 29 29 100% 16.6 25.4 0.65
2 Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 15 3 20% 29 14 48% 0.0284 0.0716 0.40
2 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 15 0 0% 29 3 10% 0.389 0.493 Subsurface only
2 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 15 15 100% 29 28 97% 34.7 45 0.77
2 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 15 0 0% 29 4 14% 0.0296 0.0668 Subsurface only
4 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals calc-dx-0 pg/g 15 15 100% 4 4 100% 4220 4030 1.0
4 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals calc-dx-2 pg/g 15 15 100% 4 4 100% 4240 4030 1.1
4 PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 mg/kg 15 15 100% 4 4 100% 1.58 0.851 1.9
4 Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 15 15 100% 4 4 100% 17.7 15.6 1.1
4 Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 15 15 100% 4 4 100% 7.84 7.12 1.1
4 Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 15 15 100% 4 4 100% 0.0645 0.0315 2.0
4 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 14 0 0% 4 0 0% 3.71 2.96 NA
4 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 15 14 93% 4 4 100% 19.9 19.8 1.0
4 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 14 0 0% 4 0 0% 0.526 0.423 NA
4 Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 14 0 0% 4 0 0% 1.86 1.47 NA
5 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals calc-dx-0 pg/g 36 36 100% 13 13 100% 13900 29500 0.47
5 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals calc-dx-2 pg/g 36 36 100% 13 13 100% 14000 29800 0.47
5 PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 mg/kg 36 36 100% 13 13 100% 9.28 25.1 0.37
5 Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 36 36 100% 13 13 100% 13.9 31.9 0.44
5 Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 36 36 100% 13 13 100% 10.2 27.9 0.37
5 Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 33 33 100% 13 13 100% 14700 32200 0.46
5 Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 33 22 67% 13 6 46% 0.0213 0.0304 0.70
5 Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 33 23 70% 13 12 92% 0.0894 0.228 0.39
5 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 27 0 0% 13 0 0% 2.92 4.39 NA
5 Dinitro-o-cresol 534-52-1 mg/kg 27 0 0% 13 1 8% 9.07 15.2 Subsurface only
5 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 36 29 81% 13 13 100% 181 427 0.42
5 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 27 1 4% 13 3 23% 1.05 1.62 0.65
5 Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 26 4 15% 13 7 54% 9.18 26.8 0.34
5 Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 24 5 21% 13 7 54% 0.0585 0.126 0.46
5 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/kg 26 10 38% 13 5 38% 0.146 0.353 0.41
PRI
Mean
Surface Mean/
Subsurface
Mean (Ratio)COPC
Surface Subsurface
UnitsCAS #
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 -April 2022
Table 7-3
Surface and Subsurface Samples Comparison
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detects
Frequency
of Detection
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detects
Frequency
of Detection Surface SubsurfacePRI
Mean
Surface Mean/
Subsurface
Mean (Ratio)COPC
Surface Subsurface
UnitsCAS #
6 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals calc-dx-0 pg/g 20 20 100% 3 3 100% 1550 4110 0.38
6 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals calc-dx-2 pg/g 20 20 100% 3 3 100% 1560 4110 0.38
6 PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 mg/kg 20 20 100% 3 3 100% 1.56 1.89 0.83
6 Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 20 20 100% 3 3 100% 7.58 26.3 0.29
6 Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 20 20 100% 3 3 100% 12.4 17.1 0.73
6 Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 20 15 75% 3 2 67% 0.0403 0.083 0.49
6 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%3 0 0% 2.43 3 NA
6 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 20 15 75% 3 3 100% 23.2 49.4 0.47
6 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%3 0 0% 0.439 0.419 NA
6 Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 15 1 7%3 1 33% 1.34 2.67 0.50
7 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals calc-dx-0 pg/g 22 22 100% 2 2 100% 1250 13500 0.09
7 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals calc-dx-2 pg/g 22 22 100% 2 2 100% 1260 13500 0.09
7 PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 mg/kg 22 22 100% 2 2 100% 0.35 7.68 0.05
7 Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 22 22 100% 2 2 100% 15 20.8 0.72
7 Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 22 22 100% 2 2 100% 21.2 25.9 0.82
7 Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 18 16 89% 2 2 100% 0.0354 0.0545 0.65
7 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 20 0 0%2 0 0% 0.664 2 NA
7 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 22 16 73% 2 2 100% 4.67 130 0.04
7 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 20 0 0%2 0 0% 0.0955 0.284 NA
7 Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 21 1 5%2 1 50% 0.539 3.55 0.15
8 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals calc-dx-0 pg/g 27 27 100% 3 3 100% 213 1.99 107
8 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals calc-dx-2 pg/g 27 27 100% 3 3 100% 227 2.17 105
8 PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 mg/kg 27 27 100% 3 3 100% 0.188 0.00409 46
8 Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 24 24 100% 3 3 100% 9.31 9.3 1.0
8 Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 24 24 100% 3 3 100% 22.2 11.6 1.9
8 Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 24 11 46% 3 1 33% 0.012 0.0125 1.0
8 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 10 0 0%3 0 0% 0.0297 0.0327 NA
8 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 27 15 56% 3 1 33% 1.91 0.00913 209
8 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 10 0 0%3 0 0% 0.00424 0.00467 NA
10 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals calc-dx-0 pg/g 14 14 100% 5 5 100% 0.945 2.42 0.39
10 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals calc-dx-2 pg/g 14 14 100% 5 5 100% 1.25 2.82 0.44
10 PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5 5 100% 0.00117 0.0143 0.08
10 Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5 5 100% 8.59 3.73 2.3
10 Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5 5 100% 14.7 7.92 1.9
10 Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 14 7 50% 5 3 60% 0.014 0.0154 0.91
10 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%5 0 0% 0.0315 0.0346 NA
10 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 14 1 7%5 2 40% 0.00302 0.00512 0.59
10 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%5 0 0% 0.00446 0.00492 NA
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 -April 2022
Table 7-3
Surface and Subsurface Samples Comparison
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detects
Frequency
of Detection
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detects
Frequency
of Detection Surface SubsurfacePRI
Mean
Surface Mean/
Subsurface
Mean (Ratio)COPC
Surface Subsurface
UnitsCAS #
14 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals calc-dx-0 pg/g 43 43 100% 3 3 100% 65.4 4.05 16
14 Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals calc-dx-2 pg/g 43 43 100% 3 3 100% 68.7 4.35 16
14 PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 mg/kg 43 43 100% 3 3 100% 0.0955 0.00384 25
14 Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 21 21 100% 3 3 100% 9.71 12 0.81
14 Chromium 7440-47-3 mg/kg 21 21 100% 3 3 100% 9.29 4.61 2.0
14 Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 18 6 33% 3 0 0% 0.0149 0.012 Surface only
14 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 24 0 0%3 0 0% 0.0453 0.0383 NA
14 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 43 16 37% 3 1 33% 0.428 0.0051 84
14 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 24 0 0%3 0 0% 0.00541 0.00543 NA
Notes:
DL = Detection Limit
NA = Not applicable; not detected in any sample
ND=0 = Non-detected values substituted with 0
ND=1/2DL = Non-detected values substituted with half the detection limit
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
Surface only = Constituent not detected in subsurface samples; quantitative comparison not conducted.
Subsurface only = Constituent not detected in surface samples; quantitative comparison not conducted.
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin toxic equivalence
pg/g = picograms per gram
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 -April 2022
Table 7-4
Comparison of ILCRs for PRI 13 Brine Shrimp Worker and PRI 12 Nearby Worker Assuming
10 Percent Hexavalent Chromium in Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Brine Shrimp Worker - PRI 13 Nearby Worker - PRI 12
RME (80/20) RME (80/20) RME (90/10) RME (90/10) CTE CTE RME RME
COPC - Solids 100% Cr(VI)
10% Cr(VI)/
90% Cr(III) 100% Cr(VI)
10% Cr(VI)/
90% Cr(III) 100% Cr(VI)
10% Cr(VI)/
90% Cr(III) 100% Cr(VI)
10% Cr(VI)/
90% Cr(III)
HCB 2E-08 2E-08 2E-08 2E-08 4E-07 4E-07 5E-07 5E-07
PCBs, Total 2E-08 2E-08 1E-08 1E-08 2E-08 2E-08 6E-08 6E-08
Arsenic 1E-06 1E-06 1E-06 1E-06 2E-06 2E-06 3E-06 3E-06
Chromium 5E-06 5E-07 5E-06 5E-07 1E-06 1E-07 3E-06 3E-07
TEQ (ND=1/2)4E-06 4E-06 2E-06 2E-06 2E-06 2E-06 4E-06 4E-06
SOLIDS ILCR 1E-05 6E-06 8E-06 4E-06 3E-06 2E-06 7E-06 5E-06
AIR ILCR 5E-06 5E-06 5E-06 5E-06 2E-06 2E-06 3E-06 3E-06
TOTAL ILCR 2E-05 1E-05 1E-05 9E-06 5E-06 4E-06 1E-05 8E-06
Notes:
80/20 = 80% Shoreline/20% GSLIC
90/10 = 90% Shoreline/10% GSLIC
Cr(III) = Trivalent chromium
Cr(VI) = Hexavalent chromium
CTE = Central Tendency Exposure
GSLIC = Great Salt Lake Intake Canal
HCB = Hexachlorobenzene
ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
TEQ (ND=1/2) = 2,3,7,8-Tetradibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalent calculated substituting 1/2 of the detection limit for non-detected congeners
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
APPENDIX A BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT TECHNICAL
MEMORANDUM

The business of sustainability
Prepared for:
US Magnesium and USEPA
Region 8
US Magnesium NPL Site
EPA Site Identification No.
UTN000802704
Tooele County, Utah
Revised Final OU-1 Baseline
Human Health Risk
Assessment Technical
Memorandum
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
US Magnesium Site
Rowley, Utah
March 2019
www.erm.com
© Copyright 2019 by ERM Worldwide Group Ltd and / or its
affiliates (“ERM”). All rights reserved. No part of this work may
be reproduced or transmitted in any form, or by any means,
without the prior written permission of ERM.

US Magnesium
Revised Final OU-1 Baseline Human
Health Risk Assessment Technical
Memorandum
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
US Magnesium Site
Rowley, Utah
March 2019
Project No. 0350891

David Abranovic
Partner
Project Manager

Jennifer Holder, Ph.D.
Partner
Risk Assessment Leader

Judy Nedoff
Senior Consultant
Human Health Risk Assessment Leader

Environmental Resources Management
7272 E. Indian School Road, Suite 108
Scottsdale, AZ 85251
T: 480-998-2401
F: 480-998-2106
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES iii
LIST OF TABLES iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS v
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 SITE BACKGROUND 2
1.2 STUDY AREA 2
1.3 PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL AND IDENTIFICATION
OF HUMAN RECEPTORS 3
1.4 OVERVIEW OF THE RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACH 3
DATA EVALUATION AND PREPARATION 4
2.1 DATA QUALITY EVALUATION 4
2.2 DATA PREPARATION 5
REFINEMENT OF COPC SELECTION 6
3.1 ADJUSTMENT FOR BLANK CONTAMINATION 6
3.2 EVALUATION OF FREQUENCY OF DETECTION 7
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 8
4.1 SUMMARY OF CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL 8
4.2 HUMAN RECEPTORS OF CONCERN AND EXPOSURE PATHWAYS 10
4.3 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS 12
4.3.1 Survey Fraction 13
4.3.2 Game Ingestion 13
4.4 DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVE EXPOSURE
CONCENTRATIONS 13
4.4.1 Solid Media 14
ii
4.4.2 Surface Water 14
4.4.3 Groundwater 15
4.4.4 Game Meat 15
4.4.5 Outdoor Air 16
4.5 DOSE ESTIMATION 16
TOXICITY ASSESSMENT 19
5.1 TOXICITY VALUES FOR DERMAL EXPOSURE 19
5.2 SURROGATES 19
5.3 EVALUATION OF DIOXINS/FURANS 20
5.4 LEAD 20
5.5 CHROMIUM 20
RISK CHARACTERIZATION 22
6.1 METHODS FOR ASSESSING CANCER RISKS 22
6.2 METHODS FOR ASSESSING NON-CANCER HEALTH EFFECTS 23
6.3 CUMULATIVE RISK 24
6.4 BACKGROUND RISK CHARACTERIZATION 24
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS 26
DATA GAPS ANALYSIS FOR BHHRA 27
8.1 GAME MEAT DATA 27
8.2 EVALUATION OF DATASETS FOR EPC DEVELOPMENT 27
SUMMARY AND INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS 28
REFERENCES 29
APPENDIX A – US MAGNESIUM WHITE PAPER ON CHROMIUM IN AIR AND
AGENCY COMMENTS ON WHITE PAPER
APPENDIX B – SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO THE BHHRA TM AND FINAL AGENCY
COMMENTS
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures follow the text
1-1 Site Location Map
1-2 Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
3-1 COPC Refinement Process
4-1 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 1 – Ditches
4-2 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 2 - Landfill
4-3 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 3 - Sanitary Lagoon
4-4 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 4 - Gypsum Pile
4-5 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 5 - Southeast Ponded
Waste Lagoon
4-6 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 6 - Northwest Ponded
Waste Lagoon
4-7 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 7 - Northeast Ponded
Waste Lagoon
4-8 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 8 - Northwest Ponded
Waste Lagoon Overflow
4-9 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 9 - Smut Area
4-10 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 10 – Barium Sulfate
Area
4-11 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 11 – ATI Titanium
Plant and US Magnesium Parking Lots
4-12 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 12 – Ancillary Worker
Exposure Areas
4-13 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 13 – Buffer Area North
and East
4-14 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 14 – Buffer Area South
4-15 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 15 – Buffer Area West
4-16 Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure – PRI 16 - Lakeside
Mountains Buffer Area
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Tables follow the figures
4-1 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 1 – Ditches
4-2 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 2 - Landfill
4-3 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 3 - Sanitary Lagoon
4-4 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 4 - Gypsum Pile
4-5 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 5 - Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
4-6 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 6 - Northwest Ponded Waste
Lagoon
4-7 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 7 - Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
4-8 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 8 - Northwest Ponded Waste
Lagoon Overflow
4-9 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 9 - Smut Area
4-10 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 10 – Barium Sulfate Area
4-11 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 11 – ATI Titanium Plant and US
Magnesium Parking Lots
4-12 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 12 – Ancillary Worker Exposure
Areas
4-13 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 13 – Buffer Area North and East
4-14 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 14 – Buffer Area South
4-15 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 15 – Buffer Area West
4-16 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 16 –Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
4-17 Receptor Exposure Parameters – PRI 17 - Site-Wide Surface and
Groundwater
4-18 Table Notes and References
4-19 Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input
Parameters
4-20 Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Assumptions
4-21 Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario
Basis
v
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
µg/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter
ADD Average daily dose
BHHRA Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
COPC Constituent of potential concern
CSF Cancer slope factor
CSM Conceptual site model
CTE Central tendency exposure
EPC Exposure concentration
ERM ERM-West, Inc.
FS Feasibility Study
HE Human Exposure
HI Hazard index
ILCR Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
LADD Lifetime average daily dose
mg/kg Milligrams per kilogram
mg/kg-d Milligrams per kilogram per day
OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
OU Operable Unit
PCB Polychlorinated biphenyl
PRI Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RAGS Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund
RBSL Risk-based screening level
RfC Reference concentration
RfD Reference dose
RI Remedial Investigation
RME Reasonable maximum exposure
SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan
SLRA Screening-Level Risk Assessment
TCDD 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEF Toxicity equivalency factor
TEQ Toxicity equivalent
vi
UCL Upper confidence limit
UDWQ Utah Division of Water Quality
US Mag US Magnesium LLC
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
VOC Volatile organic compound

ERM 1 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
INTRODUCTION
ERM-West, Inc. (ERM) has been retained by US Magnesium LLC (US
Mag) to perform Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
services at the US Mag Site located in Rowley, Utah (the “Site”). This
Technical Memorandum describes the purpose and methods for
conducting the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment (BHHRA) in
support of the US Mag Operable Unit (OU)-1 RI/FS. This Technical
Memorandum has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of
the Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent (United
States Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA] 2011a), which governs
the performance of the RI/FS. This Technical Memorandum was
originally prepared in 2016 (ERM 2016a), and this version includes
revisions agreed upon during discussions with the USEPA and Utah State
agencies regarding constituents of potential concerns (COPCs) identified
in the Final Operable Unit 2 Screening-Level Risk Assessment Report
(OU-2 SLRA; ERM 2017b). Appendix A includes a white paper proposing
methods for evaluating chromium measured in air samples collected in
Phase 1A and the agencies’ response to the proposed methods. Appendix
B contains a summary of the revisions to the BHHRA Technical
Memorandum and final comments from the agencies, which have been
incorporated into this document.
The purpose of the BHHRA is to evaluate the potential for adverse human
health impacts that may occur as a result of potential exposures to
concentrations of chemicals in Site solid wastes, soils, sediments, surface
water, wastewater, and groundwater media. COPCs were identified in the
Final OU-1 Screening-Level Risk Assessment Report (OU-1 SLRA; ERM
2017a) and the OU-2 SLRA (ERM 2017b). A refinement of COPC selection
will be conducted in the BHHRA.
The structure of this Technical Memorandum is outlined below:
 Section 1 – Introduction;
 Section 2 – Data Evaluation and Preparation;
 Section 3 – Refinement of COPC Selection;
 Section 4 – Exposure Assessment;
 Section 5 – Toxicity Assessment;
 Section 6 – Risk Characterization;
 Section 7 – Uncertainty Analysis;
 Section 8 – Data Gaps Analysis for BHHRA;
ERM 2 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
 Section 9 – Summary and Interpretation of Findings; and
 Section 10 – References.
Figures and tables follow the report text.
1.1 SITE BACKGROUND
The Site is in northern Tooele County, Utah, in the Basin and Range
Province of the Western United States (Figure 1-1). The Site is located in
the Lakeside Valley, approximately 1 to 3 miles west of the Great Salt Lake
shoreline and approximately 5 miles east of the Lakeside Mountains.
Other project reports, including the Phase I Human Exposure Survey
Report (HE Survey; ERM 2015a), the Phase 1A Sampling and Analysis
Plan (SAP; USEPA 2013a), and the Final Phase 1A-B RI SAP (ERM 2015b)
provide additional detail on the Site and background information.
1.2 STUDY AREA
The RI/FS study area includes the area within a 5-mile radius centered on
the Site. For planning purposes, the USEPA divided the Site into 18
Preliminary Remedial Investigation (PRI) areas (Figure 1-2). The Site was
subsequently divided into OUs by the USEPA, with OU-1 being defined
as all soils, sediments, solid wastes, surface water, wastewater, and
groundwater within PRIs 1 through 17 and OU-2 being defined as
ambient air within the 5-mile radius (originally designated as PRI 18).
Detailed descriptions of these areas are provided in the Phase 1A-B RI
SAP (ERM 2015b).
Specifically, OU-2 includes ambient air concentrations that may be
affected by stack and fugitive emissions from the Site. A separate OU-2
BHHRA Technical Memorandum is being developed for assessment of
risks related to chlorine and hydrochloric acid releases from the stack.
This BHHRA Technical Memorandum focuses on how human health risks
will be assessed for exposure to COPCs in the soils, sediments, wastes,
and waters of OU-1, and for exposure to COPCs identified in the OU-2
SLRA (ERM 2017b), which does not include chlorine and hydrochloric
acid. The BHHRA for OU-1 will also address inhalation exposures to
particulate emissions associated with mechanical disturbances to soils
(e.g., emissions from unpaved road traffic, soil dumping, and dozing
operations at the Site).
ERM 3 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
1.3 PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL AND IDENTIFICATION
OF HUMAN RECEPTORS
The preliminary Site-wide conceptual site model (CSM) for the current
and future land use at the Site presented in the Final SLRA Technical
Memorandum (ERM 2014) established the initial scope of receptors and
exposure pathways considered for the project. The goal of the HE Survey
(ERM 2015a), was to collect data to be used to develop Site-specific
exposure parameters for use in the BHHRA. The HE Survey also provided
qualitative information on the characteristics of the receptor groups and
where and how they utilize the Site to refine the CSM for each of the PRI
areas. These exposure parameters and their recommended values are
addressed in this BHHRA Technical Memorandum.
1.4 OVERVIEW OF THE RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACH
The risk assessment process is used to systematically evaluate and
organize data, assumptions, and uncertainties to help understand the
magnitude of risk at a Site, and the primary causes of that risk, and
contributes to the subsequent development, evaluation, and selection of
appropriate response alternatives (USEPA 1989). The risk assessment in
support of the US Mag RI/FS will be consistent with USEPA and State of
Utah guidance, and the Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order
on Consent (USEPA 2011a).
Consistent with guidance (USEPA 1989; USEPA 2001a), a phased risk
assessment process is being employed, as described in Attachment 5 to the
cover letter accompanying the Phase 1A SAP. The OU-1 SLRA (ERM
2017a) and OU-2 SLRA (ERM 2017b) provided initial selection of COPCs
and supported development of the scope of subsequent investigations
and/or risk assessment efforts, as described in the SLRA Technical
Memorandum (ERM 2014).
The BHHRA will present selected COPCs and a COPC refinement,
evaluate risk from exposure of receptors to COPCs in Site media, and
include a discussion of the uncertainty associated with the methods and
results. The BHHRA will evaluate average or central tendency exposure
(CTE) and reasonable maximum exposure (RME) for current land use
conditions and reasonable future land use conditions.
ERM 4 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
DATA EVALUATION AND PREPARATION
Data that will be used in the BHHRA were collected during five phases of
sampling and are presented in the following reports:
 Draft Phase 1A Laboratory Demonstration of Method Applicability Technical
Memorandum for Soil, Sediment, Waste, and Water (ERM 2013). This
investigation included collection of data from selected PRIs (1, 4, 5, 6,
7, 9, 14, and 15). Only solids data will be used in the BHHRA. Surface
water data from this study will not be used because those data are
superseded by the more comprehensive data collected in the Phase 1A
investigation.
 Final Phase 1A Data Report for PRIs 2 and 8 through 17 (ERM 2015c). This
investigation included collection of solids, surface water, and
groundwater data from PRIs 2 and 8 through 18. These include areas
that may be affected by waste streams and air emissions from the US
Magnesium facility and/or secondary releases. Data for all matrices
will be used in the BHHRA.
 Final Phase 1A-B Remedial Investigation Data Report (ERM 2016b). This
investigation included collection of solids data from PRIs 1 and 3
through 7, including areas known to have directly received waste
streams from the US Magnesium facility and where existing data
indicated high chemical concentrations.
 Final Phase 1A Data Report for Operable Unit 2 – Air (ERM 2016c). This
investigation included collection of air data from three monitoring
locations for selection of COPCs in air. Each sample was collected over
a duration of three days. Phase 1A air data will be used in the BHHRA.
 Final Phase 2A Representative Prey Investigation Data Report (ERM 2018).
This investigation was conducted primarily to support the baseline
ecological risk assessment. Solids data collected in the study area will
be included in the dataset. Plant tissue data from samples collected in
PRI 15 will be used for modeling game meat concentrations, as
described in Section 4.4.4.
2.1 DATA QUALITY EVALUATION
A data quality evaluation was included in each data report. The data
quality evaluations included a review and summary of the precision,
accuracy, representativeness, completeness, and comparability results as
assessed during data validation. Data usability is evaluated through
review of the method quality objectives specified in Worksheets #11 and
#37 of the applicable SAPs for data collected since 2012. In addition, data
ERM 5 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
adequacy for COPC selection is presented in the data reports compiled
after each field event. The methodology is described in the Final Phase 1A-
B RI SAP for (1) COPCs in Soil, Sediment, and Solid Wastes in PRI Areas 1 and
3 through 7; (2) Preliminary Site Characterization Mapping of PRI Areas 1 and 3
through 7; and (3) Background Chemical Assessment of Biotic Reference Areas
for Sitewide Ecological Risk Assessment (ERM 2015b).
2.2 DATA PREPARATION
Preparation of the data for use in the BHHRA will be consistent with other
uses of the data for the Site. Dioxins/furans and coplanar polychlorinated
biphenyl (PCB) congeners will be evaluated as 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-
p-dioxin (TCDD) toxicity equivalent (TEQ, as detailed in Section 5.3) and
PCBs will be evaluated as Total PCBs, as summed by the analytical
laboratory.
ERM 6 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
REFINEMENT OF COPC SELECTION
COPCs for solids, surface water, and groundwater were selected in the
OU-1 SLRA (ERM 2017a), and COPCs in air were selected in the OU-2
SLRA (ERM 2017b). During a review of the data to be included in the
BHHRA, it was noted that some sample concentrations were significantly
affected by blank results. In particular, chromium is a common
contaminant of the filters used to collect air samples for metals and
sample results were of similar magnitude to blank filter concentrations.
This prompted a review of blank data for all selected COPCs in solids,
surface water, groundwater, and air. This review indicates:
 A number of COPCs were detected in field and laboratory blank
samples during Phase 1A, Phase 1AB, and Phase 2A of the RI, some at
concentrations comparable to sample concentrations.
 Some COPCs were detected at very low frequency, particularly when
blank detections are taken into account.
Because of this, a refinement of the COPC selection process used in the
OU-1 SLRA (ERM 2017a) and the OU-2 SLRA (ERM 2017b) will be
conducted in the BHHRA. The refinement will not include
bioaccumulative COPCs, designated in the Final SLRA Technical
Memorandum (ERM 2014). The refinement process is illustrated in the
flow diagram presented on Figure 3-1. Refinement will be applied on a
PRI basis.
3.1 ADJUSTMENT FOR BLANK CONTAMINATION
Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Part A (RAGS A) (USEPA 1989)
Section 5.5 recommends that when a chemical that is a common laboratory
contaminant (these include acetone, 2-butanone, methylene chloride,
toluene, and phthalate esters) is detected in blank samples, Site sample
results should be ranked as non-detects unless the amount of chemical in
Site samples exceeds 10-times the level in any blank. For all other
chemicals, RAGS A recommends that Site samples should be ranked as
non-detects unless the amount of chemical in Site samples exceeds 5-times
the level in any blank. These guidelines are known as the “5x-10x rule.”
ERM 7 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
To apply the 5x-10x rule, data will be grouped according to matrix and the
phase it was collected (1A or 1AB). The field and laboratory blanks1
associated with each phase will be pooled. The maximum concentration of
each constituent detected in any of the blanks will be selected, and the 5x-
10x rule will be applied to the associated sample data. Two possible effects
on COPC selection at this point are:
1. The maximum detected concentration is not higher than the risk-based
screening level (RBSL), and the constituent is removed from the COPC
list, or
2. The maximum detected concentration is higher than the RBSL, and the
next refinement step is applied.
3.2 EVALUATION OF FREQUENCY OF DETECTION
RAGS A Section 5.9.3 identifies detection frequency as a valid factor to
consider in the refinement of COPCs, and indicates that any constituent
detected in fewer than five percent of the samples may be considered for
exclusion if it is not detected in high concentration in other environmental
media and if there is no reason to expect that it is site-related. If, after
application of the 5x-10x rule, a constituent is detected in less than five
percent of samples, it may be removed from the COPC list if the other two
criteria above also apply.

1 Laboratory blanks include method blanks, preparation blanks, and reagent blanks, as
applicable to each matrix, and field blanks include trip blanks (for volatile organic
compounds), equipment blanks, and source blanks.
ERM 8 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
The purpose of the BHHRA is to evaluate the potential for adverse human
health impacts that may occur as a result of potential exposures to
concentrations of chemicals in Site media. Findings of the BHHRA are
intended to support the RI process. The proposed BHHRA approach for
the Site follows basic procedures outlined in the USEPA’s Risk Assessment
Guidance for Superfund: Volume I—Human Health Evaluation Manual
(USEPA 1989). Other guidance documents used in the BHHRA include:
 Guidelines for Exposure Assessment. USEPA. 1992a.
 Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund
Sites. USEPA. 2002.
 Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I: Human Health
Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk
Assessment). USEPA. 2004.
 Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Update of
Standard Default Exposure Factors. USEPA. 2014.
A full list of documents consulted is provided in Section 10, References.
The tables in Sections 5 and 6 of the HE Survey summarize the survey
results and were used to determine the exposure pathways that are
complete. Section 6 of the HE Survey provides the basis for designation of
complete exposure pathways, as well as for the negligible or incomplete
pathways. The following sections describe Site receptors, exposure
pathways, exposure concentration estimation, exposure parameter
development, and application of exposure units in the BHHRA.
4.1 SUMMARY OF CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
A CSM, sometimes referred to as a conceptual exposure model, is a
schematic representation of the collective current knowledge of possible
chemical source areas, possible chemical release and transport
mechanisms, surfaces/media of concern, potential human exposure
pathways and routes (e.g., ingestion, inhalation, dermal contact), and
potential receptors. The CSM provides a basis for defining data quality
objectives, guiding Site characterization, and developing exposure
scenarios. Only complete exposure pathways, which must comprise all the
following elements (USEPA 1989), will be evaluated in the BHHRA:
 Source/source area;
ERM 9 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
 Mechanism of contaminant release and transport;
 Contact with media (e.g., soil, sediment, water);
 An exposure point where a potential receptor could contact the
contaminated media; and
 An exposure (intake) route (e.g., incidental dermal contact).
The absence of any one of these elements results in an incomplete
exposure pathway. A CSM has been prepared for each PRI. As noted in
Section 4.0, complete and significant exposure pathways were determined
based on HE Survey responses indicating contact with media in each PRI.
Tables from Sections 5 and 6 of the HE Survey show summary statistics
and provide CTE and RME values derived from the responses. If no
respondents within a receptor group indicated contact with a particular
media (such as surface water or game meat), this pathway is shown as
incomplete or negligible on the CSM. Site conditions (such as absence of
surface water) were also used to determine which exposure pathways are
not applicable.
Though PRI 17 was originally defined as groundwater and surface water
combined, the media will be addressed separately in the SLRA and
BHHRA. Surface water is not present in all PRIs, and contact was not
reported in all PRIs with surface water present. Because of this, surface
water exposure will be evaluated on a PRI-specific basis, with exposure
parameters based on HE Survey responses. As such, surface water
exposure pathways are presented on each PRI-specific CSM wherever
surface water is present and contact was reported in the HE Survey.
Development of surface water exposure concentrations is discussed in
Section 4.4.2.
The CSM for PRI 17 focuses only on exposure to groundwater on a site-
wide basis. Site groundwater has been classified by the State of Utah
Division of Water Quality (UDWQ) as Class IV water (Saline
Groundwater). This determination was included in the Public Notice of
Termination of Groundwater Discharge Permit, Permit No. UGW4500004,
in July 1992, from UDWQ (Montgomery Watson Harza 2004). Even
though Site groundwater is not a suitable drinking water source,
groundwater ingestion will be evaluated as a hypothetical future pathway
in the BHHRA.
The PRI-specific CSMs are shown in Figures 4-1 through 4-16. The Site
history, land uses, climate, and physical attributes (including geology and
hydrogeology) are described in the Final Phase 1A-B RI SAP (ERM 2015b).
The receptors identified in the CSMs are described below.
ERM 10 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
4.2 HUMAN RECEPTORS OF CONCERN AND EXPOSURE PATHWAYS
The facility is currently active and zoned as industrial, and the land use
will be industrial in the future. The surrounding land consists of land
owned by the United States Department of the Interior–Bureau of Land
Management, the State of Utah, ranch land, other industrial facilities, and
the Great Salt Lake.
The exposure scenarios illustrated in the CSMs establish the scope of the
BHHRA and ensure that receptors likely to be exposed and exposure
scenarios most likely to contribute to risk are evaluated. The following
receptors and associated exposure scenarios will be evaluated in the
BHHRA:
 US Mag workers:
 Incidental ingestion of on-Site surface soils2 and ditch and pond
sediments based on HE Survey ground hours per year in each PRI;
 Dermal contact with on-Site surface soils and ditch and pond
sediments based on HE Survey ground hours per year in each PRI;
 Dermal contact with surface water based on contact reported in the
HE Survey for each PRI that has Site-related surface water (PRIs 1,
3, 4, 5, 6, and 83);
 Inhalation of particulates and vapors based on HE Survey total
hours per year in each PRI; and
 Hypothetical future ingestion of Site groundwater.
 Workers at nearby facilities (PRIs 11 and 12):
 Incidental ingestion of off-Site surface soils;
 Dermal contact with off-Site surface soils; and
 Inhalation of particulates.

2 Surface soil is defined as soil from 0 to 6 inches/0.5 foot below ground surface.
3 Note that Participant ID 20’s responses were irregular in general, and particularly with
respect to surface water contact. From the HH Survey Report: “In a number of
[Participant ID 20] responses, it was stated that contact was made with the face and
body, but no contact with other body parts (hands, feet) were noted. As it seems
unlikely that body and face exposure to water would occur without concurrent contact
with peripheral body parts, these responses for US Mag worker participant ID 20 are
considered inconsistent and suspect. However, the water contact responses for US Mag
worker participant ID 20 were used as reported.” For PRIs 5 and 6, participant ID 20
was the only worker that indicated contact. These responses will be used to evaluate
surface water exposure.
ERM 11 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
 Federal and/or state resource managers (persons involved with
management of federal and state lands neighboring the facility):
 Incidental ingestion of off-Site surface soils;
 Dermal contact with off-Site surface soils;
 Dermal contact with off-Site surface water in PRI 8; and
 Inhalation of particulates.
 Recreational visitors (persons visiting the federal and state lands
neighboring the facility, which could include hunters, hikers, all-
terrain vehicle users, etc.):
 Incidental ingestion of off-Site surface soils;
 Dermal contact with off-Site surface soils;
 Inhalation of particulates; and
 Ingestion of game.
 Ranchers (ranchers on lands neighboring the facility):
 Incidental ingestion of off-Site surface soils;
 Dermal contact with off-Site surface soils; and
 Inhalation of particulates.
 Seasonal brine shrimp workers (workers harvesting brine shrimp cysts
from the surface of the Great Salt Lake):
 Incidental ingestion of off-Site surface soils;
 Dermal contact with off-Site surface soils; and
 Inhalation of particulates.
The following exposure pathways are considered incomplete or
negligible:
 Incidental ingestion of surface water is incomplete or negligible based
on HE Survey responses indicating a lack of significant or routine
contact that would facilitate incidental ingestion of water.
 Dermal contact with Site groundwater under the future hypothetical
groundwater use scenario is negligible because it is an industrial
exposure scenario; groundwater will not be used for bathing.
 Based on HE Survey responses, ranchers do not consume livestock,
and this is an incomplete exposure pathway.
ERM 12 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
4.3 HUMAN HEALTH EXPOSURE PARAMETERS
The BHHRA will evaluate both CTE and RME estimates. The results of the
HE Survey (ERM 2015a) identified specifics regarding the time spent by
workers in the individual PRI areas, surface water exposures, skin contact,
recreation activities, and ingestion of game meat. These site-specific
results for these parameters are used preferentially over other sources.
Table 4-1 of the HE Survey provides a matrix showing which exposure
parameters will be the default value from agency guidance and which will
be derived from survey responses.
Current facility workers at the US Mag facility are required to wear long-
sleeve shirts, long pants, and hard hats. The exposed skin surface area of
these workers is calculated from 50th percentile values for head and hand
surface areas for men and women compiled in the USEPA’s Exposure
Factors Handbook (2011b), resulting in a skin surface area of 2,230 square
centimeters. This value is used as the CTE estimate for US Mag and
nearby facility workers.
All receptors will be evaluated on a PRI area-specific basis for all media
except groundwater. As shown in Tables 4-1 through 4-17, exposure
parameters values are USEPA default values where site-specific
information is unavailable. For several recreational visitor exposure
parameters, where site-specific or default values are unavailable, best
professional judgement was used. These are identified in Tables 4-13
through 4-16. For hypothetical future groundwater ingestion (evaluated
only for the US Mag worker), consistent with the Frequently Asked
Questions on Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER)
Directive 9200.1-120 (USEPA 2014), an ingestion rate of 1.25 liters per day
will be used (Table 4-17). Groundwater will be evaluated under an RME
scenario only.
In the HE Survey (ERM 2015a), US Mag workers reported both total hours
at each PRI area as well as any time spent outside the vehicle (ground
hours). For all soil/sediment and water exposures, ground hours are used.
If a worker reported surface water contact, an exposure time of 1 hour was
used as recommended in the HE Survey. Some workers reported surface
water contact in PRIs where there is no surface water related to facility
operations, and thus, there are no surface water data. Surface water
exposure will only be evaluated in PRIs where surface water data are
present.
ERM 13 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
4.3.1 Survey Fraction
For all receptors included in the HE Survey, including the general US Mag
worker, CTE and RME values were derived from the survey for exposure
hours per PRI area. To relate the hours spent per PRI area, a “survey
fraction” was developed. The survey fraction is calculated as follows:
𝑆𝑡𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑦 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑛=𝑅𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑑𝑦 ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑜𝑑𝑟 𝑃𝑅𝐼
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑟 𝐸𝐸×𝐸𝑅 [Eqn. 1]
where:
EF = exposure frequency (days/year; either the default worker or 365
days/year for the recreator)
ET = exposure time (hours/day; 8 hours)
The survey fraction is then applied in the dose calculation as a separate
exposure parameter.
4.3.2 Game Ingestion
While recreator exposures for adults and children were evaluated in the
survey, CTE and RME ingestion rates of game meat were only developed
for adults, using a 0.25-pound serving size for game meat. Because serving
sizes of game meat for children were not included in the survey, USEPA’s
Exposure Factors Handbook (2011b) was consulted to find a comparable
child’s serving size. Table 11-21 in the Exposure Factors Handbook
identifies the mass consumed per occasion for various meats. While game
meat was not included, the serving size for game (0.25 pound) matched
that for an adult serving of “total chicken and turkey.” A weighted
average serving size for “total chicken and turkey” was calculated using
the portion sizes listed for 6- to 11-year-olds and 12- to 19-year-olds. The
CTE and RME grams consumed per day were calculated for the recreator
aged 6 to 16 years old using the CTE and RME number of meals per year
in Table 6-3 of the HE Survey (ERM 2015a) and the grams per meal were
derived from Table 11-21 in the Exposure Factors Handbook. It was
assumed that a child younger than 6 years old would not eat game meat.
4.4 DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVE EXPOSURE
CONCENTRATIONS
An exposure concentration (EPC) is a COPC-specific and media-specific
concentration value used in the dose equation for each receptor and each
exposure pathway. As described below, the methods, rationale, and
assumptions employed in deriving EPCs will be consistent with USEPA
ERM 14 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
guidance and will reflect Site-specific conditions. EPCs will be developed
on a PRI area-specific basis.
True risk in an exposure area in which exposures is random is related to
the true mean concentration in that area. However, the true mean
concentration cannot be determined with certainty from a finite set of
measurements within an exposure area, and an observed sample mean
may be either lower or higher than the true mean. Because risk
calculations using the sample mean could therefore underestimate true
risk in an exposure area, USEPA guidance recommends that exposure
calculations be based an appropriate upper confidence limit (UCL) of the
observed sample mean.
The optimum statistical method for calculating the UCL of the sample
mean for a dataset depends on the nature of the data. USEPA has
developed software (ProUCL version 5.0) that computes a series of
alternative estimates of the UCL for any given dataset, and identifies
which value is recommended for use. In most cases the UCL is the 95
percent UCL, but when data are limited, some higher confidence bound
may be recommended. For datasets that are mostly non-detects (< 4
detects or > 95 percent non-detects), the maximum detected concentration
will be used. In addition, if the recommended UCL is greater than the
maximum detected concentration, the maximum detected concentration
will be used as the EPC. The selected EPC will be used in both the RME
and CTE scenarios.
4.4.1 Solid Media
For direct contact with soil and sediment, the EPC will be the
recommended 95 percent UCL concentration for each detected chemical
selected as a COPC, if calculable, or the maximum detected concentration
in the cases noted above.
4.4.2 Surface Water
For direct contact with surface water, the EPC will be the recommended
95 percent UCL concentration (or the maximum concentration in the cases
noted in Section 4.4) for each detected chemical selected as a COPC.
Surface water COPCs are selected using data for all surface water samples
collected at the Site. Representative exposure concentrations will be
calculated on a PRI-specific basis. Based on the HE Survey results and the
presence of surface water, the surface water exposure pathway will be
evaluated quantitatively for US Mag workers in PRIs 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8, as
well as for resource managers in PRI 8.
ERM 15 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
4.4.3 Groundwater
Exposure to groundwater by US Mag workers is a hypothetical future
pathway. Groundwater EPCs will be dependent on detailed groundwater
characterization and an evaluation of the data to determine if there are
any significant groundwater COPC spatial patterns (e.g., plumes).
Following this characterization and evaluation, a determination will be
made, in consultation with USEPA, on how to group the data for BHHRA.
The most recent groundwater data from study area monitoring wells will
be used to derive EPCs for each detected chemical selected as a COPC.
The groundwater EPCs will be the recommended 95 percent UCL
concentration (or the maximum concentration in the cases noted in Section
4.4) for each detected chemical selected as a COPC.
4.4.4 Game Meat
To the extent possible, the BHHRA will rely on measured exposure
concentrations. Although biota samples were collected in support of the
ecological risk assessment, these samples included plants, invertebrates,
and small mammals. Collection of tissue samples from game animals (e.g.,
deer, chukar) is not planned.4 Therefore, to quantitatively evaluate this
exposure pathway, modeling of tissue concentrations will be conducted.
Tissue concentrations will be estimated based on soil and plant
concentrations from the Site. Concentrations of bioaccumulative COPCs in
plants ingested by game will be estimated using plant tissue data collected
from PRI 15 during Phase 2A. Six plant samples were collected from PRI
15 (at locations UL-10-B, UL-10-C, UL-10-D, UL-10-E, UL-10-G (ALT), and
UM-05-A). One sample, UM-05-A, had limited mass and was analyzed for
metals only. Mercury was detected in all six samples. In the five samples
analyzed for organic constituents, TCDD TEQ was not detected in any
sample, while Total PCBs and hexachlorobenzene were detected in all five
samples.
Equations and parameters from USEPA’s Human Health Risk Assessment
Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities (2005) for beef and
chicken will be used to estimate deer/antelope and chukar tissue
concentrations, respectively. Because game ingestion rates usually depend
on the type of game, exposure and risk will be evaluated separately for
each game type. The uncertainties associated with the approach will be
discussed in the Uncertainty Analysis section of the BHHRA.

4 Note that tissue data, if available, will be used preferentially over modeled data.
However, the collection of tissue data from deer and/or chukar, even
opportunistically, is likely to be infeasible.
ERM 16 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
4.4.5 Outdoor Air
Long–term exposure to COPCs bound to dust particles generated from
mechanical disturbances will be evaluated using the USEPA’s Particulate
Emission Factor approach (USEPA 2002). The Particulate Emission Factor
relates concentrations of a chemical in soil to the concentration of dust
particles in the air. Input soil concentrations for the model will be the
EPCs as described above. Other model input parameters for each PRI, and
their basis, are provided in Tables 4-19 and 4-20, respectively. The basis
for each of the model scenarios for each PRI are provided in Table 4-21.
Data collected in OU-2 Phase 1A will also be included in evaluation of risk
from the inhalation pathway.
4.5 DOSE ESTIMATION
RME and CTE levels (as applicable) will be calculated for each COPC for
each receptor of concern using the exposure parameters identified in
Tables 4-1 through 4-17. The methodology used to estimate the average
daily dose (ADD) of the chemicals via each of the complete exposure
pathways except inhalation will be based on USEPA (1989, 1992a)
guidance. For carcinogens, lifetime ADD (LADD) estimates are based on
chronic lifetime exposure extrapolated over the estimated average 70-year
lifetime (USEPA 1989). This is consistent with cancer slope factors (CSF),
which are based on chronic lifetime exposures. For non-carcinogens, ADD
estimates will be averaged over the estimated exposure period. The
generic equation for calculating the ingestion and dermal ADDs and
LADDs is:
d/yr 365 AT BW
BIOSFEF ED IR C = LADDorADD uu
uuuuu [Eqn. 2]
For inhalation exposure, the average daily concentration (ADC) and
lifetime ADC (LADC) are calculated using the generic equation below:
ADC or LADC = C × ET × EF × ED × SF [Eqn. 3]
AT × 365 d/yr × 24 hr/d
ERM 17 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
where:
ADD/ADC = Dose or concentration terms for non-carcinogens (in
milligrams per kilogram per day [mg/kg-d] or micrograms per
cubic meter [µg/m3])
LADD/LADC = Dose or concentration terms for carcinogens (in mg/kg-d
or µg/m3)
C = chemical concentration in the contact medium (e.g., mg/kg soil)
IR = intake rate (e.g., mg/day soil ingestion and dermal contact
[requires a conversion factor of 106 kilograms per milligram])
ED = exposure duration (years of exposure)
EF = exposure frequency (number of days per year)
ET = exposure time (hours/day)
SF = survey fraction (unitless)
BW = average body weight over the exposure period (kilograms)
BIO = relative bioavailability (unitless)
AT = averaging time; same as the ED for non-carcinogens and 70
years (average lifetime) for carcinogens
With the exception of arsenic, the relative oral bioavailability (BIO) of all
COPCs will be 100 percent. For arsenic, consistent with the
recommendation in OSWER Directive 9200.1-113 (USEPA 2012), an oral
relative bioavailability of 60 percent will be used. The actual oral
bioavailability of arsenic (as well as other metals at the Site, for which an
oral bioavailability of 100 percent will be used) is likely to be lower than
this value. For dioxins/furans, a discussion on the effect of an oral
bioavailability of 38 percent on the risk estimates, based on a study
conducted by US Mag using Site soil (Finley 2007), will be included in the
Uncertainty Analysis section of the BHHRA.
Exposure levels of potentially carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic
chemicals will be calculated separately because different exposure
endpoints apply (ADD for non-carcinogens and LADD for carcinogens).
Exposure levels will be estimated for each relevant exposure pathway for
each medium (soil, water, and air) and for each exposure route (oral and
dermal). The total dose of each COPC is the sum of doses across all
applicable exposure routes. Exposure parameters that have significant
impact on the results will be discussed in the Uncertainty Analysis section
of the BHHRA.
ERM 18 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
The results of the exposure assessment will be used with information on
the toxicity of the COPCs in the risk characterization step of the risk
assessment to estimate the potential risks to human health posed by
exposure to the COPCs. This process is discussed in Section 6.

ERM 19 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
Toxicity values, when available, are published by the USEPA in the on-
line Integrated Risk Information System (USEPA 2018). CSFs (in units of
reciprocal dose: [mg/kg-d]-1) are chemical-specific and experimentally
derived potency values that are used to calculate the risk of cancer
resulting from exposure to potentially carcinogenic chemicals. A higher
value implies a more potent carcinogenic potential. Reference doses
(RfDs) are experimentally derived “no-effect” levels used to quantify the
extent of toxic effects other than cancer due to exposure to chemicals (in
units of mg/kg-d). With RfDs, a lower value implies a more potent
toxicant. These criteria are generally developed by USEPA risk assessment
work groups and listed in the USEPA risk assessment guidance
documents and databases. USEPA’s hierarchy of sources (USEPA 2003)
will be followed to select toxicity values.
5.1 TOXICITY VALUES FOR DERMAL EXPOSURE
Although USEPA has developed toxicity criteria for the oral and
inhalation routes of exposure, it has not developed toxicity criteria for the
dermal route of exposure. USEPA has proposed a method for
extrapolating oral toxicity criteria to the dermal route in the Risk
Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume I: Human Health Evaluation
Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment) (USEPA
2004). USEPA states that the adjustment of the oral toxicity factor for
dermal exposures is necessary only when the oral-gastrointestinal
absorption efficiency of the chemical of interest is less than 50 percent
(due to the variability inherent in absorption studies). Chemical-specific
dermal absorption values from USEPA guidance (USEPA 2004) will be
used in the risk assessments. USEPA does not recommend absorption
factors for volatile organic compounds based on the rationale that they are
volatilized from the soil on skin and exposure is accounted for via
inhalation routes (USEPA 2004).
5.2 SURROGATES
Some chemicals detected in media at the Site lack agency-derived toxicity
values. Surrogate toxicity values will not be selected for these chemicals.
The lack of toxicity data for these chemicals will be addressed in the
Uncertainty Analysis section of the BHHRA.
ERM 20 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
5.3 EVALUATION OF DIOXINS/FURANS
For dioxins/furans and coplanar polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)
congeners, the USEPA TEQ procedure, developed to describe the
cumulative toxicity of these compounds, will be used. This procedure
involves assigning an individual toxicity equivalency factor (TEF) to the
2,3,7,8-substituted dioxin/furan and PCB congeners. TEFs are estimates of
the toxicity of dioxin-like compounds relative to the toxicity of TCDD,
which is assigned a TEF of 1.0. Calculating the TEQ of a mixture involves
multiplying the concentration of an individual congener by its respective
TEF. The sum of the TEQ concentrations for the individual congeners is
the TCDD TEQ concentration for the mixture. TEFs from USEPA (2010b)
will be used. TCDD TEQs will be calculated two ways: substituting zero
for non-detected congeners and substituting one-half the detection limit.
Intakes and associated risks will be calculated for both TEQs, and an
Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk (ILCR) and hazard index (HI) using
each will be presented.
5.4 LEAD
Lead is assessed differently than most other COPCs. Extensive
information is available regarding the health effects of exposure to lead,
and the effects database is largely based on blood-lead concentrations.
USEPA has not developed traditional RfD toxicity criteria for lead risk
assessment, primarily because a threshold for toxic effects in mammals
has not been established. If lead is identified as a COPC, the Adult Lead
Methodology and Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic Model for Lead
in Children will be used to generate predicted blood-lead concentrations
and provide information on the percentage of the population exceeding 10
micrograms per deciliter, which will allow evaluation of the probability of
adverse health effects associated with lead exposures. If needed, input
parameter values will be provided for the applicable model(s) in the
BHHRA.
5.5 CHROMIUM
Chromium primarily exists in either the trivalent (III) or hexavalent (VI)
state in the environment. Hexavalent chromium mostly occurs due to
human activities. Many trivalent chromium compounds have low
solubility in water, while some hexavalent chromium compounds are
readily soluble in water. Hexavalent chromium compounds are reduced
to the trivalent form in the presence of oxidizable organic matter.
Chromium data for matrices other than water were not speciated, and the
ERM 21 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
reported concentrations are for total chromium. If total chromium is
retained as a COPC, evaluation of risk will be performed based on toxicity
values for both trivalent chromium and hexavalent chromium, and the
uncertainty section will discuss which calculation is considered to be most
relevant, and why. For water, EPCs will be developed for both hexavalent
chromium and total chromium with the specific data available for each,
and the associated toxicity values will be used.
ERM 22 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
The final step in the BHHRA is the characterization of the potential risks
associated with exposure to detected chemicals, by combining the
estimates of exposure (exposure assessment) with the selected measures of
toxicity (toxicity assessment). Cancer risks and non-cancer health hazards
are characterized separately.
6.1 METHODS FOR ASSESSING CANCER RISKS
In the risk characterization, carcinogenic risk will be estimated separately
as the incremental probability of an individual developing cancer over a
lifetime as a result of exposure to chemicals. Carcinogenic risks for
chemicals will be evaluated by multiplying the estimated average
exposure rate (i.e., LADD calculated in the exposure assessment) by the
chemical’s CSF. The CSF converts estimated daily doses averaged over a
lifetime to incremental risk of an individual developing cancer. According
to USEPA (1989), this approach is appropriate for theoretical upper-bound
ILCR of less than 1  10-2. The following equation will be used to calculate
chemical-specific risks and total risks:
Risk = LADD × CSF or LADC × IUR [Eqn. 4]
where:
LADD = Lifetime average daily dose [oral and dermal pathways;
(mg/kg-d)]
LADC = Lifetime average daily concentration [inhalation pathway;
(µg/m3)]
CSF = Cancer slope factor [(mg/kg-d)-1]
IUR = Inhalation unit risk [inhalation pathways; (µg/m3)-1]
CSF = Cancer slope factor [ingestion and dermal risk; (mg/kg-d)-1]
IUR = Inhalation unit risk [inhalation risk; milligrams per cubic
meter]
It will be assumed that cancer risks for different chemicals and from
multiple exposure routes are additive.
ERM 23 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
6.2 METHODS FOR ASSESSING NON-CANCER HEALTH EFFECTS
Non-cancer adverse health effects are estimated by comparing the
estimated average exposure rate (i.e., ADDs/ADCs estimated in the
exposure assessment) with an exposure level at which no adverse health
effects are expected to occur for a long period of exposure (i.e., the RfDs/
reference concentrations [RfCs]).
ADDs are compared to RfDs and ADCs are compared to RfCs by dividing
the ADD or ADC by the RfD or RfC to obtain the ratio (hazard quotient),
as follows:
HQ = ADD/RfD or ADC/RfC [Eqn. 5]
where:
HQ = hazard quotient
ADD = average daily dose (mg/kg-d)
ADC = average daily concentration (µg/m3)
RfD = reference dose (mg/kg-d)
RfC = reference concentration (µg/m3)
If a person’s average exposure is less than the RfD or RfC (i.e., if the hazard
quotient is less than 1), the chemical is considered unlikely to pose a
significant non-carcinogenic health hazard to individuals under the given
exposure conditions. Unlike carcinogenic risk estimates, a hazard quotient
is not expressed as a probability. Therefore, while both cancer and non-
cancer risk characterizations indicate a relative potential for adverse effects
to occur from exposure to a chemical, a non-cancer adverse health effect
estimate is not directly comparable with a cancer risk estimate.
If exposure to a COPC occurs by more than one pathway, the hazard
quotients for that COPC will be summed across all applicable pathways.
This sum of the hazard quotients is known as a HI.
Hazard Index =  Hazard Quotients [Eqn. 6]
A total HI that includes all COPCs and all exposure pathways will be
presented in the risk assessment.
If the HI that includes all COPCs and all exposure pathways is less than or
equal to one, further characterization of non-cancer risk is not necessary.
For any HI that exceeds 1, the potential for adverse health effects will be
further evaluated by considering the target organs upon which each
chemical could have an adverse effect. The target organ-specific HIs will be
ERM 24 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
summed for all relevant COPCs. The segregation of HI by target organ is
consistent with USEPA guidance for non-carcinogens, including metals
(USEPA 1989, 2001b, 2005).
6.3 CUMULATIVE RISK
Because there is a nearly infinite set of alternative scenarios in which a
worker may be exposed at multiple PRIs, the following approach will be
used in the BHHRA:
¦
¦u
)(
)()( RiskCumulative if
ifiRisk = [Eqn. 7]
where “i” is an index indicating PRI; and
¦
¦
)(/
)],(/[)(jyrhrs
jiyrhrs = if [Eqn. 8]
where “j” is an index referring to a specific US Mag worker
For CTE, two alternative values will be calculated:
 The sum of the CTE risks across the five most heavily occupied PRIs (1,
2, 4, 9, and 11); and
 The sum of the CTE risks across all PRIs.
For RME, the following two alternative values will be calculated:
 The RME risks from the two PRIs that have the highest risk values,
plus the CTE risks from each of the other three most heavily used PRIs;
and
 The RME risks from the two PRIs that have the highest risk values,
plus the CTE risks from all other PRIs.
This set of values should provide a reasonable sense of the width of the
range of cumulative risks that could reasonably occur, depending on work
patterns.
6.4 BACKGROUND RISK CHARACTERIZATION
For purposes of risk assessment, the ILCR is that risk attributed to
exposure to the COPCs present at the Site and is independent of non-Site-
ERM 25 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
related cancer risk, which is considered to be “total background” risk. The
risk associated with background concentrations of COPCs in soil is the
risk associated with the component of the COPC concentration in soil that
is not associated with Site-related releases. This is characterized by the
background soil data for the Site, which were reported in the Phase 1A-B
RI Data Report (ERM 2016b). Total risk includes both incremental and
background risks. Because risks from background concentrations of
constituents such as metals and ubiquitous anthropogenic constituents
(e.g., dioxins) will be included in the risk assessment based on measured
concentrations of COPCs in Site media, in instances where the total risk is
calculated to exceed a cancer risk of 10-5 or HI of 1, the risk assessment
will calculate and report the risk based on the concentrations measured at
background locations in order to provide context to the BHHRA results.
ERM 26 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
Consistent with USEPA (1989) guidance, a qualitative discussion of the
uncertainties associated with the estimation of risks for the Site will be
presented. The Uncertainty Analysis will discuss uncertainties associated
with each step of the risk assessment, including Site characterization data,
data usability, selection of COPCs, representative exposure
concentrations, fate and transport mechanisms, exposure assessment,
toxicity assessment, and risk characterization. For each source of
uncertainty, a qualitative evaluation of the expected impact of each one on
the results will be conducted. Available information will be combined
with the risk assessor’s professional judgement to ascertain the extent
(low, moderate, high) that any of the sources might result in an
“overestimation,” “underestimation,” or “no discernable effect” on risk
estimates. Uncertainties regarding the magnitude of the contribution of
specific COPCs and pathways to the risk assessment results will be
discussed. In general, a quantitative Uncertainty Analysis will not be
performed. If significant uncertainty is introduced by evaluating
bioaccumulative COPCs in non-bioaccumulative pathways (such as
inhalation) where the constituent’s maximum concentration is less than its
RBSL, a quantitative analysis may be conducted. In addition, there are
generally one or more constituents in each PRI that are never detected but
whose maximum detection limit exceeds the RBSL. An evaluation of the
likelihood that the constituent is present and a semi-quantitative
evaluation of the associated uncertainty in the risk calculations will be
presented. In addition, subsurface concentrations will be compared to
surface data to determine whether there are any locations where deeper
samples are substantially more contaminated than the surface interval
evaluated, and whether or not the subsurface is a potential concern for
hypothetical future human exposure.

ERM 27 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
DATA GAPS ANALYSIS FOR BHHRA
Site data collected in Phase 1A and Phase 1A-B are expected to be
sufficient to conduct the BHHRA. Some additional evaluation will be
conducted during preparation of the Phase 2B SAP as described below.
8.1 GAME MEAT DATA
In general, the BHHRA will rely on measured concentration data in solid
media, surface water, and groundwater. Game meat data have not been
collected in the study area; an evaluation of risk from ingestion of game
meat based on modeled tissue concentrations will be conducted in the
BHHRA as discussed in Section 3.4.4.
8.2 EVALUATION OF DATASETS FOR EPC DEVELOPMENT
Data collected during Phase 1A and Phase 1A-B are likely to meet DQOs
for selection of COPCs. Prior to conducting the BHHRA, the datasets for
COPCs selected in soil and surface water will be evaluated for EPC
development. Some datasets with few detects or highly skewed
distributions may not support development of a 95 UCL. ProUCL 5.0
(USEPA 2013b) provides methods for selecting alternative values for the
EPC, as described in Section 4.4. Development of EPCs will be conducted
during preparation of the Phase 2B SAP to evaluate whether EPCs are
sufficiently robust and whether further data collection would be helpful
for some COPCs in some areas of the Site.

ERM 28 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
SUMMARY AND INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS
The risk characterization results will be presented in tabular format in the
risk assessment report. Key exposure factors (e.g., estimated intakes,
important modeling assumptions, summary of exposure pathways for
each receptor) and toxicity information (e.g., CSFs, RfDs, and target
organs) will be provided. The risk results will be discussed in the context
of the target risk goals specified in Section 5. The report will present the
cancer risk assessment results for chemicals for incremental cancer risk
estimates (see Section 5.1), and the percent contribution of the risk
associated with background levels of metals, dioxins/furans, PCBs, and
hexachlorobenzene in soil to the incremental cancer risk. In addition,
those COPCs and exposure pathways having the greatest influence on the
risk assessment results will be identified. As appropriate, graphical
presentation of the results will also be included in the risk assessment
report.
ERM 29 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
REFERENCES
ERM-West, Inc. (ERM). 2013. Draft Phase 1A Laboratory Demonstration of
Method Applicability Technical Memorandum for Soil, Sediment, Waste, and
Water. US Magnesium RI/FS, Rowley, Utah. January.
ERM. 2014. Final Screening-Level Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum.
July.
ERM. 2015a. Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report Final. August.
ERM. 2015b. Phase 1A-B Remedial Investigation Sampling and Analysis Plan
for 1) Chemicals of Potential Concern in Soil, Sediment, and Solid Wastes in
PRI Areas 1 and 3 through 7; 2) Preliminary Site Characterization Mapping
of PRI Areas 1 and 3 through 7; and 3) Background Chemical Assessment of
Biotic Reference Areas for Sitewide Ecological Risk Assessment. September.
ERM. 2015c. Phase 1A Data Report for PRI Areas 2 and 8–17. October.
ERM. 2016a. Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical
Memorandum. August.
ERM. 2016b. Final Phase 1A-B Remedial Investigation Data Report. October.
ERM. 2016c. Final Phase 1A Data Report for Operable Unit 2 - Air. October.
ERM. 2017a. Final OU-1 Screening-Level Risk Assessment Report. April.
ERM. 2017b. Final Operable Unit 2 Screening-Level Risk Assessment Report.
September.
ERM. 2018. Final Phase 2A Representative Prey Investigation Data Report.
August.
Finley, B.L. 2007. Expert Report of Brent L. Finley, Ph.D., DABT. US
Magnesium Facility. Rowley, Utah. Prepared for Parsons Behle &
Latimer. April.
Montgomery Watson Harza. 2004. Groundwater Monitoring Plan. March.
Unites States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1989. Risk
Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume I—Human Health Evaluation
Manual (Part A). Interim Final. Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, Washington, D.C. USEPA/540/1-89/002. December.
ERM 30 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
USEPA. 1992a. Guidelines for Exposure Assessment. Federal Register,
57(104):22888-22938. 29 May.
USEPA. 1992b. Supplemental Guidance to RAGS: Calculating the
Concentration Term. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Washington D.C. Publication 9285.7-08I. May.
USEPA. 2001a. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume III - Part A,
Process for Conducting Probabilistic Risk Assessment. Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. Publication 9285.7-45.
December.
USEPA. 2001b. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume I Human
Health Evaluation Manual—Part D, Standardized Planning, Reporting, and
Review of Superfund Risk Assessments. Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. Publication 9285.7-47.
December.
USEPA. 2002. Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for
Superfund Sites. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Washington, D.C. OSWER 9355.4-24. December.
USEPA. 2003. Memorandum on Human Health Toxicity Values in Superfund
Risk Assessments, from Michael B. Cook, Director, Office of Superfund
Remediation and Technology Innovation to Superfund Remediation
Policy Managers, Regions 1-10, dated 5 December. OSWER Directive
9285.7-53.
USEPA. 2004. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I: Human
Health Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk
Assessment) Final. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response,
Washington, D.C. EPA/540/R/99/005. July.
USEPA. 2005. Human Health Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste
Combustion Facilities. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Washington D.C. EPA530-R-05-006. September.
USEPA. 2010b. Recommended Toxicity Equivalence Factors (TEFs) for Human
Health Risk Assessments of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and Dioxin-
Like Compounds. EPA/100/R-10/005. Risk Assessment Forum.
Washington, D.C.
USEPA. 2011a. Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study. CERCLA Docket No. CERCLA-
08-2011-0013.
ERM 31 US MAGNESIUM/0350891 – MARCH 2019
USEPA. 2011b. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition. National Center
for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC; EPA/600/R-
09/052F. Available online at http://www.epa.gov/ncea/efh.
USEPA. 2012. Recommendations for Default Value for Relative Bioavailability of
Arsenic in Soil. OSWER Directive 9200.1-113. December 2012.
USEPA. 2013a. Phase 1A Remedial Investigation Sampling and Analysis Plan
to Identify Chemicals of Potential Concern in Soils, Sediment, Solid Waste,
Water and Air, and Receptor Surveys, Revision 0 for PRI Areas 2 and 8
through 17. September.
USEPA. 2013b. ProUCL Version 5.0.00 (or most recent) Technical Guide
and Software. September.
USEPA. 2014. OSWER Directive 9200.1-120. Human Health Evaluation
Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Update of Standard Default Exposure
Factors. February.
USEPA. 2018. Integrated Risk Information System. USEPA on-line database:
ttp://www.epa.gov/iris/index.html.

Figures
Figure 1-1
Site Location Map
Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
Technical Memorandum
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
US Magnesium Facility
RI/FS Study Area Boundary
0 10 20Miles
³
File: M:\Projects\0132320_USMagnesium_Confidential\maps\Baseline HHRA TM\Fig 1-1 SiteLocation.mxd By: Mike Appel Date: 9/16/2015 12:47:26 PM
1:500,000
PRI 10
Barium
Sulfate Area
PRI 7
Northeast Ponded
Waste Lagoon
PRI 11
ATI Titanium Plant and US
Magnesium Parking Lots
PRI 4
Gypsum
PilePRI 9
Smut Area
PRI 13
Buffer
Area North & East
PRI 14
Buffer Area South
PRI 15
Buffer Area West
PRI 16
Lakeside Mountains
Buffer Area
PRI 8
Northwest Ponded
Waste Lagoon Overflow
PRI 12
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Areas
PRI 5
Southeast Ponded
Waste Lagoon
PRI 6
Northwest Ponded
Waste Lagoon
Figure 1-2
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
Technical Memorandum
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Operating Facility
RI/FS Study Area Boundary
PRI 1: Ditches
PRI 2: Landfill
PRI 3: Sanitary Lagoon
PRI 4: Gypsum Pile
PRI 5: Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 6: Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 7: Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
PRI 8: Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
PRI 9: Smut Area
PRI 10: Barium Sulfate Area
PRI 11: ATI Titanium Plant andUS Magnesium Parking Lots
PRI 12: Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas
PRI 13: Buffer Area North & East
PRI 14: Buffer Area South
PRI 15: Buffer Area West
PRI 16: Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
0 1 2Miles³
Notes: All boundaries approximate, originally provided by EPA Revised Buffer Areas - April 2012. Aerial Photo: NAIP (USDA) 2014
File: M:\Projects\0132320_USMagnesium_Confidential\maps\Baseline HHRA TM\Fig1-2 PRI Areas.mxd By: Austin Phelps Date: 6/24/2015 3:29:59 PM
PRI 17: Site-Wide Surface and Groundwater (Not Shown)
PRI 18: Site-Wide Ambient Air (Not Shown)
PRI 2
Landfill
PRI 1
Ditches
PRI 4
Gypsum Pile
PRI 9
Smut
Area PRI 3
Sanitary
Lagoon
PRI 12
Ancillary Worker
Exposure Areas
PRI 11
ATI Titanium Plant
and USM Parking Lots
PRI 5
Southeast
Ponded Waste
Lagoon
PRI 15
Buffer Area West
  KEY
Figure 3-1
COPC Refinement Process
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
For each PRI (solids)
or for all GW or SW,
is the analyte a COPC per
OU-1 SLRA1?
Was the analyte detected in
any blank 3?
Is the FOD < 5%?
1 COPCs identified based on maximum detected concentration ≥ RBSL
2 RAGS Part A, 5.9.3: Consider the chemical as a candidate for elimination from the quantitative risk assessment if: (1) it
is detected infrequently in one or perhaps two environmental media, (2) it is not detected in any other sampled media or
at high concentrations, and (3) there is no reason to believe that the chemical may be present.
3 Per RAGS Part A, 5.5, all blanks for a sample set (RI Phase) will be included.
4 Common lab contaminants include acetone, 2-butanone, methylene chloride, toluene, and the phthalate esters.
Not detected at high
concentration or in other media
and not expected to be site-
related 2?
Yes
Yes Yes Eliminate
as COPC
NoNo
Retain as
COPCNo
Treat sample results as ND
if < 5X max. blank detection
(10X for common lab
contaminants) 3
Is maximum detected result
≥ RBSL?
Is the FOD < 5%?
Not detected at high concentration
in other PRIs/ media and not
expected to be site-related 3?
Yes Yes Eliminate
as COPC
No
No Eliminate
as COPC
Retain as
COPC
Yes
Is the COPC considered
bioaccumulative?
No
Retain as
COPCYes
No
Yes
●
●●●
●●●
oo●
◊oo
oo●
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.
o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-1
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 1 - Ditches
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI
Minor transport or exposure pathway
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct Contact
●
●●●
◊oo
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-2
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 2 - Landfill
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI
Minor transport or exposure pathway
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
●
●●●
◊oo
oo●
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-3
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 3 - Sanitary Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
●
●●●
◊oo
oo●
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-4
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 4 - Gypsum Pile
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Inhalation
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
OralDirectContact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct Contact
●
●●●
◊oo
oo●
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-5
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 5 - Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct Contact
●
●●●
◊oo
oo●
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-6
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 6 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct Contact
●
●●●
◊oo
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-7
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 7 - Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct Contact
●●
●●●
●●●
◊oo
o ooo●●
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-8
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 8 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
●
●●●
◊oo
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-9
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 9 - Smut Area
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct Contact
●
●●●
◊oo
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-10
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 10 - Barium Sulfate Area
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct Contact
●●o ●
●●o ●●●o ●●●o ●
◊o o ooooooooo
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-11
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 11 - ATI Titanium Plant and US Magnesium Parking Lots
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Direct Contact
Deposition
●●o
●●o●●o●●o
◊o ooooooo
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-12
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 12 - Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Direct Contact
Deposition
●●●
●●●●●●●●●
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-13
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Direct Contact
Deposition
●●
●●●●●●
●
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-14
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
Direct Contact
●●●
●●●●●●●●●
●o
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-15
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Direct Contact
Deposition
●●●
●●●●●●●●●
●o
KEY● Pathway is complete and could be significant; quantitative evaluation.o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
Pathway is not applicable for this exposure/receptor for this PRI.Figure 4-16
◊ Current facility worker does not contact Site groundwater; ingestion of Site groundwater will be evaluated Conceptual Site Model for Human Exposure
separately for hypothetical future exposures only (see text).PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway for this PRI.Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for this PRI.
Minor transport or exposure pathway.
Pathway US Mag
Workers
Workers at
Nearby
Facilities
Episodic
Workers
Resource
Managers
Recreational
Visitors and
Hunters
Ranchers
Seasonal
Brine Shrimp
Workers
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates
Oral
Inhalation
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Livestock/Game Oral
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Direct Contact
Runoff,
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Direct Contact
Deposition

Tables

Table 4-1
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 1 - Ditches
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag
Worker Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr 1 4 1 4
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²1,390 4 3,800 4
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day 1 5 1 5
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 143 2 750 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.072 6 0.38 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 163 2 750 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.082 6 0.38 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-2
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 2 - Landfill
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag
Worker Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 51 2 200 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.026 6 0.10 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 141 2 500 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.071 6 0.25 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-3
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 3 - Sanitary Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag
Worker Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr 1 4 1 4
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²3,800 4 5,460 4
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day 1 5 1 5
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 35 2 100 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.018 6 0.050 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 64 2 200 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.032 6 0.1 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-4
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 4 - Gypsum Pile
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag
Worker Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr 4 4 10 4
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²3,800 4 5,460 4
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day 1 5 1 5
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 22 2 50 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.011 6 0.025 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 287 2 800 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.14 6 0.4 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-5
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 5 - Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag
Worker Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr 1 4 1 4
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²3,800 4 5,460 4
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day 1 5 1 5
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 11 2 13 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0055 6 0.0065 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 44 2 100 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.022 6 0.05 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-6
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 6 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag
Worker Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr 10 4 10 4
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²3,800 4 5,460 4
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day 1 5 1 5
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 15 2 20 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0075 6 0.010 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 76 2 250 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.038 6 0.13 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-7
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 7 - Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag
Worker Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 19 2 25 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0095 6 0.013 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 49 2 50 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.025 6 0.025 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-8
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 8 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag Resource Resource
Worker Worker Manager Manager
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1 3,527 1 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr 1.3 4 2 4 1.3 4 2 4
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²3,800 4 5,460 4 3,800 4 5,460 4
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 5
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 9 2 12 2 10 2 28 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0045 6 0.0060 6 0.0050 6 0.014 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 99 2 250 2 10 2 28 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.05 6 0.13 6 0.005 6 0.014 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-9
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 9 - Smut Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag
Worker Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 67 2 250 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.034 6 0.13 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 293 2 1,250 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.15 6 0.63 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-10
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 10 - Barium Sulfate Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag
Worker Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 17 2 48 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0085 6 0.024 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 19 2 48 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0095 6 0.024 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-11
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 11 - ATI Titanium Plant and US Magnesium Parking Lots
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag Nearby Nearby Resource Resource
Worker Worker Worker Worker Manager Manager
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1 80 1 80 1 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10 250 10 250 10 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1 25 1 25 1 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1 50 3 100 1 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1 2,230 12 3,527 1 3,527 1 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1 0.06 11 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 192 2 1,438 2 530 2 1,060 2 12 2 30 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.096 6 0.72 6 0.27 6 0.53 6 0.0060 6 0.015 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 211 2 1,500 2 1,410 2 2,000 2 12 2 30 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.11 6 0.75 6 0.71 6 1 6 0.006 6 0.015 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-12
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 12 - Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag US Mag Nearby Nearby
Worker Worker Worker Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10 250 10 250 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1 25 1 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1 50 3 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²2,230 12 3,527 1 2,230 12 3,527 1
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.06 11 0.12 1 0.06 11 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 77 2 250 2 1,410 2 2,000 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.039 6 0.13 6 0.71 6 1.0 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 115 2 500 2 1,410 2 2,000 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.058 6 0.25 6 0.71 6 1 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-13
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor Resource Resource
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor Brine Shrimp
Manager Manager Adult Adult Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 3,650 1,b 3,650 1,b 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1 80 1 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10 365 10 365 10 121.7 1,c
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 24
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1 10 1, BPJ 10 1, BPJ 25 1
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1 50 BPJ 100 BPJ 100 1
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²3,527 1 3,527 1 6,032 1 6,032 1 1,523 7
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²NA NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 10 2 25 2 35 2 120 2 NA
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0050 6 0.013 6 0.012 6 0.041 6 1
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 10 2 24 2 35 2 120 2 NA
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.005 6 0.012 6 0.012 6 0.041 6 NA
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-14
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor Resource Resource
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor
Manager Manager Adult Adult Child - 0-6
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 3,650 1,b 3,650 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1 80 1 80 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10 365 10 365 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1 10 1, BPJ 10 1, BPJ
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1 50 BPJ 100 BPJ
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²3,527 1 3,527 1 6,032 1,f 6,032 1,f
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day NA NA 0.039 9 0.058 9
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 9 2 20 2 43 2 160 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0045 6 0.010 6 0.015 6 0.055 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 11 2 24 2 43 2 160 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.0055 6 0.012 6 0.015 6 0.055 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-14
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor Resource
Manager
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days
Body Weight BW kg
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr
Exposure Time ET hours/day
Exposure Duration ED years
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr
Survey Fraction SR unitless
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr
Survey Fraction SR unitless
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor
Child - 0-6 Child - 0-6 Child - 6-16 Child - 6-16
CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref
25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
2,190 1,b 2,190 1,b 3,650 1,b 3,650 1,b
15 1 15 1 47 7 47 7
365 10 365 10 365 10 365 10
8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10
6 1, BPJ 6 1, BPJ 10 1, BPJ 10 1, BPJ
100 BPJ 200 BPJ 50 BPJ 100 BPJ
2,727 8,d,f 2,727 8,d,f 5,454 8,e,f 5,454 8,e,f
0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1
chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA 0.043 9,g 0.065 9,g
16 2 40 2 9 2 10 2
0.0055 6 0.014 6 0.0031 6 0.0034 6
16 2 40 2 9 2 10 2
0.0055 6 0.014 6 0.0031 6 0.0034 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-15
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor Resource Resource
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor
Manager Manager Adult Adult Child - 0-6 Child - 0-6 Child - 6-16
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 3,650 1,b 3,650 1,b 2,190 1,b 2,190 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1 80 1 80 1 15 1 15 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10 365 10 365 10 365 10 365 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1 10 1, BPJ 10 1, BPJ 6 1, BPJ 6 1, BPJ
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1 50 BPJ 100 BPJ 100 BPJ 200 BPJ
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²3,527 1 3,527 1 6,032 1,f 6,032 1,f 2,727 8,d,f 2,727 8,d,f
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA NA NA
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day NA NA 0.047 9 0.12 9 NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 31 2 288 2 104 2 650 2 19 2 40 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.016 6 0.14 6 0.036 6 0.22 6 0.0065 6 0.014 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year TH hours/yr 4 2 9 2 104 2 650 2 19 2 40 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.002 6 0.0045 6 0.036 6 0.22 6 0.0065 6 0.014 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-15
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor Resource
Manager
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days
Body Weight BW kg
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr
Exposure Time ET hours/day
Exposure Duration ED years
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr
Survey Fraction SR unitless
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year TH hours/yr
Survey Fraction SR unitless
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor Rancher Rancher
Child - 6-16 Child - 6-16 Adult Adult
CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref
25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
3,650 1,b 3,650 1,b 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
47 7 47 7 80 1 80 1
365 10 365 10 250 10 250 10
8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10
10 1, BPJ 10 1, BPJ 25 1 25 1
50 BPJ 100 BPJ 50 3 100 1
5,454 8,e,f 5,454 8,e,f 3,470 1 3,470 1
0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1
chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
0.053 9,g 0.13 9,g NA NA
17 2 30 2 48 2 120 2
0.0058 6 0.010 6 0.024 6 0.060 6
17 2 30 2 48 2 120 2
0.0058 6 0.01 6 0.024 6 0.06 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-16
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor Resource Resource
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor
Manager Manager Adult Adult Child - 0-6 Child - 0-6 Child - 6-16
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b 3,650 1,b 3,650 1,b 2,190 1,b 2,190 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1 80 1 80 1 80 1 15 1 15 1
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 10 250 10 365 10 365 10 365 10 365 10
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1 25 1 10 1, BPJ 10 1, BPJ 6 1, BPJ 6 1, BPJ
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day 50 3 100 1 50 BPJ 100 BPJ 100 BPJ 200 BPJ
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²3,527 1 3,527 1 6,032 1,f 6,032 1,f 2,727 8,d,f 2,727 8,d,f
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²NA NA NA NA NA NA
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day NA NA NA NA NA NA
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day NA NA 0.050 9 0.12 9 NA NA
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr 36 2 288 2 81 2 650 2 53 2 336 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.018 6 0.14 6 0.028 6 0.22 6 0.018 6 0.12 6
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr 10 2 20 2 81 2 650 2 53 2 336 2
Survey Fraction SR unitless 0.005 6 0.01 6 0.028 6 0.22 6 0.018 6 0.12 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-16
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor Resource
Manager
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days
Body Weight BW kg
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr
Exposure Time ET hours/day
Exposure Duration ED years
Soil - Ingestion
Incidental Soil Ingestion Rate IRs mg/day
Soil - Dermal Contact
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSA cm²
Skin Adherence Factor AF mg/cm²-day
Dermal Absorption Efficiency ABSd --
Surface Water - Dermal Contact
Exposure Frequency Efsw_derm days/yr
Exposed Skin Surface Area SSAsw cm²
Exposure Time ETsw hours/day
Game Ingestion Rate
Meals Consumed per Day IRb g/kg-day
Use Factor - Ingestion and Dermal Contact
Survey Ground Hours per Year GH hours/yr
Survey Fraction SR unitless
Use Factor - Inhalation
Survey Total Hours per Year GH hours/yr
Survey Fraction SR unitless
Recreational
Visitor
Recreational
Visitor Rancher Rancher
Child - 6-16 Child - 6-16 Adult Adult
CTE ref RME ref CTE ref RME ref
25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b 25,550 1,b
3,650 1,b 3,650 1,b 9,125 1,b 9,125 1,b
47 7 47 7 80 1 80 1
365 10 365 10 250 10 250 10
8 10 8 10 8 10 8 10
10 1, BPJ 10 1, BPJ 25 1 25 1
50 BPJ 100 BPJ 50 3 100 1
5,454 8,e,f 5,454 8,e,f 3,470 1 3,470 1
0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1 0.12 1
chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific chem.-specific
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
0.056 9,g 0.13 9,g NA NA
59 2 336 2 48 2 120 2
0.020 6 0.12 6 0.024 6 0.060 6
59 2 336 2 48 2 120 2
0.02 6 0.12 6 0.024 6 0.06 6
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-17
Receptor Exposure Parameters
PRI 17 - Site-Wide Groundwater
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Receptor US Mag
Worker
Exposure Parameter a Symbol Units RME ref
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,b
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,b
Body Weight BW kg 80 1
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1
Groundwater - Ingestion
Exposure Frequency EF days/yr 250 1
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 1
Groundwater Ingestion IRgw Liters/day 1.25 13
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-18
Table Notes and References
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
References [ref]:
1 USEPA (2014). OSWER Directive 9200.1-120.
2 Table 5-6 for the Inhalation pathway; Table 5-7 for for other pathways. Final Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report (ERM 2015).
3 Table 5-1, CTE values. USEPA (2011). Exposure Factors Handbook.
4 Table 6-1. Final Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report (ERM 2015).
5 Text (Section 6.1.3). Final Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report (ERM 2015).
6 A ratio of CTE and RME hours per year shown inTable 5-6 (inhalation) or Table 5-7 (Final Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report [ERM 2015]) for US Mag workers and other
receptors, to default worker hours (250 day/year x 8 hr/day) or for the recreator (365 day/year x 8 hr/day).
7 USEPA (2011). Exposure Factors Handbook. Table 8-3. Weighted average calculated for 6-16 year-olds.
8 USEPA (2011). Exposure Factors Handbook. Table 7-2.B15
9 ERM 2015. Human Health Survey. Table 6-3.
10 Assumed default in determination of the Survey Ratio (from USEPA [2014]).
11 Finley (2007). Site-specific dermal adherence factor study.
12 CTE skin surface area includes head and hands only (mean of male and female values from USEPA 2011). Protocol for workers at US Mag is to wear long sleeves.
13 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Update of Standard Default Exposure Factors (OSWER Directive 9285.6-03, originally dated February 6, 2014; FAQs updated September 14, 2015).
Notes:
a The exposure assumptions presented are used to assess cancer and non-cancer risk. Exposure parameters were selected preferentially from the Final
Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report (ERM 2015).
b The averaging period for cancer risk is the expected lifespan of 70 years expressed in days. The averaging period for non-cancer risk is the total exposure
period expressed in days.
c Default exposure values for residents adjusted for an exposure frequency of approximately 4 months per year.
d Value for 3- to 6-year-olds used.
e Value for 11- to 16-year-olds used.
f Recreational visitor (mean values of head, forearms, hands, lower legs, feet).
g The meals consumed were calculated using the calculation and data presented in Table 6-3 of the Human Health Survey; however, the portion size (weighted
average for 6- to 11- and 12- to 19-year-olds) was revised using a comparable value for total chicken and turkey obtained from USEPA 2011, Table 11-21.
CTE = Central Tendency Exposure
DMA = Demonstration of Method Applicability
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
NA = Not applicable
BPJ = Best Professional Judgement:
Recreational visitor exposure durations are based on a total of 26 years of residence in the area and the age ranges for each receptor.
Adult soil ingestion values were used for the 6- to 16- year-old child. Child values were used for the 0- to 6-year-old based upon
the OSWER Directive (USEPA 2014) and the CTE values from Table 5-1 (USEPA 2011; Exposure Factors Handbook).
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units PRI-1 PRI-2 PRI-3 PRI-4
Mechanical Disturbance Activities(1)
Mean annual wind speed(2)Um m/s 4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf m2 134,000 144,000 7,500 728,000
Fugitive dust from excavation soil dumping Mexcav g NA Calculated NA Calculated
In situ wet soil bulk density(4)rsoil mg/m3 NA 2.01 NA 2.01
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %NA 16 NA 30
Areal extent of site excavation(5)Aexcav m2 NA 10000 NA 700
Average depth of site excavation(5)dexcav m NA 0.15 NA 3
Number of times soil is dumped(6)NA --NA 2 NA 2
Fugitive dust from dozing Mdoz g NA Calculated NA Calculated
Soil silt content %(4)s %NA 48.9 NA 95.0
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %NA 16 NA 30
Average dozing speed(6)Sdoz km/hr NA 11.40 NA 11.40
Number of times area is dozed(5)Ndoze --NA 5 NA 1
Length of dozer blade(6)Bd m NA 2.44 NA 2.44
Fugitive dust from grading Mgrade g NA NA NA NA
Average grading speed Sgrade km/hr NA NA NA NA
Number of times area is graded Ngrade --NA NA NA NA
Length of grading blade Bg m NA NA NA NA
Fugitive dust from tilling Mtill g NA NA NA NA
Soil silt content %s %NA NA NA NA
Areal extent of site tilling Atill acre NA NA NA NA
Number of times soil is tilled NA --NA NA NA NA
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for Area Source
Constant A(6)A --NA 2.45 NA 2.45
Constant B(6)B --NA 17.57 NA 17.57
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units PRI-1 PRI-2 PRI-3 PRI-4
Constant C(6)C --NA 189.04 NA 189.04
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf acres 134,000 144,000 7,500 728,000
Unpaved Road Traffic
Length of road segment(5)LR m 1,650 1,400 NA NA
Width of road segment(5)WR m 6.1 6.1 NA NA
Surface area of contaminated road segment(5)AR m2 10,065 8,540 NA NA
Road surface silt content %(4)s %82.4 48.9 NA NA
Mean vehicle weight(6)W tons 8.0 8.0 NA NA
Percent moisture in dry road surface(4)M %37 16 NA NA
Number of days/year with at least 0.01 inches of precipitation(4)p days 33 33 NA NA
Number of vehicles for duration of activity(5)NV vehicles 20 20/2 NA NA
Length of road traveled per day(5)LD m/day 785 550 NA NA
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units PRI-1 PRI-2 PRI-3 PRI-4
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for road segment
Constant A(6)A --12.94 12.94 NA NA
Constant B(6)B --5.74 5.74 NA NA
Constant C(6)C --71.77 71.77 NA NA
(1)Calculations based on USEPA (2002) equations. See Table 3-21 for information on basis for relevant scenarios for each PRI.
(2)From Utah DEQ, Division of Air Quality, Air Monitoring Program, Meteorological Data Archive.
(3)Based on areal extent of PRI.
(4)From site-specific data.
(5)See Table 3-20.
(6)EPA model default value.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Mechanical Disturbance Activities(1)
Mean annual wind speed(2)Um m/s
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf m2
Fugitive dust from excavation soil dumping Mexcav g
In situ wet soil bulk density(4)rsoil mg/m3
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %
Areal extent of site excavation(5)Aexcav m2
Average depth of site excavation(5)dexcav m
Number of times soil is dumped(6)NA --
Fugitive dust from dozing Mdoz g
Soil silt content %(4)s %
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %
Average dozing speed(6)Sdoz km/hr
Number of times area is dozed(5)Ndoze --
Length of dozer blade(6)Bd m
Fugitive dust from grading Mgrade g
Average grading speed Sgrade km/hr
Number of times area is graded Ngrade --
Length of grading blade Bg m
Fugitive dust from tilling Mtill g
Soil silt content %s %
Areal extent of site tilling Atill acre
Number of times soil is tilled NA --
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for Area Source
Constant A(6)A --
Constant B(6)B --
PRI-5 PRI5
Seasonal PRI-6 PRI-7
4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12
1,357,000 1,357,000 708,000 3,375,000
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Constant C(6)C --
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf acres
Unpaved Road Traffic
Length of road segment(5)LR m
Width of road segment(5)WR m
Surface area of contaminated road segment(5)AR m2
Road surface silt content %(4)s %
Mean vehicle weight(6)W tons
Percent moisture in dry road surface(4)M %
Number of days/year with at least 0.01 inches of precipitation(4)p days
Number of vehicles for duration of activity(5)NV vehicles
Length of road traveled per day(5)LD m/day
PRI-5 PRI5
Seasonal PRI-6 PRI-7
NA NA NA NA
1,357,000 1,357,000 708,000 3,375,000
4,600 4,600 NA 5,200
6.1 6.1 NA 6.1
28,060 28,060 NA 31,720
63.3 63.3 NA 72.7
8.0 8.0 NA 8.0
28 28 NA 45
33 33 NA 33
5 20 NA 5
1,500 1,500 NA 380
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for road segment
Constant A(6)A --
Constant B(6)B --
Constant C(6)C --
(1)Calculations based on USEPA (2002) equations. See Table 3-21 for information on basis for relevant scenarios for each PRI.
(2)From Utah DEQ, Division of Air Quality, Air Monitoring Program, Meteorological Data Archive.
(3)Based on areal extent of PRI.
(4)From site-specific data.
(5)See Table 3-20.
(6)EPA model default value.
PRI-5 PRI5
Seasonal PRI-6 PRI-7
12.94 12.94 NA 12.94
5.74 5.74 NA 5.74
71.77 71.77 NA 71.77
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Mechanical Disturbance Activities(1)
Mean annual wind speed(2)Um m/s
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf m2
Fugitive dust from excavation soil dumping Mexcav g
In situ wet soil bulk density(4)rsoil mg/m3
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %
Areal extent of site excavation(5)Aexcav m2
Average depth of site excavation(5)dexcav m
Number of times soil is dumped(6)NA --
Fugitive dust from dozing Mdoz g
Soil silt content %(4)s %
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %
Average dozing speed(6)Sdoz km/hr
Number of times area is dozed(5)Ndoze --
Length of dozer blade(6)Bd m
Fugitive dust from grading Mgrade g
Average grading speed Sgrade km/hr
Number of times area is graded Ngrade --
Length of grading blade Bg m
Fugitive dust from tilling Mtill g
Soil silt content %s %
Areal extent of site tilling Atill acre
Number of times soil is tilled NA --
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for Area Source
Constant A(6)A --
Constant B(6)B --
PRI7
Seasonal PRI-8 PRI-9
4.12 4.12 4.12
3,375,000 715,000 445,000
NA NA Calculated
NA NA 1.23
NA NA 25
NA NA 200
NA NA 3
NA NA 2
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA 2.45
NA NA 17.57
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Constant C(6)C --
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf acres
Unpaved Road Traffic
Length of road segment(5)LR m
Width of road segment(5)WR m
Surface area of contaminated road segment(5)AR m2
Road surface silt content %(4)s %
Mean vehicle weight(6)W tons
Percent moisture in dry road surface(4)M %
Number of days/year with at least 0.01 inches of precipitation(4)p days
Number of vehicles for duration of activity(5)NV vehicles
Length of road traveled per day(5)LD m/day
PRI7
Seasonal PRI-8 PRI-9
NA NA 189.04
3,375,000 715,000 445,000
5,200 NA 2,100
6.1 NA 6.1
31,720 NA 12,810
72.7 NA 72.1
8.0 NA 8.0
45 NA 25
33 NA 33
20 NA 10
380 NA 1,050
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for road segment
Constant A(6)A --
Constant B(6)B --
Constant C(6)C --
(1)Calculations based on USEPA (2002) equations. See Table 3-21 for information on basis for relevant scenarios for each PRI.
(2)From Utah DEQ, Division of Air Quality, Air Monitoring Program, Meteorological Data Archive.
(3)Based on areal extent of PRI.
(4)From site-specific data.
(5)See Table 3-20.
(6)EPA model default value.
PRI7
Seasonal PRI-8 PRI-9
12.94 NA 12.94
5.74 NA 5.74
71.77 NA 71.77
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Mechanical Disturbance Activities(1)
Mean annual wind speed(2)Um m/s
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf m2
Fugitive dust from excavation soil dumping Mexcav g
In situ wet soil bulk density(4)rsoil mg/m3
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %
Areal extent of site excavation(5)Aexcav m2
Average depth of site excavation(5)dexcav m
Number of times soil is dumped(6)NA --
Fugitive dust from dozing Mdoz g
Soil silt content %(4)s %
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %
Average dozing speed(6)Sdoz km/hr
Number of times area is dozed(5)Ndoze --
Length of dozer blade(6)Bd m
Fugitive dust from grading Mgrade g
Average grading speed Sgrade km/hr
Number of times area is graded Ngrade --
Length of grading blade Bg m
Fugitive dust from tilling Mtill g
Soil silt content %s %
Areal extent of site tilling Atill acre
Number of times soil is tilled NA --
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for Area Source
Constant A(6)A --
Constant B(6)B --
PRI-10 PRI-11 PRI-12 PRI12
Seasonal
4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12
117,000 805,000 280,000 280,000
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Constant C(6)C --
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf acres
Unpaved Road Traffic
Length of road segment(5)LR m
Width of road segment(5)WR m
Surface area of contaminated road segment(5)AR m2
Road surface silt content %(4)s %
Mean vehicle weight(6)W tons
Percent moisture in dry road surface(4)M %
Number of days/year with at least 0.01 inches of precipitation(4)p days
Number of vehicles for duration of activity(5)NV vehicles
Length of road traveled per day(5)LD m/day
PRI-10 PRI-11 PRI-12 PRI12
Seasonal
NA NA NA NA
117,000 805,000 280,000 280,000
NA 3,650 4,700 4,700
NA 6.1 6.1 6.1
NA 22,265 28,670 28,670
NA 83.2 82.2 82.2
NA 8.0 8.0 8.0
NA 9 13 13
NA 33 33 33
NA 1 1/10/5/2 20
NA 560 Table 3-20 1,150
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for road segment
Constant A(6)A --
Constant B(6)B --
Constant C(6)C --
(1)Calculations based on USEPA (2002) equations. See Table 3-21 for information on basis for relevant scenarios for each PRI.
(2)From Utah DEQ, Division of Air Quality, Air Monitoring Program, Meteorological Data Archive.
(3)Based on areal extent of PRI.
(4)From site-specific data.
(5)See Table 3-20.
(6)EPA model default value.
PRI-10 PRI-11 PRI-12 PRI12
Seasonal
NA 12.94 12.94 12.94
NA 5.74 5.74 5.74
NA 71.77 71.77 71.77
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Mechanical Disturbance Activities(1)
Mean annual wind speed(2)Um m/s
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf m2
Fugitive dust from excavation soil dumping Mexcav g
In situ wet soil bulk density(4)rsoil mg/m3
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %
Areal extent of site excavation(5)Aexcav m2
Average depth of site excavation(5)dexcav m
Number of times soil is dumped(6)NA --
Fugitive dust from dozing Mdoz g
Soil silt content %(4)s %
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %
Average dozing speed(6)Sdoz km/hr
Number of times area is dozed(5)Ndoze --
Length of dozer blade(6)Bd m
Fugitive dust from grading Mgrade g
Average grading speed Sgrade km/hr
Number of times area is graded Ngrade --
Length of grading blade Bg m
Fugitive dust from tilling Mtill g
Soil silt content %s %
Areal extent of site tilling Atill acre
Number of times soil is tilled NA --
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for Area Source
Constant A(6)A --
Constant B(6)B --
PRI-13 PRI13
Seasonal PRI-14 PRI-15
4.12 4.12 4.12 4.12
54,956,000 54,956,000 35,450,000 59,954,000
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Constant C(6)C --
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf acres
Unpaved Road Traffic
Length of road segment(5)LR m
Width of road segment(5)WR m
Surface area of contaminated road segment(5)AR m2
Road surface silt content %(4)s %
Mean vehicle weight(6)W tons
Percent moisture in dry road surface(4)M %
Number of days/year with at least 0.01 inches of precipitation(4)p days
Number of vehicles for duration of activity(5)NV vehicles
Length of road traveled per day(5)LD m/day
PRI-13 PRI13
Seasonal PRI-14 PRI-15
NA NA NA NA
54,956,000 54,956,000 35,450,000 59,954,000
100 100 16,700 87,950
6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1
610 610 101,870 536,495
58.9 58.9 70.2 82.6
8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0
22 22 24 7
33 33 33 33
5 30 0 3
100 4,400 0 10,500
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for road segment
Constant A(6)A --
Constant B(6)B --
Constant C(6)C --
(1)Calculations based on USEPA (2002) equations. See Table 3-21 for information on basis for relevant scenarios for each PRI.
(2)From Utah DEQ, Division of Air Quality, Air Monitoring Program, Meteorological Data Archive.
(3)Based on areal extent of PRI.
(4)From site-specific data.
(5)See Table 3-20.
(6)EPA model default value.
PRI-13 PRI13
Seasonal PRI-14 PRI-15
12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94
5.74 5.74 5.74 5.74
71.77 71.77 71.77 71.77
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Mechanical Disturbance Activities(1)
Mean annual wind speed(2)Um m/s
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf m2
Fugitive dust from excavation soil dumping Mexcav g
In situ wet soil bulk density(4)rsoil mg/m3
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %
Areal extent of site excavation(5)Aexcav m2
Average depth of site excavation(5)dexcav m
Number of times soil is dumped(6)NA --
Fugitive dust from dozing Mdoz g
Soil silt content %(4)s %
Gravimetric soil moisture content %(4)M %
Average dozing speed(6)Sdoz km/hr
Number of times area is dozed(5)Ndoze --
Length of dozer blade(6)Bd m
Fugitive dust from grading Mgrade g
Average grading speed Sgrade km/hr
Number of times area is graded Ngrade --
Length of grading blade Bg m
Fugitive dust from tilling Mtill g
Soil silt content %s %
Areal extent of site tilling Atill acre
Number of times soil is tilled NA --
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for Area Source
Constant A(6)A --
Constant B(6)B --
PRI15
Seasonal PRI-16
4.12 4.12
59,954,000 43,585,000
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Constant C(6)C --
Areal extent of site surface contamination(3)Asurf acres
Unpaved Road Traffic
Length of road segment(5)LR m
Width of road segment(5)WR m
Surface area of contaminated road segment(5)AR m2
Road surface silt content %(4)s %
Mean vehicle weight(6)W tons
Percent moisture in dry road surface(4)M %
Number of days/year with at least 0.01 inches of precipitation(4)p days
Number of vehicles for duration of activity(5)NV vehicles
Length of road traveled per day(5)LD m/day
PRI15
Seasonal PRI-16
NA NA
59,954,000 43,585,000
87,950 1,250
6.1 6.1
536,495 7,625
82.6 86.6
8.0 8.0
7 8
33 33
20 0
14,080 0
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-19
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Input Parameters
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Parameter Abbrev. Units
Subchronic Dispersion Factor for road segment
Constant A(6)A --
Constant B(6)B --
Constant C(6)C --
(1)Calculations based on USEPA (2002) equations. See Table 3-21 for information on basis for relevant scenarios for each PRI.
(2)From Utah DEQ, Division of Air Quality, Air Monitoring Program, Meteorological Data Archive.
(3)Based on areal extent of PRI.
(4)From site-specific data.
(5)See Table 3-20.
(6)EPA model default value.
PRI15
Seasonal PRI-16
12.94 12.94
5.74 5.74
71.77 71.77
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-20
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Assumptions
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Road Width = 6.1 meters (20 feet)
All road lengths are approximated from Google Earth, June 2015 images.
All surface areas approximated from .kmz file (Feb. 2015).
Aerial extent of site surface contamination = PRI surface area (m^2)
Length of road segments = all road lengths in PRI. Length of road traveled per day = actual travel distance in PRI
PRI PRI-Specific Assumptions
PRI 1 20 vehicles/day travel one way on main road north and east of PRI1 - 600 meters.
20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip between 'plant footprint' and stockpiled limestone in PRI2. 185m in PRI1.
PRI 2 20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip on top of landfill - 550 meters. 2 vehicles/day travel one way on road south of landfill/north of star pond - 550 meters.
Estimated landfill covered once per day with average 6 inches of gypsum/gravel across an average area of 10,000 square meters
PRI 3 no activity
PRI 4 approximately 700 square meters of active excavation. No other vehicle activity.
PRI 5 5 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road. Waste pond road negligible to dust generation.
20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road during shrimping operations.
PRI 6 negligible vehicle traffic in PRI 6
PRI 7 5 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road. Other dikes negligible to dust generation.
20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road during shrimping operations.
PRI 8 no activity
PRI 9 10 vehicles/day travel roundtrip to dump in smut piles.
Assume each load covers 20 square meters to depth of 3 meters.
PRI 10 no activity
PRI 11 1 vehicle/day travels ATI perimeter. perimeter approx 3650 meters
Length of road traveled = sqrt(ATI perimeter) + 500m on US Mag property
PRI 12 1 vehicle/day travels inside Hill Bros. (sqrt(perimeter))
10 vehicles/day enter/exit Hill Bros. facility (250 meter driveway)
5 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road (1150 meters)
2 vehicles/day travel one way on road around east side of star pond
20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road during shrimping operations
PRI 13 5 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across main pump road during non-shrimp season.
30 vehicles/day travel roundtrip across lakebed from pump station to ditch inlet at GSL shoreline.
PRI 14 Pump road traffic accounted for in PRIs 5 and 7.
PRI 15 3 vehicles/day travel roundtrip on county road. Negligible vehicle traffic on other roads in PRI 15.
20 vehicles/day travel roundtrip on county road during shrimping operations
PRI 16 negligible vehicle traffic in PRI 16. County road accounted for in PRI 15.
OTHER Unpaved roads and plant operations in "plant footprint" accounted for in OU2.
Activities associated with Wasatch Regional Landfill operations not accounted for.
Quarry in PRI 16 no longer in use. Not accounted for.
Grading/dozing/dumping activities in ATI not accounted for.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-21
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Scenario
Excavation/ Soil
Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road
Traffic
1
Ditches
Excavation - Ditches
are reportedly
dredged on an as-
needed basis to
maintain wastewater
flows. Materials
handled during
dredging would be
wet and not expected
to generate dust.
Soil Dumping - No
regular soil dumping
at this PRI Area. Soil
(consisting of
limestone gravels and
fines) may be placed
along ditches to
minimize erosion /
improve banks.
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area.
Limited grading may
be performed
occasionally to
maintain unpaved
roads present within
PRI Area 1 roads.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Heavy traffic to
access landfill and to
transport limestone
from stockpile (on
landfill) to Plant area.
Historical/DMA and
Phase 1A-B data are
almost entirely from
the ditch bottoms and
would not be
representative of the
roads adjacent to the
ditches.
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations
and Other Notes
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-21
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Scenario
Excavation/ Soil
Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road
Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations
and Other Notes
2
Landfill
Excavation - No
known or suspected
excavation at PRI Area
2. A limestone
stockpile (for Mg
production process) is
located in PRI Area 2.
Soil dumping -
Gypsum is used as
cover on the landfill,
and gravel is placed
on the landfill top.
Dozing is possible on
landfill top and/or
faces.
No known or
suspected grading at
this PRI area.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Heavy traffic to
access landfill face
and limestone
stockpile. Occasional
traffic along unpaved
road S of landfill
(between landfill and
Star Pond). Less
frequent traffic to
access gypsum piles
and to travel between
E and W areas of
Plant.
Phase 1A soil data
should be adequate
for characterizing dust
from traffic on
landfill.
3
Sanitary
Lagoon
Excavation - Limited
excavation may be
required on an as-
needed basis for
maintenance of
discharge line(s) to the
Sanitary Lagoon.
Soil dumping - No
known or suspected
soil dumping at this
PRI area.
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area.
No known or
suspected grading at
this PRI area.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
None Historical sample
locations were from
sidewalls. Phase 1A-B
sample locations were
within lagoon floor.
Ditch dredge spoils /
gypsum have washed
into the lagoon from
sidewalls. Lagoon
floor is heavily
vegetated and wet.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-21
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Scenario
Excavation/ Soil
Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road
Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations
and Other Notes
4
Gypsum
Pile
Excavation & Soil
Dumping - A tracked
excavator is regularly
used on the gypsum
pile to manage
gypsum waste and
slurry flows.
A bulldozer may be
used in association
with gypsum
management
described under
Excavation/Soil
Dumping
No known or
suspected grading at
this PRI area.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
None No special
considerations for soil
concentration data.
5
SE
Current
Waste
Pond
Excavation - No
known or suspected
ongoing excavation at
this PRI area.
Soil Dumping - Soil
dumping on an as-
needed basis for berm
enhancements/waste
water management
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area.
Limited grading may
be performed
occasionally to
maintain unpaved
roads or maintain
berms present within
this PRI area.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
The N dike road (to P-
0 pump station, solar
pond 1N, and brine
shrimp area) is
unpaved and has
moderate to high
(relative) traffic
volume. Low traffic
volume on other dike
roads present at this
PRI area. The
unpaved road along
the NE edges of the
waste pond in this
PRI area has been
partially capped with
gravel.
While most sampling
has been performed in
the waste pond area, a
subset of
historical/DMA and
Phase 1A-B may be
representative of soils
along dike/road
areas.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-21
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Scenario
Excavation/ Soil
Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road
Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations
and Other Notes
6
NW
Current
Waste
Pond
Excavation - No
known or suspected
ongoing excavation at
this PRI area.
Soil Dumping - Soil
dumping on an as-
needed basis for berm
enhancements/waste
water management
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area.
Limited grading may
be performed
occasionally to
maintain unpaved
roads or maintain
berms present within
this PRI area.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Low traffic volume at
this PRI area. The
unpaved road along
the N edges of this
PRI area has been
partially capped with
gravel.
While most sampling
has been performed in
the waste pond area, a
subset of
historical/DMA and
Phase 1A-B may be
representative of soils
along dike/road
areas.
7
Old
Waste
Pond
Excavation - No
known or suspected
ongoing excavation at
this PRI area.
Soil Dumping - Soil
dumping on an as-
needed basis for berm
enhancements/
wastewater
management
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area.
Limited grading may
be performed
occasionally to
maintain unpaved
roads or maintain
berms present within
this PRI area.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
The N dike road (to P-
0 pump station, solar
pond 1N, and brine
shrimp area) is
unpaved and has
moderate to high
(relative) traffic
volume. Low traffic
volume on other dike
roads present at this
PRI area.
Soil/sediment
samples have been
collected from the
OWP floor, not from
the road areas along
dikes.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-21
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Scenario
Excavation/ Soil
Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road
Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations
and Other Notes
8
Overflow
Area
Excavation - No
known or suspected
ongoing excavation at
this PRI area.
Soil Dumping - Soil
dumping on an as-
needed basis for berm
enhancements/
wastewater
management
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area.
Limited grading may
be performed
occasionally to
maintain unpaved
roads or maintain
berms present within
this PRI area.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Low traffic volume at
this PRI area. The
major unpaved road
crossing this PRI area
has been capped with
gravel. Unimproved
roads along fence
lines are native soil.
Phase 1A soil data
would not be
representative of dust
from the major
unpaved road at this
PRI area, which has
been capped using
imported gravel.
Fence line roads
(which are
presumably travelled
infrequently) may be
better represented by
a subset of Phase 1A
locations: PRI8-001, -
002, -008, and -013.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-21
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Scenario
Excavation/ Soil
Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road
Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations
and Other Notes
9
Smut
Piles
Excavation - No
known or suspected
excavation at this PRI
area.
Soil Dumping - Smut
piles are placed by
end dumping.
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area.
Limited grading may
be performed
occasionally to
maintain unpaved
roads present within
this PRI area.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Moderate to heavy
traffic on unpaved
roads to access Smut
piles and travel along
the Western Ditch.
Unpaved roads at PRI
Area 9 are
constructed on native
soil, not Smut.
Phase 1A soil data
from locations PRI9-
001 through -006 and
PRI9-008 through -014
would be
representative of
dumped Smut. Dust
from unpaved road
travel would
characterized by
location PRI9-007
and/or samples from
PRI Area 15.
10
Barium
Sulfate
Area
Excavation - A borrow
pit located W of the
barium sulfate
disposal cells is used
occasionally as a
source of clay and soil.
Soil Dumping - No
known or suspected
ongoing soil dumping
at this PRI area.
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area.
Limited grading may
be performed
occasionally to
maintain unpaved
roads present within
this PRI area.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Low traffic volume at
this PRI area. The
unpaved road
crossing this PRI area
has been capped with
gravel.
Phase 1A soil data
would be
representative of
excavation at borrow
area but would not be
representative of dust
from unpaved road,
which has been
capped using
imported gravel.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-21
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Scenario
Excavation/ Soil
Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road
Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations
and Other Notes
11
USM
Parking
Lot / ATI
No known or
suspected ongoing
soil excavation or
dumping at this PRI
area.
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area.
Grading possible on
an as-needed basis to
maintain unpaved
roads at ATI.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Low /insignificant
traffic in unpaved
(gravel) lot west of
USM parking lot.
Some unpaved roads
are present at ATI.
Phase 1A soil data
likely adequately
representative for
unpaved roads at this
PRI area.
12
Hill Bros
No known or
suspected ongoing
soil excavation or
dumping at this PRI
area. Soil
excavation/dumping
may be performed
during construction of
lined holding/mixing
ponds.
No known or
suspected ongoing
soil excavation or
dumping at this PRI
area. Dozing may be
performed during
construction of lined
holding/mixing
ponds.
Grading possible on
an as-needed basis to
maintain unpaved
roads.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Unpaved roads are
used to access Hill
Bros and access
process ponds.
Phase 1A soil data
likely adequately
representative for
unpaved roads at this
PRI area.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-21
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Scenario
Excavation/ Soil
Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road
Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations
and Other Notes
13
Buffer
Area N &
E
Excavation/Soil
dumping on an as-
needed basis to
maintain GSL intake
canal & P-0 pump
station (infrequent -
every 10 years).
Limited excavation
dumping may also be
required to maintain
dikes.
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area,
although dike
maintenance may
include dozing.
Grading on an as-
needed basis to
maintain dikes and
associated unpaved
roads.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Heavy ATV traffic in
lakebed during brine
shrimp harvest. The
N dike road (to P-0
pump station, solar
pond 1N, and brine
shrimp area) is
unpaved and has
moderate to high
(relative) traffic
volume.
Phase 1A sample
location within the
lakebed would be
representative of dust
from travel by ATVs
(shrimpers) within the
lakebed, and may be
adequately
representative for
unpaved roads which
are located on dikes in
this PRI area.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-21
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Scenario
Excavation/ Soil
Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road
Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations
and Other Notes
14
Buffer
Area S
Limited excavation /
soil dumping may be
required to maintain
dikes on an as-needed
basis.
No known or
suspected dozing at
this PRI area,
although dike
maintenance may
include dozing.
Grading on an as-
needed basis to
maintain dikes and
associated unpaved
roads.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
The N dike road (to P-
0 pump station, solar
pond 1N, and brine
shrimp area) is
unpaved and has
moderate to high
(relative) traffic
volume.
Phase 1A sample
location within the
lakebed may not be
representative of dust
from unpaved roads,
which are located on
dike roads in this PRI
area. No significant
vehicle travel in
lakebed at this PRI
area. High
concentrations of
COPCs detected at
this PRI area
(presumably due to
wastewater/waste
releases) seem
inappropriate to apply
to roadways.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019
Table 4-21
Mechanical Disturbance Particulate Emission Factor Model Scenario Basis
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Scenario
Excavation/ Soil
Dumping Dozing Grading Tilling Unpaved Road
Traffic
PRI
Area
Soil Concentrations
and Other Notes
15
Buffer
Area W
No known or
suspected ongoing
soil excavation or
dumping at this PRI
area other than
operations at Wasatch
Regional Landfill.
No known or
suspected ongoing
dozing at this PRI area
other than operations
at Wasatch Regional
Landfill.
Grading performed in
association with
maintenance of the
County Road.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Most unpaved road
traffic occurs on the
County Road (PRI 15 -
16 boundary).
Unpaved spur roads
may be used for
ranching or accessing
USM / ATI facilities.
Unpaved road traffic
also likely at Wasatch
Regional Landfill.
Dust from County
Road probably more
similar to PRI Area 15
soils than soils of PRI
Area 16.
16
Lakeside
Mtns
Buffer
Area
No known or
suspected ongoing
soil excavation or
dumping at this PRI
area. Craner Canyon
quarry within
Lakeside Mountains
appears to be inactive.
No known or
suspected ongoing
dozing at this PRI
area. Craner Canyon
quarry within
Lakeside Mountains
appears to be inactive.
Grading performed in
association with
maintenance of the
County Road.
No known or
suspected tilling at
this PRI area
Most unpaved road
traffic occurs on the
County Road (PRI 15 -
16 boundary).
Unpaved spur roads
may be used for
ranching or accessing
Lakeside Mountains.
Dust from County
Road probably more
similar to PRI Area 15
soils than soils of PRI
Area 16.
ERM US MAGNESIUM/0132320 - 2/22/2019

Appendix A
US Magnesium White Paper on Chromium
in Air and Agency Comments on the White
Paper

Methods for Assignment of Chromium Speciation -
US Magnesium Phase 1A Ambient Air Samples
Risk evaluations based on OU-2 Phase 1A air samples show an elevated exposure
risk value with respect to airborne hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] if it is
conservatively assumed that all of the measured total chromium is Cr(VI). While it is
accepted that a small portion of the total chromium in these samples could in
actuality be Cr(VI), the analytical information from Phase 1A does not support a
quantitative speciation between trivalent chromium [Cr(III)] and Cr(VI). A defensible
speciation method to estimate the portion of Cr(VI) potentially present in ambient air
particulate samples is needed to realistically assess exposure risk.
To address this issue, three approaches have been proposed:
1.Obtain literature information that is pertinent to the ambient air samples that
supports a conservative speciation of Cr(VI) that may be present in airborne
samples;
2.Obtain comparable physical data from the literature or prior studies pertaining
to US Magnesium that supports a chromium speciation; or
3.Implement an abbreviated sampling effort to obtain, in the vicinity of the US
Magnesium facility, air samples and analytical data that includes chromium
speciation.
Literature Chromium Speciation Information
Pursuing the first approach, an applicable published study supports a speciation of
25% Cr(VI), 75% Cr(III) in inorganic chemical process stack emissions. This study
recommended emission factors for speciated chromium for several source categories1.
The category most similar to US Magnesium was stack emissions for phosphoric acid
and phosphate fertilizer production. It was acknowledged that there was "no emissions
data specific to the facilities reporting these chromium emissions, or to the phosphoric
acid or phosphate fertilizer production industries. As such, we considered using
chromium speciation data from source categories with similar processes." Therefore,
this study represented phosphoric acid process emissions with stack testing data from
production processes to refine chromium chemicals. The rationale provided was that
these data represented "another facility type that produces inorganic chemicals and that
also processes ore containing chromium compounds." Further, the phosphoric acid and
chromium chemicals processes both are inorganic, generally aqueous processes. These
same process attributes describe the magnesium spray dryer and electrolytic process
used at US Magnesium, the presumed source of the measured chromium.
1 C. French and A. Pope. Chromium Emissions Speciation for Selected Source Categories. SPDD, March 2011.
In combination with this literature speciation estimate, another factor that should be
applied to the US Magnesium risk calculations is the relative sample concentrations and
laboratory filter blank analyses for the Phase 1A samples. These blanks show detectable
and significant levels of chromium, ranging from 10.7 to 27.9 micrograms (µg) per filter.
Sample concentrations (not subtracting the blanks) generally ranged from 4.87 to 49.5
µg, plus two samples significantly higher, at 129 and 199 µg. Concentrations in 16 of the
33 samples were lower than the highest filter blank, and 31 of the samples were within
two times the highest laboratory blank concentration. This observation has also been
noted in prior studies of Cr(VI) in ambient air, and has been attributed to trace levels of
chromium that may contaminate the sample or are a residual of the filter manufacturing
process.2
It is an accepted practice in low concentration ambient air samples to subtract the blank
concentration from the final detected sample value. The impact of blank corrections on
the risk results was evaluated preliminarily by adjusting the sample chromium
concentration by subtracting the filter blank chromium concentration on a batch-specific
basis. After making this adjustment to each sample, the mean and 95 percent upper
confidence limit on the mean was derived from the new dataset. The speciation of 25
percent Cr(VI), 75 percent Cr(III), based on the literature cited above, was then applied
to the blank-corrected values in the preliminary risk workbooks. These two adjustments
reduce the risk estimates to 3.7 x 10-5 for the most sensitive receptor, the brine shrimp
worker in PRI 13. Previous assumptions had resulted in estimated risk to the brine
shrimp worker of 1 x 10-4.
Ambient Air Data in Literature
Limited Cr(VI) and Cr(III) ambient air data has been identified in literature, and data to
support derivation of the Cr(VI) and Cr(III) speciation have not been identified. In 2006,
Eastern Research Group tested sampling and analysis for Cr(VI) in many U.S. cities3.
Detected values ranged from 0.001 to 2.9 nanograms per cubic meter (ng/m3), and
samples in Bountiful, Utah ranged from 0.004 to 0.079 ng/m3. However, there were no
concurrent samples of other metals to offer a method of speciating total chromium and
Cr(VI) independently. This study also identified reducing agents in ambient air acting
to convert Cr(VI) to Cr(III) on samples not preserved to avoid this reaction.
Ambient air sampling was described in a District Department of the Environment
(DDOE) presentation describing a program in Washington D.C., using a new Teflon
membrane filter apparatus followed by filter digestion and analysis using EPA Method
IO-3.5 (Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass Spectroscopy) for Cr(VI) species.4 This study
2 J. Swift, et al., Collection and Analysis of Hexavalent Chromium in Ambient Air, Eastern Research Group,
2006.
3 J. Swift, et al. 2006.
4 A. Asimalowo, et al., Ambient Air Concentration of Hexavalent Chromium in District of Columbia: Any Health
Concern? District Dept. of the Environment, 2008
used the Cr(VI) data for a risk assessment relative to that chromium species alone. As in
the case of the 2006 ERG survey, there was no concurrent total chromium data
presented for the DDOE samples to support separate speciation of Cr(VI).
Concentrations of Chromium in Phase 1A Samples Compared to Plant Emissions
Comparisons of the detected total chromium in Phase 1A air samples with the
concurrent level of magnesium production do not show a correlation. This suggests that
airborne chromium is not a stack-emitted pollutant, but may be from fugitive or
background sources. Current processing practices at US Magnesium indicate that air
emission sources of Cr(VI) do not exist. The facility has ceased the practice of dragging
alloy chains through the anode boxes that had been the hypothesized source of
chromium in the process emissions.
Prior expert studies pertaining to US Magnesium have identified chromium in some of
the wastes generated by the magnesium process in the past. But these have quantified
TCLP chromium or total chromium, without speciation of Cr(VI) separately.
Potential Supplemental Ambient Air Sampling at US Magnesium
Three candidate discrete sampling and analytical methods have been identified should
it be necessary to obtain additional ambient air samples at US Magnesium. Each suffers
drawbacks if intended to supplement the existing Phase 1A data:
•Air samples on treated, membrane cartridge filters, followed by Cr(VI) analysis by
EPA Method IO-3.5 (ICP/MS). This was applied in the DDOE sampling study, but
is not a proven and formally-accepted analysis technique. It has been reported that
the ICP/MS method used in the referenced DDOE study for Cr(VI) analysis
remains under development (Rice 2003) and it is not described in any approved/
finalized EPA air monitoring procedures. Based on the information provided in the
DDOE presentation, the MDL for Teflon filter Cr(VI) analysis was approximately
0.173 ng/sample. The reported ambient air MDL was about 0.008 ng/m3 and the
reported sample volume was 21.6 m3 (15 L/min for 24 hours). These are comparable
to the industrial worker RSL for Cr(VI) in air based on carcinogenic risk at 0.15 ng/
m3. For comparison purposes, the MDL for filter analysis for total Cr from Phase 1A
was 2,400 ng/sample (2.4 µg/sample) and ambient air detection limits assuming a
3,000 m3 sample volume was 0.8 ng/m3.
•The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has published an analytical method for
Cr(VI) analysis of sodium bicarbonate-impregnated 37 mm diameter cellulose filters
using IC (CARB 2002). The CARB Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 039-3.0
Extraction and Analysis of Hexavalent Chromium by Ion Chromatography 5 describes an
MDL of 3 ng/sample. Filters are extracted using 15 mL of nanopure water and the
instrument detection limit is 0.2 ng/mL. Assuming a 24-hour sample duration
5 https://www.arb.ca.gov/aaqm/sop/mld039.pdf
at 10 L/min, the MDL using this CARB method would be 0.2 ng/m3. Eastern
Research Group (ERG) prepared a Standard Operating Procedure for the
Determination of Hexavalent Chromium in Ambient Air Analyzed by Ion
Chromatography (IC) for the USEPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
in December 2006. This SOP has not been subjected to USEPA’s review and is not a
USEPA-approved document. The methods described in the ERG SOP are
analogous to and modified from the CARB method.
•OSHA Method Number: ID-215 Hexavalent Chromium in Workplace Atmospheres
uses a sampling pump and a 37-mm diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) filter (5-
μm pore size) contained in a polystyrene cassette to collect particulate material over
an 8-hour sample duration using a sampling rate of 2 liters per minute. Filters are
extracted using an aqueous solution containing 10% sodium carbonate / 2%
sodium bicarbonate and analyzed for Cr(VI) by IC. The detection limit and
quantitation limit specified by the method are 1 ng/m3 and 3 ng/m3, respectively,
for an 8-hour / 960 liter air sample.
In general, a methodology tailored to Cr(VI) detection would differ substantially from
air sampling and monitoring methods applied in Phase 1A. The methods described
above all rely on relatively low-flow sampling rates, compared to the Phase 1A high-
volume methods. While Phase 1A samples at US Magnesium operated for three days at
high flow rates to obtain sufficient sample volume for adequately low detection limits,
the sampling constraints to detect Cr(VI) have been shown to not allow sampling for
longer than 24 hours. For implementation of the above methods for the US Magnesium
site, there are also significant logistical challenges. First, operation of the filter samplers
requires line electrical power at the sampling location, which limits the available
sampling sites. Further, it has been shown that achieving reasonable levels of field
spike recovery for Cr(VI) requires several special steps: 6
•Filters must be acid washed and rinsed, then coated with sodium bicarbonate to
avoid Cr(VI) background contamination;
•Samples must be retrieved from the field within one day after the sample has
been collected, to avoid Cr(VI) loss and negative bias (up to 20% the first day)
which precludes samples extended beyond 24 hours to obtain lower detection
limits; and,
•Samples must be frozen after collection and remain chilled until analysis
commences, to retard Cr(VI) conversion to Cr III.
•To avoid excess Cr(VI) loss, sample filters must be digested as soon as possible
after sampling concludes (i.e., within 24 hours).
As new procedures for the US Magnesium RI/FS program, use of a method described
above may require a demonstration of method applicability step. At minimum, a
6 J. Swift, et al., 2006
revision and agency review of the program SAP would be necessary before the data
would meet data quality objectives, and thus allow the results to be relied upon for risk
assessment. For results to be useful to estimate speciation between Cr(III) and Cr(VI),
total chromium must be detected in a concurrent and co-located separate sample, and
Cr(VI) must either be detected or not detected with a detection limit lower than the
total chromium sample.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Review of available approaches to derive a reasonable Cr(VI)/Cr(III) speciation for the
Phase 1A ambient air samples at US Magnesium supports the use of a literature value
showing no more than 25 percent of total chromium would be present as Cr(VI). This
estimate is very conservative, and defensible, based on the process environment for
magnesium production. Further, the Phase 1A sample concentrations should be
corrected for the blank detections of Cr(VI). Sample blank detections of Cr(VI) have
been observed in other studies using conventional filter sampling, which has been
suggested to represent an artifact of quartz filter manufacturing. Using Phase 1A data
and these adjustments results in a risk estimate for the most sensitive receptor (the
brine shrimp worker in PRI 13) of 3.7 x 10-5, which is within the risk management
range.
Further sampling using the high-volume methods utilized in Phase 1A would not
provide defensible values for Cr(VI) concentrations because the Cr(VI) to Cr(III)
reaction must be arrested on the filter media. Procedures to do so have been explored,
but are not incorporated into accepted U.S. EPA air sampling methods. Development
of a new field sampling and analysis methodology for the site would be time-
consuming and costly. Adjustments made to risk estimates using information from the
literature provide a sufficiently conservative Cr(VI) speciation estimate for the baseline
inhalation risk evaluation.
Response to Agency Comments on ERM’s “Methods for Assignment of Chromium
Speciation – US Magnesium Phase 1A Ambient Air Samples” 05/15/2018
1

EPA and our partner Agencies have reviewed the white paper entitled “Methods for
Assignment of Chromium Speciation - US Magnesium Phase 1A Ambient Air Samples”
submitted to EPA by e-mail on 04/19/2018. Consolidated Agency comments are provided
below, along with the recommended course of action.
Comments on ERM White Paper
1. The white paper recommends using a report by French and Pope as the basis for assuming a fractional
content of 25% Cr(VI) in ambient air at US Magnesium. This estimate is based on results from other
types of industrial sources (phosphate fertilizer production). It is not clear why chromium emissions at a
phosphate plant should be considered a good model for the US Magnesium Site. Moreover, as the white
paper notes, French and Pope do not have any real Cr(VI) data for phosphate plants, but infer values
from other types of plants. In any event, the Agencies believe that conditions at US Magnesium are
likely to be essentially unique due to the presence of Cl2 and HCl in the plant emissions, so extrapolation
from any other source seems dubious. On this basis, EPA does not consider this approach to be reliable.
ERM Response: Comment noted.
2. The white paper notes that chromium is consistently detected in field blank and laboratory filter blank
samples, and recommends that concentration values calculated in Site samples be corrected for the
laboratory filter blank values prior to computation of the mean and 95% UCL of the mean. While this
approach has merit, computation of the UCL based on the blank-adjusted values does not account for the
fact that many samples would need to be ranked as non-detects. See EPA’s recommended approach,
below, for further discussion.
ERM Response: Comment noted.
3. The white paper states that measured chromium levels do not correlate with magnesium production
rates, implying the source of chromium measured in Phase 1A ambient air samples is not the Site.
Although the data and calculations were not included in the white paper, EPA has independently
evaluated this assertion, and while the statement is true (EPA calculated an overall correlation
coefficient of -0.2 between production rates and chromium levels), the Agencies believe that the data are
actually too weak to support this conclusion. While a dip in production occurred during the middle of
the Phase 1A sampling program, collection of ambient air samples was discontinued during this time
(as specified in the QAPP). Production on the days when Phase 1A sampling actually occurred was
relatively consistent, varying by no more than ± 6%. Likewise, concentration values were
approximately constant over time, with the exception of an apparent “spike” at Stations 2 and 3. The
cause of the “spike” is unknown, but it is plausible that it could be the result of a short-term release that
was not reflected in an increase in production. This quasi-consistency of both production rates and
ambient air levels of chromium substantially decreases the power of the data set to detect a correlation if
one were present. Consequently, EPA places low confidence in this line of evidence.
ERM Response: Comment noted.
4. The white paper reviewed three methods for the collection and analysis of Cr(VI) in air, and argues that
there are sufficient technical and logistical issues associated with any such sampling and analysis effort
that to do so would require a substantial investment of time and money. While several of the concerns
Response to Agency Comments on ERM’s “Methods for Assignment of Chromium
Speciation – US Magnesium Phase 1A Ambient Air Samples” 05/15/2018
2

identified by ERM seem easily solvable, the Agencies agree that sampling and analysis could involve
considerable effort to develop a SAP and potentially perform a Demonstration of Methods Applicability,
and that the potential benefit of sampling and analysis for Cr(VI) should be balanced against the added
cost and time delay in the development of the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment.
ERM Response: Comment noted.
Agency Recommendation
The Agencies considered a number of alternative strategies for evaluating risk from chromium
in ambient air in the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment. Based on this evaluation, the
Agencies recommend implementing the following approach.
1. Application of the 5X-10X Rule. RAGS A Section 5.5 recommends that when a chemical that is a
common laboratory contaminant (acetone, 2-butanone, methylene chloride, toluene, phthalate esters)
is detected in blank samples, site samples should be ranked as non-detects unless the amount of
chemical in site samples exceeds 10-times the level in any blank. For all other chemicals (e.g.,
chromium), RAGS A recommends that site samples should be ranked as non-detects unless the
amount of chemical in site samples exceeds 5-times the level in any blank. Based on analysis of the
blank samples (considering both the field blanks and the laboratory filter blanks), the mass of
chromium on blank filters ranges from 4.9 ug to 27.9 ug. Applying the 5X rule, any field sample
with less than 139.5 ug on the filter should be ranked as a non-detect. On this basis, 32 of the 33 field
samples collected during the Phase 1A air study rank as non-detects.
2. Application of the 5% Rule. RAGS A Section 5.9.3 identifies detection frequency as a valid factor to
consider in the refinement of COPCs, and indicates that any chemical detected in fewer than 5% of
the samples may be considered for exclusion if it is not detected in high concentration in other
environmental media and if there is no reason to expect that it is Site related. Based on the “5X”
rule, the detection frequency for chromium is 1/33 = 3%. Since there is no reason to anticipate that
chromium is released to air from Site operations, and because it does not occur at high levels in other
media, the Agencies conclude that chromium may be excluded as a COPC in ambient air.
Note, however, that if this approach is followed for chromium in ambient air, the same approach must be
followed for other COPCs and other media. That is, rather than applying special steps to chromium only,
the Agencies recommend performing a COPC refinement step for all COPCs in soil, water, and air that
have been previously identified in the OU1 SLRA and OU2 SLRA reports. This COPC refinement step
would require applying the “5X-10X” rule, followed by the “5%” rule, prior to the calculation of human
exposure and risk. As has been done previously, these rules would be applied on a PRI-by-PRI basis.
ERM Response: The proposed approach from the agencies is acceptable to US Magnesium and
will be incorporated into the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum.

Appendix B
Summary of Changes to the BHHRA TM
and Final Agency Comments

ERM 7272 E. Indian School Road
Suite 108
Scottsdale, AZ
85251
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

www.erm.com

© Copyright 2018 by ERM Worldwide Group Limited and/or its affiliates (‘ERM’). All Rights Reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in
any form or by any means, without prior written permission of ERM.
Page 1 of 3
4 December 2018
Ken Wangerud
Remedial Project Manager
Superfund Remedial Program
USEPA Region 8 – EPR-SR
1595 Wynkoop Street
Denver, CO 80202-1129

Reference: US Magnesium RI/FS
Subject: List of Major Revisions to Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical Memo US
Magnesium LLC, Tooele County, Utah
Dear Mr. Wangerud:
This letter provides a summary of the major revisions made to the line Human Health Risk
Assessment Technical Memo for the US Magnesium site (Site). These revisions have been
presented to the agency group over the past few months and discussed during conference calls, as
summarized below. The revised memo is attached; with changes in redline for review. Because
these revisions have been discussed with the group, we anticipate few, if any, comments on the
revised text. Revised CSMs are also attached, which show inclusion of the inhalation exposure
pathway for ambient air. Exposure to particulates in air was included previously.
ERM-AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE ON REVISIONS TO BHHRA TM
■ A conference call was held on 22 February 2018, and ERM sent a follow-up email with proposed
revisions to the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum (BHHRA TM).
■ Hexavalent chromium white paper submitted by ERM tto agencies on 19 April 2018, comments
received from USEPA on 17 May 2018.
■ A conference call was held on 24 May 2018 to discuss agency comments on the white paper and
agencies’ proposal for Constituent of Potential Concern (COPC) refinement process.
■ ERM submitted proposed COPC refinement text and flow diagram to agencies via email on 22
August 2018.
■ Email exchanged between agencies and ERM regarding dataset for the Baseline Ecological Risk
Assessment (BERA) included application to BHHRA dataset.
■ 17 September 2018, BERA dataset call with agencies to clarify applicability to BHHRA dataset.
TOPICS ADDRESSED IN THE REVISED BHHRA TM
Data Evaluation and Preparation (Section 2)
■ A list of the data sources for the BHHRA has been added to Section 2. Valid (non-R qualified)
samples from the DMA (solids only), Phase 1A (all matrices), Phase 1A/B, and Phase 2A (solids
and PRI 15 plant tissue), including samples from reference areas, will be included.
■ Only surface soil samples (0 to 6 inches below ground surface) will be used in computing
exposure concentrations.
ERM 4 December 2018
Reference: US Magnesium RI/FS

Page 2 of 3

COPC Refinement (New Section 3)
■ A new Section 3 has been added that describes the steps to be taken in refinement of the
COPCs selected in the OU-1 Screening-Level Risk Assessment (SLRA) Report.
Changes to Exposure Assessment (Section 4)
■ For constituents with mostly non-detect (ND) results, and the maximum detection limit (DL)
exceeds the risk-based screening level (RBSL), the maximum detected concentration will be
used as the exposure point concentration (EPC).
■ Surface water EPCs will be calculated on a PRI-specific basis.
■ Rather than modeling tissue concentrations based only on incidental soil ingestion, plant tissue
data collected during Phase 2A from PRI 15 will also be used in the model for estimating game
tissue concentrations.
■ COPCs selected in the Phase 1A Air SLRA will be included in the OU-1 BHHRA.
Toxicity Assessment
■ For evaluation of risk from exposure to chromium, toxicity values for trivalent chromium (as a
surrogate for total chromium) will be used for non-water matrix exposure pathways. For water,
EPCs will be developed for both hexavalent chromium and total chromium with the specific data
available for each, and the associated toxicity values will be used.
Uncertainty Evaluation
■ Toxicity equivalent (TEQ) in Risk Characterization: The 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
(TCDD) TEQ is calculated two ways: assuming congeners that are ND are not present
(concentration = 0), and assuming ND congeners are present at half the detection limit reported
(concentration = DL x 0.5). For clarification, intakes and associated risks will be calculated for
both TEQs, and an incremental lifetime cancer risk (ILCR) and hazard index (HI) using each will
be presented.
■ For constituents that are never detected in a PRI whose maximum DL exceeds the RBSL, the
uncertainty evaluation will discuss the probability that the chemical is present at the site and
evaluate the presence of other risk drivers present in the PRI. A semi-quantitative evaluation will
be performed if it is likely the non-detect constituents are present and could affect the risk results.
■ Only surface solids data (collected from 0 to 0.5 feet below ground surface) will be used in the
BHHRA. Subsurface samples were collected in some PRIs. A comparison of subsurface
concentrations to surface data will be conducted to determine whether there are any locations
where deeper samples are substantially more contaminated than the surface, and whether or not
the subsurface is a potential concern for hypothetical future human exposure.
■ Bioaccumulative Constituents in Air: Although bioaccumulation does not apply to the inhalation
pathway, per USEPA requirement, any bioaccumulative constituents detected in Phase 1A air
samples are included as COPCs. The uncertainty that this adds to the BHHRA will be evaluated
quantitatively.
PRI 14 Data Adequacy
■ Additional data collection at PRI 14 is not required for the BHHRA.
ERM 4 December 2018
Reference: US Magnesium RI/FS

Page 3 of 3

Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or comments regarding
these revisions.
Sincerely,

David J. Abranovic, P.E.
Project Coordinator

DJA/JN/0350891
enclosures

cc: Wendy O’Brien, USEPA
Bill Brattin, SRC
Mike Storck, DEQ
Scott Everett, DEQ

Response to Agency Comments on ERM’s Revised Final OU-1 Baseline Human
Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum 02/14/2019

The Agencies have reviewed the Revised Final HHRA Tech Memo submitted by e-mail on
12/05/2018. The Agencies accept all revisions except as noted below.

1. The Agencies never agreed that if total chromium is retained as a COPC in solid media or air it
should be assessed based on toxicity factors for Cr(III) only. Rather, if total chromium is retained,
and if no data are available to estimate the fraction of the total that is Cr(VI), the risk assessment
should present risks based on toxicity factors for both Cr(III) and Cr(VI), and the uncertainty
section should discuss which of these calculations is considered to be most relevant, and why. In this
case, it is expected that total chromium will not be retained as a COPC after application of the
COPC refinement protocol. Nevertheless, the language in Section 5.5 requires revision, as follows:

Chromium primarily exists in either the trivalent (III) or hexavalent (VI) state in the environment.
Hexavalent chromium mostly occurs due to human activities. Many trivalent chromium compounds
have low solubility in water, while some hexavalent chromium compounds are readily soluble in
water. Hexavalent chromium compounds are reduced to the trivalent form in the presence of
oxidizable organic matter. Though hexavalent chromium was detected in a few water samples, there is
no known source of hexavalent chromium at the Site, and it is not expected to be present in solid
matrices. Chromium data for matrices other than water were not speciated, and the reported
concentrations are for total chromium. If total chromium is retained as a COPC, For evaluation of
risk from exposure to chromiumwill be performed based on, toxicity values for both trivalent
chromium and hexavalent chromium (as a surrogate for total chromium) will be used, and the
uncertainty section will discuss which calculation is considered to be most relevant, and why for non-
water matrix exposure pathways. For water, EPCs will be developed for both hexavalent chromium
and total chromium with the specific data available for each, and the associated toxicity values will be
used.

As a minor point, the text description of the COPC refinement protocol in Section 3 does not
match the flow diagram in Figure 3-1. More specifically, the text describes a process where the
5x-10x rule is applied before the application of the 5% rules, while Figure 3-1 shows the 5% rule
being applied both before and after the 5x-10x rule. However, either protocol should yield the
same results, so no change is needed.

ERM Response: Comments noted. The requested revisions will be made to the text in Section 5.5.

1
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
APPENDIX B GROUNDWATER BHHRA

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-i
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
B1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ B-1
B1.1 Overview of the Risk Assessment Approach .................................................................................... B-1
B1.2 Purpose of the Groundwater Evaluation ........................................................................................... B-1
B2 DATA EVALUATION AND PREPARATION ................................................................................. B-3
B2.1 Data Quality Evaluation .................................................................................................................... B-3
Data Validation................................................................................................................. B-3
Analytical Sensitivity ........................................................................................................ B-4
Accuracy of Analytical Data ............................................................................................. B-4
B2.2 Development of 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxic Equivalent and Total Polychlorinated Biphenyls ..................... B-4
B2.3 Dataset Selection .............................................................................................................................. B-4
B3 CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN SELECTION AND REFINEMENT ...................... B-6
B3.1 Constituents of Potential Concern Selection ..................................................................................... B-6
B3.2 Refinement of Constituents of Potential Concern Selection and Dataset ......................................... B-6
B4 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................... B-9
B4.1 Conceptual Site Model ...................................................................................................................... B-9
Sources ............................................................................................................................ B-9
Fate and Transport ........................................................................................................ B-10
Groundwater Quality ...................................................................................................... B-11
B4.2 Receptors Evaluated ...................................................................................................................... B-12
B4.3 Determination of Representative Exposure Concentrations ........................................................... B-12
B4.4 Dose Estimation .............................................................................................................................. B-12
B5 HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY ASSESSMENT ............................................................................. B-13
B5.1 Evaluation of Dioxins/Furans .......................................................................................................... B-13
B5.2 Evaluation of Lead .......................................................................................................................... B-13
B6 RISK CHARACTERIZATION ....................................................................................................... B-14
B6.1 Upper Aquifer Zone ........................................................................................................................ B-15
Noncancer Hazards in Upper Aquifer Zone ................................................................... B-15
Cancer Risk in Upper Aquifer Zone ............................................................................... B-16
Upper Aquifer Zone Summary ....................................................................................... B-16
B6.2 Lower Aquifer Zone ........................................................................................................................ B-16
Noncancer Hazards in Lower Aquifer Zone ................................................................... B-16
Cancer Risk in Lower Aquifer Zone ............................................................................... B-17
Lower Aquifer Zone Summary ....................................................................................... B-17
B7 UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... B-18
B7.1 Uncertainty in Environmental Sampling and Analyses .................................................................... B-18
B7.2 Uncertainty in Data Preparation ...................................................................................................... B-19
B7.3 Uncertainty in Constituents of Potential Concern Selection and Refinement .................................. B-19
Constituents of Potential Concern Selection .................................................................. B-19
COPC Refinement ......................................................................................................... B-21
B7.4 Uncertainty in Exposure Assessment ............................................................................................. B-21
Uncertainties in Selection of Receptors, Exposure Pathways, and Exposure
Parameters .................................................................................................................... B-21
Exposure Concentrations ............................................................................................... B-22

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-ii
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
B7.5 Uncertainty in Toxicity Assessment ................................................................................................ B-22
B7.6 Risk Characterization ...................................................................................................................... B-23
B7.7 Summary of Uncertainty Analysis ................................................................................................... B-23
B8 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ........................................................................................................... B-24
B8.1 Noncancer Risk Summary .............................................................................................................. B-24
B8.2 Cancer Risk Summary .................................................................................................................... B-24
B8.3 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................... B-24
B9 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. B-25

ATTACHMENT 1 COPC REFINEMENT
ATTACHMENT 2 RISK CALCULATIONS

List of Figures
Figure B-1: Conceptual Site Model for Groundwater Exposure - Worker
Figure B-2 HI and ILCR in the Upper Aquifer Zone

List of Tables
Table B-1: Sampling Analyses Matrix for Upper Aquifer Zone Wells
Table B-2: Sampling Analyses Matrix for Lower Aquifer Zone Wells
Table B-3: Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
Table B-4: Lower Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
Table B-5: Groundwater COPC Selection
Table B-6: Receptor Exposure Parameters – Groundwater
Table B-7: Upper Aquifer Zone Exposure Point Concentrations for Detected COPCs
Table B-8: Lower Aquifer Zone Exposure Point Concentrations for Detected COPCs
Table B-9: Summary of Toxicity Data for COPCs
Table B-10: Groundwater Hazard and Risk Summary for Upper Aquifer Zone Wells – Worker
Table B-11: Groundwater Hazard and Risk Summary for Lower Aquifer Zone Wells – Worker
Table B-12: Constituents Lacking Risk-Based Screening Levels for Groundwater
Table B-13: Site-Wide Groundwater Constituents not Detected in Samples – Maximum Detection
Limit Greater than RBSL
Table B-14 Comparison of ND=0 and ND=1/2DL for TEQ in Groundwater Well Water Samples

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-iii
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADD Average daily dose
AOC Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent
bgs Below ground surface
BHHRA Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
COPC Constituent of potential concern
CSM Conceptual site model
CWP Current Waste Pond
DL Detection limit
DLC Dioxin-like compound
EPC Exposure point concentration
ERM ERM-West, Inc.
GSL Great Salt Lake
HAA Haloacetic acid
HCB Hexachlorobenzene
HI Hazard index
HQ Hazard quotient
ILCR Incremental lifetime cancer risk
IRIS Integrated Risk Information System
LAZ Lower aquifer zone
MCL Maximum contaminant level
MDL Method detection limit
mg/kg Milligrams per kilogram
mg/kg-d Milligrams per kilogram per day
mg/L Milligrams per liter
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level
MRL Method reporting limit
ND Nondetect
OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
OU Operable Unit
OWP Old Waste Pond
PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
PCB Polychlorinated biphenyl

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-iv
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONTENTS
PRI Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RAGS Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund
RBA Relative bioavailability
RBSL Risk-based screening level
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RfD Reference dose
RI Remedial investigation
RSL Regional Screening Level
RWP Retrofitted waste pond
SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan
SIF Summary intake factor
SFO Slope factor, oral
SLRA Screening-Level Risk Assessment
SMCL Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level
SVOC Semivolatile organic compound
TCDD 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TCE Trichloroethene
TDS Total dissolved solids
TEF Toxicity equivalency factor
TEQ Toxic equivalence
THM Trihalomethane
TM Technical Memorandum
UAZ Upper aquifer zone
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USM US Magnesium LLC
VOC Volatile organic compound
WWI Wastewater indicator

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-1
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
INTRODUCTION
B1 INTRODUCTION
In this appendix for evaluation of groundwater risk, groundwater is evaluated on a well-by-well basis,
rather than Site-wide. For purposes of the remedial investigation (RI), groundwater at the Site is classified
into two units, the Upper Aquifer Zone (UAZ) and Lower Aquifer Zone (LAZ), which are separated by a
silty-clay unit that is continuous beneath the operating facility, wastewater ponds, and beyond.
Pursuant to Utah Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Ground Water Discharge Permit (GWDP) No.
UGW450012, effective December 19, 2018, Renewed as Modified August 12, 2020 and Consent Decree
between the United States and US Magnesium LLC (Case No. 2:01CV0040B), PRI 5 will be merged with
PRIs 6 and 7 to create a retrofitted waste pond (RWP). The RWP will receive the current wastewater
stream, including the US Magnesium LLC (USM) lithium carbonate process constructed and operational
in 2020 to re-process electrolytic cell salt (“smut”) material in PRI 9. As a part of the compliance schedule
for the GWDP, USM will be reporting the results of the human health risk assessment completed for the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) RI, evaluating risk
to human receptors that may be exposed to groundwater or surface water affected by discharge of
contaminants.
B1.1 Overview of the Risk Assessment Approach
The risk assessment process is used to systematically evaluate and organize data, assumptions, and
uncertainties to help understand the magnitude of risk at a Site and the primary causes of that risk; and
contributes to the subsequent development, evaluation, and selection of appropriate response
alternatives (United States Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA] 1989). This groundwater risk
evaluation, in support of the USM RI/Feasibility Study, is consistent with USEPA and State of Utah
guidance, and the Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (USEPA 2011a).
Consistent with guidance (USEPA 1989, 2001a), a phased risk assessment process is being employed,
as described in Section 1.2 of the OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment (OU-1 BHHRA, ERM
2021b). The Final OU-1 Screening-Level Risk Assessment Report (OU-1 SLRA, ERM 2017) was the first
phase, providing initial selection of constituents of potential concern (COPCs) in groundwater. Additional
information on the phased approach is included in the Final Screening Level Risk Assessment Technical
Memorandum (SLRA TM, ERM 2014). This groundwater evaluation is part of the second phase, a
baseline human health risk assessment for the hypothetical exposure of a worker to COPCs in Site
groundwater through ingestion.
B1.2 Purpose of the Groundwater Evaluation
The purpose of the groundwater risk evaluation is to evaluate the potential for adverse human health
impacts that may occur as a result of potential exposure of a worker to concentrations of COPCs in Site
groundwater through ingestion. Exposure to other media at the Site is evaluated in the OU-1 BHHRA
(ERM 2021b) to which this groundwater evaluation is an appendix. This evaluation presents the final
selection of groundwater COPCs and results of the COPC refinement, evaluates risk from hypothetical
exposure of receptors (workers) to COPCs in Site groundwater, and includes a discussion of the
uncertainty associated with the methods and results. The reasonable maximum exposure for hypothetical
use of Site groundwater as drinking water for workers is assessed. This exposure is unlikely to occur
because the high levels of total dissolved solids (TDS) in Site groundwater make it unsuitable as a source
of drinking water.
This evaluation is presented as an appendix to the BHHRA because Site groundwater is designated by
the Utah Ground Water Quality Protection Program as Class IV, also referred to as Saline Ground Water

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-2
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
INTRODUCTION
and is classified as such by containing greater than 10,000 milligrams per liter (mg/L) of TDS. The
majority of Site groundwater contains TDS in excess of 100,000 mg/L and is therefore not considered to
be a realistic current or future potable drinking water source. This groundwater risk evaluation is therefore
presented as a stand-alone assessment from the BHHRA and is not expected to be used to support risk
management decisions for the Site.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-3
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA EVALUATION AND PREPARATION
B2 DATA EVALUATION AND PREPARATION
The primary objective of the data collection and evaluation process in the groundwater risk evaluation is
to develop a dataset of sufficient quality and quantity to adequately evaluate the potential constituent
impacts to human receptors. The initial step has two parts: (1) the available sampling data and site
information are reviewed to select data applicable to human health, and (2) constituent concentrations
within the dataset are evaluated to identify constituents and affected groundwater that are potential
human health concerns requiring a more detailed assessment. This section covers Site-wide groundwater
data selection.
Groundwater data used in the groundwater evaluation were mainly collected during two phases of RI
sampling and are presented in the following reports:
 Final Phase 1A Data Report for PRIs 2 and 8 through 17 (ERM 2016). This investigation included
groundwater data from UAZ wells only. Groundwater samples for the Phase 1A RI were collected in
one event during the winter of 2013-2014.
 Draft Phase 2B Hydro Remedial Investigation Data Report (ERM 2020). Groundwater samples were
collected quarterly for four quarters from 2018 to 2019 for the Phase 2B Hydro RI. An objective of
the Phase 2B Hydro RI was to spatially and temporally characterize the nature and extent of
constituents of potential ecological concern in groundwater in the UAZ and LAZ. Phase 2B was
designed to collect data for the Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment, and the analyte lists did not
include all COPCs identified in the OU-1 SLRA (ERM 2017a); however, most of the groundwater
COPCs were analyzed.
Groundwater samples collected from UAZ wells MW-20A and MW-20B in April 2015 in the vicinity of the
ferrous chloride process in the USM operating facility are also included. These data were transmitted on
1 July 2015 from ERM to USEPA.
Although some additional groundwater sampling was conducted between Phase 1A and Phase 2B, the
Phase 2B RI included quarterly sampling and analysis, and the Phase 2B data supersede the interim
data.
B2.1 Data Quality Evaluation
In each of the data reports listed above and for the 2015 samples, a data quality evaluation was
conducted as described in Section B2.1.1. Data deemed of adequate quality for use in the groundwater
evaluation are included in the datasets for each PRI Area.
Data Validation
All data collected for the RI were subject to third-party validation. Data validation reports are included in
an appendix to each data report. A data quality evaluation was included in each data report and
incorporated data validation results, as well as any field conditions that may have affected data usability.
Additional details of the data quality evaluation process are provided in Section 2.1 of the OU-1 BHHRA
(ERM 2021b).
The majority of data collected (ranging from 96 to 99 percent of the data collected in each RI phase) were
deemed usable in the groundwater evaluation. Any data that were rejected (R qualifier applied at
validation) were excluded from the dataset. Sample concentrations were reported to the method detection
limit (MDL) by the analytical laboratory; results qualified as estimated (J-qualified) by the laboratory
because the concentration was less than the reporting limit, but equal to or greater than the MDL or
because of a quality control issue were also included in the dataset.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-4
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA EVALUATION AND PREPARATION
Analytical Sensitivity
In general, the laboratory methods available had the sensitivity to meet the risk-based screening level
(RBSL) with the MDL (if not the method reporting limit [MRL]) in undiluted samples with minimal matrix
interference. Groundwater samples collected at the Site have high TDS concentrations and at times had
high concentrations of some constituents. A Demonstration of Method Applicability study was conducted
for water samples (ERM 2013a) to optimize analytical methods prior to conducting the RI, which included
adding cleanup steps for some methods and other measures to reduce matrix interference where
possible. Even with these method adjustments, sample matrix interference was encountered in several
samples that required dilution, and associated MDLs were greater than RBSLs for a number of
constituents. Constituents that were never detected, but with MDLs exceeding the RBSL, were not carried
through the risk assessment, but were instead identified as an area of uncertainty. The impacts of these
never-detected constituents on the conclusions of the risk assessment are discussed qualitatively in the
uncertainty section (Section B7).
Some constituents were reported by more than one analytical method in the same sample. If the analyte
was detected by both methods, the result from the method with the lower MDL was used. If the analyte
was detected by one method, but not detected by the other, the detected result was used. If the analyte
was not detected by either method, the lower MDL of the two results was used.
Accuracy of Analytical Data
As described in the data adequacy evaluation for the air and solids datasets (described in Section 2.2 of
the OU-1 BHHRA [ERM 2021b]), some sample concentrations were similar to, or in some cases, less
than associated laboratory and field blank results. Based on this observation, the COPC refinement
process incorporating comparison of sample concentrations to blank concentrations in all matrices was
developed and implemented. The process as it applies to groundwater is described in Section B3.2.
B2.2 Development of 2,3,7,8-TCDD Toxic Equivalent and Total Polychlorinated
Biphenyls
Dioxins/furans and coplanar polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congeners reported in each sample are
evaluated as the 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) toxic equivalent (TEQ). The TEQ is
developed by multiplying an individual toxic equivalence factor (TEF) with the concentration of each
2,3,7,8- substituted dioxin/furan and coplanar PCB congener in a sample and summing the results. TEFs
are estimates of the toxicity of dioxin-like compounds relative to the toxicity of 2,3,7,8-TCDD, which is
assigned a TEF of 1.0. For human health risk assessment, mammalian TEFs (USEPA 2010) are used.
TEQs are calculated two ways: substituting zero for nondetected congeners [TEQ (ND=0)] and
substituting one-half the detection limit [TEQ (ND=1/2)].
PCBs are evaluated as Total PCBs, as summed by the analytical laboratory. These methods of data
preparation are consistent with other uses of the data for the Site.
B2.3 Dataset Selection
Groundwater data collected in Phase 1A, Phase 2B, and from wells MW-20A and MW-20B in 2015 in the
vicinity of the ferrous chloride process are included in the Site groundwater dataset. Although well MW-18
has been destroyed, Phase 1A data for the well are included in the groundwater evaluation. Although the
Revised Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum (BHHRA TM,
ERM 2019) indicated that only the most recent groundwater data from study area monitoring wells would
be used, per USEPA request, Phase 1A data and the 2015 data are included in the data for groundwater
risk evaluation.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-5
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
DATA EVALUATION AND PREPARATION
The list of analytes was not consistent across all sampling events for groundwater. Phase 1A included
dioxins/furans, PCBs, semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), metals, anions, cyanide, perchlorate, haloacetic acids
(HAAs), and general chemistry such as TDS and alkalinities. The 2015 samples collected from wells MW-
20A and MW-20B were analyzed for only PCBs, SVOCs, PAHs, and metals. In Phase 2B, all samples
(except those noted below) were analyzed for anions, TDS, cyanide, alkalinities, HAAs, and density. In
addition to those analytes, some wells were designated “Group A” and analyzed for Group A metals and
Group A VOCs1 for all four Phase 2B events, some wells were designated “Group B” and analyzed for
Group B metals and Group B VOCs2 for all four events, while a few were analyzed for Group A metals
and VOCs for two events and Group B metals and VOCs for two events. Samples analyzed as Group B
were not analyzed for dioxins/furans, PCBs, SVOCs, and cyanide. Tables B-1 and B-2 show which
analyses were performed on each well in the UAZ and LAZ, respectively. Any wells that lack Phase 1A
data or Phase 2B Group A data for at least one event generally do not have sufficient data for inclusion in
the OU-1 BHHRA groundwater evaluation.
 MW-32A, MW-35, and PZ-3 (all in the UAZ) have only density data from Phase 2B and are not
included in the evaluation.
 Although PZ-10 (UAZ) only has density data from Phase 2B, Phase 1A data are available and are
included.
 MW-22A and PZ-13 in the UAZ and MW-2, MW-10, MW-23, and MW-33 in the LAZ do not have
Phase 1A data and only have Group B data from Phase 2B. The data for these locations are not
sufficient for the groundwater evaluation.
 Only Phase 1A data are available for several UAZ wells: LF-01, LF-03, MW-4A, MW-6, MW-7, MW-
8A, MW-8B, MW-13A, MW-14, MW-15A, MW-15B, MW-17, MW-18, MW-119A, MW-19B, PZ-8, PZ-
10, PZ-12, PZ-16, PZ-18, PZ-22, PZ-24, and PZ-26. These data are included in the groundwater
evaluation.
 All other wells have Group A data for one or more Phase 2B events, and these data are sufficient for
inclusion in the groundwater evaluation.
UAZ and LAZ groundwater data included in the risk evaluation dataset are summarized in Tables B-3 and
B-4, respectively. Field and laboratory duplicate sample results are excluded from the dataset. Because
exposure point concentrations (EPCs) are selected on a well-by-well basis (Section B4.4), if both total
(unfiltered) and dissolved (field-filtered using a 0.45 micron filter) metals results are available (Phase 1A
data), both were included in the dataset used for COPC selection and EPCs. This approach provides
certainty that the maximum concentration is included for each metal COPC in each well.

1 Group A Metals (Dissolved) = Calcium, Sodium, Potassium, Magnesium, Mercury, Aluminum, Antimony, Arsenic, Barium,
Beryllium, Cadmium, Chromium, Cobalt, Copper, Iron, Lead, Manganese, Molybdenum, Nickel, Selenium, Silver, Thallium,
Vanadium, and Zinc; Group A VOCs = Bromodichloromethane, Bromoform, Bromomethane, Carbon disulfide, Carbon tetrachloride,
Chloroform, Dibromochloromethane, Ethylbenzene, m- & p-Xylene, Naphthalene, o-Xylene, Toluene, Trichloroethene, and Xylenes,
Total
2 Group B Metals (Dissolved) = Calcium , Sodium, Potassium, Magnesium, Iron; Group B VOCs = Bromodichloromethane,
Bromoform, Chloroform, Dibromochloromethane, Trichloroethene

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-6
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL
CONCERN SELECTION AND REFINEMENT
B3 CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN SELECTION AND REFINEMENT
Typically, not all contaminants present at a site pose health risks or contribute significantly to overall site
risks. USEPA guidelines (Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Part A [RAGS A], USEPA 1989)
recommend focusing on a group of COPCs based on inherent toxicity, site concentration, and the
behavior of the constituents in the environment. To identify these COPCs, health-protective RBSLs are
compared to Site concentrations of constituents. As noted in Section B2.1.3, during review of data for
potential inclusion in the baseline risk assessment, some sample concentrations were significantly
affected by blank results (i.e., were similar to or sometimes less than field and laboratory blank sample
concentrations). The COPC selection process and subsequent refinement of the dataset to account for
concentrations of constituents detected in blanks, and the results of these steps are described in the
following subsections.
B3.1 Constituents of Potential Concern Selection
COPCs for groundwater were selected in the OU-1 SLRA (ERM 2017) using the groundwater data
collected in Phase 1A RI (ERM 2016). Additional groundwater data (Phase 2B RI) were collected after the
OU-1 SLRA was conducted and are included in the dataset. Statistics for the groundwater dataset
defined in Section B2.3 are shown in the groundwater screening table (Table B-5) used for selection of
COPCs with the updated dataset.
COPC identification consists primarily of comparing the maximum detected concentration of an analyte or
the maximum detection limit for analytes with no detected concentrations against its respective RBSL.
Exceptions to this were:
 Bioaccumulative compounds3, which were carried through as COPCs in groundwater even if the
maximum detected concentration was less than the RBSL (though groundwater ingestion is a non-
bioaccumulative pathway); and
 Essential nutrients, which were excluded from consideration as COPCs.
For all other analytes, groundwater COPCs were selected by comparison to USEPA Tap Water Regional
Screening Levels (RSLs), as defined in the SLRA TM (ERM 2014). The RSLs used are from the
November 2020 RSL tables distributed by USEPA (2020a). In addition, the Secondary Maximum
Contaminant Limit (SMCL) for TDS is included for comparison to Site TDS concentrations. The SMCL is
the National Secondary Drinking Water Regulation established by USEPA (USEPA 2021a). As noted,
dissolved and total metals data are included in the dataset. Statistics are presented in Table B-5 for both,
allowing for the maximum concentration of each metal in groundwater to be compared to the RBSL for
COPC selection, whether that is a dissolved or total concentration.
Two VOCs (bromochloromethane and chloromethane) were not retained as COPCs despite having
maximum detected concentrations that are greater than their RBSLs. The RBSLs for these two VOCs are
derived from exposure via the inhalation pathway for activities such as showering, laundering, and dish
washing (USEPA 2020a), which is not applicable to the ingestion only exposure scenario in this
groundwater evaluation (Section B4.2.2). Toxicity data are not available to evaluate them for oral
exposure.
B3.2 Refinement of Constituents of Potential Concern Selection and Dataset
As previously described, some groundwater sample concentrations were significantly affected by blank
results. When COPCs are detected in field or laboratory blank analyses, sample results may be biased

3 Defined in ERM (2014) as: mercury; hexachlorobutadiene; HCB; pentachlorobenzene; 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene; TCDD, and
other polychlorinated dioxins and furans; and PCBs.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-7
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL
CONCERN SELECTION AND REFINEMENT
high. As a result, field and laboratory blank data were reviewed for all selected COPCs in groundwater.
This review indicates:
 A number of COPCs were detected in field and laboratory blank samples during Phase 1A and
Phase 2B sampling events, and samples from the wells near the ferrous chloride process
 Some blank concentrations are comparable to sample concentrations for COPCs
Because of this, once the individual COPC datasets were compiled for each well for the groundwater
evaluation, datasets for COPCs potentially affected by blank contamination underwent a refinement
process, as summarized on Figure 3-1 of the OU-1 BHHRA (ERM 2021b).
The refinement process is based on RAGS A (USEPA 1989) Section 5.5, which recommends that when a
chemical that is a common laboratory contaminant (these include acetone, 2-butanone, methylene
chloride, toluene, and phthalate esters) is detected in blank samples, Site sample results should be
ranked as nondetects unless the amount of chemical in Site samples exceeds 10-times the level in any
blank. For all other chemicals, RAGS A recommends that Site samples should be ranked as nondetects
unless the amount of chemical in Site samples exceeds 5-times the level in any blank. These guidelines
are known as the “5x-10x rule.” In addition, RAGS A Section 5.9.3 identifies frequency of detection (FOD)
as a valid factor to consider in the refinement of COPCs, and indicates that any constituent detected in
fewer than 5 percent of the samples may be considered for exclusion if it is not detected at a high
concentration in other environmental media and if there is no reason to expect that it is site-related.
Sample data for each COPC4 were compared to blank data generated as required by the sampling and
analysis plan (SAP) for each RI phase; sample data were matched to blank data from the same phase of
sample collection. Appendix D of the OU-1 BHHRA (ERM 2021b) provides details of the process.
Although the process includes a step evaluating FOD when determining if a COPC will remain in the risk
assessment, this criterion was not applied to groundwater data. Any detected concentration of a COPC in
a well was kept in the groundwater dataset. Attachment 1 includes tables showing the application of the
5x-10x rule to sample concentrations by investigation phase for each COPC dataset in each well.
Several constituents were affected, as summarized below.
 COPCs detected in Phase 1A blanks exceed the 5x-10x rule, including nine metals, three polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and six VOCs, so that some results change from detect to
nondetect:
- Results changed from detected to nondetected in some wells for eight of the total metals and
seven of the dissolved metals, including thallium, zinc, and for all detects of lead in two wells.
- For PAHs, 2-methylnaphthalene and naphthalene results changed from detected to nondetected
in some samples, while benzo(a)anthracene changed in all samples so it was removed as a
COPC in all wells.
- Some of the data for all six VOCs changed from detected to nondetected, including
bromodichloromethane and chloroform, but none were eliminated as a COPC in any well.
 COPCs detected in blanks for all Phase 2B events that exceed the 5x-10x rule include four metals
and six VOCs, resulting in:
- Results changed from detected to nondetected for some wells for dissolved antimony (Event 3),
mercury (Events 1 and 2), nickel (Event 3), and zinc (Event 4).

4 COPC refinement did not need to be applied to dioxin, furan, and PCB congeners during the groundwater evaluation because
blank contamination is addressed during validation per National Functional Guidelines for Chlorinated Dioxin/Furan Review (USEPA
2011b) and National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Organic Methods Data Review (USEPA 2014b).

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-8
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL
CONCERN SELECTION AND REFINEMENT
- Some of the data for all six VOCs changed from detected to nondetected, including carbon
disulfide and dibromochloromethane, but none were eliminated as a COPC in any well.
 No COPCs were detected in blanks at concentrations that exceed the 5x-10x rule in the samples
collected in 2015 from wells MW-20A and MW-20B near the ferrous chloride process.
Attachment 1, Tables B1-1 through B1-6, show the overall blank comparison for COPCs detected in
blanks for each phase of groundwater data collection. Attachment 1, Tables B1-7 through B1-37 provide
the comparison of individual sample COPC concentrations in cases where at least one sample was
affected by the 5x-10x rule. These tables show when a detect changes to nondetect in the dataset for
each well. Ultimately, the blank comparison process only affected a few COPC datasets and had little
effect on selection of EPCs because the maximum detected concentration in the well was used to
estimate risks (Section B4.4).

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-9
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
B4 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
Exposure assessment is a process that seeks to identify groups of people who are exposed to Site-
related chemicals, and quantify the amount of exposure that is occurring (i.e., the dose). The calculation
of dose is based on:
 A conceptual site model (CSM) that identifies how chemicals could reach a person—the complete
exposure pathways from contaminant source to people
 Selection of the populations that will be exposed
 Selection of the factors that quantify the amount of exposure, such as how long people are exposed
to the chemical
 An estimate of media concentrations at the exposure point (the point of contact between the
chemical and person)
B4.1 Conceptual Site Model
The preliminary Site-wide CSM for the current and future land use at the Site presented in the SLRA TM
(ERM 2014) established the initial scope of receptors and exposure pathways considered for the project.
A CSM, sometimes referred to as a conceptual exposure model, is a schematic representation of the
collective current knowledge of possible chemical source areas; possible chemical release and transport
mechanisms; surfaces/media of concern; potential human exposure pathways and routes (e.g., ingestion,
inhalation, dermal contact); and potential receptors. Only complete exposure pathways, which must
comprise all of the following elements (USEPA 1989), are included in the groundwater evaluation:
 Source/source area
 Mechanism of contaminant release and transport
 Contact with media (e.g., water)
 An exposure point where a potential receptor could contact the contaminated media
 An exposure (intake) route (e.g., ingestion)
The absence of any one of these elements results in an incomplete exposure pathway. A CSM for the
hypothetical exposure of the worker to groundwater through ingestion is shown on Figure B-1.
Sources
Historical and ongoing USM facility operations have generated three main types of wastes:
 Gases and fine particulate materials released to air
 Solid materials placed in piles on the ground or released from buildings as fugitive dusts that fall to
the ground
 Liquid wastes and slurries discharged historically through ditches (now closed and capped) and
more recently through pipes into the wastewater ponds (PRIs 5, 6, and 7)
These processes have led to the presence of Site-related chemical contaminants in air, soil, waste piles,
surface water, sediments, and groundwater. Contaminants in soil and waste piles may disperse through
the environment by wind (airborne contaminants), and contaminants in ponds may disperse in surface
water runoff. In some instances, breaches of impoundment berms have resulted in unintended releases
of wastewater or sediment outside the wastewater ponds; an overflow pipe installed in November 2017
pursuant to a DWQ construction permit facilitates controlled discharges of wastewater from the Current

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-10
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
Waste Pond (CWP) to the Old Waste Pond (OWP). Contaminants in sediments and possibly surface soils
may be transported to groundwater by surface water infiltration.
Even though Site groundwater is not a suitable drinking water source and the exposure pathway is not
complete (i.e., there is no realistic current or future exposure point or exposure [intake] route)
groundwater ingestion is evaluated in this groundwater evaluation as a hypothetical complete exposure
pathway for a worker.
Furthermore, this hypothetical pathway is evaluated with the assumption that groundwater COPCs would
remain if the water were treated to reduce salinity to a level suitable for drinking water. Desalinization of
the groundwater could remove a significant amount of most or all COPCs. USEPA has set an SMCL
500 mg/L for TDS. Consumption of drinking water with higher levels of TDS has been linked to a variety
of health effects, including heart disease (Schroeder H.A. 1966).
Fate and Transport
Contaminants in soil and waste piles may disperse through the environment by wind (airborne
contaminants), and contaminants in ponds may disperse in surface water. In some instances, breaches of
impoundment berms have resulted in uncontrolled releases of wastewater or sediment from the CWP to
the OWP. Contaminants in sediments and possibly surface soils may be transported to groundwater by
surface water infiltration.
Surface water is present at the Site within the CWP (PRIs 5 and 6) and the OWP (PRI 7), in areas of
surface expression of groundwater seepage or seepage from wastewater ponds, in non-wastewater
earthen ditches such as the Skull Valley Diversion Ditch and Great Salt Lake Intake Canal, and in a
former barrow area in PRI 8 (referred to as the “angel wing”). Historically, there have been occasional
wastewater releases from PRI 6 into the PRI 8 former barrow area, resulting in temporary acidic
conditions in surface water. Wastewater in PRIs 5, 6, and 7 is acidic, with measurements in most samples
at less than 1 standard pH unit. Wastewater releases from PRI 6 into PRI 8 have not occurred since the
installation of an overflow pipe from PRI 5 into PRI 7 in November 2017.
Groundwater in the Great Salt Lake (GSL) basin generally occurs within four types of basin-fill aquifers.
From deepest to shallowest, these aquifers include (1) a deep confined aquifer in central valley areas; (2)
a deep unconfined aquifer adjacent to mountain recharge zones; (3) a shallow unconfined aquifer
overlying the deep confined aquifer; and (4) local perched aquifers (Hely et al. 1971). The shallow
unconfined aquifer, which is generally defined as the uppermost saturated permeable unit within the
unconsolidated lake sediments, extends across the Site from near the bedrock front of the Lakeside
Mountains, eastward into the GSL. In the vicinity of the USM facility and wastewater ponds, the shallow
aquifer comprises (1) an upper unconfined zone (referred to as the UAZ) that occurs from near ground
surface to about 25 to 35 feet below ground surface (bgs); (2) a 10- to 20-foot-thick silty-clay layer
separating upper and deeper shallow zones; and (3) a deeper confined or semi-confined zone below
about 45 to 50 feet bgs (referred to as the LAZ). A planned upgrade to the wastewater evaporation ponds
will include installation of a vertical hydraulic barrier wall to create an RWP. The barrier wall will be keyed
into the silty-clay layer separating the UAZ and LAZ, which will minimize downward migration of
wastewater into the underlying aquifer.
In shallow groundwater underlying the USM facility and associated wastewater ponds, TDS content
significantly exceeds 10,000 mg/L, the threshold the State of Utah designates as Class IV saline
groundwater. Some areas upgradient of the facility, closer to the Lakeside Mountains, are designated as
Class III (limited use) groundwater with TDS concentrations between 5,000 and 10,000 mg/L.
The presence of a deep unconfined aquifer has not been confirmed adjacent to the Lakeside Mountains
recharge zone south of the Site, and no information is available regarding the presence or extent of the

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-11
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
deep confined aquifer in the central valley area. Local perched aquifers at the Site may be present in
association with recharge areas in the Lakeside Mountains and adjoining upland areas, or in association
with the operating facility. These perched aquifers are expected to occur at shallow depth, generally less
than 20 feet bgs to the west of the USM facility and less than 10 feet bgs in the vicinity of the facility and
wastewater ponds.
Groundwater in the UAZ generally flows from southwest to northeast, from a recharge area in the
Lakeside Mountains toward the GSL. A groundwater mound north and northeast of the main operating
facility redirects groundwater outward (north, east, and southeast) from the CWP. These redirected
groundwater flow paths inferred from the potentiometric maps in the Phase 2B Hydro RI Data Report
(ERM 2020) are localized and recover to the more general east-northeastern flow direction as
groundwater flows beyond the margins of the CWP.
Vertical gradients between the uppermost water-bearing zone of the UAZ and the lowermost water-
bearing zone of the UAZ (immediately above the silty-clay layer) were generally very small and positive,
indicating a slight downward gradient. Vertical gradients between the lowermost water-bearing zone of
the UAZ and the uppermost water-bearing zone of the LAZ were generally very small and negative,
indicating a slight upward gradient.
Based on the horizontal groundwater flow directions and an evaluation of groundwater chemistry in the
Phase 2B Hydro RI Data Report, some wells located upgradient and cross-gradient of the wastewater
ponds represent background groundwater conditions:
 MW-25A, MW-34, and PMW-1S in the UAZ
 MW-24B, MW-25B, and PMW-1D in the LAZ
Groundwater Quality
The presence of wastewater indicators (WWIs) in groundwater or surface water provides a line of
evidence to indicate impacts from wastewater. WWIs are intrinsic tracers that are present in wastewater
at the Site, as identified in the OWP/CWP Hydro CSM (ERM 2017b). The WWIs analyzed in the
Phase 2B Hydro RI to assess potential migration of wastewater or impacted groundwater from the
operating facility includes:
1. Trihalomethanes (THMs) - includes the VOCs chloroform, bromoform, chlorodibromomethane, and
dichlorobromomethane
2. HAAs – includes monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic
acid, and dibromoacetic acid
3. Trichloroethene (TCE), a VOC
Of the WWI VOCs analyzed, TCE and chloroform were detected in groundwater more often than the
other compounds. Detections were concentrated in wells near the main operating facility (MW-5A,
MW-20A, PZ-1 and PZ-4) as well as in well PZ-5 along the northern edge of the OWP. Of the WWI HAAs
analyzed, dichloroacetic acid was detected more often than the other HAAs. Distribution of the HAAs
followed patterns of VOCs distribution, but were less pronounced.
Some WWIs were detected in groundwater from the buffer area (PRI Area 15) including trichloroacetic
acid and TCE at UAZ well MW-30A located near the northwest corner of the proposed RWP vertical
barrier wall alignment.
No WWI detections of either of the two main classes (THMs and HAAs) or TCE were reported in
groundwater samples from any LAZ well.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-12
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
B4.2 Receptors Evaluated
The Site will remain industrial for the foreseeable future; as a result, an industrial worker is the only
potential receptor. Groundwater would only be used for a drinking water source; other potential uses are
considered unlikely or would result in negligible additional exposure. Dermal contact with Site
groundwater and exposure to VOCs via inhalation under the hypothetical scenario are considered to be
negligible exposures because in this industrial exposure scenario, groundwater will not be used for
bathing or other activities that would lead to significant exposure via these pathways. As a result, only
risks from the ingestion pathway are quantified and evaluated under a reasonable maximum exposure
scenario. The hypothetical groundwater ingestion scenario for the worker is evaluated using
recommended exposure factors in Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Update of
Standard Default Exposure Factors (USEPA 2014a) and consistent with the Frequently Asked Questions
on Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) Directive 9200.1-120 (USEPA 2015).
These factors are provided in Table B-6.
B4.3 Determination of Representative Exposure Concentrations
An EPC is a COPC-specific and media-specific concentration value used in the dose equation for each
receptor and each exposure pathway. The methods, rationale, and assumptions employed in deriving
EPCs are consistent with USEPA guidance and reflect Site-specific conditions. COPCs in groundwater
are selected on a Site-wide basis; however, EPCs are derived on a well-by-well basis. The BHHRA TM
(ERM 2019) indicated that EPCs would be the recommended 95 percent upper confidence limit on the
mean; but due to limited data per well, EPCs for groundwater are the maximum detected COPC
concentration in each well. This method of EPC selection was also applied to the background wells (listed
in Section B4.1.2).
EPCs are summarized for each aquifer zone in Tables B-7 and B-8.
B4.4 Dose Estimation
Receptor exposures are calculated for groundwater ingestion by calculating a noncancer summary intake
factor (SIF) and a cancer SIF (Attachment 2, Table B2-1). Individual noncancer average daily dose (ADD)
and cancer lifetime average daily dose for each COPC in each well are not presented, as the SIFs are
used in a formula that incorporates the individual well EPC and the associated noncancer or cancer
toxicity value for each COPC. The calculations are consistent with standard dose calculations as
presented in Section 4.5 of the BHHRA TM (ERM 2019).

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-13
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
B5 HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
Toxicity values, when available, are published by the USEPA in the on-line Integrated Risk Information
System (IRIS; USEPA 2021b). Cancer slope factors (in units of reciprocal dose: [milligrams per kilogram
per day, mg/kg-d]-1) are chemical-specific and experimentally derived potency values that are used to
calculate the risk of cancer resulting from exposure to potentially carcinogenic chemicals. A higher value
implies a more potent carcinogenic potential. Reference doses (RfDs) are experimentally derived “no-
effect” levels used to quantify the extent of toxic effects other than cancer due to exposure to chemicals
(in units of mg/kg-d). With RfDs, a lower value implies a more potent toxicant. USEPA’s hierarchy of
sources (USEPA 2003) was followed to select toxicity values. Some chemicals detected in groundwater
at the Site lack agency-derived toxicity values. Surrogate toxicity values were not selected for these
chemicals. The lack of toxicity data for these chemicals is addressed in the Uncertainty Analysis. Toxicity
values used in this appendix are summarized in Table B-9. The treatment of dioxins/furans as a toxic
equivalence with 2,3,7,8-TCDD is described below. In addition, the method of evaluation for lead, which is
not evaluated with an RfD or oral slope factor (SFO), is described below.
B5.1 Evaluation of Dioxins/Furans
Toxicity values developed for 2,3,7,8-TCDD are used to evaluate the exposure to the mixture of dioxins,
furans, and coplanar (dioxin-like) PCBs in media tested at the Site. Concentrations of dioxin, furan, and
PCB congeners in a sample are evaluated as the 2,3,7,8-TCDD TEQ, as described in Section B2.3. Of
the toxicity values used for TEQ risk evaluation, only the RfD is from the USEPA IRIS database (USEPA
2020b). Other toxicity values used in this assessment (reference concentration, SFO, and IUR) were
developed by the California Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment. These values were
selected based on the USEPA hierarchy of sources (USEPA 2003). Although 2,3,7,8-TCDD is classified
as a Group 1 human carcinogen, there is enough uncertainty in the available studies that IRIS has not yet
developed an SFO or IUR. The SFO and IUR developed by the California Environmental Protection
Agency (CalEPA; 2007 and 2011, respectively) both use a “linear dose” model to estimate the toxicity
criteria value. This method has been standard for cancer SFO and IUR development and assumes there
is no dose without some risk of causing cancer. However, it is now understood that an RfD-type approach
(non-linear dose model) may be appropriate for chemicals that cause cancer via a mode of action that is
not mutagenic or genotoxic (USEPA 2005). There is evidence that a non-linear dose model would be
more appropriate for evaluating TCDD cancer risks, and that use of a linear dose model may
overestimate risks (Simon et al 2009).
B5.2 Evaluation of Lead
Lead is assessed differently from most other COPCs. Extensive information is available regarding the
health effects of exposure to lead, and the effects database is largely based on blood-lead
concentrations. USEPA has not developed traditional RfD toxicity criteria for lead risk assessment,
primarily because a threshold for toxic effects in mammals has not been established. Lead is a COPC in
groundwater, and the only exposure pathway is ingestion in an industrial setting. Risk from lead in
groundwater is evaluated by comparing groundwater well concentrations to the Maximum Contaminant
Level (MCL) of 15 micrograms per liter.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-14
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
B6 RISK CHARACTERIZATION
Risk characterization integrates the exposure assessment with the selected measures of toxicity (toxicity
assessment). The cancer risk and/or noncancer hazard is calculated for each COPC in groundwater for
the hypothetical exposure of ingestion for drinking water while working.
Cancer risks and noncancer health hazards are characterized separately. The cancer risk is defined as
“the risk, or theoretical probability of developing cancer from that chemical upon exposure to that
medium” (California Environmental Protection Agency 1994). An incremental lifetime cancer risk (ILCR) is
calculated for compounds identified as probable human carcinogens. The cancer SIF is multiplied by the
SFO to derive a Unit ILCR (Attachment 2, Table B2-1). The Unit ILCR is multiplied by the EPC for each
COPC in each well to derive the ILCR for that COPC in that well. Cancer risks for different chemicals are
assumed to be additive, and individual ILCRs are summed to provide the total ILCR in each well. Per
USEPA guidance (USEPA 1991), the ILCR range of 1  10-6 to 1  10-4 is the range within which the
USEPA strives to manage risks. Although 1  10-4 is generally used as the upper boundary, it is not a
discrete line; ILCR results slightly greater than 1  10-4 may be considered protective, and certain
situations may warrant management of risks that are less than 1  10-4.
Noncancer adverse health effects are estimated by calculating a hazard quotient (HQ) for each
noncancer COPC. As was done for the ILCR calculation, the noncancer SIF is multiplied by the RfD to
derive a Unit HQ (Attachment 2, Table B2-1). The Unit HQ is multiplied by the EPC for each COPC in
each well to derive the HQ for that COPC in that well. The individual HQs are summed across all COPCs
in each well, and this sum is the hazard index (HI). If the HI that includes all COPCs and all exposure
pathways is less than or equal to 1, further characterization of noncancer risk is not necessary. For any HI
that exceeds 1, the potential for adverse health effects may be further evaluated by considering the target
organs upon which each chemical could have an adverse effect, in which case the target organ specific
HIs will be summed for all relevant COPCs. The segregation of HI by target organ is consistent with
USEPA guidance for noncarcinogens, including metals (USEPA 1989, 2001b, 2005). Unlike carcinogenic
risk estimates, a hazard quotient is not expressed as a probability. Therefore, while both cancer and
noncancer risk characterizations indicate a relative potential for adverse effects to occur from exposure to
a chemical, a noncancer adverse health effect estimate is not directly comparable with a cancer risk
estimate.
SIFs and EPCs for the UAZ and LAZ are presented in Attachment 2, Tables B2-1, B2-2, and B2-3,
respectively. The individual HQs and HIs for each well are presented in Table B2-4 for UAZ wells and
Table B2-5 for LAZ wells, and percent contributions of the primary COPC drivers are shown. The
individual and summed ILCRs for each well are presented in Table B2-6 for UAZ wells and Table B2-7 for
LAZ wells, and percent contributions of the primary COPC drivers are shown.
For purposes of risk assessment, the HI and ILCR are the risk levels attributed to exposure to the COPCs
present at the Site and are independent of non-Site-related risks, which is considered to be “total
background” risk. Risk estimates presented here include both Site-related and background risks. To
understand how background concentrations contribute to overall risk estimates, risks for background
wells (located upgradient and cross-gradient of the wastewater ponds, as discussed in Section B4.1.2)
were also estimated. HIs and ILCRs for the background wells with data not significantly affected by
laboratory dilution indicate the contribution of background conditions to the risks seen in Site wells.
Note that the lowest TDS concentrations in background wells exceed the SMCL for TDS by an order of
magnitude. Over much of the Site, TDS exceeds the SMCL by two to three orders of magnitude (ERM
2020). Tables B-10 (UAZ) and B-11 (LAZ) provide a summary of the HIs and ILCRs for groundwater
exposure for workers at the Site and the COPCs that are the main contributors to noncancer and cancer
risk. The maximum TDS for each well is also shown.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-15
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
B6.1 Upper Aquifer Zone
The estimated noncancer HI for a hypothetical human receptor exposed to groundwater from UAZ wells if
the exposure pathway were complete would range from 0.4 (MW-8B) to 70 (MW-20A), and many would
be greater than an HI of 1. Arsenic, iron, and fluoride are the main COPCs that contribute to the HI;
however, additional chemicals also exceed an individual HQ value of 1 and, therefore, could present a
health concern. Laboratory dilution of some samples resulted in some key contributors to the HI being
reported as nondetected, as noted below.
 In MW-8B, fluoride was not detected as a result of sample dilution by the laboratory, and arsenic
was detected at a low concentration.
 In MW-29A, several metals were not detected as a result of sample dilution by the laboratory, and
when detected, arsenic was present at a low concentration.
 Arsenic was also not detected due to sample dilution in samples from background location PMW-1S.
Noncancer Hazards in Upper Aquifer Zone
Figure 6-1 shows the distribution of HIs in UAZ wells as well as the approximate RWP barrier wall
alignment. The HI is driven by concentrations of arsenic (up to 86 percent, 25 percent of HI on average);
fluoride (up to 74 percent, 29 percent of HI on average); and manganese (up to 48 percent, 23 percent of
HI on average). Other less frequent but sometimes significant contributors to the HI include cobalt (up to
23 percent of total), iron (up to 77 percent of total), and thallium (up to 25 percent of total). These are all
naturally occurring constituents in groundwater that are not USM facility process byproducts. If workers
used Site groundwater for drinking water, the groundwater noncancer hazard would exceed an HI of 1 in
many locations, as follows.
 The two background wells without dilution issues (MW-25A and MW-34) would have HIs of 3 and 2,
respectively, driven by arsenic (47 percent of total, on average) and fluoride (41 percent of total, on
average).
 The HI for wells outside and west of the RWP area without dilution issues (MW-18, MW-20A,
MW-20B, and MW-31), which are around the main plant and outside the RWP barrier wall alignment,
range from 5 to 73. The HI of 73 in MW-20A is driven by an anomalously high iron concentration.
The other iron concentrations reported for MW-20A are less than half of the maximum concentration,
and the maximum HI for MW-20A using the next highest iron concentration would be 41.
 The HI for wells outside and north of the RWP barrier wall alignment (MW-24A, MW-26, MW-27,
MW-28, and MW-30A) range from 2 (MW-28) to 44 (MW-30A), primarily driven by arsenic, fluoride,
and manganese. MW-30A also has an unusually high iron result and the highest arsenic
concentration seen in Site wells, both seen in the Phase 2B Event 4 sample.
 HIs for the westernmost wells inside the proposed RWP area (PZ-24 and PZ-16 are the easternmost
in the group, Figure B-2) would generally range from 2 to 23, driven by arsenic, fluoride, manganese,
and sometimes iron. The highest HIs generally correspond to the highest TDS concentrations seen
in the group (greater than 150,000). The HI for MW-8B (0.4) is artificially low due to the lack of
detected arsenic resulting from sample dilution.
 The wells along the eastern boundary of PRIs 5 and 6 and along the barrier wall alignment would
have HIs ranging from 6 to 22, driven by arsenic, fluoride, and manganese, with contributions from
cobalt, iron, and dichloroacetic acid in some wells.
Lead was detected in four UAZ wells; in three wells, the maximum detected lead concentration exceeds
the lead MCL (15 micrograms per liter).

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-16
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
Cancer Risk in Upper Aquifer Zone
The distribution of ILCRs in UAZ wells is shown on Figure 6-1. If workers used Site groundwater for
drinking water, only six of the 42 wells would have an ILCR within the risk management range of 10-4 to
10-6. The majority of the ILCR is due to arsenic (84 percent on average), a naturally occurring constituent
in groundwater. As noted above, arsenic was not detected in some samples due to laboratory dilution,
and the potential ILCRs are lower than surrounding locations where arsenic was detected.
 The two background wells without dilution issues (MW-25A and MW-34) would have ILCRs of 2 
10-4, exceeding the risk management range. The ILCR is 100 percent driven by arsenic.
 The ILCR for wells outside and west of the RWP area without dilution issues (MW-18, MW-20A,
MW-20B, and MW-31), which are around the main plant outside the RWP barrier wall alignment,
would have ILCRs ranging from 3  10-4 (MW-20A) to 5  10-4 (MW-20B), mainly driven by arsenic
with contribution from vinyl chloride in MW-20A.
 ILCRs for wells outside and north of the RWP barrier wall alignment (MW-24A, MW-26, MW-27,
MW-28, and MW-30A) would range from 1  10-4 to 1  10-3, all driven by arsenic.
 The ILCRs for the westernmost wells inside the proposed RWP area would have ILCRs ranging from
4  10-5 to 2  10-3, with 13 wells exceeding the risk management range. The ILCRs are mainly
driven by arsenic, except in MW-6, where vinyl chloride contributes 73 percent of the ILCR.
 The wells along the eastern boundary of PRIs 5 and 6 and along the barrier wall alignment would
have ILCRs ranging from 2  10-4 to 1  10-3, all exceeding the risk management range. Arsenic
contributes 10 to 100 percent of the ILCR. Wells with lesser arsenic contributions have significant
contributions (20 percent or more) from HAAs, and occasionally from THMs (up to 15 percent).
Upper Aquifer Zone Summary
As noted, high TDS concentrations upgradient of and within the wastewater pond areas make the
groundwater unusable as drinking water. As TDS increases across the Site from the southwest
(upgradient in the Lakeside Mountains) to the northeast (beneath the wastewater ponds and with
increasing proximity to the GSL), noncancer and cancer risk estimates would also increase, and some of
the main HI drivers (fluoride, arsenic, manganese, and iron) are associated with higher salinity. Arsenic is
always a significant contributor to the ILCR; where the ILCR exceeds the risk management range,
additional contributors are HAAs and THMs, which are wastewater indicators.
B6.2 Lower Aquifer Zone
As noted for some UAZ samples, laboratory dilution of some LAZ samples resulted in the main contributor
to noncancer and cancer risk (arsenic) being reported as nondetected.
 In MW 30B, arsenic was not detected due to sample dilution.
 Arsenic was also not detected due to sample dilution in all samples from background locations MW-
25B and PMW-1D.
Noncancer Hazards in Lower Aquifer Zone
For the hypothetical worker drinking water scenario, the estimated noncancer HI in LAZ wells without
dilution issues would range from 1 (MW-2) to 3 (MW-9). HIs in MW-9, MW-22B, and MW-32B would
exceed an HI of 1. These three wells are along the RWP barrier wall alignment or at the eastern edge of
the CWP. Arsenic and fluoride are the main contributors to the HI. The HI for the one background well not
affected by sample dilution issues, MW-24B, is 1.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-17
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
Lead concentrations do not exceed the MCL in any LAZ sample.
Cancer Risk in Lower Aquifer Zone
The ILCR in LAZ wells would range from 8  10-5 (MW-29B) to 3  10-4 (MW-22B) in wells without dilution
issues. Three of these five LAZ wells would have ILCRs that exceed 1  10-4, the upper end of the risk
management range, all driven by arsenic. Background location MW-24B would have an ILCR of 1  10-4,
which indicates the ILCR is due to natural background levels of arsenic.
Lower Aquifer Zone Summary
Similar to the UAZ, cancer risk increases with higher TDS. The TDS concentrations in the LAZ, which
appears to be unimpacted by Site operations, increases along the gradient from the Lakeside Mountains
toward the GSL, indicating that a significant portion of the UAZ HIs and ILCRs may be related to naturally
occurring concentrations of arsenic, other metals, and fluoride.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-18
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
B7 UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
Risk estimates are values that have uncertainties associated with them. These uncertainties, which arise
at every step of a risk assessment, are evaluated to provide an indication to risk managers of the relative
degree of uncertainty associated with a risk estimate. Some sources of uncertainty may be evaluated
quantitatively, while others are discussed qualitatively.
A risk assessment is not intended to quantify actual risks to receptors as a result of theoretical chemical
exposures. In fact, estimating actual risks is impossible because of the variability in the exposed or
potentially exposed populations. Therefore, risk assessment is a means of estimating the theoretical
upper-bound probability that an adverse health effect (e.g., cancer, impaired reproduction) might occur in
a receptor as a result of either actual or assumed chemical exposures. The multitude of conservative
assumptions inherent in the risk assessment process guards against underestimation of risks.
Risk estimates are calculated by combining site data, assumptions about individual receptor’s exposures
to impacted media, and toxicity information. The uncertainties in this risk evaluation can be grouped into
five main categories that correspond to these steps:
1. Uncertainties in environmental sampling and analyses
2. Uncertainties in preparation of the data for risk characterization
3. Uncertainties in selection of COPCs
4. Uncertainties in assumptions concerning exposure scenarios
5. Uncertainties in toxicity data and dose response extrapolations
B7.1 Uncertainty in Environmental Sampling and Analyses
The environmental sampling conducted at the Site is one source of uncertainty in this risk evaluation. This
risk evaluation relies on the sampling results obtained from the phased RI investigations conducted at the
Site. Sampling was performed according to agency-approved standard operating procedures
incorporated into the SAP prepared for each investigation phase, reducing the level of uncertainty. Field
quality control procedures were documented and tracked throughout each phase to confirm they were
completed. Errors in site investigation results can arise from the field sampling methods, laboratory
analyses, and data analyses. Although a large amount of sampling was conducted over several years,
project quality and assurance procedures identified very few errors in sampling and analyses. Careful
tracking of sampling and quality control activities supports the assumption that few, if any, additional
unidentified issues occurred, and the data generated are deemed appropriate for use in Site decision
making.
Errors in laboratory analysis procedures are usually found during data review and validation, and data
that do not meet data quality standards established in the quality assurance project plan incorporated into
each SAP (data qualified as “R”/rejected) are not included in the risk assessment dataset.
Because Site water samples are generally high in salt and often acidic, higher levels of interference occur
in laboratory analyses of Site samples than are typical in low TDS (e.g., potable) water quality samples. A
DMA was conducted for solids and water analyses (ERM 2013a) to test adjustments to the analytical
methods and improve data quality. As described in the DMA TM (ERM 2013a), several project-specific
techniques were incorporated into a set of laboratory work instructions for inclusion in the SAP for each
sampling phase. These techniques allowed for adjustments to be made for high concentration samples as
well as different cleanup and analytical techniques for improved quantitation of SVOCs, metals,
perchlorate, and anions. Even with these sampling and analytical adjustments, interferences were
common due to the salinity of Site groundwater, and some samples were diluted to the extent that

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-19
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
common COPCs such as arsenic and fluoride were not detected, including in some background wells. As
discussed in the risk characterization, risk is underestimated in several background wells due to sample
dilution, likely due to high salinity of the samples. Risk levels in background wells with limited nondetects
related to dilution are considered representative of background risk.
B7.2 Uncertainty in Data Preparation
Most COPCs were evaluated using data reported by the laboratory without any manipulation. One COPC,
TEQ, is a calculated value that modifies the concentration of 17 reported dioxin and furan congeners and
12 reported coplanar PCB congeners by applying a congener-specific TEF (developed by the World
Health Organization in 2005 and summarized in USEPA 2010). TEFs are estimates of the toxicity of
dioxin-like compounds relative to the toxicity of 2,3,7,8-TCDD, which is assigned a TEF of 1.0. As noted in
USEPA (2010), there are uncertainties associated with the development and application of TEFs:
 Expert scientific judgment was used to select the dioxin-like compounds (DLCs) included in the
approach and to derive the TEFs, but not all anthropogenic DLCs identified are included.
 The kinds of information available for comparing responses to individual DLCs to the index
compound (2,3,7,8-TCDD) are highly variable across chemicals and studies (both in vivo using
different species and in vitro).
 Different methods are used to calculate relative potency of DLCs across the studies, and the TEFs
developed by the World Health Organization in 2005 (based on van den Berg et al. 2006) are not
central tendency estimates; instead they are assigned based on professional judgment.
The question of how to incorporate DLCs that were not detected in a sample into the TEQ is addressed in
the groundwater evaluation by calculating the TEQ two ways: substituting 0 for the nondetect DLC and
substituting one-half the detection limit of the nondetect DLC and summing. The effect of the substitution
method on the TEQ is discussed in Section B7.4.2.2.
B7.3 Uncertainty in Constituents of Potential Concern Selection and Refinement
COPCs were selected on a PRI Area basis using Site-wide groundwater data, as described in
Section B3.1. Refinement of COPC selection was then conducted because of laboratory and field blank
contamination for some COPCs at concentrations near or above sample concentrations. Uncertainty can
arise at a number of steps during this process, which are evaluated below.
Constituents of Potential Concern Selection
COPC selection incorporates the identification of human receptors of concern, an assessment of
exposure pathways, and selection of RBSLs. The approach for COPC selection was outlined in the SLRA
TM (ERM 2014) and applied in the OU-1 SLRA (ERM 2017). Because additional groundwater data were
collected after the SLRA, COPC selection was updated and refined in this groundwater evaluation.
Only one hypothetical receptor is evaluated for groundwater, the worker using Site groundwater as
drinking water. Groundwater ingestion is the only pathway evaluated, and it is unlikely to ever be
complete. Selection of RBSLs was based on this pathway.
There are inherent uncertainties in these steps, and the main sources of uncertainty are discussed in the
following subsections.
Selection of Risk-Based Screening Levels
As described in Section B3.1 and based on the SLRA TM, the USEPA Tap Water RSLs (USEPA 2020)
were used in COPC selection. A residential exposure scenario is used to derive the Tap Water RSLs, and

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-20
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
a higher ingestion rate is assumed than the default worker ingestion rate used in this evaluation. Because
greater exposure is assumed in calculating the RSLs than is assumed for the hypothetical worker
receptor, it is possible that some constituents selected as COPCs would not be selected if the RBSLs
were Site-specific, and it is less likely that constituents were not selected as COPCs when they should
have been.
Although an RSL is not established for TDS, TDS concentrations were compared to the SMCL in the
screening step (Section B3.1). All groundwater TDS measurements at the Site, including in background
wells in both aquifer zones, exceed the SMCL. In fact, the lowest TDS concentrations measured in
groundwater, whether in the UAZ or LAZ, are an order of magnitude greater than the SMCL for TDS,
indicating none of the groundwater at or upgradient of the Site is suitable for use.
The RBSLs for two VOCs (bromochloromethane and chloromethane) are based on inhalation exposure
from activities such as showering, laundering, and dish washing (USEPA 2020a). These activities are
assumed to occur at a minimal level, if any, in this worker scenario, and any inhalation exposure would be
negligible. Toxicity data are not available to evaluate them for oral exposure. Bromochloromethane and
chloromethane were not retained as COPCs which has little to no effect on the risk estimates.
Constituents Lacking Screening Values
Several constituents analyzed in groundwater lack sufficient toxicity data to develop an RBSL. Most of
these constituents are never, or rarely, detected in groundwater, as shown in Table B-12 and summarized
below. In groundwater, 18 analytes lack an RBSL:
 Seven are SVOCs that were not detected in any groundwater sample
 Three are PAHs (benzo(g,h,i)perylene, phenanthrene, and acenaphthylene) and all were detected in
one or more groundwater sample
 Three are HAAs that were frequently detected, as they are process byproducts
 The remaining four analytes are anions (bromide, chloride, sulfate, and orthophosphate) that are
frequently detected, as they are present in GSL water
Most of the analytes that lack RBSLs were never or rarely detected in Site samples and would not
contribute to the risk characterization. Two other HAAs detected at the Site (dichloroacetic acid and
trichloroacetic acid) have toxicity data and are included in the quantitative risk assessment. PAHs
generally are not detected at the Site and are not related to Site processes. Anions are naturally occurring
in saline waters.
Analytical Sensitivity
MRLs are laboratory quantitation limits that are adjusted to reflect sample-specific factors such as dilution,
use of a smaller sample aliquot for analysis, or for matrix interference. The MRL is the minimum
concentration at which an analyte can be accurately and reproducibly quantified. The MDL is defined as
the minimum concentration of an analyte that can be routinely identified using a specific method, but
there is less certainty in the accuracy of quantitation below the MRL. Where possible, MRLs are used in
risk assessment data evaluations because they “take into account sample characteristics, sample
preparation, and analytical adjustments” (USEPA 1989). For this RI, concentrations were reported to
MDLs to achieve greater sensitivity (though increased uncertainty in some results) for risk assessment
purposes.
MRLs below screening values are ideal, providing the risk assessor with a higher degree of certainty in
identifying COPCs and appropriately estimating media exposure concentrations for the risk calculations.
In the SAP that was prepared for each RI phase, the MRL and MDL were compared to the RBSL for each

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-21
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
analyte in each method for each matrix. The nature of many groundwater samples collected at the Site
required sample dilution and cleanup procedures, and this affected quantitation limits such that those
listed in the SAP were not met in a number of samples. Sometimes, sample MDLs were less than the
RBSL when the MRL was not.
Table B-13 summarizes the detection limit comparison for groundwater analyses, which indicates there
are 23 constituents whose maximum MDL exceeds its RBSL. For five of the 23 constituents, the minimum
MDL is less than the RBSL. These five constituents are unlikely to be present in groundwater as they
were not identified as COPCs in any matrix in the OU-1 BHHRA (ERM 2021b). Comparing MDLs the
laboratory expected to achieve (Phase 1A SAP, USEPA 2013) to the RBSLs indicates that the analytical
methods are unlikely to meet the RBSL for these constituents. As a result, there is potential for an
underestimation of risk due to the lack of sufficient analytical sensitivity in available analytical methods.
Although sample matrices affected analytical sensitivity in many samples, the RBSL was met by the MRL
and/or MDL in at least some samples for most analytes in groundwater, and sensitivity was generally
sufficient to provide confidence in COPC selection.
COPC Refinement
The COPC refinement process entails the comparison of detected sample concentrations to those in
laboratory and field blanks associated with the sample. As discussed in Section B3.2, blank
contamination affected only a few constituents and few were eliminated from a dataset. Nondetects did
affect the dataset for some constituents detected in one or more wells. The effect of some samples
changing to nondetect in a dataset, but some detects remaining, does not significantly affect the
magnitude of the EPC, because EPCs are the maximum concentration detected in each well. Review of
the sample data compared to blank results indicates that in many cases, the sample concentration is less
than the blank concentration or is within two times the blank concentration. Eliminating these results that
are less than or similar to associated blank results reduces the uncertainty in the data used for EPC
selection.
B7.4 Uncertainty in Exposure Assessment
Uncertainties can arise from the types of exposures examined, the points of potential human exposure,
the concentrations of COPCs at the points of human exposure, and the intake assumptions. The risks
calculated depend largely on the assumptions used to calculate the rate of COPC intake.
Uncertainties in Selection of Receptors, Exposure Pathways, and
Exposure Parameters
For the hypothetical groundwater ingestion pathway, only one receptor is applicable to this scenario.
Because there is no residential use of the land and no foreseeable residential use, the only applicable
receptor is a worker at an industrial facility. Based on this receptor scenario of a worker using
groundwater for drinking water, the likely exposure pathway of ingestion is evaluated. For highly volatile
chemicals (those that boil at or below room temperature or are a gas at room temperature), some
inhalation exposure could occur whenever a tap is turned on. However, the amount of gas released would
be small as no prolonged water use is assumed to occur (e.g., bathing, dish washing), and the duration of
exposure would be short.
Therefore, using default exposure parameters from USEPA guidance for worker water ingestion is
protective of this receptor in the unlikely scenario that groundwater would be desalinated, without any
removal of COPCs, and used for drinking.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-22
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
Exposure Concentrations
As a conservative assumption, individuals will be exposed to a consistent COPC concentration in drinking
water throughout the exposure period. For this evaluation of the hypothetical use of groundwater as
drinking water, risk based on using each well as the drinking water source was evaluated. Noting that all
TDS concentrations, including background concentrations in both the UAZ and LAZ, are an order of
magnitude higher than the SMCL for drinking water, none of the wells are suitable for use.
Estimating EPCs
In estimating EPCs, the maximum detected concentration is typically used when the variability in the data
is high and sample numbers are low, or, when there are few detects for a COPC. In groundwater, the
maximum detected concentration in each well for each detected COPC was selected as the EPC, as
there generally were not sufficient detects to derive the 95 percent upper confidence limit on the mean.
The use of maximum concentrations may overestimate the risk from the hypothetical exposure in wells
with quarterly monitoring results. In some wells, only one measurement is available and is used for the
EPC. It is possible that additional measurements would indicate higher or lower concentrations
seasonally or over extended time.
TEQ EPC Selection
As described in Section B2.2, mammalian TEQs were calculated two ways in each groundwater sample
included in the groundwater evaluation: substituting 0 (TEQ [ND=0]) and substituting one-half the
detection limit (TEQ [ND=1/2DL]) for nondetected DLCs. EPCs were developed for both TEQ datasets,
and the EPCs were compared to evaluate the variation between the values. Table B-14 provides a
comparison of the two sets of EPCs for groundwater.
Generally, the TEQ (ND=1/2DL) EPC is higher than the TEQ (ND=0) EPC. Given the chemical and
physical properties of dioxin, furan, and PCB congeners, they have very low solubility and are not
frequently detected in aqueous samples. Using a default concentration of one-half the detection limit for
nondetected congeners results in a highly uncertain value for the ND=1/2DL EPC. The ND=0 EPC has
significantly less uncertainty and is a better estimation of the EPC. Although the maximum TEQ ND=0
value for each well is used in the risk calculations, TEQ contributes very little to the overall HI and ILCR
as compared to other COPCs such as arsenic, fluoride, THMs, and HAAs. This is true whether the TEQ
(ND=0) or TEQ (ND=1/2DL) is used, even when the calculated TEQ EPCs are very different.
B7.5 Uncertainty in Toxicity Assessment
The availability and quality of toxicological data is a source of uncertainty in the risk evaluation.
Uncertainties associated with animal and human studies influence the toxicity criteria. Extrapolation of
toxicological data from animal tests is one of the largest sources of uncertainty in a risk assessment.
There may be important, but unidentified, differences in uptake, metabolism, and distribution of chemicals
in the body between the test animal species and humans.
Typically, animals are administered doses of a chemical in a standard diet or in air that are higher than
would be experienced in an environmental setting. In these studies, animals, usually laboratory rodents,
are exposed daily to the chemical agent for various periods of time up to their 2-year lifetimes. Humans
have an average 70-year lifetime and may be exposed either intermittently or regularly for an exposure
period ranging from months to a full lifetime. Humans may be exposed to much lower doses in a highly
variable diet, which may affect the toxicity of the chemical. Because of these differences, it is not
surprising that extrapolation error is a large source of uncertainty in a risk assessment.
For the most part, these uncertainties are addressed through use of conservative assumptions in
establishing values for RfDs and SFOs, which results in the likelihood that the risk is overestimated.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-23
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
Fluoride is a significant contributor to noncancer risk in most wells; however, its toxicity value is based on
exposure to children, and this scenario includes only adult workers. The RfD for fluoride is derived from a
study examining the effects of children ingesting fluoride in their drinking water. The RfD was determined
via a point of departure associated with dental fluorosis, which can cause brown to black staining and
pitting of developing teeth that primarily occurs in children up to eight years old (USEPA 2021b). Of the
health impacts that may be of concern to a hypothetical adult worker, the most severe outcome is skeletal
fluorosis, which is characterized by pain and stiffness in the joints. This effect is associated with an ADD
greater than 0.28 mg/kg-d (USEPA 2021b); the ADD for a worker ingesting 1.25 liters of drinking water
per day containing 40 mg/L of fluoride (highest concentration in groundwater at the Site) would be
0.43 mg/kg-d, corresponding to an HQ of 2. All other fluoride concentrations in wells on the Site would
result in an HQ of 1 or less. Fluoride is a noncancer risk driver in many wells; however, because risk of
adverse health effects on adults occurs at higher doses than would occur from the highest Site
groundwater concentration, the risk from fluoride is overestimated.
B7.6 Risk Characterization
The uncertainties discussed in the previous sections contribute to the uncertainty in the risk
characterization results. Additionally, discerning the portion of risk from Site-related impacts and the
portion from naturally occurring concentrations is important, to the extent possible. Risk calculations are
developed using groundwater data from Site wells. Some of the wells included in the evaluation are
located upgradient or cross-gradient of the USM facility and are assumed to represent naturally occurring
(background) concentrations. Three UAZ and four LAZ wells were determined to represent background
groundwater conditions (listed in Section B6), based on the evaluation in the Draft Phase 2B Hydro
Remedial Investigation Data Report (ERM 2020).
 Arsenic is the main risk driver in the two UAZ background wells without dilution issues (MW-25A and
MW-34) that exceed both a noncancer risk of 1 as well as the cancer risk management range of 10-6
to 10-4. Noncancer and cancer risk levels in many of the Site wells are less than or similar to those in
MW-25A and MW-34.
 Arsenic is the main risk driver in the LAZ background well without dilution issues (MW-24B); cancer
risk in this well is at the upper end of the cancer risk management range (1 x 10-4).
This suggests that naturally occurring concentrations of arsenic present in Site wells contribute
significantly to the cancer risk levels. Although arsenic groundwater concentrations are higher in Site
wells than in background wells, concentrations of many inorganic constituents measured (metals and
anions) generally increase with increasing TDS as proximity to the GSL increases.
B7.7 Summary of Uncertainty Analysis
There are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating exposures and the resulting risks at a site. In
most cases, when assumptions were made in the groundwater evaluation, they lead to an overestimate of
risks. As discussed in detail in previous sections, some factors are significant when evaluating the effects
of decisions made to address the uncertainties in this risk assessment. Two assumptions in particular are
significant:
 Assuming that the groundwater is usable for drinking water, and that even if the TDS concentrations
were addressed (i.e., treated to desalinate the groundwater), COPC concentrations in groundwater
would not be reduced
 Assuming a worker would be exposed to the maximum COPC concentration detected in a well over
the entire exposure period of 25 years.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-24
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
B8 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
This groundwater risk evaluation assesses the noncancer and cancer risk to workers under the
hypothetical exposure scenario where Site groundwater is used as drinking water. Groundwater could not
be used as a drinking water source unless it could be desalinated, as the natural TDS concentrations are
too high. Significant findings are summarized below.
B8.1 Noncancer Risk Summary
Noncancer risk as represented by the HI exceeds 1 in all 39 UAZ wells (including background wells) and
three of the five LAZ wells without sample dilution issues. The HI for the LAZ background well is 1.
The HI tends to increase with increased salinity (TDS) along the gradient from the Lakeside Mountains
(upgradient) toward the GSL, which corresponds to increased concentrations of the main contributors to
the HI: in the UAZ, arsenic, manganese, and fluoride (average contribution of 25 percent, 23 percent, and
29 percent, respectively); in the LAZ, arsenic and fluoride are the main contributors (averaging 60 percent
and 33 percent, respectively). The range of HIs is similar among the groups of wells (outside the RWP, in
western area of the RWP, and in the eastern area); however, closer to the GSL, contributions to the
noncancer risk is somewhat less dominated by arsenic, with greater contributions from fluoride and
manganese.
B8.2 Cancer Risk Summary
The ILCR for the worker is greater than 1 x 10-4 in 33 of the 39 UAZ wells and in three of the five LAZ
wells without sample dilution issues. Arsenic dominates the contribution to the ILCR (greater than 80
percent in all but three wells) in the area outside the RWP and in the western area of the RWP. In six of
the 12 more eastern wells, arsenic contributes more than 70 percent of the ILCR. In the other six wells in
this area, HAAs make up 41 to 75 percent of the ILCR, with THMs contributing up to 15 percent.
B8.3 Conclusions
Risk characterization results indicate that noncancer hazards are at or above 1 in all wells without sample
dilution issues, and cancer risks are greater than the risk management range for all but eight wells in the
UAZ and LAZ combined. For most UAZ wells upgradient and outside the RWP area, arsenic is the most
significant driver of the ILCR; while inside the RWP area, organics including THMs and HAAs frequently
contribute to the ILCR.
Hazard Indices in background wells and LAZ wells (assumed to be unimpacted by Site operations) are at
or above an HI of 1 due to arsenic and fluoride concentrations. Similarly, arsenic concentrations in
background and LAZ wells contribute to ILCRs that are at or above the upper end of the risk management
range. These results indicate that although Site groundwater quality in the UAZ is likely affected by
COPCs present in the wastewater ponds, increased noncancer and cancer risk along the gradient from
the Lakeside Mountains is driven at least partially by naturally occurring concentrations of arsenic that
increase with proximity to the GSL.
Groundwater quality is unacceptable for drinking water due to the high TDS (at least an order of
magnitude greater than the SMCL in both the UAZ and LAZ). TDS is made up of relatively high
concentrations of arsenic, manganese, fluoride, and other inorganic constituents that present
unacceptable risk to the worker if this groundwater were to be used for drinking water.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-25
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
REFERENCES
B9 REFERENCES
Baskin, R.L. and Allen, D.V. 2005. Bathymetric Map of the South Part of Great Salt Lake, Utah. U.S.
Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 2894.
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 1994. Preliminary Endangerment Assessment
Guidance Manual. Revised October 2015.
ERM-West, Inc. (ERM). 2014. Final Screening Level Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum. July.
ERM. 2016.2014b. Final Screening Level Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum. July.
ERM. 2015. Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report Final. August.
ERM. 2015a. Phase 1 Human Exposure Survey Report Final. August.
ERM. 2016a. Final Phase 1A Data Report for PRI Areas 2 and 8 through 17. March.
ERM. 2016b. Final Phase 1A Data Report for Operable Unit 2 – Air. October.
ERM. 2016c. Final Phase 1A-B Remedial Investigation Data Report. October.
ERM. 2017. Final OU-1 Screening-Level Risk Assessment Report. April.
ERM. 2017b. Final Old Waste Pond/Current Waste Pond Area Hydrologic Conceptual Site Model. April.
ERM. 2018. Proposed Revisions to Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical Memo Revisions
and Notes of 22 February Call. April.
ERM. 2019. Revised Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum,
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study, US Magnesium Site, Rowley, Utah. March.
ERM. 2020. Draft Phase 2B Hydro Remedial Investigation Data Report. May.
ERM. 2021a. Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment for Chlorine and Hydrogen Chloride in Air.
April.
ERM. 2021b. OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment - Draft. May.
Hely, A.G., R.W. Mower, and C.A. Horr. 1971. Water Resources of Salt Lake County, Utah. Utah
Department of Natural Resources Technical Publication No. 31, 244 p.
Schroeder H.A. 1966. Schroeder H.A. Municipal Drinking Water and Cardiovascular Death Rates. J. Am.
Med. Assoc. 1966; 195:81–85. doi: 10.1001/jama.1966.03100020069016.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance for
Superfund: Volume I—Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part A). Interim Final. Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. USEPA/540/1-89/002. December.
USEPA. 1991. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume I- Human Health Evaluation Manual
(Part B, Development of Risk-based Preliminary Remediation Goals). EPA540/R-92/003.
December.
USEPA. 2001a. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume III - Part A, Process for Conducting
Probabilistic Risk Assessment. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C.
Publication 9285.7-45. December.
USEPA. 2001b. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume I Human Health Evaluation Manual—
Part D, Standardized Planning, Reporting, and Review of Superfund Risk Assessments. Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. Publication 9285.7-47. December.

www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page B-26
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE BHHRA, APPENDIX B – GROUNDWATER BHHRA
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
REFERENCES
USEPA. 2003. Memorandum on Human Health Toxicity Values in Superfund Risk Assessments, from
Michael B. Cook, Director, Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation to
Superfund Remediation Policy Managers, Regions 1-10, dated 5 December. OSWER Directive
9285.7-53.
USEPA. 2005. Human Health Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities.
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington D.C. EPA530-R-05-006.
September.
USEPA. 2010. Recommended Toxicity Equivalence Factors (TEFs) for Human Health Risk Assessments
of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds. EPA/100/R-10/005. Risk
Assessment Forum. Washington, D.C.
USEPA. 2011a. Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study. CERCLA Docket No. CERCLA-08-2011-0013.
USEPA. 2011b. Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Chlorinated
Dioxin/Furan Data Review. EPA-540-R-11-016. September.
USEPA. 2013. Phase 1A Remedial Investigation Sampling and Analysis Plan to Identify Chemicals of
Potential Concern in Solids, Sediment, Solid Waste, Water and Air, and Receptor Surveys,
Revision 0 for PRI Areas 2 and 8 through 17. September.
USEPA. 2014a. OSWER Directive 9200.1-120. Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental
Guidance: Update of Standard Default Exposure Factors. February.
USEPA. 2014b. National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Organic Methods Data Review (SOM02.2).
OSWER 9355.0-132. EPA 540-R-014-002. August.
USEPA. 2015. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Update of Standard Default Exposure Factors.
OSWER Directive 9285.6-03. (Originally dated February 6, 2014; FAQs updated September 14,
2015.)
USEPA. 2016. Administrative Order on Consent. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Docket No. RCRA-08-2016-004.
USEPA. 2020a. Regional Screening Levels. USEPA on-line database: https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-
screening-levels-rsls. November.
USEPA. 2020b. Integrated Risk Information System. USEPA on-line database: https://www.epa.gov/iris.
USEPA. 2021a. National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations. https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/secondary-
drinking-water-standards-guidance-nuisance-chemicals
USEPA. 2021b. Integrated Risk Information System. USEPA on-line database: https://www.epa.gov/iris.
van den Berg, M., L.S. Birnbaum, M. Denison, M. DeVito, W. Farland, M. Feeley, H. Fiedler, H.
Hakansson, A. Hanberg, L. Haws, M. Rose, S. Safe, D. Schrenk, C. Tohyama, A. Tritscher, J.
Tuomisto, M. Tysklind, N. Walker, and R.E. Peterson. 2006. The 2005 World Health Organization
Reevaluation of Human and Mammalian Toxic Equivalency Factors for Dioxins and Dioxin-Like
Compounds. Toxicol. Sci. 93:223-241.
World Health Organization. 2021. Water-related diseases --- Fluorosis:
https://www.who.int/teams/environment-climate-change-and-health/water-sanitation-and-
health/burden-of-disease/other-diseases-and-risks/fluorosis. March.

FIGURES

TABLES

ATTACHMENT 1 COPC REFINEMENT

ATTACHMENT 2 RISK CALCULATIONS

FIGURES
◊
o
o
KEY
o Pathway is not complete or is negligible; quantitative evaluation not needed.
◊ Pathway is incomplete and is unlikely to be complete in the future; hypothetical exposure evaluated
Figure B-1
Conceptual Site Model for Groundwater Exposure - Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Primary transport or exposure pathway Tooele County, Utah
Primary transport or exposure pathway, but not applicable for groundwater
Minor transport or exposure pathway
On-Facility
Surface Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Liquid Waste
Dermal
Shallow
Groundwater
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Water
Oral
Inhalation (VOCs)
Dermal
Ditch and Pond
Sediments
Oral
Inhalation
Historical and
Current Plant
Operations
Solid Waste
On-Facility
Surface Piles &
Soils/Sediments
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Off-Facility
Surface Soils
Oral
Inhalation (PM10s)
Dermal
Game Oral
Pathway Individual
Well
Stack/Fugitive
Releases to Air
Gases/
Particulates Inhalation
Direct Contact
Runoff, 
Levee Breaches
Air Dispersion,
Erosion
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Direct Contact
Deposition
Air Dispersion
Deposition
>(
>(
>(
>(
>(
>(
&)
&)&)&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)&)
&)&)
&)
&)&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)&)&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)&)
&)&)
&)
&)&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
&)
DRAFT
PRI 10 PRI 6
PRI 3 PRI 2
PRI 7
PRI 5
PRI 11
PRI 4
PRI 9
PRI 13
PRI 14
PRI 15
PRI 8
PRI 9
PRI 12
PRI 1
4
2
0
7
42
0
9
4
2
0
4
4
2
2
0
4
2
0
3
4
2
1
7
4
2
1
5
4
2
2
0
420
6
4
2
1
8
4
2
1
9
4213
4
2
1
4
4
2
1
7
4
2
1
5
4
2
2
3
4
2
1
5
4216
4
2
2
2
4
2
2
1
4
2
0
4
4
2
0
5
4
2
0
6
4
2
0
7
4
2
0
8
4
2
0
9
4
2
1
0
4212
42
1
1
LF-01
LF-03MW-4A MW-5A
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8A
MW-8B
MW-13A
MW-13B
MW-14
MW-15A
MW-15B
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19AMW-19B
MW-20A
MW-20B
MW-24A
MW-26 MW-27
MW-28
MW-29A
MW-30A
MW-31
PZ-1
PZ-4
PZ-5 PZ-6
PZ-7
PZ-8
PZ-10
PZ-12
PZ-16
PZ-18
PZ-22
PZ-24
PZ-26
MW-25A
MW-34
PMW-1S
Le ge nd
Groundwater Elevation Contour (Dashed Where
Inferred)
Approximate Retrofitted Wastewater Pond (RWP)
Barrier Wall Alignment
Operating Facility
Preliminary Remedial Investigation
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
R
i
s
k

M
a
p
p
i
n
g
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

B
-
2

U
A
Z

H
I

a
n
d

I
L
C
R
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
4
/
0
1
/
2
0
2
1

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
1
8
,
4
5
1

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

G
I
S
0 1,500 3,000
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Planet Sat Imagery, Sept 2019; NAD 1983 2011 UTM Zone 12N
ERM
Figu re B-2HI and ILCR in theUppe r Aqu ife r Zone
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
Groundwater elevation values shown for each well are
based on the site-wide water level gauging performed
12/16/2019.
HI = Hazard index
ILCR = Incremental lifetime cancer risk
0 10 20
Miles
¯
>
&)
Background UAZ Monitoring Well
UAZ Monitoring Well
Privile ge d and Confide ntial – Attorne y Work Produ ct
>(
>(
>(
>(
>(
>(
&)
&)
&)
&)&)
&)
&)
&)
&)&)
PRI 10
PRI 6
PRI 3 PRI 2
PRI 7
PRI 5
PRI 11
PRI 4
PRI 9
PRI 13
PRI 14
PRI 15
PRI 8
PRI 9
PRI 12
PRI 1
42
1
3
42
0
9
4
2
0
4
4
2
0
3
4
2
1
2
4
2
0
5
4
2
0
9
4
2
1
3
4
2
0
7
4
2
1
0
4
2
0
8
4
2
1
1
4
2
0
6
4
2
1
8
4
2
1
7
42
1
6
4
2
1
5
4
2
1
4
MW-22B
MW-29B
MW-30B
MW-32B MW-9
MW-24B
MW-25B
PMW-1D
Legend
Groundwater Elevation Contour (Dashed Where
Inferred)
Approximate Retrofitted Wastewater Pond (RWP)
Barrier Wall Alignment
Operating Facility
Preliminary Remedial Investigation Areas
FI
L
E
:

M
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
1
3
2
3
2
0
_
U
S
M
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
_
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
\
m
a
p
s
\
R
i
s
k

M
a
p
p
i
n
g
\
F
i
g
u
r
e

B
-
3

L
A
Z

H
I

a
n
d

I
L
C
R
.
m
x
d
,

R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:

0
4
/
0
1
/
2
0
2
1

,

S
C
A
L
E
:

1
:
1
8
,
3
9
6

w
h
e
n

p
r
i
n
t
e
d

a
t

1
1
x
1
7
DR
A
W
N

B
Y
:

G
I
S
0 1,500 3,000
Feet
¯
Environmental Resources Managementwww.erm.com
Source: Planet Sat Imagery, Sept 2019; NAD 1983 StatePlane Utah Central FIPS 4302 Feet
ERM
Figure B-3HI and ILCR in th eLower Aquifer Zone
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
Groundwater elevation values shown for each well are
based on the site-wide water level gauging performed
12/16/2019.
HI = Hazard index
ILCR = Incremental lifetime cancer risk
NA = Not Applicable
No color = NA
0 10 20
Miles
¯
>
&)
Background UAZ Monitoring Well
UAZ Monitoring Well
Privileged and Confidential – Attorney Work Product

TABLES
Table B-1
Sampling Analyses Matrix for Upper Aquifer Zone Wells
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
:HOORU
3LH]RPHWHU 3KDVH$
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
6DPSOLQJ
&ODVVLILFDWLRQ *URXS$ *URXS$ *URXS$ *URXS$ *URXS% *URXS% *URXS%*URXS%
%DFNJURXQG:HOOV
0:$ ;;;;
0: ;;;;
30:6 ;;;;
6LWH:HOOV
/) ;
/) ;
0:$ ;
0:$ ;;;;;
0: ;
0: ;
0:$ ;
0:% ;
0:$ ;
0:% ;;;;;
0: ;
0:$ ;
0:% ;
0: ;
0: ;
0:$ ;
0:% ;
0:$ ;;;;;
0:% ;
0:$ ;;;;
0: ;;;;
0: ;;;;
0: ;;;;
0:$ ;;;;
0:$ ;;;;
0: ;;;;
3= ;;;;;
3= ;;;;;
3= ;;;;
3= ;;;;;
3= ;;;;
3= ;
3= ;
3= ;
3= ;
3= ;
3= ;
3= ;
3= ;
Notes:
Two wells (MW-20A and MW-20B) were analyzed in 2015 for SVOCs, PAHs, total metals, and PCBs.
Group B = Group B metals: calcium, sodium, potassium, magnesium, and dissolved iron.
Group B VOCs: bromodichloromethane, bromoform, chloroform, dibromochloromethane, and trichloroethene.
Cr(VI) = Hexavalent chromium
HAA = Haloacetic acids
PAH = Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
SVOC = Semivolatile organic compound
TDS = Total dissolved solids
TOC = Total organic carbon
VOC = Volatile organic compound
Phase 1A = PCBs, dioxins/furans, SVOCs, PAHs, total metals, dissolved metals, cyanide, TOC, VOCs, HAAs, perchlorate, anions, alkalinity, TDS, and Cr(VI).
Group A = Group A metals; calcium, sodium, potassium, magnesium, aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper,
iron, lead, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc.
Group A VOCs; bromodichloromethane, bromoform, bromomethane, carbon disulfide, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, dibromochloromethane, ethylbenzene,
m- & p-xylene, naphthalene, o-xylene, toluene, trichloroethene, and total xylenes
All Phase 2B wells were sampled for anions, TDS, cyanide, alkalinity, HAAs, and density; wells were additionally analyzed for Group A or B metals and Group
A or B VOCs as defined below.
(50 3DJHRI31$SULO
Table B-2
Sampling Analyses Matrix for Lower Aquifer Zone Wells
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
:HOORU
3LH]RPHWHU
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
3KDVH%
(YHQW
6DPSOLQJ
&ODVVLILFDWLRQ *URXS$ *URXS$ *URXS$ *URXS$ *URXS% *URXS% *URXS%*URXS%
%DFNJURXQG:HOOV
0:% ;;;;
0:% ;;;;
30:' ;;;;
6LWH:HOOV
0:;;
;;
0:%;;;;
0:%;;;;
0:%;;
0:%;;;;
Notes:
* = Group A metals were analyzed instead of Group B.
Two wells (MW-20A and MW-20B) were analyzed in 2015 for SVOCs, PAHs, total metals, and PCBs.
All Phase 2B wells were sampled for anions, TDS, cyanide, alkalinity, HAAs, and density; wells were additionally analyzed for Group A or B metals
and Group A or B VOCs as defined below.
Group A = Group A metals (dissolved): calcium, sodium, potassium, magnesium, aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium,
cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc.
Group A VOCs: bromodichloromethane, bromoform, bromomethane, carbon disulfide, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform,
dibromochloromethane, ethylbenzene, m- & p-xylene, naphthalene, o-xylene, toluene, trichloroethene, and total xylenes.
Group B = Group B metals (dissolved): calcium, sodium, potassium, magnesium, and iron.
Group B VOCs: bromodichloromethane, bromoform, chloroform, dibromochloromethane, and trichloroethene.
Phase 1A = PCBs, dioxins/furans, SVOCs, PAHs, total metals, dissolved metals, cyanide, TOC, VOCs, HAA, perchlorate, anions, alkalinity,
TDS, and Cr(VI).
Cr(VI) = Hexavalent chromium
HAA = Haloacetic acids
PAH = Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
SVOC = Semivolatile organic compound
TDS = Total dissolved solids
TOC = Total organic carbon
VOC = Volatile organic compound
(50 3DJHRI31$SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID LF-01 LF-01 LF-03 LF-03 MW-4A MW-4A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-6 MW-6 MW-7 MW-7 MW-8A
Sample Date 17-Feb-14 17-Feb-14 17-Feb-14 17-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 07-Feb-14 07-Feb-14 26-Nov-18 19-Mar-19 19-Mar-19 27-Jun-19 27-Jun-19 27-Aug-19 27-Aug-19 07-Feb-14 07-Feb-14 06-Feb-14 06-Feb-14 18-Feb-14
Sample TypeNNNNNN N N NNNNNNNNNNNN
Sample ID LF-01-01-
021714
LF-01-01-
021714-FF
LF-03-01-
021714
LF-03-01-
021714-FF
MW-4A-01-
020514
MW-4A-01-
020514-FF
MW-5A-01-
020714
MW-5A-01-
020714-FF
MW-5A-GW-01-
112618
MW-5A-GW-01-
031919
MW-5A-GW-01-
031919-FF
MW-5A-GW-01-
062719
MW-5A-GW-01-
062719-FF
MW-5A-GW-01-
082719
MW-5A-GW-01-
082719-FF
MW-6-01-
020714
MW-6-01-
020714-FF
MW-7-01-
020614
MW-7-01-
020614-FF
MW-8A-01-
021814
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L < 0.0000000013 < 0.0000000054 0.00000 0.00000018 0.00000055 0.00000014 0.00000092
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L < 0.0000029 < 0.0000027 0.00000066 0.0000021 0.0000013 0.00000083 0.0000056
Total PCBs μg/L 0.00016 J 0.0055 0.0035 0.088 0.061 0.0072 0.34
Total Aluminum μg/L < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 80 J
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50
Total Antimony μg/L < 0.40 < 0.40 0.65 J 1.2 J < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40
Dissolved Antimony μg/L < 0.40 < 0.40 0.54 J 1.2 J < 0.40 < 0.40
Total Arsenic μg/L 11 11 46 28 2.1 J 4.3 29
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L 9.8 9.8 46 27 2.1 J 4.1
Total Barium μg/L 42 99 540 240 1,200 3,000 200
Dissolved Barium μg/L 40 97 540 240 1,200 3,400
Total Beryllium μg/L < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20 0.38 J
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20
Total Cadmium μg/L < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L < 0.069 < 0.17 < 0.051 < 0.403 1.36 1.06 < 0.099
Total Cobalt μg/L < 1.2 1.4 J 56 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 10
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L < 1.2 1.4 J 60 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2
Total Copper μg/L < 2.0 < 2.0 4.4 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0
Dissolved Copper μg/L < 2.0 J < 2.0 J < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0
Total Iron μg/L 4,900 18,000 170,000 90,000 1,100 < 50 160,000
Dissolved Iron μg/L 4,800 18,000 160,000 88,000 86,000 180,000 150,000 180,000 880 < 50
Total Lead μg/L < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2
Dissolved Lead μg/L < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2
Total Manganese μg/L 2,200 5,400 5,000 3,300 500 1,300 5,900
Dissolved Manganese μg/L 2,200 5,400 5,200 3,200 520 1,200
Total Mercury μg/L < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
Dissolved Mercury μg/L < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
Total Molybdenum μg/L 12 5.5 21 42 1.7 J 5.2 8.1
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L 12 5.6 20 40 < 1.2 2.8 J
Total Nickel μg/L 3.0 J 7.2 130 2.0 J < 2.0 < 2.0 21
Dissolved Nickel μg/L 3.1 J 7.4 130 2.2 J < 2.0 < 2.0
Total Selenium μg/L 2.9 J-6.3 J-2.1 J < 2.0 J < 2.0 J < 2.0 < 2.0 J
Dissolved Selenium μg/L < 2.0 J 2.9 J-< 2.0 < 2.0 J < 2.0 J < 2.0
Total Silver μg/L < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60
Dissolved Silver μg/L < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60
Total Thallium μg/L < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0
Dissolved Thallium μg/L < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0
Total Vanadium μg/L < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0
Total Zinc μg/L < 8.0 J < 8.0 J 56 < 8.0 < 8.0 78 25 J-
Dissolved Zinc μg/L < 8.0 9.1 J 54 < 8.0 < 8.0 91
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L < 0.50 < 0.49 1.5 J 10 < 0.51 < 0.50 0.52 J
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L 3.5 J+
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L 0.22 J+0.2 J+0.26 J+0.85 J+< 0.18 J < 0.18
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.1 < 2.0 6.8 J+
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L 2 J
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L < 0.065 J < 0.063 J < 0.065 J < 0.064 J < 0.067 J < 0.065 J
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L < 0.074 J < 0.072 J 0.19 J-< 0.073 J < 0.076 J < 0.075 J < 0.074
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L 5.5 J+
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L < 1.8 < 1.8 < 1.8 < 1.8 < 1.9 < 1.9
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L 0.043 J 2.9 0.049 5.0 0.14 J 2.7 1.5
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L < 0.014 < 0.13 < 0.013 < 0.13 < 0.14 < 0.013 < 0.13
Naphthalene μg/L 0.18 11 0.083 7.0 0.73 20 13
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L < 0.10 2.6 0.15 J 13 1.0 0.39 J 1.9
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L 7.5 15 0.38 J 4.0 7.5 18 29
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L < 0.10 0.55 J 0.66 J 4.4 < 0.10 0.28 J 0.45 J
Benzene μg/L < 0.13 0.26 J < 0.13 0.40 J 0.61 J 0.48 J 0.75 J
Bromochloromethane μg/L < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
Bromodichloromethane μg/L < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 0.19 J < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
Bromoform μg/L < 0.10 < 0.10 0.34 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.85 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 J
Bromomethane μg/L < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
Carbon disulfide μg/L < 0.19 < 0.22 0.80 J < 1.3 < 1.9 4.3 < 0.33
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
Dibromochloromethane μg/L < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 0.61 J < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 1 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID LF-01 LF-01 LF-03 LF-03 MW-4A MW-4A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-5A MW-6 MW-6 MW-7 MW-7 MW-8A
Sample Date 17-Feb-14 17-Feb-14 17-Feb-14 17-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 07-Feb-14 07-Feb-14 26-Nov-18 19-Mar-19 19-Mar-19 27-Jun-19 27-Jun-19 27-Aug-19 27-Aug-19 07-Feb-14 07-Feb-14 06-Feb-14 06-Feb-14 18-Feb-14
Sample TypeNNNNNN N N NNNNNNNNNNNN
Sample ID LF-01-01-
021714
LF-01-01-
021714-FF
LF-03-01-
021714
LF-03-01-
021714-FF
MW-4A-01-
020514
MW-4A-01-
020514-FF
MW-5A-01-
020714
MW-5A-01-
020714-FF
MW-5A-GW-01-
112618
MW-5A-GW-01-
031919
MW-5A-GW-01-
031919-FF
MW-5A-GW-01-
062719
MW-5A-GW-01-
062719-FF
MW-5A-GW-01-
082719
MW-5A-GW-01-
082719-FF
MW-6-01-
020714
MW-6-01-
020714-FF
MW-7-01-
020614
MW-7-01-
020614-FF
MW-8A-01-
021814
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L < 0.12 2.0 4.8 2.5 3.5 10 5.7 7.4 < 0.12 < 0.12 24
Chloromethane μg/L < 0.25 < 0.25 < 0.25 < 0.25 < 0.25 < 0.25 < 0.25
Ethyl benzene μg/L 0.54 J 1.9 < 0.10 1.5 4.9 6.3 9.3
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L < 0.35 < 0.35 < 0.35 < 0.35 < 0.35 < 0.35 0.82 J
Tetrachloroethene μg/L < 0.10 < 0.10 0.50 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.46 J
Trichloroethene μg/L 3.5 14 0.53 J 1.2 0.56 J 0.64 J 0.48 J 0.43 J < 0.13 4.0 32 J
Vinyl chloride μg/L 0.80 J 0.29 J < 0.22 1.4 13 1.0 0.39 J
o-Xylene μg/L 0.19 J 2.1 < 0.10 2.2 0.65 J 6.7 18
m,p Xylenes μg/L 1.4 2.3 < 0.18 3.6 4.5 9.6 22
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L < 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J 0.012 J-< 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J 0.035 J-< 0.0050
Fluoride mg/L 2.2 J 5.9 J 6.7 12 14 J-14 J-24 J+22 J+5.1 11 16
Nitrite as N mg/L < 0.16 J < 0.32 J < 0.16 J < 0.32 J < 0.32 J < 0.32 J < 0.16 R < 0.50 < 0.080 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 39 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 15 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L < 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J 0.014 < 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J 0.097 J-
ERM Page 2 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
MW-8A MW-8B MW-8B MW-10 MW-10 MW-10 MW-10 MW-10 MW-10 MW-10 MW-13A MW-13A MW-13B MW-13B MW-13B MW-13B MW-13B
18-Feb-14 18-Feb-14 18-Feb-14 25-Oct-18 01-Apr-19 01-Apr-19 04-Jun-19 04-Jun-19 23-Sep-19 23-Sep-19 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 08-Nov-18 28-Feb-19 28-Feb-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N N
MW-8A-01-
021814-FF
MW-8B-01-
021814
MW-8B-01-
021814-FF
MW-10-GW-01-
102518
MW-10-GW-01-
040119
MW-10-GW-01-
040119-FF
MW-10-GW-01-
060419
MW-10-GW-01-
060419-FF
MW-10-GW-01-
092319
MW-10-GW-01-
092319-FF
MW-13A-01-
020414
MW-13A-01-
020414-FF
MW-13B-01-
020414
MW-13B-01-
020414-FF
MW-13B-GW-01-
110818
MW-13B-GW-01-
022819
MW-13B-GW-01-
022819-FF
< 0.0000000036 0.00000 < 0.0000000016 0.000000063 < 0.00052
< 0.0000026 0.00000084 < 0.00000073 0.000018 < 0.000017
0.002 0.0067 0.0043 < 0.000258 < 0.000258
< 50 6,300 5,400
70 J < 50 6,100 5,600 < 250 < 130
< 0.40 1.3 J 0.90 J
< 0.40 < 0.40 0.98 J 0.75 J < 2.0 < 1.0
5.5 14 30
28 5.4 15 28 < 10 7.7 J
54 190 350
190 52 180 330 99 J-120
< 0.20 2.2 J- 2.5 J-
0.29 J < 0.20 2.5 2.5 < 1.0 J < 0.50
< 1.0 4.6 J- 1.9 J-
< 1.0 < 1.0 4.6 J- 1.5 J-< 5.0 J < 2.5
< 0.073 0.490 J 0.377 J < 0.077 J < 0.306
< 1.2 98 J- 47 J-
8.5 < 1.2 98 J- 52 J-< 6.0 J 3.4 J
< 2.0 J 53 J-< 2.0 J
5.9 J-< 2.0 J 47 J-< 2.0 J < 10 J < 5.0
< 50 32,000 J- 67,000 J-
160,000 < 50 < 1,300 < 1,300 J < 1,300 < 130 J 31,000 J- 69,000 J- 560 J- 730
< 1.2 < 1.2 J < 1.2 J
< 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 J < 1.2 J < 6.0 J < 3.0
66 11,000 8,000
5,500 43 J 11,000 8,200 410 500
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 1.7 J < 0.10
< 1.2 15 23
6.3 < 1.2 15 17 < 6.0 < 3.0
2.0 J-310 J- 160 J-
17 J-< 2.0 300 J- 180 J-< 10 J < 5.0
< 2.0 J 4.0 J- 2.7 J-
< 2.0 J < 2.0 J 3.5 J- 2.8 J-< 10 J < 5.0
< 0.60 < 0.60 J < 0.60 J
< 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 3.0 J < 1.5
< 1.0 2.1 J-< 1.0 J
< 1.0 < 1.0 1.3 J-< 1.0 J < 5.0 < 2.5
< 6.0 < 6.0 J 7.3 J-
< 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 < 30 < 15
23 J-460 J- 350 J-
25 J-< 8.0 470 J- 350 J-< 40 J < 20
< 5.2 < 0.50 < 0.52 < 0.53 < 0.49
< 0.18 < 0.17 < 0.18
< 21 < 2.0 < 2.1
< 0.067 J < 0.064 J < 0.068 J < 0.068 < 0.064
< 0.076 < 0.073 J < 0.077 J < 0.078 < 0.073
< 0.45 < 0.42
< 1.9 < 1.8 < 1.9 < 2.0 < 1.8
< 0.0054 3.8 1.7
< 0.014 < 0.013 0.071
< 0.0037 3.2 1.9 < 0.15 < 0.25
1.5 1.0 0.52 J
< 0.22 0.29 J < 0.22
1.4 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
0.23 J < 0.13 < 0.13
< 0.14 1.5 4.7
< 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 130 44 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 300 78 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 1.5 0.49 J < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.59 5.0 27 0.28 J < 0.16
< 0.15 2.6 0.28 J < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 240 75 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 3 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
MW-8A MW-8B MW-8B MW-10 MW-10 MW-10 MW-10 MW-10 MW-10 MW-10 MW-13A MW-13A MW-13B MW-13B MW-13B MW-13B MW-13B
18-Feb-14 18-Feb-14 18-Feb-14 25-Oct-18 01-Apr-19 01-Apr-19 04-Jun-19 04-Jun-19 23-Sep-19 23-Sep-19 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 08-Nov-18 28-Feb-19 28-Feb-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N N
MW-8A-01-
021814-FF
MW-8B-01-
021814
MW-8B-01-
021814-FF
MW-10-GW-01-
102518
MW-10-GW-01-
040119
MW-10-GW-01-
040119-FF
MW-10-GW-01-
060419
MW-10-GW-01-
060419-FF
MW-10-GW-01-
092319
MW-10-GW-01-
092319-FF
MW-13A-01-
020414
MW-13A-01-
020414-FF
MW-13B-01-
020414
MW-13B-01-
020414-FF
MW-13B-GW-01-
110818
MW-13B-GW-01-
022819
MW-13B-GW-01-
022819-FF
< 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 100 61 < 0.12 < 0.12
< 0.25 J 11 J-4.5 J-
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.35 2.4 5.5
< 0.10 0.27 J < 0.10
0.33 J < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 0.23 J 0.24 J < 0.13 < 0.13
< 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22
< 0.10 0.24 J 0.17 J < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.18 0.46 J 0.31 J < 0.18 < 0.18
< 0.0050 J 0.032 0.03
< 1.2 < 1.5 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 2.7 16 18 2.0 J-3.0 J
< 0.32 J < 0.40 R < 0.80 J < 0.80 R < 2.5 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 0.32 J
< 9.8 < 39 < 9.8 < 10.0 J < 39 1,500 980 < 0.98 < 9.8 J
< 3.8 < 15 < 3.8 < 10.0 J < 15 1,300 420 < 0.38 < 3.8
0.0091 J-< 0.0050 J 0.031 0.028 < 0.0025 0.0025 J
ERM Page 4 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
MW-13B MW-13B MW-13B MW-13B MW-14 MW-14 MW-15A MW-15A MW-15B MW-15B MW-17 MW-17 MW-18 MW-18 MW-19A MW-19A MW-19B MW-19B MW-20A MW-20A
13-Jun-19 13-Jun-19 12-Sep-19 12-Sep-19 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 13-Feb-14 13-Feb-14 14-Feb-14 14-Feb-14 14-Feb-14 14-Feb-14 31-Jan-14 31-Jan-14
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-13B-GW-01-
061319
MW-13B-GW-01-
061319-FF
MW-13B-GW-01-
091219
MW-13B-GW-01-
091219-FF
MW-14-01-
020514
MW-14-01-
020514-FF
MW-15A-01-
020514
MW-15A-01-
020514-FF
MW-15B-01-
020514
MW-15B-01-
020514-FF
MW-17-01-
020514
MW-17-01-
020514-FF
MW-18-01-
021314
MW-18-01-
021314-FF
MW-19A-01-
021414
MW-19A-01-
021414-FF
MW-19B-01-
021414
MW-19B-01-
021414-FF
MW-20A-01-
013114
MW-20A-01-
013114-FF
0.0000000012 0.00000 0.00000030 < 0.00000042 < 0.0000000017 < 0.00000 0.00000028 < 0.00000 < 0.0000006 0.00000
0.000019 0.000018 0.0000012 < 0.00000088 < 0.00000073 < 0.00000057 0.0000025 < 0.0000029 < 0.0000041 0.00000076
< 0.000263 < 0.000258 0.0044 0.0067 0.014 0.00015 J 0.00012 J 0.000084 J 0.00013 J 0.00013 J
190 1,500 6,200 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50
< 1,300 J < 130 J 200 1,100 6,000 < 50 54 J < 50 < 50 < 50
0.97 J 0.90 J 0.78 J < 0.40 2.0 J 1.4 J 6.7 0.80 J
< 1.0 < 1.0 1.0 J 0.91 J 0.73 J < 0.40 2.1 J 1.4 J 5.0 0.92 J
25 20 42 28 66 37 78 50
10 J 6.4 J 24 20 43 26 66 38 85 48
330 230 330 72 120 55 53 230
100 120 320 220 320 69 130 54 50 230
< 0.95 < 0.45 2.5 < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20 0.54 J < 0.20 J
< 0.50 J < 0.50 J 0.85 J 0.76 J 2.1 < 0.20 0.37 J < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20
< 1.0 4.7 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 J
< 2.5 < 2.5 J < 1.0 4.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 J
< 0.077 < 0.307 0.543 J-0.558 0.634 < 0.287 1.76 < 0.165 < 0.069 0.231 J
73 140 85 < 1.2 2.8 2.5 < 1.2 11 J-
< 30 5.9 70 130 84 < 1.2 3.0 2.7 < 1.2 11 J-
< 2.0 30 3.5 J < 2.0 < 2.0 J < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 J
< 50 < 5.0 J 2.5 J 42 < 2.0 < 2.0 2.7 J-< 2.0 J < 2.0 J < 2.0 J
60,000 27,000 93,000 1,500 < 50 J 490 < 50 680,000 J-
< 1,300 J 610 59,000 27,000 91,000 1,600 490 J-490 J-< 50 J 670,000 J-
< 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 J
< 3.0 J < 3.0 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2 J
11,000 16,000 11,000 1,600 1,500 3,000 210 4,400
440 480 10,000 16,000 11,000 1,600 1,500 3,000 190 4,100
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.53 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.12 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
11 200 50 4.6 74 43 < 1.2 2.2 J
< 30 < 3.0 9.5 190 44 3.0 J 66 44 < 1.2 < 1.6
210 310 260 4.9 24 19 < 2.0 70 J-
< 50 < 6.2 200 300 250 4.5 22 19 < 2.0 68 J-
2.8 J 3.0 J 2.4 J < 2.0 < 2.0 J < 2.0 < 2.0 2.2 J-
< 5.0 < 5.0 J 3.0 J 3.2 J < 2.0 < 2.0 2.0 J-< 2.0 J 3.5 J-< 2.0 J
< 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 J
< 1.5 < 1.5 J < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60
< 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 J
< 2.5 < 2.5 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 J
< 6.0 < 6.0 8.5 J < 6.0 18 J < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 J
< 150 < 15 < 6.0 < 6.0 8.2 J < 6.0 19 J < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0
110 71 370 13 < 8.0 < 8.0 < 8.0 17 J-
< 20 J < 20 J 94 76 360 11 < 8.0 < 8.0 < 8.0 18 J-
< 25 < 5.1 < 0.52 < 0.54 < 0.52 < 0.48 < 0.50 < 0.46 < 0.50 < 0.49
< 0.18 < 0.19 < 0.18 < 0.17 < 0.18 < 0.16 < 0.18 < 0.17
< 2.1 J < 2.2 < 2.1 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 1.9 < 2.0 < 2.0
< 3.2 < 0.66 < 0.068 J < 0.071 J < 0.067 J < 0.062 J < 0.065 J < 0.06 J < 0.065 J < 0.063 J
< 3.7 < 0.75 < 0.078 J < 0.081 J < 0.077 J < 0.071 J < 0.074 J < 0.068 J < 0.074 J < 0.072
< 21 < 4.3
< 92 < 19 < 1.9 < 2 < 1.9 < 1.8 < 1.9 < 1.7 < 1.9 < 1.8
0.094 J 0.17 J 0.46 J 0.012 J < 0.0052 < 0.0047 < 0.0050 1.4
< 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.013 < 0.014 < 0.012 < 0.013 < 0.013
< 0.15 < 0.15 0.1 J 0.088 J 0.12 J 0.14 < 0.0038 < 0.0072 < 0.0059 3.5
0.80 J 1.7 1.3 5.8 < 0.10 2.0 < 0.10 1.7
< 0.22 0.40 J 0.37 J < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 9.4 1.7 4.1 < 0.10 21
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 1.0 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.13 0.15 J 0.13 J 0.51 J < 0.13 < 0.13 0.60 J 1.1
5.7 2.1 2.8 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.14 < 0.14 74 120 79 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 < 0.10 97 180 120 0.25 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 < 0.29 0.56 J 1.9 0.72 J < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.23 0.25 J+28 22 53 0.30 J < 0.26 < 0.24 < 0.54 0.29 J
< 0.15 < 0.15 0.79 J 4.2 1.9 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 < 0.13 100 180 120 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 5 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
MW-13B MW-13B MW-13B MW-13B MW-14 MW-14 MW-15A MW-15A MW-15B MW-15B MW-17 MW-17 MW-18 MW-18 MW-19A MW-19A MW-19B MW-19B MW-20A MW-20A
13-Jun-19 13-Jun-19 12-Sep-19 12-Sep-19 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 13-Feb-14 13-Feb-14 14-Feb-14 14-Feb-14 14-Feb-14 14-Feb-14 31-Jan-14 31-Jan-14
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-13B-GW-01-
061319
MW-13B-GW-01-
061319-FF
MW-13B-GW-01-
091219
MW-13B-GW-01-
091219-FF
MW-14-01-
020514
MW-14-01-
020514-FF
MW-15A-01-
020514
MW-15A-01-
020514-FF
MW-15B-01-
020514
MW-15B-01-
020514-FF
MW-17-01-
020514
MW-17-01-
020514-FF
MW-18-01-
021314
MW-18-01-
021314-FF
MW-19A-01-
021414
MW-19A-01-
021414-FF
MW-19B-01-
021414
MW-19B-01-
021414-FF
MW-20A-01-
013114
MW-20A-01-
013114-FF
< 0.12 < 0.12 83 90 76 0.14 J 0.33 J 1.4 < 0.12 0.13 J
6.4 J-20 J-11 J-< 0.25 J < 0.25 < 0.25 < 0.25 < 0.25
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.16 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 2.6
4.7 3.7 3.7 < 0.35 < 0.35 < 0.35 < 0.35 < 0.35
0.15 J 0.39 J 0.28 J < 0.10 0.69 J 0.27 J < 0.10 8.5
< 0.13 < 0.13 0.45 J 0.27 J 0.38 J 21 0.42 J 8.8 < 0.13 24
< 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 13
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.54 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 2.1
< 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 1.7
0.030 J-0.040 J-0.047 J-< 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J < 0.025 J < 0.0050
1.4 J 1.4 J+16 9.7 20 2.8 J 4.7 4.5 J 0.77 J 6.4 J
< 0.16 J < 1.0 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 0.32 J < 0.080 J < 0.40 J < 0.16 J < 0.32
< 10.0 < 39 730 1,400 990 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 9.9 J
< 10.0 < 15 570 960 590 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8
< 0.0025 J 0.0052 J 0.018 J 0.035 0.056 < 0.0050 < 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J < 0.025 J < 0.0050 J
ERM Page 6 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20B MW-20B MW-20B MW-20B MW-24A MW-24A MW-24A MW-24A
16-Apr-15 16-Apr-15 15-Nov-18 28-Feb-19 28-Feb-19 27-Jun-19 27-Jun-19 12-Sep-19 12-Sep-19 31-Jan-14 31-Jan-14 16-Apr-15 16-Apr-15 14-Nov-18 12-Mar-19 12-Mar-19 13-Jun-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-20A-01-
041615
MW-20A-01-
041615-FF
MW-20A-GW-01-
111518
MW-20A-GW-01-
022819
MW-20A-GW-01-
022819-FF
MW-20A-GW-01-
062719
MW-20A-GW-01-
062719-FF
MW-20A-GW-01-
091219
MW-20A-GW-01-
091219-FF
MW-20B-01-
013114
MW-20B-01-
013114-FF
MW-20B-01-
041615
MW-20B-01-
041615-FF
MW-24A-GW-01-
111418
MW-24A-GW-01-
031219
MW-24A-GW-01-
031219-FF
MW-24A-GW-01-
061319
0.000000097 0.000000013 < 0.00051 0.0000000010 0.000000018 < 0.00051 < 0.00052 0.00000012
0.000018 0.000017 < 0.000018 0.000018 0.00000076 < 0.000019 < 0.000019 0.000019
0.0002 0.000895 0.000271 J < 0.000255 0.000375 J 0.00021 J 0.00034 0.00131 0.000274 J < 0.000260
< 250 < 250 < 250
< 250 < 250 < 130 < 630 < 130 J < 250 < 250 < 250 J < 630
< 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0
< 2.0 < 2.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 1.5 J < 2.0 < 2.0 2.6 J 1.3 J
44 37 89
43 43 21 < 25 14 35 92 180 J- 140
270 1,900 1,500
270 820 1,100 1,500 1,600 2,100 1,600 160 J-120
< 1.0 < 1.0 J < 1.0
< 1.0 < 1.0 < 0.50 < 2.5 < 0.50 J < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 J < 0.50 J
< 5.0 < 5.0 J < 5.0
< 5.0 < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 5.0 J < 5.0 < 5.0 J < 2.5
< 1.66 J < 1.65 < 0.082 < 0.332 < 0.073 < 0.316 J < 0.306 < 0.077
33 < 6.0 J < 6.0
33 140 20 25 26 < 6.0 J < 6.0 14 J- 18 J
< 10 < 10 J < 10
< 10 < 10 < 5.0 < 25 < 5.0 J < 10 J < 10 < 10 J < 25
1,600,000 78,000 J- 120,000
1,600,000 3,700,000 1,300,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 82,000 J- 120,000 < 250 J < 630
< 6.0 < 6.0 J < 6.0
< 6.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 6.0 J < 6.0 < 6.0 J < 3.0
6,700 11,000 10,000
6,600 11,000 3,300 4,800 4,300 12,000 11,000 8,500 7,500
< 0.10
4.2 < 0.10 1.3 0.71 J < 0.10 1.5 J < 0.10
< 6.0 < 6.0 11 J
< 6.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 15 < 3.0 < 7 14 J+ 13 J-< 15
230 < 10 J < 10
230 1,600 170 140 100 < 10 J < 10 69 J- 80
64 < 10 J 16 J
< 10 < 10 < 5.0 < 25 < 5.0 J < 10 J < 10 < 10 J < 5.0 J
< 3.0 < 3.0 J < 3.0
< 3.0 < 3.0 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 J < 3.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 J < 7.5
< 5.0 < 5.0 J < 5.0
< 5.0 < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 5.0 J < 5.0 < 5.0 J < 2.5
< 30 < 30 J < 30
< 30 < 30 < 15 < 75 < 15 < 30 < 30 < 30 < 75
< 40 630 J- 500
< 40 41 J < 20 < 100 < 20 J 690 J- 540 < 40 J < 100
< 0.49 < 0.53 < 0.51 < 0.49 < 5.2 < 0.47 < 0.45 < 0.53 J < 0.52 < 0.52
< 1.8 < 1.7
0.29 J < 0.17 < 0.16
< 2.0 < 1.9 < 1.8
< 1.3 < 1.2
< 0.063 < 0.068 < 0.065 < 0.064 < 0.68 < 0.061 J < 0.058 < 0.068 J < 0.068 < 0.067
< 1.2 < 1.1
< 0.072 < 0.078 < 0.075 < 0.073 < 0.78 < 0.07 < 0.066 < 0.078 J < 0.078 < 0.077
< 0.45 < 0.43 < 0.42 < 4.5 < 0.45 J < 0.45 < 0.44
< 1.8 < 1.7
< 1.8 < 2.0 < 1.9 < 1.8 < 19 < 1.7 < 1.7 < 2.0 R < 1.9 J < 1.9 J
1.7 0.045 0.0080 J
< 0.013 < 0.012 < 0.012
3.5 6.5 2.5 3.5 2.8 0.87 0.55 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
1.4
< 0.22
2.8
< 0.10
< 0.13
< 0.14
< 0.14 0.33 J 0.61 J 0.56 J < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 0.53 J 1.6 0.95 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.67 < 0.16 < 0.43 0.80 J 0.27 J < 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.40
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 0.46 J 1.1 0.78 J < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 7 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20A MW-20B MW-20B MW-20B MW-20B MW-24A MW-24A MW-24A MW-24A
16-Apr-15 16-Apr-15 15-Nov-18 28-Feb-19 28-Feb-19 27-Jun-19 27-Jun-19 12-Sep-19 12-Sep-19 31-Jan-14 31-Jan-14 16-Apr-15 16-Apr-15 14-Nov-18 12-Mar-19 12-Mar-19 13-Jun-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-20A-01-
041615
MW-20A-01-
041615-FF
MW-20A-GW-01-
111518
MW-20A-GW-01-
022819
MW-20A-GW-01-
022819-FF
MW-20A-GW-01-
062719
MW-20A-GW-01-
062719-FF
MW-20A-GW-01-
091219
MW-20A-GW-01-
091219-FF
MW-20B-01-
013114
MW-20B-01-
013114-FF
MW-20B-01-
041615
MW-20B-01-
041615-FF
MW-24A-GW-01-
111418
MW-24A-GW-01-
031219
MW-24A-GW-01-
031219-FF
MW-24A-GW-01-
061319
0.14 J < 0.31 0.44 J 0.45 J 0.13 J < 0.12 7.1 9.0
1.4
6.5 18 21 24 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
0.43 J
1.0
10 1.6 1.1 1.3 7.9 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
0.43 J
1.8 0.81 J 0.86 J 0.97 J 0.35 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
3.5 6.0 5.3 7.4 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18
< 0.0050
11 J- 5.1 J 5.7 J+ 4.8 J+ 13 J 4.5 J- 6.0 J- 11 J
< 0.32 J < 0.32 J < 0.16 R < 1.0 J < 0.80 0.88 J- 0.70 J- 0.86 J-
20 J+< 9.8 J < 9.8 < 39 21 < 0.98 < 9.8 < 10.0
< 3.8 4.3 J 8.8 J < 15 < 3.8 < 0.38 4.8 J < 10.0
< 0.0025 0.0064 J 0.0026 J < 0.0025 J < 0.0050 J 0.012 0.0053 J
ERM Page 8 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
MW-24A MW-24A MW-24A MW-25A MW-25A MW-25A MW-25A MW-25A MW-25A MW-25A MW-26 MW-26 MW-26 MW-26 MW-26 MW-26
13-Jun-19 29-Aug-19 29-Aug-19 13-Nov-18 25-Feb-19 25-Feb-19 24-Jun-19 24-Jun-19 26-Aug-19 26-Aug-19 06-Nov-18 21-Mar-19 21-Mar-19 26-Jun-19 26-Jun-19 19-Sep-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-24A-GW-01-
061319-FF
MW-24A-GW-01-
082919
MW-24A-GW-01-
082919-FF
MW-25A-GW-01-
111318
MW-25A-GW-01-
022519
MW-25A-GW-01-
022519-FF
MW-25A-GW-01-
062419
MW-25A-GW-01-
062419-FF
MW-25A-GW-01-
082619
MW-25A-GW-01-
082619-FF
MW-26-GW-01-
110618
MW-26-GW-01-
032119
MW-26-GW-01-
032119-FF
MW-26-GW-01-
062619
MW-26-GW-01-
062619-FF
MW-26-GW-01-
091919
0.00000027 0.000000050 0.000000044 0.0000000014 0.00000011 0.000000097 0.00000024 0.00000023 0.00000020
0.000020 0.00002 0.000016 0.000018 0.000017 0.000017 0.000019 0.000017 0.000018
0.000293 J < 0.000278 < 0.000245 < 0.000243 < 0.000250 0.000390 J < 0.000258 < 0.000250 < 0.000252
< 1,300 J < 130 J < 250 < 130 J < 130 J < 630 J < 250 < 630 < 630 J
2.0 J < 3.2 < 2.0 1.1 J < 1.0 < 2.4 < 2.0 < 5.0 < 1.0
150 J130 30 31 21 22 210 < 25 < 25
150 190 28 22 20 24 220 J+120 110
< 5.0 < 0.50 J < 1.0 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 2.5 J < 1.0 < 2.5 < 2.5
< 2.5 < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 13 < 2.5 J
< 0.307 < 0.076 J < 0.152 < 0.076 < 0.076 < 0.309 < 1.02 < 0.077 0.130 J
< 30 26 < 6.0 < 3.0 J < 3.0 J < 15 J 7.5 J < 15 < 15 J
< 50 < 25 < 10 < 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 25 J < 10 < 25 < 25 J
< 1,300 J < 130 J < 250 J < 130 J < 130 J < 630 J 21,000 6,400 2,900 J
< 3.0 J < 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 J < 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0
9,200 8,300 J 370 62 J 31 J < 35 J 2,800 1,900 1,500 J
< 0.10 < 0.10 1.1 J < 0.10 < 0.14 < 0.10 < 1.2 J < 0.10 < 0.16
< 30 13 50 52 33 40 7.6 J < 15 < 15
110 98 11 J 6.0 J 5.4 J-< 25 J 19 J < 25 < 25 J
< 5.0 < 5.0 J < 10 J < 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 10 < 25 < 25 J
< 1.5 < 1.5 J < 3.0 < 1.5 < 1.5 J < 1.5 J < 3.0 < 7.5 < 1.5 J
< 2.5 < 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5
< 150 23 J < 30 < 15 J < 15 J < 75 J < 30 < 75 < 75 J
< 20 J < 20 J < 40 < 20 < 20 J < 20 J < 40 < 100 < 100
< 0.51 < 0.56 J < 0.50 < 0.52 J < 0.52 < 0.51 J < 0.52 < 5.2 J < 27
< 0.066 < 0.073 J < 0.065 < 0.067 < 0.067 < 0.066 J < 0.068 < 0.67 < 3.5
< 0.075 < 0.083 J < 0.075 < 0.077 < 0.077 < 0.075 J < 0.077 < 0.77 < 4.0
< 0.43 < 0.48 J < 0.43 < 0.44 < 0.44 < 0.43 J < 0.44 < 4.4 < 23
< 1.9 < 2.1 < 1.9 < 1.9 < 1.9 < 1.9 J < 1.9 < 19 < 99
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.16 0.25 J 0.32 J < 0.16 < 0.16 1.4 J 1.5 J < 0.56 < 0.16
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 9 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
MW-24A MW-24A MW-24A MW-25A MW-25A MW-25A MW-25A MW-25A MW-25A MW-25A MW-26 MW-26 MW-26 MW-26 MW-26 MW-26
13-Jun-19 29-Aug-19 29-Aug-19 13-Nov-18 25-Feb-19 25-Feb-19 24-Jun-19 24-Jun-19 26-Aug-19 26-Aug-19 06-Nov-18 21-Mar-19 21-Mar-19 26-Jun-19 26-Jun-19 19-Sep-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-24A-GW-01-
061319-FF
MW-24A-GW-01-
082919
MW-24A-GW-01-
082919-FF
MW-25A-GW-01-
111318
MW-25A-GW-01-
022519
MW-25A-GW-01-
022519-FF
MW-25A-GW-01-
062419
MW-25A-GW-01-
062419-FF
MW-25A-GW-01-
082619
MW-25A-GW-01-
082619-FF
MW-26-GW-01-
110618
MW-26-GW-01-
032119
MW-26-GW-01-
032119-FF
MW-26-GW-01-
062619
MW-26-GW-01-
062619-FF
MW-26-GW-01-
091919
7.4 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 4.0 < 0.90 0.94 J 0.41 J
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18
9.8 J+1.1 J-1.1 J-4.3 J+4.2 J+6.7 J-3.5 J-4.9 J+2.7 J+
< 0.50 J < 0.080 J < 0.080 J < 0.16 R < 0.50 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 R < 0.50 J
< 0.98 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 0.98 < 0.98 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 3.9
1.5 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 0.38 < 0.38 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 1.5
< 0.0025 J 0.0031 J-< 0.0041 0.019 < 0.0025 < 0.0025 J 0.0051 J 0.0032 J 0.012
ERM Page 10 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
MW-26 MW-27 MW-27 MW-27 MW-27 MW-27 MW-27 MW-27 MW-28 MW-28 MW-28 MW-28 MW-28 MW-28 MW-28 MW-29A MW-29A
19-Sep-19 06-Nov-18 28-Mar-19 28-Mar-19 27-Jun-19 27-Jun-19 26-Sep-19 26-Sep-19 06-Nov-18 21-Mar-19 21-Mar-19 26-Jun-19 26-Jun-19 19-Sep-19 19-Sep-19 29-Nov-18 26-Feb-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N N
MW-26-GW-01-
091919-FF
MW-27-GW-01-
110618
MW-27-GW-01-
032819
MW-27-GW-01-
032819-FF
MW-27-GW-01-
062719
MW-27-GW-01-
062719-FF
MW-27-GW-01-
092619
MW-27-GW-01-
092619-FF
MW-28-GW-01-
110618
MW-28-GW-01-
032119
MW-28-GW-01-
032119-FF
MW-28-GW-01-
062619
MW-28-GW-01-
062619-FF
MW-28-GW-01-
091919
MW-28-GW-01-
091919-FF
MW-29A-GW-01-
112918
MW-29A-GW-01-
022619
0.00000023 0.00000 < 0.0005 < 0.00050 0.00000016 0.00000018 < 0.000521 0.000000078 0.0000000090 0.000000012
0.000017 0.000018 < 0.000018 < 0.000018 0.000017 0.000019 < 0.000019 0.000018 0.000017 0.000017
0.00150 0.00507 0.000767 0.000369 J < 0.000255 < 0.000258 < 0.000260 < 0.000252 < 0.000250 0.000813
< 130 < 250 < 130 J < 630 J < 130 < 250 < 630 < 630 J < 130 < 1,300
< 1.0 < 2.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 2.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 2.0
7.5 J 81 68 61 62 19 J 10 J < 25 9.1 J < 10
94 410 J+350 390 420 91 J+100 110 130 37
< 0.50 < 1.0 < 0.50 < 2.5 < 0.50 < 1.0 < 0.50 J < 2.5 J < 0.50 < 5.0
< 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 2.5 J < 5.0
< 0.315 < 0.312 < 0.106 J < 0.311 < 0.303 < 0.505 < 0.077 < 0.076 < 0.152 J < 0.152
4.1 J 51 53 J 62 J 59 < 6.0 < 15 < 15 J 3.8 J < 30
< 5.0 J < 10 < 5.0 J < 25 J < 5.0 < 10 < 25 < 25 J < 5.0 J < 50
830 61,000 62,000 J 72,000 J 69,000 < 250 < 630 < 630 J 600 < 1,300
< 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 6.0
1,100 10,000 11,000 J 12,000 J 12,000 370 1,300 1,900 J 2,200 < 70
< 0.10 4.0 J < 0.10 < 0.74 < 0.14 < 1.0 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 3.0 8.4 J 7.7 J < 15 8.6 J < 6.0 < 3.0 J < 15 < 3.0 < 6.0
< 5.0 J 150 130 J 140 J 140 < 10 < 25 < 25 J < 5.0 J < 50
< 5.0 J < 10 < 5.0 < 25 < 5.0 J < 10 < 5.0 J < 25 J < 5.0 J < 10 J
< 1.5 < 3.0 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 3.0 < 7.5 < 1.5 J < 1.5 < 3.0
< 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 5.0
< 15 < 30 < 15 J < 75 J < 15 < 30 < 75 < 75 J < 15 < 150
< 20 J < 40 20 J < 100 < 20 J < 40 < 20 J < 100 < 20 J < 40
< 0.51 J < 0.50 < 0.51 J < 1.0 < 0.52 J < 0.49 < 5.4 J < 26 < 0.50 J < 0.52
< 0.066 J < 0.064 < 0.066 < 0.13 < 0.067 J < 0.063 < 0.70 < 3.3 < 0.065 J < 0.067
< 0.076 J < 0.074 < 0.075 < 0.15 < 0.077 J < 0.072 < 0.81 < 3.8 < 0.074 J < 0.076
< 0.44 J < 0.42 < 0.43 < 0.87 < 0.44 J < 0.42 < 4.6 < 22 < 0.43 J < 0.44
< 1.9 J < 1.8 2.9 J 5.6 J < 1.9 J < 1.8 < 20 < 94 < 1.9 J < 1.9
< 0.15 < 0.15 0.25 J < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
0.24 J < 0.16 < 0.34 < 0.16 1.3 J 10 < 1.6 < 0.16 0.48 J < 0.16
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 11 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
MW-26 MW-27 MW-27 MW-27 MW-27 MW-27 MW-27 MW-27 MW-28 MW-28 MW-28 MW-28 MW-28 MW-28 MW-28 MW-29A MW-29A
19-Sep-19 06-Nov-18 28-Mar-19 28-Mar-19 27-Jun-19 27-Jun-19 26-Sep-19 26-Sep-19 06-Nov-18 21-Mar-19 21-Mar-19 26-Jun-19 26-Jun-19 19-Sep-19 19-Sep-19 29-Nov-18 26-Feb-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N N
MW-26-GW-01-
091919-FF
MW-27-GW-01-
110618
MW-27-GW-01-
032819
MW-27-GW-01-
032819-FF
MW-27-GW-01-
062719
MW-27-GW-01-
062719-FF
MW-27-GW-01-
092619
MW-27-GW-01-
092619-FF
MW-28-GW-01-
110618
MW-28-GW-01-
032119
MW-28-GW-01-
032119-FF
MW-28-GW-01-
062619
MW-28-GW-01-
062619-FF
MW-28-GW-01-
091919
MW-28-GW-01-
091919-FF
MW-29A-GW-01-
112918
MW-29A-GW-01-
022619
17 15 14 14 0.17 J < 0.24 0.48 J 0.24 J < 0.12 < 0.12
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
0.15 J 0.13 J < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18
18 J-20 J-37 J+40 J 1.4 J-1.7 J-1.8 J+1.1 J+1.3 J-1.0 J-
< 0.16 J < 0.32 J < 0.32 R < 5.0 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 R < 0.50 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J
< 0.98 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 0.98 < 0.98 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 0.98 < 0.98 < 9.8
< 0.38 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 0.38 J < 0.38 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 0.38 < 0.38 < 3.8
< 0.0025 < 0.0025 0.0094 J < 0.0086 < 0.0025 0.0025 J < 0.0025 0.0049 J 0.014 < 0.0025
ERM Page 12 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
MW-29A MW-29A MW-29A MW-29A MW-29A MW-30A MW-30A MW-30A MW-30A MW-30A MW-30A MW-30A MW-31 MW-31 MW-31 MW-31
26-Feb-19 29-May-19 29-May-19 10-Sep-19 10-Sep-19 28-Nov-18 27-Feb-19 27-Feb-19 30-May-19 30-May-19 09-Sep-19 09-Sep-19 13-Nov-18 28-Feb-19 28-Feb-19 20-Jun-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-29A-GW-01-
022619-FF
MW-29A-GW-01-
052919
MW-29A-GW-01-
052919-FF
MW-29A-GW-01-
091019
MW-29A-GW-01-
091019-FF
MW-30A-GW-01-
112818
MW-30A-GW-01-
022719
MW-30A-GW-01-
022719-FF
MW-30A-GW-01-
053019
MW-30A-GW-01-
053019-FF
MW-30A-GW-01-
090919
MW-30A-GW-01-
090919-FF
MW-31-GW-01-
111318
MW-31-GW-01-
022819
MW-31-GW-01-
022819-FF
MW-31-GW-01-
062019
0.0000012 < 0.00050 0.000000030 0.00000 < 0.000526 < 0.00050 < 0.00055 0.0000000054 0.00000015
0.000021 < 0.000018 0.000018 0.000017 < 0.000019 < 0.000017 < 0.000019 0.000016 0.000018
0.000615 < 0.000250 0.000634 < 0.000245 < 0.000263 0.000857 0.000650 0.000266 J < 0.000245
< 130 J < 630 < 130 < 1,300 J < 130 < 130 J 120,000 < 250 < 130
< 1.0 2.9 J < 1.0 < 2.0 1.1 J 1.7 J 38 < 2.0 < 1.0
< 5.0 5.3 J < 5.0 84 76 80 490 31 21
31 34 35 79 100 120 910 120 110
< 0.50 < 0.50 J < 0.50 < 5.0 < 0.50 < 0.50 J 4.6 J < 1.0 < 0.50
< 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 2.7 J < 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5
< 0.152 < 0.076 < 0.152 J < 0.152 < 0.152 < 0.076 < 0.077 J < 0.306 < 0.312
< 3.0 J < 3.0 J < 3.0 J < 30 J 5.1 10 J 31 10 16
< 5.0 J < 25 < 5.0 J < 50 J < 5.0 J < 5.0 J 160 < 10 < 5.0
< 130 J < 130 < 130 < 1,300 J < 130 < 130 J 960,000 5,600 J- 1,500
< 3.0 < 3.0 J < 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 63 < 6.0 < 3.0
15 J 19 J 15 240 J 230 290 J 2,300 2,100 2,300
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.17 J < 0.50 < 0.10 1.7 J 0.11 J
< 3.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 40 27 22 300 < 6.0 13
< 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 50 J 14 J- 19 J 250 32 45
< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 J < 10 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 10 J < 5.0
< 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 J < 3.0 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 3.0 < 1.5
< 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 5.0 2.6 J < 2.5 < 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5
< 15 J < 15 J < 15 < 150 J < 15 < 15 J 1,400 < 30 < 15
< 20 < 100 < 20 J < 40 < 20 J < 20 610 < 40 < 20
< 2.5 < 0.54 J < 0.52 J < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.51 < 0.56 J < 0.50 < 0.53
< 0.33 < 0.069 J < 0.067 J < 0.065 < 0.065 < 0.066 < 0.072 J < 0.065 < 0.069
< 0.37 < 0.079 J < 0.077 J < 0.075 < 0.075 < 0.075 < 0.082 J < 0.075 < 0.079
< 2.2 < 0.46 J < 0.44 J < 0.43 < 0.43 < 0.43 < 0.47 J < 0.43 < 0.45
< 9.4 < 2.0 < 1.9 J < 1.9 < 1.9 < 1.9 < 2.1 < 1.9 < 2.0
< 0.27 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.28 < 0.15
< 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.30 < 0.33 < 0.16 2.6 < 0.30 < 0.16 0.19 J 0.51 J < 0.25
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 13 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
MW-29A MW-29A MW-29A MW-29A MW-29A MW-30A MW-30A MW-30A MW-30A MW-30A MW-30A MW-30A MW-31 MW-31 MW-31 MW-31
26-Feb-19 29-May-19 29-May-19 10-Sep-19 10-Sep-19 28-Nov-18 27-Feb-19 27-Feb-19 30-May-19 30-May-19 09-Sep-19 09-Sep-19 13-Nov-18 28-Feb-19 28-Feb-19 20-Jun-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-29A-GW-01-
022619-FF
MW-29A-GW-01-
052919
MW-29A-GW-01-
052919-FF
MW-29A-GW-01-
091019
MW-29A-GW-01-
091019-FF
MW-30A-GW-01-
112818
MW-30A-GW-01-
022719
MW-30A-GW-01-
022719-FF
MW-30A-GW-01-
053019
MW-30A-GW-01-
053019-FF
MW-30A-GW-01-
090919
MW-30A-GW-01-
090919-FF
MW-31-GW-01-
111318
MW-31-GW-01-
022819
MW-31-GW-01-
022819-FF
MW-31-GW-01-
062019
< 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 0.17 J < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 1.3 0.17 J 1.4
< 0.13 < 0.13 0.16 J 0.15 J 0.33 J 0.37 J 0.56 J 1.1 0.47 J
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.11 J
< 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 0.23 J 0.20 J 0.25 J
1.1 J+< 1.1 1.6 J 2.8 J 2.2 J 1.1 J+4.1 J-4.2 8.3 J
< 0.16 J < 1.0 J < 0.16 J < 0.32 J < 0.32 J < 1.0 < 0.080 J < 0.080 J < 0.16 R
< 0.98 J < 0.98 < 0.98 < 9.8 J < 10.0 J < 0.98 < 9.8 < 9.8 J < 9.8
< 0.38 J < 0.38 < 0.38 < 3.8 J < 10.0 J 0.44 J < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8
0.0031 J < 0.0025 J < 0.0025 J 0.0036 J 0.0031 J < 0.0052 < 0.0025 R < 0.0033 0.0051 J
ERM Page 14 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
MW-31 MW-31 MW-31 MW-32A MW-32A MW-32A MW-32A MW-33 MW-33 MW-33 MW-33 MW-33 MW-33 MW-33 MW-34 MW-34 MW-34
20-Jun-19 17-Sep-19 17-Sep-19 27-Nov-18 19-Mar-19 18-Jun-19 26-Sep-19 05-Dec-18 13-Mar-19 13-Mar-19 12-Jun-19 12-Jun-19 28-Aug-19 28-Aug-19 12-Nov-18 11-Mar-19 11-Mar-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-31-GW-01-
062019-FF
MW-31-GW-01-
091719
MW-31-GW-01-
091719-FF
MW-32A-GW-01-
112718
MW-32A-GW-01-
031919
MW-32A-GW-01-
061819
MW-32A-GW-01-
092619
MW-33-GW-01-
120518
MW-33-GW-01-
031319
MW-33-GW-01-
031319-FF
MW-33-GW-01-
061219
MW-33-GW-01-
061219-FF
MW-33-GW-01-
082819
MW-33-GW-01-
082819-FF
MW-34-GW-01-
111218
MW-34-GW-01-
031119
MW-34-GW-01-
031119-FF
0.0000000018 0.00000011 < 0.00052
0.000017 0.000019 < 0.00002
0.00164 0.00114 0.00107
< 130 J < 130 < 250 < 130
< 1.0 < 1.0 < 2.0 < 1.0
78 52 29 30
140 150 40 29
< 0.50 < 0.50 < 1.0 < 0.50
< 2.5 J < 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5
< 0.305 J < 0.076 J < 0.152
16 J 17 < 6.0 < 3.0
< 5.0 J < 5.0 < 10 < 5.0
6,900 J 7,900 < 1,300 J < 630 < 1,300 J < 130 < 250 < 130
< 3.0 J < 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0
2,300 J 2,400 320 23
0.15 J < 0.10 1.0 J 0.13 J
< 3.0 < 3.0 27 23
37 J- 37 < 10 < 5.0
< 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 10 < 5.0
< 1.5 J < 1.5 < 3.0 < 1.5
< 2.5 J < 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5
< 15 J < 15 < 30 < 15
< 20 J < 20 J < 40 < 20
< 0.50 J < 0.58 < 0.55
< 0.065 J < 0.075 < 0.071
< 0.074 J < 0.086 < 0.082
< 0.43 J < 0.49 < 0.47
< 1.9 < 2.1 < 2.0
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.16
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 15 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
MW-31 MW-31 MW-31 MW-32A MW-32A MW-32A MW-32A MW-33 MW-33 MW-33 MW-33 MW-33 MW-33 MW-33 MW-34 MW-34 MW-34
20-Jun-19 17-Sep-19 17-Sep-19 27-Nov-18 19-Mar-19 18-Jun-19 26-Sep-19 05-Dec-18 13-Mar-19 13-Mar-19 12-Jun-19 12-Jun-19 28-Aug-19 28-Aug-19 12-Nov-18 11-Mar-19 11-Mar-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-31-GW-01-
062019-FF
MW-31-GW-01-
091719
MW-31-GW-01-
091719-FF
MW-32A-GW-01-
112718
MW-32A-GW-01-
031919
MW-32A-GW-01-
061819
MW-32A-GW-01-
092619
MW-33-GW-01-
120518
MW-33-GW-01-
031319
MW-33-GW-01-
031319-FF
MW-33-GW-01-
061219
MW-33-GW-01-
061219-FF
MW-33-GW-01-
082819
MW-33-GW-01-
082819-FF
MW-34-GW-01-
111218
MW-34-GW-01-
031119
MW-34-GW-01-
031119-FF
< 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12
1.3 < 0.10 < 0.10
0.38 J < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
0.11 J < 0.10 < 0.10
0.22 J < 0.18 < 0.18
6.6 J+< 3.0 < 3.0 J < 5.9 < 2.7 1.6 1.7
< 0.50 < 0.80 < 0.80 J < 1.6 J < 2.5 J < 0.032 J < 0.032 J
< 39 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 10.0 < 39 < 9.8 < 9.8
< 15 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 10.0 < 15 < 3.8 < 3.8
< 0.0025 0.0025 J-< 0.0025 < 0.0025
ERM Page 16 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
MW-34 MW-34 MW-34 MW-34 MW-35 MW-35 MW-35 MW-35 PMW-1S PMW-1S PMW-1S PMW-1S PMW-1S PMW-1S PMW-1S PZ-1 PZ-1
25-Jun-19 25-Jun-19 05-Sep-19 05-Sep-19 27-Nov-18 26-Feb-19 29-May-19 10-Sep-19 12-Nov-18 11-Mar-19 11-Mar-19 25-Jun-19 25-Jun-19 05-Sep-19 05-Sep-19 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14
NNNNNNNN N N N NNNNNN
MW-34-GW-01-
062519
MW-34-GW-01-
062519-FF
MW-34-GW-01-
090519
MW-34-GW-01-
090519-FF
MW-35-GW-01-
112718
MW-35-GW-01-
022619
MW-35-GW-01-
052919
MW-35-GW-01-
091019
PMW-1S-GW-01-
111218
PMW-1S-GW-01-
031119
PMW-1S-GW-01-
031119-FF
PMW-1S-GW-01-
062519
PMW-1S-GW-01-
062519-FF
PMW-1S-GW-01-
090519
PMW-1S-GW-01-
090519-FF
PZ-01-01-
020414
PZ-01-01-
020414-FF
0.00000031 < 0.00050 0.000000093 < 0.00052 0.000000012 0.00000038 < 0.00000
0.000019 < 0.000018 0.000018 < 0.00002 0.000017 0.000018 < 0.00000078
< 0.000269 < 0.000250 0.000862 0.00119 < 0.000255 < 0.000250 0.000096 J
< 50
< 630 J < 630 < 250 < 130 J < 630 < 630 < 50
8.6
< 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 2.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 J 9.0
130
28 J 35 J < 10 < 5.0 J < 25 < 25 130
18
28 J 31 J 25 27 29 30 J 18
< 0.20 J
< 2.5 < 2.5 J < 1.0 < 0.50 J < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 0.20
2.6 J-
< 2.5 J < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 J 2.5 J-
< 0.101 < 0.076 < 0.076 J < 0.152 < 0.076 0.117 J < 0.077
22 J-
< 15 J < 15 J < 6.0 < 3.0 J < 15 < 15 J 22 J-
6.7 J-
< 25 J < 25 J < 10 < 5.0 J < 25 < 25 J 6.4 J-
1,700 J-
< 630 J < 630 < 250 < 130 J < 630 < 630 1,600
51 J-
< 3.0 < 3.0 J < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 J 51 J-
4,900
< 35 J < 35 26 22 J < 35 < 35 4,900
< 0.10
< 0.10 0.13 J 1.8 J < 0.10 < 0.10 0.10 J < 0.10
110
25 J 26 J 6.7 J 7.3 J < 15 < 15 110
78 J-
< 25 J < 25 J < 10 < 5.0 J < 25 < 25 J 78 J-
5.7 J-
< 25 < 5.0 J < 10 < 5.0 J < 25 < 5.0 J 6.2 J-
0.61 J-
< 1.5 J < 1.5 J < 3.0 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 J < 0.60
1.6 J-
< 2.5 < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 J 1.8 J-
17 J-
< 75 J < 75 < 30 < 15 J < 75 < 75 18 J
100 J-
< 100 < 100 J < 40 < 20 J < 100 < 100 J 100 J-
< 0.51 J < 0.55 < 0.54 < 0.57 < 0.53 J < 0.54 J < 0.43
< 0.15
< 1.7
< 0.067 < 0.071 < 0.070 < 0.074 < 0.069 < 0.070 J < 0.056 J
< 0.076 < 0.081 < 0.080 < 0.084 < 0.079 < 0.080 J < 0.064 J
< 0.44 < 0.47 < 0.46 < 0.48 < 0.45 < 0.46 J
< 1.9 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.1 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 1.6
< 0.0044
< 0.012
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.0029
1.5
< 0.22
< 0.10
< 0.10
< 0.13
< 0.14
< 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.77
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 17 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
MW-34 MW-34 MW-34 MW-34 MW-35 MW-35 MW-35 MW-35 PMW-1S PMW-1S PMW-1S PMW-1S PMW-1S PMW-1S PMW-1S PZ-1 PZ-1
25-Jun-19 25-Jun-19 05-Sep-19 05-Sep-19 27-Nov-18 26-Feb-19 29-May-19 10-Sep-19 12-Nov-18 11-Mar-19 11-Mar-19 25-Jun-19 25-Jun-19 05-Sep-19 05-Sep-19 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14
NNNNNNNN N N N NNNNNN
MW-34-GW-01-
062519
MW-34-GW-01-
062519-FF
MW-34-GW-01-
090519
MW-34-GW-01-
090519-FF
MW-35-GW-01-
112718
MW-35-GW-01-
022619
MW-35-GW-01-
052919
MW-35-GW-01-
091019
PMW-1S-GW-01-
111218
PMW-1S-GW-01-
031119
PMW-1S-GW-01-
031119-FF
PMW-1S-GW-01-
062519
PMW-1S-GW-01-
062519-FF
PMW-1S-GW-01-
090519
PMW-1S-GW-01-
090519-FF
PZ-01-01-
020414
PZ-01-01-
020414-FF
< 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 1.4
0.97 J-
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
0.64 J
< 0.10
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
< 0.22
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18
< 0.0050
3.3 J+2.4 J+0.41 J 0.40 J 0.79 J+0.60 J+11 J
< 0.032 R < 0.25 < 0.016 J < 0.016 J < 0.016 R < 0.050 < 0.80 J
< 9.8 < 0.98 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 0.98 21
< 3.8 < 0.38 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 0.38 < 3.8
< 0.0025 < 0.0025 < 0.0025 < 0.0025 < 0.0025 0.0039 J < 0.0050
ERM Page 18 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
PZ-1 PZ-1 PZ-1 PZ-1 PZ-1 PZ-1 PZ-3 PZ-3 PZ-3 PZ-3 PZ-1 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4
26-Nov-18 27-Feb-19 27-Feb-19 18-Jun-19 18-Jun-19 18-Sep-19 27-Nov-18 28-Mar-19 19-Jun-19 17-Sep-19 18-Sep-19 13-Feb-14 13-Feb-14 08-Nov-18 11-Mar-19 11-Mar-19 24-Jun-19 24-Jun-19 27-Aug-19 27-Aug-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
PZ-1-GW-01-
112618
PZ-1-GW-01-
022719
PZ-1-GW-01-
022719-FF
PZ-1-GW-01-
061819
PZ-1-GW-01-
061819-FF
PZ-1-GW-01-
091819
PZ-3-GW-01-
112718
PZ-3-GW-01-
032819
PZ-3-GW-01-
061919
PZ-3-GW-01-
091719
PZ-1-GW-01-
091819-FF
PZ-04-01-
021314
PZ-04-01-
021314-FF
PZ-4-GW-01-
110818
PZ-4-GW-01-
031119
PZ-4-GW-01-
031119-FF
PZ-4-GW-01-
062419
PZ-4-GW-01-
062419-FF
PZ-4-GW-01-
082719
PZ-4-GW-01-
082719-FF
0.000000028 0.000000068 < 0.00051 0.00000012 0.000000023 0.000000016 < 0.00054 < 0.000521 0.00000023
0.000017 0.000017 < 0.000019 0.000017 0.0000018 0.000018 < 0.00002 < 0.000019 0.000018
< 0.000260 < 0.000252 < 0.000255 < 0.000250 0.000046 J < 0.000258 < 0.000272 < 0.000260 < 0.000250
62 J
< 1,300 J < 130 < 130 < 130 J < 50 < 250 < 130 < 130 J < 130
2.0 J
18 J 19 17 20 2.3 J 4.5 J 3.9 J 2.8 J < 5.6
170
150 190 170 180 170 260 280 260 290
520
14 15 11 17 520 580 J-570 550 680
< 0.20
< 5.0 J < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 J 0.76 J < 1.0 J < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 J
17
< 5.0 4.1 J 4.3 J-4.6 J-18 6.6 J-5.8 4.7 J-4.8 J-
< 0.330 J < 0.316 < 0.078 < 0.511 < 0.077 < 0.076 J < 0.152 < 0.076 < 0.076
< 1.2
61 J 53 46 J-57 J < 1.2 < 6.0 J 18 27 J 27
< 2.0 J
< 50 J 16 J-11 J-16 J 3.6 J-< 10 J < 5.0 < 5.0 J < 25
< 50 J
< 1,300 J 720 590 1,100 J < 50 J < 250 J < 130 < 130 J < 130
3.1
270 300 300 J-290 3.1 23 J-21 17 J-19
600
8,800 J 9,100 9,400 11,000 J 610 4,300 4,600 4,100 J 4,500
< 0.10
< 1.0 1.1 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 1.4 J < 0.50 < 0.92 < 0.50
96
140 130 180 150 94 120 110 110 130
21
140 J 100 J-90 J-110 J 21 36 J-44 49 J 58
2.2 J-
< 10 J < 5.0 6.2 J-5.7 J-2.3 J-< 10 J < 5.0 < 5.0 J < 5.0 J
1.6 J
< 3.0 < 1.5 < 1.5 J < 1.5 1.5 J < 3.0 J < 1.5 < 1.5 J < 1.5 J
5.1
< 5.0 3.0 J 3.7 J-4.0 J 5.3 < 5.0 4.4 J 3.3 J-3.7 J
14 J
< 150 J < 15 < 15 26 J 14 J < 30 < 15 < 15 J 17 J
< 8.0
270 270 J-220 J-250 J-< 8.0 < 40 J < 20 < 20 J < 20 J
< 0.45 J < 0.45 < 0.43 J < 2.1 < 0.47 < 0.49 J < 0.48 < 0.49 J < 0.48 J
< 0.17
< 1.9
< 0.058 J < 0.059 < 0.056 J < 0.28 < 0.062 J < 0.064 J < 0.062 < 0.063 < 0.063 J
< 0.066 J < 0.067 < 0.064 J < 0.31 < 0.07 J < 0.073 J < 0.071 < 0.072 < 0.072 J
< 0.38 J < 0.39 < 0.37 J < 1.8 < 0.42 J < 0.41 < 0.42 < 0.41 J
4.2 J
< 1.7 < 1.6 < 7.9 < 1.8 < 1.8 < 1.8 < 1.8 < 1.8
< 0.0048
< 0.013
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.0032 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.30 < 0.30
0.18 J
< 0.22
0.29 J
< 0.10
< 0.13
< 0.14
0.35 J 6.8 0.45 J 0.36 J 9.9 20 25 21 J+26
0.71 J 70 0.63 J < 0.10 16 81 100 84 J+100
< 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 0.58 < 0.29
2.8 1.2 J 3.0 3.4 < 0.32 2.2 J < 0.80 < 0.32 < 0.40
< 0.15 2.7 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.30 < 0.15
0.43 J 11 0.50 J 0.31 J 17 51 63 51 J+64
ERM Page 19 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
PZ-1 PZ-1 PZ-1 PZ-1 PZ-1 PZ-1 PZ-3 PZ-3 PZ-3 PZ-3 PZ-1 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4 PZ-4
26-Nov-18 27-Feb-19 27-Feb-19 18-Jun-19 18-Jun-19 18-Sep-19 27-Nov-18 28-Mar-19 19-Jun-19 17-Sep-19 18-Sep-19 13-Feb-14 13-Feb-14 08-Nov-18 11-Mar-19 11-Mar-19 24-Jun-19 24-Jun-19 27-Aug-19 27-Aug-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
PZ-1-GW-01-
112618
PZ-1-GW-01-
022719
PZ-1-GW-01-
022719-FF
PZ-1-GW-01-
061819
PZ-1-GW-01-
061819-FF
PZ-1-GW-01-
091819
PZ-3-GW-01-
112718
PZ-3-GW-01-
032819
PZ-3-GW-01-
061919
PZ-3-GW-01-
091719
PZ-1-GW-01-
091819-FF
PZ-04-01-
021314
PZ-04-01-
021314-FF
PZ-4-GW-01-
110818
PZ-4-GW-01-
031119
PZ-4-GW-01-
031119-FF
PZ-4-GW-01-
062419
PZ-4-GW-01-
062419-FF
PZ-4-GW-01-
082719
PZ-4-GW-01-
082719-FF
5.5 1.1 7.3 5.3 5.5 12 16 17 J+20
0.85 J
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.20 < 0.10
< 0.35
1.2
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 0.88 J 0.79 J 1.6 J 1.8 J+1.5
< 0.22
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.20 < 0.10
< 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.90 < 0.90 < 0.36 < 0.18
0.0055 J-
13 J-13 J 9.9 J < 13 J 2.9 J 3.4 J- 3.3 J 3.7 J+9.5 J+
< 0.80 J < 0.80 J < 0.80 J < 5.0 J < 0.32 J < 0.32 J < 0.40 J < 0.80 R < 1.3
74 J+ 46 J 50 J 69 < 9.8 6.9 62 54 73
< 3.8 < 3.8 J < 0.38 < 15 130 13 93 92 98
< 0.0025 0.0032 J 0.042 0.0034 J 0.0057 J- 0.0041 J < 0.0080 < 0.0025 < 0.0025 R
ERM Page 20 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-7 PZ-7 PZ-7 PZ-7 PZ-7
07-Nov-18 14-Mar-19 14-Mar-19 03-Jun-19 03-Jun-19 25-Sep-19 25-Sep-19 31-Jan-14 31-Jan-14 29-Oct-18 01-Apr-19 01-Apr-19 04-Jun-19 04-Jun-19 23-Sep-19 23-Sep-19 29-Oct-18 13-Mar-19 13-Mar-19 12-Jun-19 12-Jun-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
PZ-5-GW-01-
110718
PZ-5-GW-01-
031419
PZ-5-GW-01-
031419-FF
PZ-5-GW-01-
060319
PZ-5-GW-01-
060319-FF
PZ-5-GW-01-
092519
PZ-5-GW-01-
092519-FF
PZ-06-01-
013114
PZ-06-01-
013114-FF
PZ-6-GW-01-
102918
PZ-6-GW-01-
040119
PZ-6-GW-01-
040119-FF
PZ-6-GW-01-
060419
PZ-6-GW-01-
060419-FF
PZ-6-GW-01-
092319
PZ-6-GW-01-
092319-FF
PZ-7-GW-01-
102918
PZ-7-GW-01-
031319
PZ-7-GW-01-
031319-FF
PZ-7-GW-01-
061219
PZ-7-GW-01-
061219-FF
0.000000012 0.0000012 0.0000000054 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000092 0.00000011 0.000000074 < 0.00051 0.000000012 0.00000015 < 0.0005
0.000018 0.000017 0.000019 0.000018 0.00000084 0.000018 0.000018 0.000019 < 0.000018 0.000017 0.000018 < 0.000018
0.00131 0.00280 < 0.000250 < 0.000255 0.0035 0.00587 0.00904 0.00555 0.00242 0.0115 < 0.000250 < 0.000250
< 50
< 250 < 130 J < 1,300 J < 630 < 50 < 250 < 1,300 J < 1,300 < 630 < 250 < 630 < 1,300 J
2.0 J
< 2.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 1.9 J 3.9 J 6.2 J-6.1 J 6.4 J 4.3 J 1.5 J 3.5 J
30
17 J 15 < 50 34 J 28 29 54 J < 50 57 33 36 J 81 J
240
580 370 J 390 640 240 210 220 J 230 290 2,500 1,900 2,100
< 0.20 J
< 1.0 < 0.50 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 0.20 < 1.0 < 5.0 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 1.0 < 0.50 J < 5.0
< 1.0 J
< 5.0 < 2.5 J < 2.5 J < 2.5 J < 1.0 J < 5.0 3.0 J-< 2.5 < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5
< 0.321 < 0.312 < 0.315 < 0.317 0.129 J < 0.077 J < 0.309 < 0.078 < 0.308 < 0.079 J < 0.318 < 0.079
< 1.2 J
< 6.0 10 J < 30 J 21 J < 1.2 J < 6.0 < 30 J < 30 < 15 < 6.0 17 J < 30 J
< 2.0 J
< 10 < 5.0 J < 50 J < 25 < 2.0 J < 10 < 50 J < 50 < 25 < 10 < 25 < 50 J
1,500 J-
9,100 6,800 J 9,300 J-23,000 1,400 2,200 < 1,300 J < 1,300 1,000 J 29,000 28,000 38,000 J
< 1.2 J
< 6.0 < 3.0 J < 3.0 J < 3.0 J < 1.2 J < 6.0 < 30 J < 3.0 3.1 J-< 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 J
1,200
13,000 11,000 J 14,000 19,000 J-1,200 1,500 830 J 720 1,200 J 20,000 20,000 22,000 J
< 0.10
1.2 J < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.17 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
31
< 6.0 < 3.0 < 30 < 15 27 140 94 J 84 J 110 J < 6.0 16 J < 30
5.9 J-
< 10 12 J < 50 J 27 J 5.1 J-< 10 < 50 J < 50 26 J-< 10 35 J < 50 J
< 2.0 J
< 10 < 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 2.0 J < 10 < 50 < 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 10 < 5.0 < 50
< 0.60 J
< 3.0 < 1.5 J < 1.5 J < 1.5 J < 0.60 < 3.0 < 1.5 J < 1.5 < 1.5 J < 3.0 < 7.5 < 1.5 J
< 1.0 J
< 5.0 < 2.5 J < 2.5 J < 2.5 J < 1.0 J < 5.0 < 2.5 J < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 J
< 6.0 J
< 30 < 15 J < 150 < 75 < 6.0 < 30 < 150 J < 150 < 75 < 30 < 75 < 150 J
9.9 J-
< 40 39 J-< 200 J < 100 < 8.0 J < 40 < 200 J < 200 < 100 J < 40 < 100 < 200 J
< 0.48 J < 0.49 < 9.6 < 2.5 < 0.49 < 5.4 J < 0.50 < 5.2 < 0.50 < 5.4 J < 0.47 < 2.2
< 0.17
< 2.0
< 0.062 < 0.063 < 1.2 < 0.32 < 0.063 J < 0.70 J < 0.065 < 0.67 < 0.065 < 0.70 J < 0.061 < 0.29
< 0.071 J < 0.072 < 1.4 < 0.37 < 0.072 < 0.80 J < 0.074 < 0.77 < 0.074 < 0.80 J < 0.069 < 0.33
< 0.41 J < 0.42 < 8.2 < 2.1 < 4.6 J < 0.43 < 4.4 < 0.42 < 4.6 J < 0.40 < 1.9
< 1.8 J < 1.8 < 35 < 9.2 < 1.8 < 20 J < 1.9 < 19 < 1.8 < 20 J < 1.7 < 8.3
0.76
< 0.013
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 0.59 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.10
< 0.22
< 0.10
< 0.10
< 0.13
< 0.14
< 0.14 < 0.14 0.27 J < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 < 0.10 0.33 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.93 < 0.63 < 0.16 < 0.16 0.23 J < 0.31 < 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.68 0.37 J
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 < 0.13 0.40 J < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 21 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-5 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-6 PZ-7 PZ-7 PZ-7 PZ-7 PZ-7
07-Nov-18 14-Mar-19 14-Mar-19 03-Jun-19 03-Jun-19 25-Sep-19 25-Sep-19 31-Jan-14 31-Jan-14 29-Oct-18 01-Apr-19 01-Apr-19 04-Jun-19 04-Jun-19 23-Sep-19 23-Sep-19 29-Oct-18 13-Mar-19 13-Mar-19 12-Jun-19 12-Jun-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
PZ-5-GW-01-
110718
PZ-5-GW-01-
031419
PZ-5-GW-01-
031419-FF
PZ-5-GW-01-
060319
PZ-5-GW-01-
060319-FF
PZ-5-GW-01-
092519
PZ-5-GW-01-
092519-FF
PZ-06-01-
013114
PZ-06-01-
013114-FF
PZ-6-GW-01-
102918
PZ-6-GW-01-
040119
PZ-6-GW-01-
040119-FF
PZ-6-GW-01-
060419
PZ-6-GW-01-
060419-FF
PZ-6-GW-01-
092319
PZ-6-GW-01-
092319-FF
PZ-7-GW-01-
102918
PZ-7-GW-01-
031319
PZ-7-GW-01-
031319-FF
PZ-7-GW-01-
061219
PZ-7-GW-01-
061219-FF
0.73 J 1.5 2.8 2.1 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12
< 0.25
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.35
< 0.10
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 0.15 J < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
< 0.22
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18
< 0.0050
12 11 J 17 J 25 J+3.8 J 4.2 J 5.1 J 5.4 J 9.0 J+12 J 12 J-15 J
< 0.32 J < 0.40 J < 0.40 J < 1.3 < 0.32 < 0.32 R < 0.32 J < 0.32 R < 1.3 J < 0.40 R < 0.80 J < 1.6 J
< 39 42 160 J < 0.98 < 9.8 < 0.98 < 9.8 < 1.0 J < 39 < 9.8 67 53
< 15 < 3.8 < 10.0 J < 0.38 J < 3.8 < 0.38 < 3.8 < 1.0 J < 15 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 10.0
0.011 0.0057 J 0.011 0.0033 J < 0.0050 0.0078 J < 0.0025 0.0062 J < 0.0025 0.0088 J < 0.0025 0.0080 J
ERM Page 22 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
PZ-7 PZ-7 PZ-8 PZ-8 PZ-10 PZ-10 PZ-10 PZ-10 PZ-10 PZ-10 PZ-12 PZ-12 PZ-16 PZ-16 PZ-18 PZ-18 PZ-22 PZ-22 PZ-24 PZ-24 PZ-26 PZ-26
28-Aug-19 28-Aug-19 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 27-Nov-18 18-Mar-19 10-Jun-19 03-Sep-19 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 07-Feb-14 07-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N NNNNN
PZ-7-GW-01-
082819
PZ-7-GW-01-
082819-FF
PZ-08-01-
020514
PZ-08-01-
020514-FF
PZ-10-01-
020414
PZ-10-01-
020414-FF
PZ-10-GW-01-
112718
PZ-10-GW-01-
031819
PZ-10-GW-01-
061019
PZ-10-GW-01-
090319
PZ-12-01-
020414
PZ-12-01-
020414-FF
PZ-16-01-
020314
PZ-16-01-
020314-FF
PZ-18-01-
020314
PZ-18-01-
020314-FF
PZ-22-01-
020314
PZ-22-01-
020314-FF
PZ-24-01-
020714
PZ-24-01-
020714-FF
PZ-26-01-
020514
PZ-26-01-
020514-FF
< 0.00050 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000072 0.000000012 0.000000002 < 0.0000000013 0.00000 0.00000028
< 0.000019 0.00000087 0.00000072 0.00000084 0.00000074 0.00000064 < 0.00000078 0.0000047 0.0000014
< 0.000250 J 0.0029 0.00034 J 0.015 0.000074 J 0.00018 J 0.000068 J 0.0017 J 0.038
56 J 51 J 3,600 < 50 < 50 < 60 < 50 700
< 130 < 50 < 50 3,600 < 50 < 50 < 50 < 50 630
0.70 J < 0.40 0.85 J 1.2 J 0.93 J 1.4 J 0.71 J 0.89 J
< 4.0 0.67 J < 0.40 0.76 J 0.56 J 0.74 J 1.4 J 0.63 J 0.97 J
130 53 49 55 19 69 40 62
53 120 53 46 54 17 64 36 56
160 110 210 95 46 20 84 250
2,900 160 110 200 98 55 17 85 240
< 1 0.39 J-2.3 J- 0.62 J-< 0.20 J < 0.20 J < 0.20 0.78 J
< 0.50 J 0.95 J 0.37 J 1.8 J < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.20 0.85 J
< 1.0 < 1.0 J < 1.0 J 1.0 J-< 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 < 1.0
< 2.5 J < 1.0 < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 < 1.0
< 0.322 J 0.671 0.159 J 0.251 J 0.158 J 0.400 J 0.379 J < 0.24 < 0.279 J
65 28 J-81 J- 17 J-< 1.2 J 23 J- 8.1 34
25 60 29 J-81 J- 16 J-< 1.2 J 21 J- 8.4 32
2.7 J < 2.0 J < 2.0 J < 2.0 J < 2.0 J 2.3 J-< 2.0 < 2.0
< 25 2.5 J 2.1 J-< 2.0 J < 2.0 J < 2.0 J 2.0 J- 3.2 J < 2.0
83,000 240,000 J-160,000 J- 1,500 J- 2,800 J- 750 J- 70,000 290,000
36,000 80,000 240,000 J-160,000 J- 1,500 2,300 690 70,000 290,000
< 1.2 < 1.2 J < 1.2 J < 1.2 J < 1.2 J < 1.2 J < 1.2 < 1.2
< 3.0 < 1.2 < 1.2 J < 1.2 J < 1.2 J < 1.2 J < 1.2 J < 1.2 < 1.2
9,500 16,000 12,000 8,300 810 5,400 6,000 15,000
20,000 9,000 16,000 12,000 8,100 780 5,500 6,200 14,000
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
0.16 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
8.4 2.4 J 13 11 1.4 J 120 < 1.2 14
19 5.4 < 1.6 8.4 10 < 1.2 110 < 1.2 8.9
180 45 J-200 J-45 J-2.0 J-66 J-34 64
< 25 160 46 J-190 J-44 J-< 2.0 J 62 J-36 61
6.2 < 2.0 J 2.6 J-2.2 J-< 2.0 J 4.0 J-< 2.0 J < 2.0
< 5.0 J 6.4 4.4 J-3.2 J-< 2.0 J < 2.0 J 2.4 J-< 2.0 J 2.1 J
< 0.60 < 0.60 J < 0.60 J < 0.60 J < 0.60 J < 0.60 J < 0.60 < 0.60
< 1.5 J < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60 < 0.60
< 1.0 < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 < 1.0
< 2.5 < 1.0 < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 J < 1.0 < 1.0
6.5 J < 6.0 J < 6.0 J < 6.0 J < 6.0 J 7.3 J-< 6.0 9.9 J
< 15 6.7 J < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 < 6.0 7.3 J < 6.0 8.6 J
15 11 J-69 J-< 8.0 J < 8.0 J < 8.0 J 15 11
21 J 19 < 8.0 J 70 J-< 8.0 J < 8.0 J < 8.0 J < 8.0 12
< 0.46 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.48 < 0.46 < 0.52 < 0.50
< 0.18 < 0.17 0.47 J+< 0.18 < 0.17 < 0.16 < 0.18 < 0.18
< 2.0 J < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 1.9 < 2.1 < 2.0 J
< 0.060 < 0.065 J < 0.064 J < 0.064 J < 0.065 J < 0.063 J < 0.06 J < 0.068 J < 0.065 J
< 0.068 < 0.074 J < 0.073 J < 0.074 J < 0.074 J < 0.072 J < 0.068 J < 0.077 J < 0.074 J
< 0.39
< 1.7 < 1.8 < 1.8 < 1.8 < 1.9 < 1.8 < 1.7 < 1.9 < 1.8
0.54 0.33 0.14 < 0.0051 0.018 J < 0.0049 0.19 J 0.64
< 0.13 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.14 < 0.13
< 0.30 0.32 J 0.1 0.054 < 0.0034 < 0.0033 0.0070 J 1.3 0.4 J
1.8 0.56 J 1.1 0.38 J < 0.10 1.7 7.2 0.84 J
0.53 J 0.29 J 0.36 J 0.29 J < 0.22 < 0.22 0.27 J 0.41 J
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 1.7 16 0.18 J
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.13 0.30 J 0.15 J 0.36 J 0.34 J < 0.13 0.43 J 0.33 J
18 < 0.14 15 < 0.14 0.83 J < 0.14 < 0.14 7.7
< 0.28 79 < 0.14 57 < 0.14 0.92 J < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.20 120 0.31 J 110 < 0.10 0.71 J < 0.10 < 0.10 0.29 J
< 0.58 < 0.29 < 0.29 0.84 J < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.32 71 < 0.54 88 < 0.16 1.7 J 0.34 J < 0.97 4.9
< 0.30 1.3 < 0.15 1.7 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.26 99 < 0.13 95 < 0.13 0.95 J < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 23 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-3
Upper Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
PZ-7 PZ-7 PZ-8 PZ-8 PZ-10 PZ-10 PZ-10 PZ-10 PZ-10 PZ-10 PZ-12 PZ-12 PZ-16 PZ-16 PZ-18 PZ-18 PZ-22 PZ-22 PZ-24 PZ-24 PZ-26 PZ-26
28-Aug-19 28-Aug-19 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 27-Nov-18 18-Mar-19 10-Jun-19 03-Sep-19 04-Feb-14 04-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 03-Feb-14 07-Feb-14 07-Feb-14 05-Feb-14 05-Feb-14
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N NNNNN
PZ-7-GW-01-
082819
PZ-7-GW-01-
082819-FF
PZ-08-01-
020514
PZ-08-01-
020514-FF
PZ-10-01-
020414
PZ-10-01-
020414-FF
PZ-10-GW-01-
112718
PZ-10-GW-01-
031819
PZ-10-GW-01-
061019
PZ-10-GW-01-
090319
PZ-12-01-
020414
PZ-12-01-
020414-FF
PZ-16-01-
020314
PZ-16-01-
020314-FF
PZ-18-01-
020314
PZ-18-01-
020314-FF
PZ-22-01-
020314
PZ-22-01-
020314-FF
PZ-24-01-
020714
PZ-24-01-
020714-FF
PZ-26-01-
020514
PZ-26-01-
020514-FF
< 0.24 100 19 74 7.2 5.1 0.77 J 23 74 J-
14 J-< 0.25 J 9.7 J-< 0.25 < 0.25 < 0.25 < 0.25 0.96 J-
< 0.20 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 1.4 < 0.10
13 0.41 J 9.9 < 0.35 0.99 J < 0.35 < 0.35 11
0.59 J 0.11 J 0.31 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.66 J 0.47 J
< 0.26 0.38 J 0.30 J 0.29 J 0.13 J < 0.13 1.4 26 0.86 J
< 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 < 0.22 0.27 J < 0.22
< 0.20 < 0.10 0.13 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 2.5 0.14 J
< 0.36 < 0.18 0.30 J < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 2.2 0.28 J
0.026 J- 0.023 0.0095 J < 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J 0.0066 J- 0.0057 J-
28 J+ 13 16 15 4.8 J 1.9 J 3.4 J 13 17
< 2.5 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 0.32 J < 0.40 J < 0.32 J < 0.16 J
86 500 < 9.8 470 < 9.8 14 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8
< 15 410 < 3.8 540 13 18 < 3.8 < 3.8 23
< 0.0025 J 0.029 0.0053 J 0.015 0.0073 J < 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J 0.0093 J-< 0.0050
ERM Page 24 of 24 PN0508502 - $SULO
Notes:
< = Constituent not detected at concentrations above the laboratory reporting detection limit. The laboratory reporting detection limit is shown.
Results shown in bold font indicate a constituent was detected above the laboratory reporting detection limit.
μg/L = micrograms per liter
DL = Detection limit
Empty cells = Not analyzed
mg/L = milligrams per liter
ND = Not detected
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
SIM = Selected ion monitoring mode. If a constituent has both SIM and non-SIM results, they are combined into one dataset for the risk calculations
TEQ = Toxic Equivalence
Analyses performed by TestAmerica - Sacramento, CA; TestAmerica - Savannah, GA; Alpha Analytical - Westborough, MA; TestAmerica - Irvine, CA; TestAmerica - Denver, CO; IsoTech; BROOKS Applied Labs; BRL; and Eaton Analytical (Eurofins).
Qualifiers:
J = The result is an estimated quantity. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the analyte in the sample.
J+ = The result is an estimated quantity, biased high. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the analyte in the sample.
J-J- = The result is an estimated quantity, biased low. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the alyte in the sample.
R = The sample result is rejected and unusable due to serious deficiencies in meeting quality control criteria. The analyte may or may not be present in the sample.
Table B-4
Lower Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID MW-9 MW-9 MW-9 MW-9 MW-9 MW-9 MW-9 MW-22B MW-22B MW-22B MW-22B MW-22B MW-22B MW-22B MW-24B MW-24B MW-24B MW-24B
Sample Date 07-Nov-18 14-Mar-19 14-Mar-19 03-Jun-19 03-Jun-19 25-Sep-19 25-Sep-19 08-Nov-18 18-Mar-19 18-Mar-19 10-Jun-19 10-Jun-19 03-Sep-19 03-Sep-19 14-Nov-18 12-Mar-19 12-Mar-19 13-Jun-19
Sample Type N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Sample ID
MW-9-GW-
01-110718
MW-9-GW-
01-031419
MW-9-GW-01-
031419-FF
MW-9-GW-
01-060319
MW-9-GW-01-
060319-FF
MW-9-GW-
01-092519
MW-9-GW-01-
092519-FF
MW-22B-GW-01-
110818
MW-22B-GW-
01-031819
MW-22B-GW-01-
031819-FF
MW-22B-GW-
01-061019
MW-22B-GW-01-
061019-FF
MW-22B-GW-
01-090319
MW-22B-GW-01-
090319-FF
MW-24B-GW-
01-111418
MW-24B-GW-
01-031219
MW-24B-GW-
01-031219-FF
MW-24B-GW-01-
061319
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L 0.00000011 0.00000015 < 0.00026 < 0.00052 0.0000000012
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L 0.000017 0.000018 < 0.00002 < 0.000019 0.000019
Total PCBs μg/L < 0.000252 < 0.000243 J < 0.000272 < 0.000260 < 0.000258
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L < 130 J < 250 < 130 < 250 J < 630
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L 9.5 J < 2.0 2.9 J < 2.0 J < 1.0
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L 28 38 45 25 J-< 25
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L 29 J 21 J-22 62 J-27
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L < 0.50 J < 1.0 J < 0.50 J < 1.0 J < 0.50 J
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L < 2.5 J < 5.0 J < 2.5 < 5.0 J < 2.5
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L < 0.076 J < 0.076 < 0.152 J < 0.152 < 0.076
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L < 3.0 J < 6.0 J < 3.0 J < 6.0 J < 15
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L < 5.0 J < 10 J < 5.0 < 10 J < 25
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L < 250 < 130 J < 1,300 J < 630 < 250 J < 130 J < 130 J < 630 J < 250 J < 630
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L < 3.0 J < 6.0 J < 3.0 < 6.0 J < 3.0
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L 49 J < 14 < 7.0 J 49 J < 35
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L 1.7 J < 0.10 1.2 J < 0.50
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L < 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 6.0 J < 15
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L < 5.0 J < 10 J < 5.0 J < 10 J < 25
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L < 5.0 J < 10 J < 5.0 < 10 J < 5.0
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L < 1.5 J < 3.0 J < 1.5 < 3.0 J < 7.5
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 5.0 J < 2.5
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L < 15 J < 30 < 15 J < 30 J < 75
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L 28 J-< 40 J < 20 < 40 J < 100
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L < 0.50 < 9.8 < 0.52 J < 0.55 < 4.9
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L < 0.064 < 1.3 < 0.067 J < 0.071 < 0.63
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L < 0.074 < 1.4 < 0.077 J < 0.081 < 0.72
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L < 0.42 < 8.3 < 0.44 J < 0.47 < 4.2
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L < 1.8 < 36 < 1.9 < 2.0 < 18
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
Bromoform μg/L < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
Bromomethane μg/L < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
Carbon disulfide μg/L 0.37 J 0.83 J < 0.74 0.56 J < 0.55
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
Dibromochloromethane μg/L < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 1 of 6 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-4
Lower Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID MW-9 MW-9 MW-9 MW-9 MW-9 MW-9 MW-9 MW-22B MW-22B MW-22B MW-22B MW-22B MW-22B MW-22B MW-24B MW-24B MW-24B MW-24B
Sample Date 07-Nov-18 14-Mar-19 14-Mar-19 03-Jun-19 03-Jun-19 25-Sep-19 25-Sep-19 08-Nov-18 18-Mar-19 18-Mar-19 10-Jun-19 10-Jun-19 03-Sep-19 03-Sep-19 14-Nov-18 12-Mar-19 12-Mar-19 13-Jun-19
Sample Type N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Sample ID
MW-9-GW-
01-110718
MW-9-GW-
01-031419
MW-9-GW-01-
031419-FF
MW-9-GW-
01-060319
MW-9-GW-01-
060319-FF
MW-9-GW-
01-092519
MW-9-GW-01-
092519-FF
MW-22B-GW-01-
110818
MW-22B-GW-
01-031819
MW-22B-GW-01-
031819-FF
MW-22B-GW-
01-061019
MW-22B-GW-01-
061019-FF
MW-22B-GW-
01-090319
MW-22B-GW-01-
090319-FF
MW-24B-GW-
01-111418
MW-24B-GW-
01-031219
MW-24B-GW-
01-031219-FF
MW-24B-GW-01-
061319
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
m,p Xylenes μg/L < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L 1.4 J < 1.5 < 1.5 J 5.0 J+ 1.3 J- 1.9 J-< 1.5 J < 1.3 1.2 J-< 1.5 J < 1.5
Nitrite as N mg/L < 0.32 J < 0.40 J < 0.40 J < 1.3 < 0.32 J < 0.32 J < 0.40 J < 1.3 < 0.32 J < 0.40 J < 0.40 J
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L < 9.8 < 9.8 < 10.0 J < 0.98 < 0.98 < 9.8 < 1.0 < 3.9 J < 9.8 < 9.8 < 10.0
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L < 3.8 < 3.8 < 10.0 J < 0.38 J < 0.38 < 3.8 < 1.0 < 1.5 J < 3.8 < 3.8 < 10.0
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L 0.019 J 0.084 0.058 0.045
ERM Page 2 of 6 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-4
Lower Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
MW-24B MW-24B MW-24B MW-25B MW-25B MW-25B MW-25B MW-25B MW-25B MW-25B MW-29B MW-29B MW-29B MW-29B MW-29B MW-29B MW-29B MW-30B
13-Jun-19 29-Aug-19 29-Aug-19 13-Nov-18 25-Feb-19 25-Feb-19 24-Jun-19 24-Jun-19 26-Aug-19 26-Aug-19 29-Nov-18 26-Feb-19 26-Feb-19 29-May-19 29-May-19 10-Sep-19 10-Sep-19 28-Nov-18
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-24B-GW-
01-061319-FF
MW-24B-GW-
01-082919
MW-24B-GW-01-
082919-FF
MW-25B-GW-
01-111318
MW-25B-GW-
01-022519
MW-25B-GW-
01-022519-FF
MW-25B-GW-
01-062419
MW-25B-GW-
01-062419-FF
MW-25B-GW-
01-082619
MW-25B-GW-
01-082619-FF
MW-29B-GW-
01-112918
MW-29B-GW-
01-022619
MW-29B-GW-
01-022619-FF
MW-29B-GW-
01-052919
MW-29B-GW-01-
052919-FF
MW-29B-GW-
01-091019
MW-29B-GW-
01-091019-FF
MW-30B-GW-01-
112818
0.00000021 < 0.00067 0.00000016 0.00000018 0.00000014 0.00000015 < 0.000495 < 0.00050 < 0.00042
0.000021 < 0.000019 0.000016 0.000019 0.000018 0.000017 < 0.000019 < 0.000017 < 0.000018
< 0.000272 < 0.000278 < 0.000245 < 0.000263 < 0.000248 0.000383 J 0.000269 J < 0.000250 0.000621
< 1,300 J < 130 J < 250 < 130 < 130 J < 130 < 250 J < 130 < 630 < 250
1.0 J < 2.5 < 2.0 1.7 J < 1.0 < 1.0 < 2.0 5.2 J 3.6 J < 2.0
25 15 < 10 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 12 J 14 12 < 10
33 39 23 20 17 19 21 17 20 18
< 0.50 J < 0.50 J < 1.0 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 J < 5.0 < 0.50 < 0.50 J < 1.0
< 2.5 < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 5.0
< 0.076 < 0.076 J < 0.152 < 0.076 0.083 J < 0.152 J < 0.152 0.082 J < 0.152 J
< 30 < 15 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 J < 15 < 6.0 J < 3.0 J < 15 J < 6.0
< 50 < 25 < 10 < 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 25 < 50 J < 5.0 < 25 J < 10 J
< 1,300 J < 130 J < 250 J < 130 < 130 J < 130 < 250 J < 130 < 130 < 630 < 250
< 3.0 J < 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 J < 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 J < 3.0 < 6.0
< 70 < 7.0 J 81 31 24 J 27 31 J 14 < 35 26
< 0.10 < 0.10 1.2 J < 0.10 0.24 < 0.10 0.15 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 30 < 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 6.0
< 50 < 25 < 10 < 5.0 < 5.0 J < 25 < 10 J < 5.0 J < 25 J < 10
< 5.0 < 5.0 J < 10 J < 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 5.0 J < 10 J < 5.0 < 5.0 J < 10
< 1.5 < 1.5 J < 3.0 < 1.5 < 1.5 J < 1.5 J < 3.0 < 1.5 < 1.5 J < 3.0
< 2.5 < 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 5.0
< 150 < 15 < 30 < 15 < 15 J < 15 < 30 J < 15 < 75 < 30
< 20 J < 20 J < 40 < 20 < 20 J < 20 J < 40 < 100 < 20 J < 40
< 5.1 < 0.55 < 0.50 < 2.6 J < 5.6 < 0.52 J < 10 < 5.3 < 0.58 J
< 0.66 < 0.071 < 0.065 < 0.34 < 0.72 < 0.067 J < 1.3 < 0.68 < 0.075 J
< 0.76 < 0.081 < 0.074 < 0.39 < 0.83 < 0.077 J < 1.5 < 0.78 < 0.085 J
< 4.3 < 0.47 < 0.43 < 2.3 < 4.7 < 0.44 J < 8.5 < 4.5 < 0.49 J
< 19 < 2.0 < 1.9 < 9.8 < 21 < 1.9 J < 37 < 19 < 2.1 J
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 0.17 J < 0.15 0.89 J < 0.31 0.16 J+< 0.15
< 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.43 0.99 J < 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.44 0.62 J < 0.80 < 1.5 J 0.29 J
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 3 of 6 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-4
Lower Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
MW-24B MW-24B MW-24B MW-25B MW-25B MW-25B MW-25B MW-25B MW-25B MW-25B MW-29B MW-29B MW-29B MW-29B MW-29B MW-29B MW-29B MW-30B
13-Jun-19 29-Aug-19 29-Aug-19 13-Nov-18 25-Feb-19 25-Feb-19 24-Jun-19 24-Jun-19 26-Aug-19 26-Aug-19 29-Nov-18 26-Feb-19 26-Feb-19 29-May-19 29-May-19 10-Sep-19 10-Sep-19 28-Nov-18
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-24B-GW-
01-061319-FF
MW-24B-GW-
01-082919
MW-24B-GW-01-
082919-FF
MW-25B-GW-
01-111318
MW-25B-GW-
01-022519
MW-25B-GW-
01-022519-FF
MW-25B-GW-
01-062419
MW-25B-GW-
01-062419-FF
MW-25B-GW-
01-082619
MW-25B-GW-
01-082619-FF
MW-29B-GW-
01-112918
MW-29B-GW-
01-022619
MW-29B-GW-
01-022619-FF
MW-29B-GW-
01-052919
MW-29B-GW-01-
052919-FF
MW-29B-GW-
01-091019
MW-29B-GW-
01-091019-FF
MW-30B-GW-01-
112818
< 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.10 J < 0.10 0.10 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18
< 1.3 0.40 J-0.75 J-0.68 J+0.87 J+1.1 J-1.0 J-1.2 J+< 1.3 0.45 J
< 1.3 J < 0.080 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 R < 0.50 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 0.16 J < 1.3 J < 0.040 J
< 0.98 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 0.98 < 0.98 < 9.8 J < 9.8 J < 39 < 0.98
< 0.38 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 0.38 < 0.38 < 3.8 J < 3.8 J < 15 < 0.38
< 0.0025 J < 0.0025 J 0.015 0.064 0.012 < 0.0025 J 0.12 0.034 J-< 0.0065 J 0.011
ERM Page 4 of 6 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-4
Lower Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian μg/L
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian μg/L
Total PCBs μg/L
Total Aluminum μg/L
Dissolved Aluminum μg/L
Total Antimony μg/L
Dissolved Antimony μg/L
Total Arsenic μg/L
Dissolved Arsenic μg/L
Total Barium μg/L
Dissolved Barium μg/L
Total Beryllium μg/L
Dissolved Beryllium μg/L
Total Cadmium μg/L
Dissolved Cadmium μg/L
Chromium, Hexavalent μg/L
Total Cobalt μg/L
Dissolved Cobalt μg/L
Total Copper μg/L
Dissolved Copper μg/L
Total Iron μg/L
Dissolved Iron μg/L
Total Lead μg/L
Dissolved Lead μg/L
Total Manganese μg/L
Dissolved Manganese μg/L
Total Mercury μg/L
Dissolved Mercury μg/L
Total Molybdenum μg/L
Dissolved Molybdenum μg/L
Total Nickel μg/L
Dissolved Nickel μg/L
Total Selenium μg/L
Dissolved Selenium μg/L
Total Silver μg/L
Dissolved Silver μg/L
Total Thallium μg/L
Dissolved Thallium μg/L
Total Vanadium μg/L
Dissolved Vanadium μg/L
Total Zinc μg/L
Dissolved Zinc μg/L
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene μg/L
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene μg/L
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)μg/L
Pentachlorobenzene μg/L
Pentachlorophenol μg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)μg/L
2-Methylnaphthalene μg/L
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene μg/L
Naphthalene μg/L
1,1-Dichloroethane μg/L
1,2-Dichloroethane μg/L
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene μg/L
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene μg/L
Benzene μg/L
Bromochloromethane μg/L
Bromodichloromethane μg/L
Bromoform μg/L
Bromomethane μg/L
Carbon disulfide μg/L
Carbon tetrachloride μg/L
Dibromochloromethane μg/L
MW-30B MW-30B MW-32B MW-32B MW-32B MW-32B MW-32B MW-32B MW-32B PMW-1D PMW-1D PMW-1D PMW-1D PMW-1D PMW-1D PMW-1D
30-May-19 30-May-19 05-Dec-18 19-Mar-19 19-Mar-19 18-Jun-19 18-Jun-19 26-Sep-19 26-Sep-19 12-Nov-18 06-Mar-19 06-Mar-19 25-Jun-19 25-Jun-19 05-Sep-19 05-Sep-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-30B-GW-
01-053019
MW-30B-GW-
01-053019-FF
MW-32B-GW-
01-120518
MW-32B-GW-
01-031919
MW-32B-GW-
01-031919-FF
MW-32B-GW-
01-061819
MW-32B-GW-
01-061819-FF
MW-32B-GW-
01-092619
MW-32B-GW-
01-092619-FF
PMW-1D-GW-
01-111218
PMW-1D-GW-
01-030619
PMW-1D-GW-
01-030619-FF
PMW-1D-GW-
01-062519
PMW-1D-GW-
01-062519-FF
PMW-1D-GW-
01-090519
PMW-1D-GW-
01-090519-FF
< 0.000505 0.00000037 0.0000000015 0.000000060 0.0000000011 0.00000019 < 0.00050
< 0.000019 0.00002 0.000019 0.000018 0.000017 0.000018 < 0.000018
< 0.000252 < 0.000255 < 0.000255 0.00102 0.000622 < 0.000258 0.000259 J
< 130 J < 1,300 J < 130 < 250 < 130 < 630 < 630
< 1.0 < 2.3 J < 1.0 < 2.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 5.0
< 5.0 36 J 33 < 10 < 5.0 < 25 < 25
13 21 26 25 26 27 29 J
< 0.50 < 5.0 J < 0.50 < 1.0 < 0.50 < 2.5 < 2.5 J
< 2.5 < 5.0 < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 13 J
< 0.152 < 0.152 J < 0.076 < 0.076 J < 0.152 < 0.076 < 0.076
< 3.0 J < 30 J < 3.0 J < 6.0 < 3.0 < 15 < 15 J
< 5.0 J < 50 J < 5.0 J < 10 < 5.0 < 25 < 25 J
< 130 J < 1,300 J < 630 < 130 < 130 J < 250 < 130 < 630 < 630
< 3.0 < 6.0 < 3.0 J < 6.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 < 3.0 J
11 J < 70 J < 7.0 23 J 23 < 35 < 35
< 0.10 0.11 J < 0.10 1.2 J < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 3.0 < 6.0 J < 3.0 7.2 J 7.2 J < 15 < 15
< 5.0 J < 50 J < 5.0 J < 10 < 5.0 < 25 < 25 J
< 5.0 < 10 J < 5.0 J < 10 < 5.0 < 25 < 25 J
< 1.5 < 3.0 < 1.5 J < 3.0 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 7.5 J
< 2.5 < 5.0 J < 2.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 J
< 15 J < 150 J < 15 < 30 < 15 < 75 < 75
< 20 < 40 J < 20 J < 40 < 20 < 100 < 100 J
< 10 < 0.50 J < 5.2 < 0.61 < 0.53 < 0.54 J < 0.51
< 1.3 < 0.065 J < 0.67 < 0.079 < 0.069 < 0.070 < 0.066
< 1.5 < 0.074 J < 0.77 < 0.090 < 0.078 < 0.080 < 0.076
< 8.8 < 0.43 J < 4.4 < 0.52 < 0.45 < 0.46 < 0.44
< 38 < 1.9 < 19 < 2.2 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 1.9
< 0.15 0.19 J < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14 < 0.14
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 0.29
< 0.38 0.54 J 0.82 J < 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.16 < 0.16
< 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
ERM Page 5 of 6 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-4
Lower Aquifer Zone Wells Data Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Chloroform μg/L
Chloromethane μg/L
Ethyl benzene μg/L
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)μg/L
Tetrachloroethene μg/L
Trichloroethene μg/L
Vinyl chloride μg/L
o-Xylene μg/L
m,p Xylenes μg/L
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L
Fluoride mg/L
Nitrite as N mg/L
Dichloroacetic Acid μg/L
Trichloroacetic acid μg/L
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L
MW-30B MW-30B MW-32B MW-32B MW-32B MW-32B MW-32B MW-32B MW-32B PMW-1D PMW-1D PMW-1D PMW-1D PMW-1D PMW-1D PMW-1D
30-May-19 30-May-19 05-Dec-18 19-Mar-19 19-Mar-19 18-Jun-19 18-Jun-19 26-Sep-19 26-Sep-19 12-Nov-18 06-Mar-19 06-Mar-19 25-Jun-19 25-Jun-19 05-Sep-19 05-Sep-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
MW-30B-GW-
01-053019
MW-30B-GW-
01-053019-FF
MW-32B-GW-
01-120518
MW-32B-GW-
01-031919
MW-32B-GW-
01-031919-FF
MW-32B-GW-
01-061819
MW-32B-GW-
01-061819-FF
MW-32B-GW-
01-092619
MW-32B-GW-
01-092619-FF
PMW-1D-GW-
01-111218
PMW-1D-GW-
01-030619
PMW-1D-GW-
01-030619-FF
PMW-1D-GW-
01-062519
PMW-1D-GW-
01-062519-FF
PMW-1D-GW-
01-090519
PMW-1D-GW-
01-090519-FF
< 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12 < 0.12
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.13
< 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10
< 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.18
0.41 J 2.2 J 1.7 J-< 1.2 < 5.3 0.52 0.55 0.93 J+0.76 J+
< 0.080 J < 0.32 < 0.32 J < 0.32 J < 5.0 J < 0.016 J < 0.016 J < 0.016 R < 0.050
< 1.0 J < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 0.98 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 9.8 < 0.98
< 1.0 J < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 0.38 J < 3.8 < 3.8 < 3.8 < 0.38
< 0.0069 < 0.013 0.044 J-< 0.0025 < 0.0065 < 0.0070 0.0061 J
ERM Page 6 of 6 PN0508502 - $SULO
Notes:
< = Constituent not detected at concentrations above the laboratory reporting detection limit. The laboratory reporting detection limit is shown.
Results shown in bold font indicate a constituent was detected above the laboratory reporting detection limit.
μg/L = Micrograms per liter
DL = Detection limit
Empty cells = Not analyzed
mg/L = Milligrams per liter
N = Normal Environmental Sample
ND = Not detected
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
SIM = Selected ion monitoring mode. If a constituent has both SIM and non-SIM results, they are combined into one dataset for the risk calculations
TEQ = Toxic Equivalence
Sacramento, CA; TestAmerica -
Savannah, GA; TestAmerica -
Qualifiers:
J = The result is an estimated quantity. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the analyte in the sample.
J+ = The result is an estimated quantity, biased high. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the analyte in the sample.
J- = The result is an estimated quantity, biased low. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the analyte in the sample.
R = The sample result is rejected and unusable due to serious deficiencies in meeting quality control criteria. The analyte may or may not be present in the sample.
Table B-5
Groundwater COPC Selection
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent CAS No. Units
Total
Samples
Collected
Number of
Detects
Maximum
Detection
Minimum
Detection
Average of
Detections
Minimum
Detection
Limit
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Maximum
Detect / RBSL
(ratio)
Maximum DL /
RBSL
(ratio)
Bioaccumulative or
Essential Nutrient Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 μg/L 123 83 1.2E-06 2.7E-11 1.4E-07 1.3E-10 6.7E-04 1.2E-06 1.0E+00 NA Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 μg/L 123 83 2.1E-05 6.4E-07 1.4E-05 5.7E-07 2.0E-05 1.2E-06 1.8E+01 NA Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 μg/L 125 70 3.4E-01 4.6E-05 9.6E-03 2.4E-04 2.8E-04 4.4E-02 7.7E+00 NA Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 μg/L 32 11 6.3E+03 5.1E+01 2.2E+03 5.0E+01 2.5E+02 2.0E+03 3.2E+00 1.3E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Aluminum 7429-90-5 μg/L 126 10 1.2E+05 5.4E+01 1.4E+04 5.0E+01 1.3E+03 2.0E+03 6.0E+01 6.5E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 μg/L 32 21 8.6E+00 6.5E-01 1.8E+00 4.0E-01 2.0E+00 7.8E-01 1.1E+01 2.6E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Antimony 7440-36-0 μg/L 126 50 3.8E+01 5.4E-01 4.6E+00 4.0E-01 5.6E+00 7.8E-01 4.9E+01 7.2E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 μg/L 32 32 1.7E+02 2.1E+00 4.7E+01 5.2E-02 3.3E+03 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Arsenic 7440-38-2 μg/L 126 97 4.9E+02 2.1E+00 6.5E+01 5.0E+00 5.0E+01 5.2E-02 9.4E+03 9.6E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Barium 7440-39-3 μg/L 32 32 3.0E+03 1.8E+01 4.0E+02 3.8E+02 7.9E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Barium 7440-39-3 μg/L 126 126 3.4E+03 1.1E+01 3.1E+02 3.8E+02 8.9E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 μg/L 32 9 2.5E+00 3.8E-01 1.4E+00 2.0E-01 1.0E+00 2.5E+00 1.0E+00 4.0E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dissolved Beryllium 7440-41-7 μg/L 126 13 4.6E+00 2.9E-01 1.4E+00 2.0E-01 5.0E+00 2.5E+00 1.8E+00 2.0E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 μg/L 32 6 1.7E+01 1.0E+00 5.3E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E+00 9.2E-01 1.8E+01 5.4E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Cadmium 7440-43-9 μg/L 126 14 1.8E+01 1.5E+00 5.1E+00 1.0E+00 1.3E+01 9.2E-01 2.0E+01 1.4E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 μg/L 30 30 5.0E+07 4.9E+05 6.9E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Dissolved Calcium 7440-70-2 μg/L 156 156 4.8E+07 4.4E+04 5.6E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 μg/L 32 3 5.2E+00 2.1E+00 3.4E+00 2.0E+00 1.0E+01 2.2E+03 2.4E-03 4.5E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dissolved Chromium 7440-47-3 μg/L 126 14 4.6E+02 2.1E+00 4.2E+01 2.0E+00 5.0E+01 2.2E+03 2.1E-01 2.3E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chromium, Hexavalent1 18540-29-9 μg/L 123 20 1.8E+00 8.2E-02 4.8E-01 5.1E-02 1.7E+00 3.5E-02 5.0E+01 4.7E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 μg/L 32 20 1.4E+02 1.4E+00 1.2E+00 6.0E+00 6.0E-01 2.3E+02 1.0E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Cobalt 7440-48-4 μg/L 126 54 1.4E+02 1.4E+00 3.3E+01 1.2E+00 3.0E+01 6.0E-01 2.3E+02 5.0E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 μg/L 32 7 5.3E+01 2.3E+00 1.5E+01 2.0E+00 1.0E+01 8.0E+01 6.6E-01 1.3E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dissolved Copper 7440-50-8 μg/L 126 15 1.6E+02 2.0E+00 2.2E+01 2.0E+00 5.0E+01 8.0E+01 2.0E+00 6.3E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 μg/L 32 27 1.6E+06 4.9E+02 1.5E+05 5.0E+01 5.0E+01 1.4E+03 1.1E+03 3.6E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Iron 7439-89-6 μg/L 158 71 3.7E+06 4.9E+02 2.0E+05 5.0E+01 1.3E+03 1.4E+03 2.6E+03 9.3E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 μg/L 32 2 5.1E+01 3.1E+00 2.7E+01 1.2E+00 6.0E+00 1.5E+01 3.4E+00 4.0E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Lead 7439-92-1 μg/L 126 12 3.0E+02 3.1E+00 1.1E+02 1.2E+00 3.0E+01 1.5E+01 2.0E+01 2.0E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 μg/L 30 30 5.1E+07 1.5E+06 8.3E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Dissolved Magnesium 7439-95-4 μg/L 156 156 6.0E+07 1.6E+05 5.8E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 μg/L 32 32 1.6E+04 6.6E+01 6.2E+03 4.3E+01 3.7E+02 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Manganese 7439-96-5 μg/L 126 110 2.2E+04 1.1E+01 4.8E+03 7.0E+00 7.0E+01 4.3E+01 5.1E+02 1.6E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 μg/L 30 1 5.3E-01 5.3E-01 5.3E-01 1.0E-01 1.0E-01 6.3E-02 8.4E+00 1.6E+00 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Dissolved Mercury2 7439-97-6 μg/L 123 28 4.2E+00 1.0E-01 1.1E+00 1.0E-01 1.2E+00 6.3E-02 6.7E+01 1.9E+01 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 μg/L 32 27 2.0E+02 1.4E+00 3.5E+01 1.2E+00 6.0E+00 1.0E+01 2.0E+01 6.0E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Molybdenum 7439-98-7 μg/L 126 60 3.0E+02 2.8E+00 5.3E+01 1.2E+00 3.0E+01 1.0E+01 3.0E+01 3.0E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 μg/L 32 27 3.1E+02 2.0E+00 9.3E+01 2.0E+00 1.0E+01 3.9E+01 7.9E+00 2.6E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Nickel 7440-02-0 μg/L 126 60 1.6E+03 2.2E+00 1.1E+02 2.0E+00 5.0E+01 3.9E+01 4.1E+01 1.3E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 μg/L 30 30 7.9E+06 1.0E+05 1.5E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Dissolved Potassium 7440-09-7 μg/L 156 156 1.0E+07 8.6E+04 1.3E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 μg/L 32 17 6.4E+01 2.1E+00 7.7E+00 2.0E+00 1.0E+01 1.0E+01 6.4E+00 1.0E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Selenium 7782-49-2 μg/L 126 16 6.4E+00 2.0E+00 3.7E+00 2.0E+00 5.0E+01 1.0E+01 6.4E-01 5.0E+00 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 μg/L 32 2 1.6E+00 6.1E-01 1.1E+00 6.0E-01 3.0E+00 9.4E+00 1.7E-01 3.2E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dissolved Silver 7440-22-4 μg/L 126 1 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 6.0E-01 7.5E+00 9.4E+00 1.6E-01 8.0E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 μg/L 30 30 1.9E+07 1.3E+06 5.7E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Dissolved Sodium 7440-23-5 μg/L 156 156 8.7E+07 1.2E+06 1.3E+07 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 μg/L 32 3 5.1E+00 1.6E+00 2.9E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E+00 2.0E-02 2.6E+02 2.5E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Thallium 7440-28-0 μg/L 126 10 5.3E+00 1.3E+00 3.3E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E+00 2.0E-02 2.7E+02 2.5E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 μg/L 32 8 1.8E+01 6.5E+00 1.1E+01 6.0E+00 3.0E+01 8.6E+00 2.1E+00 3.5E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Vanadium 7440-62-2 μg/L 126 11 1.4E+03 6.7E+00 1.4E+02 6.0E+00 1.5E+02 8.6E+00 1.6E+02 1.7E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 μg/L 32 20 6.3E+02 9.9E+00 1.5E+02 8.0E+00 4.0E+01 6.0E+02 1.1E+00 6.7E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Zinc 7440-66-6 μg/L 126 27 6.9E+02 9.1E+00 1.8E+02 8.0E+00 2.0E+02 6.0E+02 1.2E+00 3.3E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 4 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-5
Groundwater COPC Selection
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent CAS No. Units
Total
Samples
Collected
Number of
Detects
Maximum
Detection
Minimum
Detection
Average of
Detections
Minimum
Detection
Limit
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Maximum
Detect / RBSL
(ratio)
Maximum DL /
RBSL
(ratio)
Bioaccumulative or
Essential Nutrient Conclusion
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 μg/L 32 0 4.0E+00 4.8E+01 8.3E-02 NA 5.8E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 μg/L 125 3 1.0E+01 5.2E-01 4.0E+00 4.3E-01 2.7E+01 1.7E-01 5.9E+01 1.6E+02 Bioaccumulative COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 μg/L 32 0 1.0E+00 1.2E+01 7.1E+01 NA 1.7E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 μg/L 32 0 2.0E+00 2.4E+01 2.4E+01 NA 1E+00 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+00 1.9E+01 1.2E+02 NA 1.6E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 μg/L 34 7 3.5E+00 2.0E-01 -- 1.5E-01 1.8E+00 1.2E+00 2.9E+00 1.5E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 μg/L 32 0 2.1E+00 2.5E+01 4.6E+00 NA 5.4E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 μg/L 32 0 1.7E+00 2.1E+01 3.6E+01 NA 5.8E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+01 1.9E+02 3.9E+00 NA 4.9E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+00 1.9E+01 2.4E-01 NA 7.9E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+00 1.9E+01 4.9E-02 NA 3.9E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 μg/L 32 0 1.0E+00 1.2E+01 7.5E+01 NA 1.6E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 μg/L 32 0 1.3E+00 1.5E+01 9.1E+00 NA 1.6E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 μg/L 32 0 7.4E-01 8.9E+00 9.3E+01 NA 9.6E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+00 1.9E+01 1.9E+01 NA 1E+00 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 μg/L 32 0 1.5E+00 1.8E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 μg/L 32 0 7.6E-01 9.2E+00 1.3E-01 NA 7.1E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 μg/L 32 0 1.1E+00 1.3E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 μg/L 32 1 6.8E+00 6.8E+00 6.8E+00 1.7E+00 2.1E+01 1.5E-01 4.5E+01 1.4E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 μg/L 32 0 8.7E-01 1.0E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+00 1.9E+01 1.4E+02 NA 1.4E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+00 1.9E+01 3.7E-01 NA 5.1E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 μg/L 32 0 8.7E-01 1.0E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 μg/L 32 7 7.8E+00 1.2E+00 3.2E+00 9.1E-01 1.1E+01 9.3E+01 8.4E-02 1.2E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 μg/L 32 0 1.2E+00 1.4E+01 3.8E+00 NA 3.7E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 μg/L 125 0 4.9E+00 3.0E+02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 μg/L 32 12 2.5E+00 7.5E-01 1.4E+00 6.2E-01 7.4E+00 1.9E+02 1.3E-02 3.9E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 μg/L 32 0 6.6E+00 8.0E+01 1.9E+01 NA 4.2E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 μg/L 32 0 1.1E+00 1.3E+01 1.6E+01 NA 8.1E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 μg/L 32 0 8.0E-01 9.5E+00 5.9E+00 NA 1.6E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 μg/L 32 0 1.2E+00 1.4E+01 1.4E-02 NA 1.0E+03 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 μg/L 125 23 5.6E+00 9.2E-01 2.5E+00 8.0E-01 5.0E+01 5.6E+00 1.0E+00 8.9E+00 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 μg/L 32 0 9.5E-01 1.1E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 μg/L 32 0 8.7E-01 1.0E+01 7.9E-01 NA 1.3E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 μg/L 32 0 7.4E-01 8.9E+00 1.5E+03 NA 5.9E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 μg/L 32 0 7.0E-01 8.4E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 μg/L 32 0 8.7E-01 1.0E+01 9.0E+01 NA 1.1E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 μg/L 32 0 1.2E+00 1.4E+01 2.0E+01 NA 7.0E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 μg/L 127 1 2.0E+00 2.0E+00 -- 5.6E-02 3.5E+00 9.8E-03 2.0E+02 3.6E+02 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 μg/L 127 1 1.9E-01 1.9E-01 -- 6.4E-02 4.0E+00 1.4E-01 1.4E+00 2.9E+01 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 μg/L 32 0 4.0E+00 4.8E+01 4.1E-02 NA 1.2E+03 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 μg/L 32 0 1.1E+00 1.3E+01 3.3E-01 NA 3.9E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 μg/L 32 0 8.0E-01 9.5E+00 7.8E+01 NA 1.2E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 μg/L 32 0 1.3E+00 1.5E+01 1.4E-01 NA 1.1E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
n-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 μg/L 32 0 5.6E-02 7.1E-02 1.1E-04 NA 6.5E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 μg/L 32 0 1.1E+00 1.3E+01 1.1E-02 NA 1.2E+03 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 μg/L 32 0 4.3E-01 5.2E+00 1.2E+01 NA 4.3E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 μg/L 93 0 3.7E-01 2.3E+01 3.2E-01 NA 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 μg/L 127 4 5.6E+00 2.9E+00 -- 1.6E+00 9.9E+01 4.1E-02 1.4E+02 2.4E+03 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 μg/L 32 1 2.2E+00 2.2E+00 2.2E+00 8.7E-01 1.0E+01 5.8E+02 3.8E-03 1.7E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 μg/L 32 24 5.0E+00 8.0E-03 1.0E+00 4.4E-03 5.4E-03 3.6E+00 1.4E+00 1.5E-03 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 μg/L 32 7 2.7E-01 9.3E-03 1.0E-01 2.5E-03 3.1E-02 5.3E+01 5.1E-03 5.8E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 μg/L 32 1 2.5E-02 2.5E-02 2.5E-02 2.4E-03 3.0E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
ERM Page 2 of 4 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-5
Groundwater COPC Selection
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent CAS No. Units
Total
Samples
Collected
Number of
Detects
Maximum
Detection
Minimum
Detection
Average of
Detections
Minimum
Detection
Limit
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Maximum
Detect / RBSL
(ratio)
Maximum DL /
RBSL
(ratio)
Bioaccumulative or
Essential Nutrient Conclusion
Anthracene 120-12-7 μg/L 32 4 2.9E-02 6.2E-03 1.9E-02 3.5E-03 4.4E-02 1.8E+02 1.6E-04 2.4E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 μg/L 32 1 3.6E-02 3.6E-02 3.6E-02 3.7E-03 4.5E-02 3.0E-02 1.2E+00 1.5E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 μg/L 32 1 1.7E-02 1.7E-02 1.7E-02 3.5E-03 4.3E-02 2.5E-02 6.8E-01 1.7E+00 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 μg/L 32 1 9.3E-02 9.3E-02 9.3E-02 9.8E-03 1.2E-01 2.5E-01 3.7E-01 4.8E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 μg/L 32 2 5.8E-02 6.0E-03 3.2E-02 4.4E-03 5.4E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 μg/L 32 1 8.3E-02 8.3E-02 8.3E-02 6.2E-03 7.7E-02 2.5E+00 3.3E-02 3.1E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 μg/L 32 1 7.1E-02 7.1E-02 7.1E-02 3.2E-03 3.9E-02 2.5E+01 2.8E-03 1.6E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 μg/L 32 1 7.1E-02 7.1E-02 7.1E-02 1.2E-02 1.4E-01 2.5E-02 2.8E+00 5.6E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 μg/L 32 6 3.9E-02 4.0E-03 1.9E-02 3.4E-03 4.2E-02 8.0E+01 4.9E-04 5.3E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 μg/L 32 13 4.0E-01 6.9E-03 8.8E-02 3.2E-03 4.0E-02 2.9E+01 1.4E-02 1.4E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 μg/L 32 1 6.2E-02 6.2E-02 6.2E-02 1.1E-02 1.4E-01 2.5E-01 2.5E-01 5.6E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 μg/L 125 33 2.0E+01 7.0E-03 2.6E+00 2.9E-03 7.5E-01 1.7E-01 1.2E+02 4.4E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 μg/L 32 6 1.6E-01 9.9E-03 6.9E-02 5.0E-03 6.2E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Pyrene 129-00-0 μg/L 32 3 1.2E-02 3.8E-03 7.4E-03 3.3E-03 4.1E-02 1.2E+01 1.0E-03 3.4E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 μg/L 30 0 2.5E+01 2.5E+01 4.6E-01 NA 5.4E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 μg/L 30 25 1.3E+01 1.5E-01 2.1E+00 1.0E-01 1.0E-01 2.8E+00 4.6E+00 3.6E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 μg/L 30 22 8.2E+00 1.4E-01 9.4E-01 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 2.8E+01 2.9E-01 5.0E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 μg/L 30 0 3.2E-01 3.2E-01 3.3E-04 NA 9.7E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 μg/L 30 0 2.2E-01 2.2E-01 7.5E-03 NA 2.9E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 μg/L 30 0 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 3.0E+01 NA 4.7E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 μg/L 30 9 5.3E-01 2.7E-01 3.6E-01 2.2E-01 2.2E-01 1.7E-01 3.1E+00 1.3E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 μg/L 30 17 2.9E+01 1.8E-01 8.2E+00 1.0E-01 1.0E-01 3.6E+00 8.1E+00 2.8E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 μg/L 30 12 7.3E+00 1.7E-01 2.7E+00 1.1E-01 1.1E-01 3.6E+01 2.0E-01 3.1E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 μg/L 30 12 6.1E-01 1.9E-01 3.7E-01 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 8.2E-01 7.4E-01 1.8E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 μg/L 30 2 2.8E-01 1.2E-01 2.0E-01 1.1E-01 1.1E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-01-5 μg/L 30 0 2.2E-01 2.2E-01 4.7E-01 NA 4.7E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-02-6 μg/L 30 0 8.0E-02 8.0E-02 4.7E-01 NA 1.7E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 μg/L 30 2 1.5E-01 1.3E-01 1.4E-01 1.3E-01 1.3E-01 4.8E-01 3.1E-01 2.7E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 μg/L 30 1 2.8E-01 2.8E-01 2.8E-01 1.9E-01 1.9E-01 8.0E+02 3.5E-04 2.4E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 μg/L 30 0 3.1E-01 3.1E-01 4.1E-02 NA 7.6E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon-113) 76-13-1 μg/L 30 0 2.5E-01 2.5E-01 1.0E+03 NA 2.5E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 μg/L 30 0 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 7.0E-01 NA 2.0E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 μg/L 30 6 4.4E+00 2.8E-01 1.2E+00 1.0E-01 1.0E-01 4.0E-01 1.1E+01 2.5E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 μg/L 30 0 9.0E-02 6.3E-01 7.6E-02 NA 8.3E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Butanone 78-93-3 μg/L 30 15 3.0E+01 3.5E-01 1.4E+01 3.5E-01 3.5E-01 5.6E+02 5.4E-02 6.3E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Hexanone 591-78-6 μg/L 30 11 2.0E+00 5.3E-01 1.1E+00 1.7E-01 1.7E-01 3.8E+00 5.3E-01 4.5E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 μg/L 30 22 3.9E+01 2.6E-01 7.7E+00 1.8E-01 1.8E-01 6.3E+02 6.2E-02 2.9E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acetone 67-64-1 μg/L 30 20 1.5E+02 2.3E+00 5.5E+01 2.1E+00 2.1E+00 1.4E+03 1.1E-01 1.5E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzene 71-43-2 μg/L 30 17 1.1E+00 1.3E-01 4.2E-01 1.3E-01 1.3E-01 4.6E-01 2.4E+00 2.8E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 μg/L 30 9 1.8E+01 8.3E-01 6.5E+00 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 8.3E+00 2.2E+00 1.7E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)*
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 μg/L 156 22 1.3E+02 1.9E-01 3.2E+01 1.4E-01 2.8E-01 1.3E-01 1.0E+03 2.2E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Bromoform 75-25-2 μg/L 156 25 3.0E+02 2.5E-01 5.9E+01 1.0E-01 2.0E-01 3.3E+00 9.1E+01 6.1E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Bromomethane 74-83-9 μg/L 123 6 1.9E+00 4.9E-01 1.0E+00 2.9E-01 1.5E+00 7.5E-01 2.5E+00 2.0E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 μg/L 123 44 8.8E+01 1.9E-01 7.8E+00 1.6E-01 1.9E+00 8.1E+01 1.1E+00 2.3E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 μg/L 123 8 4.2E+00 2.8E-01 1.9E+00 1.5E-01 7.5E-01 4.6E-01 9.1E+00 1.6E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 μg/L 30 0 1.2E-01 1.2E-01 7.8E+00 NA 1.5E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Cyclohexane 110-82-7 μg/L 30 5 2.4E+00 1.3E-01 1.0E+00 1.2E-01 1.2E-01 1.3E+03 1.8E-03 9.2E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 μg/L 156 22 2.4E+02 3.1E-01 5.3E+01 1.3E-01 2.6E-01 8.7E-01 2.8E+02 3.0E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Chloroethane 75-00-3 μg/L 30 11 6.1E+00 3.7E-01 2.6E+00 3.4E-01 3.4E-01 2.1E+03 2.9E-03 1.6E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloroform 67-66-3 μg/L 156 61 1.0E+02 1.3E-01 1.6E+01 1.2E-01 9.0E-01 2.2E-01 4.5E+02 4.1E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Chloromethane 74-87-3 μg/L 30 11 2.0E+01 8.5E-01 7.3E+00 2.5E-01 2.5E-01 1.9E+01 1.1E+00 1.3E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)*
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon-12)75-71-8 μg/L 30 1 2.9E-01 2.9E-01 2.9E-01 1.6E-01 1.6E-01 2.0E+01 1.5E-02 8.0E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
ERM Page 3 of 4 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-5
Groundwater COPC Selection
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent CAS No. Units
Total
Samples
Collected
Number of
Detects
Maximum
Detection
Minimum
Detection
Average of
Detections
Minimum
Detection
Limit
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Maximum
Detect / RBSL
(ratio)
Maximum DL /
RBSL
(ratio)
Bioaccumulative or
Essential Nutrient Conclusion
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 μg/L 123 19 2.4E+01 1.0E-01 5.4E+00 1.0E-01 5.0E-01 1.5E+00 1.6E+01 3.3E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 μg/L 30 8 2.0E+00 1.5E-01 1.0E+00 1.2E-01 1.2E-01 4.5E+01 4.4E-02 2.7E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Methyl tertbutyl ether (MTBE)1634-04-4 μg/L 30 0 1.9E-01 1.9E-01 1.4E+01 NA 1.4E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)75-09-2 μg/L 30 13 1.3E+01 4.1E-01 4.4E+00 3.5E-01 3.5E-01 1.1E+01 1.2E+00 3.2E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Styrene 100-42-5 μg/L 30 0 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 1.2E+02 NA 1.3E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 μg/L 30 16 8.5E+00 1.1E-01 9.9E-01 1.0E-01 1.0E-01 4.1E+00 2.1E+00 2.4E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Toluene 108-88-3 μg/L 123 22 4.5E+00 2.7E-01 1.6E+00 2.5E-01 1.3E+00 1.1E+02 4.1E-02 1.2E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 μg/L 156 52 3.2E+01 1.3E-01 3.4E+00 1.3E-01 2.6E-01 2.8E-01 1.1E+02 9.3E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon-11)75-69-4 μg/L 30 0 2.3E-01 2.3E-01 5.2E+02 NA 4.4E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 μg/L 30 9 1.3E+01 2.7E-01 3.4E+00 2.2E-01 2.2E-01 1.9E-02 6.8E+02 1.2E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
o-Xylene 95-47-6 μg/L 123 20 1.8E+01 1.1E-01 2.0E+00 1.0E-01 5.0E-01 1.9E+01 9.5E-01 2.6E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
m,p-Xylenes 179601-23-1 μg/L 123 20 2.2E+01 2.0E-01 3.6E+00 1.8E-01 9.0E-01 1.9E+01 1.2E+00 4.7E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Dissolved Solids5 TDS mg/L 156 156 3.2E+05 4.5E+03 9.4E+04 NA NA 5.0E+02 6.4E+02 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Bromide 24959-67-9 mg/L 156 72 1.8E+03 1.3E+00 2.1E+02 8.8E-01 2.2E+03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Chloride 16887-00-6 mg/L 158 158 2.2E+05 2.4E+03 5.5E+04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 mg/L 30 13 4.7E-02 5.5E-03 2.3E-02 5.0E-03 2.5E-02 1.5E-04 3.1E+02 1.7E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Fluoride 16984-48-8 mg/L 156 129 4.0E+01 2.3E-01 6.9E+00 1.1E+00 1.3E+01 8.0E-02 5.0E+02 1.6E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 mg/L 156 26 2.7E+00 5.9E-02 -- 2.2E-02 1.0E+01 3.2E+00 8.4E-01 3.1E+00 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Nitrite as N 14797-65-0 mg/L 156 3 8.8E-01 7.0E-01 -- 1.6E-02 5.0E+00 2.0E-01 4.4E+00 2.5E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Sulfate 14808-79-8 mg/L 156 156 2.6E+04 2.8E+02 4.5E+03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 μg/L 30 11 1.1E+00 1.1E-01 5.6E-01 8.2E-02 8.2E-01 1.4E+00 7.9E-01 5.9E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Monochloroacetic Acid 79-11-8 μg/L 156 15 3.6E+02 6.7E+00 1.3E+02 4.0E-01 2.0E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Monobromoacetic Acid 79-08-3 μg/L 156 7 2.0E+01 7.7E+00 1.2E+01 7.5E-01 3.0E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 μg/L 156 25 1.5E+03 6.9E+00 3.0E+02 9.8E-01 3.9E+01 1.5E+00 1.0E+03 2.6E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dibromoacetic Acid 631-64-1 μg/L 156 11 1.1E+03 4.6E-01 3.4E+02 3.8E-01 1.5E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Trichloroacetic Acid 76-03-9 μg/L 156 20 1.3E+03 4.4E-01 2.6E+02 3.8E-01 1.5E+01 1.1E+00 1.2E+03 1.4E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Orthophosphate as P 14265-44-2-OR-P mg/L 156 12 3.3E+01 8.3E-01 -- 7.7E-02 8.2E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Total Cyanide - Filtered 74-90-8 mg/L 123 61 1.2E-01 2.5E-03 -- 2.5E-03 2.5E-02 1.5E-04 8.0E+02 1.7E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Notes:
μg/L = micrograms per liter Not a COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)* = The RBSL is based on an inhalation exposure only; not applicable to the ingestion scenario evaluated in this BHHRA
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = Data are based on the dissolved (filtered) fraction.
mg/L = milligrams per liter 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBSL used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected 4 = The RBSL listed is based on a mixture of cis- and trans-isomers (CAS 542-75-6).
NSV = No Screening Value 5 = The RBSL is the Secondary Maximum Contaminant Limit established by the USEPA under the Safe Drinking Water Act
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Tap-Water, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
USEPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency
ERM Page 4 of 4 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-6
Receptor Exposure Parameters - Groundwater
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Worker
Exposure Parameter Symbol Units RME Reference
General Factors
Averaging Time (cancer)ATc days 25,550 1,2
Averaging Time (noncancer)ATnc days 9,125 1,2
Body Weight BW kg 80 1
Exposure Duration ED years 25 1
Groundwater - Ingestion
Exposure Frequency EF days/year 250 1
Exposure Time ET hours/day 8 1
Groundwater Ingestion IRgw Liters/day 1.25 3
Notes
1 USEPA (2014). OSWER Directive 9200.1-120.
kg = Kilogram
OSWER = Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
USEPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency
Receptor
2 The averaging period for cancer risk is the expected lifespan of 70 years expressed in days. The
averaging period for non-cancer risk is the total exposure time.
3 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Update of Standard Default Exposure Factors (OSWER
Directive 9285.6-03, originally dated 6 February 2014; FAQs updated 14 September 2015).
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-7
Upper Aquifer Zone Exposure Point Concentrations for Detected COPCs
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Well or
Piezometer
Name Units
Mammalian
TEQ, ND=0
PCBs,
Total Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium
Chromium,
Hexavalent Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Selenium Thallium Vanadium Zinc
1,2,4,5-
Tetrachloro-
benzene
2,4,6-
Trichloro-
phenol
calc-dx-0 1336-36-3 7429-90-5 7440-36-0 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 7440-41-7 7440-43-9 18540-29-9 7440-48-4 7440-50-8 7439-89-6 7439-92-1 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 7440-02-0 7782-49-2 7440-28-0 7440-62-2 7440-66-6 95-94-3 88-06-2
Background Wells
MW-25A μg/L 0.00000099 1.1 31 28 370 1.1 52 11
MW-34 μg/L 0.00000031 0.00114 35 40 320 1.0 27
PMW-1S μg/L 0.00000038 0.00119 30 0.117 26 1.8 7.3
Site Wells
LF-01 μg/L 0.00016 11 42 2,200 3.1 2.9 0.22
LF-03 μg/L 0.0055 11 99 1.4 18,000 5,400 7.4 6.3 0.20
MW-4A μg/L 1.7E-10 0.0035 46 540 60 170,000 5,200 130 2.1 56 1.5 0.26
MW-5A μg/L 0.00000018 0.088 1.2 28 240 180,000 3,300 2.2 10 0.85
MW-6 μg/L 0.00000055 0.061 2.1 1,200 520
MW-7 μg/L 0.00000014 0.0072 4.3 3,400 1,300 91
MW-8A μg/L 0.00000095 0.34 80 31 200 0.38 10 170,000 6,200 21 5.1 27 0.53 3.6
MW-8B μg/L 0.000000021 0.002 6.1 54 66 3.4 2.3
MW-13A μg/L 2.7E-11 0.0067 6,300 1.3 15 190 2.5 4.6 98 53 32,000 11,000 310 4.0 470
MW-13B μg/L 0.000000063 0.0043 5,600 30 350 2.5 1.9 52 69,000 8,200 1.7 180 2.8 7.3 350
MW-14 μg/L 0.0000003 0.0044 220 1.00 25 340 0.92 75 8.2 61,000 11,000 210 3.0 110 0.39
MW-15A μg/L 0.0067 1,500 20 230 0.76 4.7 140 42 27,000 16,000 200 310 3.2 76
MW-15B μg/L 0.014 6,200 43 330 2.5 85 93,000 11,000 260 2.4 8.5 370
MW-17 μg/L 0.00015 28 72 1,600 4.9
MW-18 μg/L 0.00000028 0.00012 54 2.1 66 130 0.37 3.0 1,500 24 2.0 19
MW-19A μg/L 0.000084 1.4 38 55 2.7 3,000 19
MW-19B μg/L 0.00013 6.7 85 53 0.54 210 3.5
MW-20A μg/L 0.000000097 0.000895 1.5 50 1,600 140 3,700,000 11,000 4.2 1,600 64 41 0.29
MW-20B μg/L 0.000000018 0.00034 92 2,100 120,000 12,000 14 16 690
MW-22A μg/L
MW-24A μg/L 0.00000027 0.00131 2.6 180 190 26 9,200 1.5 13 110 23
MW-26 μg/L 0.00000024 0.00039 210 220 0.13 7.5 21,000 2,800 7.6 19
MW-27 μg/L 0.00000023 0.00507 81 420 62 72,000 12,000 4.0 8.6 150 20
MW-28 μg/L 0.00000018 19 130 3.8 600 2,200
MW-29A μg/L 0.0000012 0.000813 2.9 5.3 37 19
MW-30A μg/L 0.00000003 0.000857 120,000 38 490 910 4.6 2.7 31 160 960,000 63 2,300 300 250 2.6 1,400 610
MW-31 μg/L 0.00000015 0.00164 78 150 17 7,900 2,400 1.7 13 45
PZ-1 μg/L 0.00000012 0.000096 20 190 18 4.6 61 16 1,100 300 11,000 1.1 180 140 6.2 4.0 26 270
PZ-4 μg/L 0.00000023 0.000046 62 4.5 290 680 0.76 18 27 23 4,600 1.4 130 58 2.3 5.3 17
PZ-5 μg/L 0.0000012 0.0028 34 640 21 23,000 19,000 1.2 27 39
PZ-6 μg/L 0.00000022 0.00904 6.6 59 290 3.0 2,200 3.1 1,500 140 26
PZ-7 μg/L 0.00000015 0.0115 4.3 81 2,900 25 38,000 22,000 0.16 19 35
PZ-8 μg/L 1.4E-10 0.0029 56 130 160 0.95 65 83,000 9,500 180 6.4 6.7
PZ-10 μg/L 9.3E-11 0.00034 51 53 110 0.39 29 240,000 16,000 46 4.4
PZ-12 μg/L 0.000000072 0.015 3,600 49 210 2.3 81 160,000 12,000 200 3.2 70 0.47
PZ-16 μg/L 0.000000012 0.000078 1.2 57 98 0.62 1.0 17 8,700 48 2.2
PZ-18 μg/L 0.000000002 0.00018 19 55 810 2.0
PZ-22 μg/L 0.000068 1.4 69 20 23 5,500 120 66 4.0 7.3
PZ-24 μg/L 1.9E-10 0.0017 40 85 8.4 70,000 6,200 36
PZ-26 μg/L 0.00000028 0.038 700 62 250 0.85 34 290,000 15,000 64 2.1 9.9
CAS No.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - $SULO
Well or
Piezometer
Name Units
Background Wells
MW-25A μg/L
MW-34 μg/L
PMW-1S μg/L
Site Wells
LF-01 μg/L
LF-03 μg/L
MW-4A μg/L
MW-5A μg/L
MW-6 μg/L
MW-7 μg/L
MW-8A μg/L
MW-8B μg/L
MW-13A μg/L
MW-13B μg/L
MW-14 μg/L
MW-15A μg/L
MW-15B μg/L
MW-17 μg/L
MW-18 μg/L
MW-19A μg/L
MW-19B μg/L
MW-20A μg/L
MW-20B μg/L
MW-22A μg/L
MW-24A μg/L
MW-26 μg/L
MW-27 μg/L
MW-28 μg/L
MW-29A μg/L
MW-30A μg/L
MW-31 μg/L
PZ-1 μg/L
PZ-4 μg/L
PZ-5 μg/L
PZ-6 μg/L
PZ-7 μg/L
PZ-8 μg/L
PZ-10 μg/L
PZ-12 μg/L
PZ-16 μg/L
PZ-18 μg/L
PZ-22 μg/L
PZ-24 μg/L
PZ-26 μg/L
CAS No.
4,6-Dinitro-
2-methyl-
phenol
Hexachloro-
benzene
Penta-
chloro-
phenol
Hexachloro-
butadiene
2-Methyl-
naph-
thalene
Dibenzo(a,h)-
anthracene
Naph-
thalene
1,1-
Dichloro-
ethane
1,2-
Dichloro-
ethane
cis-1,2-
Dichloro-
ethene
1,2,4-
Trichloro-
benzene Benzene
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane Bromoform
Bromo-
methane
Carbon
disulfide
Carbon
tetra-
chloride
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane Chloroform
Ethyl-
benzene
Dichloro-
methane
(Methylene
chloride)
Tetra-
chloro-
ethene
Trichloro-
ethene
Vinyl
chloride m,p-Xylenes o-Xylene
Total
Cyanide -
Unfiltered Fluoride
Nitrite
as N
Dichloro-
acetic
Acid
Trichloro-
acetic acid
534-52-1 118-74-1 87-86-5 87-68-3 91-57-6 53-70-3 91-20-3 75-34-3 107-06-2 156-59-2 120-82-1 71-43-2 75-27-4 75-25-2 74-83-9 75-15-0 56-23-5 124-48-1 67-66-3 100-41-4 75-09-2 127-18-4 79-01-6 75-01-4 179601-23-1 95-47-6 74-90-8 16984-48-8 14797-65-0 79-43-6 76-03-9
4,300
3,300
790
7.5 0.54 3.5 0.80 1.4 2,200
2.9 11 2.6 15 0.55 0.26 1.9 14 0.29 2.3 2.1 5,900
0.19 0.15 0.38 6.60E-01 0.5 0.53 14 6,700
5.0 7.0 13 4.0 4.40E+00 0.4 0.19 0.85 0.61 11 1.5 1.2 1.4 3.6 2.2 25,000
1.0 7.5 0.61 4.9 13 4.5 5,100
2.7 20 0.39 18 2.80E-01 0.48 6.3 4.0 1.0 9.6 6.7 97 11,000
7.3 2.0 5.5 0.095 1.5 13 1.9 29 4.50E-01 0.75 24 9.3 0.91 0.46 32 0.43 22 18 9.1 16,000
1.5 1.4 0.23 0.37 6.0
3.8 3.2 1.0 0.29 130 300 1.5 5.0 2.6 240 100 2.4 0.27 0.23 0.46 32 16,000 1,500 1,300
1.7 0.071 1.9 0.52 44 78 0.49 27 0.28 75 61 5.5 0.24 0.31 30 18,000 980 420
0.8 0.11 0.15 74 100 0.56 28 0.79 110 86 4.9 0.15 0.45 32 16,000 730 570
1.7 0.4 0.15 120 180 1.9 22 4.2 180 90 3.7 0.39 0.27 40 9,700 1,400 960
0.46 1.3 0.37 0.13 79 120 0.72 53 1.9 120 76 3.7 0.28 0.38 56 20,000 990 590
5.8 9.4 0.51 0.16 21 2,800
1.7 1.0 0.69 0.42 4,700
2.0 4.1 0.27 8.8 4,500
0.6 770
1.7 6.5 1.7 21 1.1 0.61 1.6 1.1 0.45 24 8.5 24 13 7.4 2.1 11,000 20 8.8
0.008 0.55 1.4 2.8 0.43 1.0 7.9 0.43 13,000 21
0.17 2,200
9.0 11,000 860 4.9
0.94 6,700
5.6 15 0.15 40,000
10 0.48 1,800
1,300
0.17 0.37 2,800 0.44
1.4 1.1 0.25 0.11 9,300
4.2 1.5 6.8 70 3.0 2.7 11 7.3 0.64 13,000 74
0.18 0.29 26 100 64 20 1.2 1.8 5.7 9,500 73 130
0.27 0.33 0.4 2.8 0.15 25,000 160
0.76 9,000
28,000 86
0.54 1.8 0.53 79 120 71 1.3 99 100 13 0.59 0.38 29 13,000 500 410
0.56 0.29 0.3 0.41 0.11 0.3 0.3 23 16,000
1.1 0.36 0.15 57 110 0.84 88 1.7 95 74 9.9 0.31 0.29 15 15,000 470 540
0.38 0.29 0.36 0.14 7.3 4,800 13
0.34 0.99 1,900 14 18
1.7 1.7 1.4 3,400
7.2 0.27 16 0.43 1.4 0.66 26 0.27 2.2 2.5 9.3 13,000
0.64 0.84 0.41 0.18 0.33 4.9 74 11 0.47 0.86 0.28 5.7 17,000 23
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - $SULO
Notes:
μg/L = Micrograms per liter
BG = Background
COPCs = Constituents of potential concern
ND = Not detected
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
UAZ = Upper aquifer zone
Table B-7
Upper Aquifer Zone Exposure Point Concentrations for Detected COPCs
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Table B-8
Lower Aquifer Zone Exposure Point Concentrations for Detected COPCs
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Well or
Piezometer
Name Units
Calculated
TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Total
PCBs Antimony Arsenic Barium
Chromium,
Hexavalent Iron Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Zinc
Naph-
thalene
Ethyl-
benzene Fluoride
calc-dx-0 1336-36-3 7440-36-0 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 18540-29-9 7439-89-6 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 7440-66-6 91-20-3 100-41-4 16984-48-8
Background Wells
MW-24B μg/L 2.10E-07 25 62 49 1.2 1,200
MW-25B μg/L 1.80E-07 1.7 23 0.083 81 1.2 0.1 870
PMW-1D μg/L 1.90E-07 0.00102 29 23 1.2 7.2 930
Site Wells
MW-9 μg/L 9.5 28 29 49 28 5,000
MW-22B μg/L 1.50E-07 2.9 45 22 1.7 1,900
MW-29B μg/L 1.50E-07 0.000383 5.2 14 21 0.082 31 0.89 0.1 1,200
MW-30B μg/L 0.000621 18 26 450
MW-32B μg/L 3.70E-07 36 26 0.19 2,200
Notes:
μg/L = Micrograms per liter
BG = Background
COPCs = Constituents of potential concern
LAZ = Lower aquifer zone
ND = Not detected
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
CAS No.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-9
Summary of Toxicity Data for COPCs
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
RfDo SFO IARC
Analyte CAS # mg/kg-day Source
(mg/kg-day)-1 Source Group
Calculated TEQ, Mammalian CALC_DX_0 7.0E-10 I 1.3E+05 C 1
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 - - 2.0E+00 I 1
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.0E+00 P - - -
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 4.0E-04 I - - -
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 3.0E-04 I 1.5E+00 I 1
Total Barium 7440-39-3 2.0E-01 I - - -
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.0E-03 I - - 1
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0E-03 I - - 1
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 1.5E+00 - - -
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 3.0E-03 I 5.0E-01 C 1
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.0E-04 P - - 2B
Total Copper 7440-50-8 4.0E-02 H - - -
Total Iron 7439-89-6 7.0E-01 P - - -
Total Lead 7439-92-1 -----
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 1.4E-01 I - - -
Total Mercury1 7439-97-6 3.0E-04 ---
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 5.0E-03 I ---
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 2.0E-02 I --2B
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 1.0E-05 X ---
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 5.0E-03 G ---
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 3.0E-01 I ---
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 3.0E-04 I ---
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 1.0E-03 P 1.1E-02 I 2B
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 8.0E-05 X ---
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 8.0E-04 I 1.6E+00 I 2B
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 1.0E-03 P 7.8E-02 I 3
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 8.0E-04 I ---
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 5.0E-03 I 4.0E-01 I 1
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 4.0E-03 I ---
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 --1.0E-01 I 2B
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 -- 1.0E+00 I 2A
Naphthalene 91-20-3 2.0E-02 I --2B
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 2.0E-01 P 5.7E-03 C CA
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 6.0E-03 X 9.1E-02 I 2B
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 2.0E-03 I NA --
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 1.0E-02 I 2.9E-02 P -
Benzene 71-43-2 4.0E-03 I 5.5E-02 I 1
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 2.0E-02 I 6.2E-02 I 2B
Bromoform 75-25-2 2.0E-02 I 7.9E-03 I 3
Bromomethane 74-83-9 1.4E-03 I ---
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 1.0E-01 I ---
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 4.0E-03 I 7.0E-02 I 2B
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 2.0E-02 I 8.4E-02 I -
Chloroform 67-66-3 1.0E-02 I 3.1E-02 C 2B
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 1.0E-01 I 1.1E-02 C 2B
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride) 75-09-2 6.0E-03 I 2.0E-03 I 2A
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 6.0E-03 I 2.1E-03 I 2A
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 5.0E-04 I 4.6E-02 I 1
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 3.0E-03 I 7.2E-01 I 1
m,p-Xylenes 179601-23-1 2.0E-01 G ---
o-Xylene 95-47-6 2.0E-01 G ---
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 4.0E-03 I 5.0E-02 I -
Trichloroacetic Acid 76-03-9 2.0E-02 I 7.0E-02 I -
Fluoride 16984-48-8 4.0E-02 C ---
Nitrite as N 14797-65-0 1.0E-01 I ---
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 6.0E-04 I ---
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-9
Summary of Toxicity Data for COPCs
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Concern
IARC = International Agency for Research on Cancer
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
PCB = Polychlorinated Biphenyl
RfD o = Chronic Oral Reference Dose
SFO = Oral Slope Factor
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Toxic Equivalence
USEPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency
Data sourced from USEPA Regional Screening Levels, Hazard Quotient = 0.1, November 2020
1 = The CAS# presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (7439-97-6), as reported by the laboratory. The toxicity values
used in the BHHRA are for mercuric salts (7487-94-7).
IARC Group Classifications
1 = Carcinogenic to humans
2A = Probably carcinogenic to humans
2B = Possibly carcinogenic to humans
3 = Not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans
CA = Not classified as a carcinogen by IARC; SFO and IUR developed by California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.
Sources
A = Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/)
C = California Environmental Protection Agency
G = See Regional Screening Levels User's Guide (https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls-users-guide)
I = Integrated Risk Information System (https://www.epa.gov/iris)
H = Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (https://epa-heast.ornl.gov/)
P = Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTV) (https://www.epa.gov/pprtv)
X = PPRTV Screening Level
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-10
Groundwater Hazard and Risk Summary for Upper Aquifer Zone Wells - Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
TDS
unitless Drivers unitless Drivers (mg/L)
Background Wells
MW-25A 3 Arsenic, Fluoride 2 E-4 Arsenic 37,000
MW-34 2 Arsenic, Fluoride 2 E-4 Arsenic 11,000
PMW-1S 0.3 4 E-7 5,800
Site Wells
LF-01 2 Zinc, Manganese 7 E-5 Arsenic, Vinyl Chloride 33,000
LF-03 5 Fluoride, Manganese 7 E-5 Arsenic, Naphthalene, and
Trichloroethene
77,000
MW-4A 11 Arsenic, Cobalt, Iron, Manganese, Fluoride 3 E-4 Arsenic 54,000
MW-5A 12 Fluoride, Iron 2 E-4 Arsenic, Naphthalene, Vinyl Chloride 130,000
MW-6 2 Fluoride, Manganese 5 E-5 Arsenic, Vinyl Chloride 29,000
MW-7 6 Fluoride 4 E-5 Arsenic, Naphthalene, Vinyl Chloride 39,000
MW-8A 13 Fluoride, Iron, Manganese 2 E-4 Arsenic, Chloroform,
Hexachlorobenzene, PCBs,
Pentachlorophenol, and Trichloroethene
57,000
MW-8B 0.4 4 E-5 Arsenic 77,000
MW-13A 20 Cobalt, Dichloroacetic Acid, Fluoride,
Manganese
9 E-4 Arsenic, Dibromochloromethane,
Dichloroacetic Acid, Trichloroacetic
Acid
53,000
MW-13B 16 Cobalt, Dichloroacetic Acid, Fluoride,
Manganese
5 E-4 Arsenic, Bromodichloromethane,
Chloroform, Dibromochloromethane,
Dichloroacetic Acid, and Trichloroacetic
Acid
72,000
MW-14 17 Cobalt, Dichloroacetic Acid, Fluoride, and
Manganese
5 E-4 Arsenic, Bromodichloromethane,
Chloroform, Dibromochloromethane,
Dichloroacetic Acid, and Trichloroacetic
Aid
64,000
MW-15A 22 Cobalt, Dichloroacetic Acid, Fluoride,
Manganese
7 E-4 Arsenic, Bromodichloromethane,
Dibromochloromethane, Dichloroacetic
Acid, and Trichloroacetic Acid
53,000
MW-15B 21 Cobalt, Dichloroacetic Acid, Fluoride,
Manganese
7 E-4 Arsenic, Bromodichloromethane,
Dibromochloromethane, Dichloroacetic
Acid, and Trichloroacetic Acid
58,000
MW-17 3 Arsenic, Fluoride, Manganese 2 E-4 Arsenic, Trichloroethene 100,000
MW-18 5 Arsenic, Fluoride, Manganese 4 E-4 Arsenic 22,000
MW-19A 4 Arsenic, Fluoride, Manganese 2 E-4 Arsenic, Trichloroethene 130,000
MW-19B 4 Arsenic 5 E-4 Arsenic 72,000
MW-20A 73 Arsenic, Iron, and Fluoride 3 E-4 Arsenic, Naphthalene, Trichloroacetic
Acid, Trichloroethene
100,000
MW-20B 14 Arsenic, Fluoride, Iron, Manganese 5 E-4 Arsenic, Vinyl Chloride 280,000
Well or
Piezometer
Noncancer Hazard Index Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0035967.04 - April 2022
Table B-10
Groundwater Hazard and Risk Summary for Upper Aquifer Zone Wells - Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
TDS
unitless Drivers unitless Drivers (mg/L)
Well or
Piezometer
Noncancer Hazard Index Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
MW-24A 15 Arsenic, Fluoride, Manganese 1 E-3 Arsenic 71,000
MW-26 11 Arsenic, Fluoride, Manganese 1 E-3 Arsenic 59,000
MW-27 23 Arsenic, Cobalt, Manganese, Fluoride 5 E-4 Arsenic 98,000
MW-28 2 Arsenic, Fluoride, Manganese 1 E-4 Arsenic 67,000
MW-29A 0.6 3 E-5 Arsenic 67,000
MW-30A 44 Arsenic, Iron, Thallium, Vanadium 3 E-3 Arsenic 78,000
MW-31 7 Arsenic and Fluoride 4 E-4 Arsenic 53,000
PZ-1 23 Arsenic, Cobalt, Manganese, Thallium,
Fluoride
1 E-3 Arsenic, Dichloroacetic Acid 320,000
PZ-4 23 Arsenic, Manganese, Thallium, Fluoride 2 E-3 Arsenic, Dibromochloromethane,
Dichloroacetic Acid, Trichloroacetic Acid
180,000
PZ-5 18 Manganese, Fluoride 2 E-4 Arsenic, Dichloroacetic Acid 150,000
PZ-6 6 Arsenic, Fluoride 3 E-4 Arsenic 140,000
PZ-7 22 Arsenic, Manganese, Fluoride 5 E-4 Arsenic and Dichloroacetic Acid 250,000
PZ-8 18 Arsenic, Cobalt, Manganese, Fluoride 1 E-3 Arsenic, Bromodichloromethane,
Dibromochloromethane, Dichloroacetic
51,000
PZ-10 18 Arsenic, Iron, Manganese, Fluoride 3 E-4 Arsenic 56,000
PZ-12 19 Arsenic, Cobalt, Iron, Manganese, Fluoride 6 E-4 Arsenic, Bromodichloromethane,
Dibromochloromethane, Dichloroacetic
Acid, Trichloroacetic Acid
190,000
PZ-16 8 Arsenic, Manganese 3 E-4 Arsenic 60,000
PZ-18 2 Arsenic, Fluoride 1 E-4 Arsenic 92,000
PZ-22 7 Arsenic, Manganese 4 E-4 Arsenic 180,000
PZ-24 10 Manganese, Fluoride 2 E-4 Arsenic 77,000
PZ-26 19 Arsenic, Fluoride, Manganese, Iron 4 E-4 Arsenic 63,000
Notes:
Drivers in Bold font contribute the majority of the ILCR.
mg/L = Milligram per liter
HI = Hazard index
ILCR = Incremental lifetime cancer risk
NA = Not applicable
TDS = Total dissolved solids
UAZ = Upper Aquifer Zone
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0035967.04 - April 2022
Table B-11
Groundwater Hazard and Risk Summary for Lower Aquifer Zone Wells - Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
TDS
unitless Drivers unitless Drivers (mg/L)
Background Wells
MW-24B 1 Arsenic and Fluoride 1 E-4 Arsenic 110,000
MW-25B 0.4 3 E-7 37,000
PMW-1D 0.3 1 E-7 4,800
Site Wells
MW-9 3 Arsenic and Fluoride 2 E-4 Arsenic 110,000
MW-22B 2 Arsenic 3 E-4 Arsenic 110,000
MW-29B 1 8 E-5 Arsenic 93,000
MW-30B 0.1 5 E-9 17,000
MW-32B 2 Arsenic and Fluoride 2 E-4 Arsenic 82,000
Notes:
mg/L = Milligrams per liter
HI = Hazard index
ILCR = Incremental lifetime cancer risk
LAZ = Lower Aquifer Zone
TDS = Total dissolved solids
Incremental Lifetime
Cancer RiskNoncancer Hazard IndexWell or
Piezometer
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0035967.04 - $SULO
Table B-12
Constituents Lacking Risk-Based Screening Levels for
Groundwater
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS #
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7
Carbazole 86-74-8
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2
Phenanthrene 85-01-8
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1
Monochloroacetic acid 79-11-8
Monobromoacetic acid 79-08-3
Dibromoacetic acid 631-64-1
Bromide 24959-67-9
Chloride 16887-00-6
Sulfate 14808-79-8
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-13
Site-Wide Groundwater Constituents not Detected in Samples - Maximum Detection Limit Greater than RBSL
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Minimum
Detection
Limit
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Min DL /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 μg/L 32 0 4.0E+00 4.8E+01 8.3E-02 4.8E+01 5.8E+02
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 μg/L 32 0 2.1E+00 2.5E+01 4.6E+00 4.6E-01 5.4E+00
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+01 1.9E+02 3.9E+00 4.1E+00 4.9E+01
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+00 1.9E+01 2.4E-01 6.7E+00 7.9E+01
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+00 1.9E+01 4.9E-02 3.3E+01 3.9E+02
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 μg/L 32 0 1.3E+00 1.5E+01 9.1E+00 1.4E-01 1.6E+00
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 μg/L 32 0 7.6E-01 9.2E+00 1.3E-01 5.8E+00 7.1E+01
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 μg/L 32 0 1.6E+00 1.9E+01 3.7E-01 4.3E+00 5.1E+01
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 μg/L 32 0 1.2E+00 1.4E+01 3.8E+00 3.2E-01 3.7E+00
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 μg/L 32 0 6.6E+00 8.0E+01 1.9E+01 3.5E-01 4.2E+00
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 μg/L 32 0 8.0E-01 9.5E+00 5.9E+00 1.4E-01 1.6E+00
Bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 μg/L 32 0 1.2E+00 1.4E+01 1.4E-02 8.6E+01 1.0E+03
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 μg/L 32 0 8.7E-01 1.0E+01 7.9E-01 1.1E+00 1.3E+01
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 μg/L 32 0 4.0E+00 4.8E+01 4.1E-02 9.8E+01 1.2E+03
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 μg/L 32 0 1.1E+00 1.3E+01 3.3E-01 3.3E+00 3.9E+01
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 μg/L 32 0 1.3E+00 1.5E+01 1.4E-01 9.3E+00 1.1E+02
n-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 μg/L 32 0 5.6E-02 7.1E-02 1.1E-04 5.1E+02 6.5E+02
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 μg/L 32 0 1.1E+00 1.3E+01 1.1E-02 1.0E+02 1.2E+03
1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 μg/L 30 0 2.5E+01 2.5E+01 4.6E-01 5.4E+01 5.4E+01
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 μg/L 30 0 3.2E-01 3.2E-01 3.3E-04 9.7E+02 9.7E+02
1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 μg/L 30 0 2.2E-01 2.2E-01 7.5E-03 2.9E+01 2.9E+01
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 μg/L 30 0 3.1E-01 3.1E-01 4.1E-02 7.6E+00 7.6E+00
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 μg/L 30 0 9.0E-02 6.3E-01 7.6E-02 1.2E+00 8.3E+00
Notes:
μg/L = Micrograms per liter
DL = Detection Limit
Max = Maximum
Min = Minimum
RBSL = Risk Based Screening Level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-14
Comparison of ND=0 and ND=1/2DL for TEQ in Groundwater Well Water Samples
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Well ID Sample ID Detected?
Mammalian
TEQ, ND=0
(μg/L)
Mammalian TEQ,
ND=1/2DL
(μg/L)
Ratio
(ND=1/2/ND=0)
Background Wells - UAZ
MW-25A MW-25A-GW-01-022519 Yes 4.4E-08 0.000016 363.6
MW-25A MW-25A-GW-01-062419 Yes 1.4E-09 0.000018 12857.1
MW-25A MW-25A-GW-01-082619 Yes 0.00000011 0.000017 154.5
MW-25A MW-25A-GW-01-111318 Yes 0.00000005 0.00002 400.0
MW-34 MW-34-GW-01-031119 No 0 0 NA
MW-34 MW-34-GW-01-062519 Yes 0.00000031 0.000019 61.3
MW-34 MW-34-GW-01-090519 No 0 0 NA
MW-34 MW-34-GW-01-111218 Yes 0.00000011 0.000019 172.7
PMW-1S PMW-1S-GW-01-031119 No 0 0 NA
PMW-1S PMW-1S-GW-01-062519 Yes 1.2E-08 0.000017 1416.7
PMW-1S PMW-1S-GW-01-090519 Yes 0.00000038 0.000018 47.4
PMW-1S PMW-1S-GW-01-111218 Yes 9.3E-08 0.000018 193.5
Site Wells - UAZ
LF-01 LF-01-01-021714 No 0 0 NA
LF-03 LF-03-01-021714 No 0 0 NA
MW-4A MW-4A-01-020514 Yes 1.7E-10 0.00000066 3882.4
MW-5A MW-5A-01-020714 Yes 0.00000018 0.0000021 11.7
MW-6 MW-6-01-020714 Yes 0.00000055 0.0000013 2.4
MW-7 MW-7-01-020614 Yes 0.00000014 0.00000083 5.9
MW-8A MW-8A-01-021814 Yes 0.00000092 0.0000056 6.1
MW-8B MW-8B-01-021814 No 0 0 NA
MW-13A MW-13A-01-020414 Yes 2.7E-11 0.00000084 31111.1
MW-13B MW-13B-01-020414 No 0 0 NA
MW-13B MW-13B-GW-01-022819 No 0 0 NA
MW-13B MW-13B-GW-01-061319 Yes 1.2E-09 0.000019 15833.3
MW-13B MW-13B-GW-01-091219 Yes 8E-10 0.000018 22500.0
MW-13B MW-13B-GW-01-110818 Yes 6.3E-08 0.000018 285.7
MW-14 MW-14-01-020514 Yes 0.0000003 0.0000012 4.0
MW-15A MW-15A-01-020514 No 0 0 NA
MW-15B MW-15B-01-020514 No 0 0 NA
MW-17 MW-17-01-020514 No 0 0 NA
MW-18 MW-18-01-021314 Yes 0.00000028 0.0000025 8.9
MW-19A MW-19A-01-021414 No 0 0 NA
MW-19B MW-19B-01-021414 No 0 0 NA
MW-20A MW-20A-01-013114 Yes 2E-10 0.00000076 3800.0
MW-20A MW-20A-GW-01-022819 Yes 1.3E-08 0.000017 1307.7
MW-20A MW-20A-GW-01-062719 No 0 0 NA
MW-20A MW-20A-GW-01-091219 Yes 1E-09 0.000018 18000.0
MW-20A MW-20A-GW-01-111518 Yes 9.7E-08 0.000018 185.6
MW-20B MW-20B-01-013114 Yes 1.8E-08 0.00000076 42.2
MW-24A MW-24A-GW-01-031219 No 0 0 NA
MW-24A MW-24A-GW-01-061319 Yes 0.00000012 0.000019 158.3
MW-24A MW-24A-GW-01-082919 Yes 0.00000027 0.00002 74.1
MW-24A MW-24A-GW-01-111418 No 0 0 NA
MW-26 MW-26-GW-01-032119 Yes 0.00000024 0.000019 79.2
MW-26 MW-26-GW-01-062619 Yes 0.00000023 0.000017 73.9
MW-26 MW-26-GW-01-091919 Yes 0.0000002 0.000018 90.0
MW-26 MW-26-GW-01-110618 Yes 9.7E-08 0.000017 175.3
MW-27 MW-27-GW-01-032819 Yes 3E-10 0.000018 60000.0
MW-27 MW-27-GW-01-062719 No 0 0 NA
MW-27 MW-27-GW-01-092619 No 0 0 NA
MW-27 MW-27-GW-01-110618 Yes 0.00000023 0.000017 73.9
MW-28 MW-28-GW-01-032119 Yes 0.00000018 0.000019 105.6
MW-28 MW-28-GW-01-062619 No 0 0 NA
MW-28 MW-28-GW-01-091919 Yes 7.8E-08 0.000018 230.8
MW-28 MW-28-GW-01-110618 Yes 0.00000016 0.000017 106.3
MW-29A MW-29A-GW-01-022619 Yes 1.2E-08 0.000017 1416.7
MW-29A MW-29A-GW-01-052919 Yes 0.0000012 0.000021 17.5
MW-29A MW-29A-GW-01-091019 No 0 0 NA
MW-29A MW-29A-GW-01-112918 Yes 9E-09 0.000017 1888.9
MW-30A MW-30A-GW-01-022719 Yes 2.8E-10 0.000017 60714.3
MW-30A MW-30A-GW-01-053019 No 0 0 NA
MW-30A MW-30A-GW-01-090919 No 0 0 NA
MW-30A MW-30A-GW-01-112818 Yes 0.00000003 0.000018 600.0
MW-31 MW-31-GW-01-022819 Yes 5.4E-09 0.000016 2963.0
MW-31 MW-31-GW-01-062019 Yes 0.00000015 0.000018 120.0
MW-31 MW-31-GW-01-091719 Yes 1.8E-09 0.000017 9444.4
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - $SULO
Table B-14
Comparison of ND=0 and ND=1/2DL for TEQ in Groundwater Well Water Samples
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Well ID Sample ID Detected?
Mammalian
TEQ, ND=0
(μg/L)
Mammalian TEQ,
ND=1/2DL
(μg/L)
Ratio
(ND=1/2/ND=0)
MW-31 MW-31-GW-01-111318 No 0 0 NA
PZ-1 PZ-01-01-020414 No 0 0 NA
PZ-1 PZ-1-GW-01-022719 Yes 6.8E-08 0.000017 250.0
PZ-1 PZ-1-GW-01-061819 No 0 0 NA
PZ-1 PZ-1-GW-01-091819 Yes 0.00000012 0.000017 141.7
PZ-1 PZ-1-GW-01-112618 Yes 2.8E-08 0.000017 607.1
PZ-4 PZ-04-01-021314 Yes 2.3E-08 0.0000018 78.3
PZ-4 PZ-4-GW-01-031119 No 0 0 NA
PZ-4 PZ-4-GW-01-062419 No 0 0 NA
PZ-4 PZ-4-GW-01-082719 Yes 0.00000023 0.000018 78.3
PZ-4 PZ-4-GW-01-110818 Yes 1.6E-08 0.000018 1125.0
PZ-5 PZ-5-GW-01-031419 Yes 0.0000012 0.000017 14.2
PZ-5 PZ-5-GW-01-060319 Yes 5.4E-09 0.000019 3518.5
PZ-5 PZ-5-GW-01-092519 Yes 8E-10 0.000018 22500.0
PZ-5 PZ-5-GW-01-110718 Yes 1.2E-08 0.000018 1500.0
PZ-6 PZ-06-01-013114 Yes 1.8E-10 0.00000084 4666.7
PZ-6 PZ-6-GW-01-040119 Yes 0.00000011 0.000018 163.6
PZ-6 PZ-6-GW-01-060419 Yes 7.4E-08 0.000019 256.8
PZ-6 PZ-6-GW-01-092319 No 0 0 NA
PZ-6 PZ-6-GW-01-102918 Yes 9.2E-08 0.000018 195.7
PZ-7 PZ-7-GW-01-031319 Yes 0.00000015 0.000018 120.0
PZ-7 PZ-7-GW-01-061219 No 0 0 NA
PZ-7 PZ-7-GW-01-082819 No 0 0 NA
PZ-7 PZ-7-GW-01-102918 Yes 1.2E-08 0.000017 1416.7
PZ-8 PZ-08-01-020514 Yes 1.4E-10 0.00000087 6214.3
PZ-10 PZ-10-01-020414 Yes 9.3E-11 0.00000072 7741.9
PZ-12 PZ-12-01-020414 Yes 7.2E-08 0.00000084 11.7
PZ-16 PZ-16-01-020314 Yes 1.2E-08 0.00000074 61.7
PZ-18 PZ-18-01-020314 Yes 2E-09 0.00000064 320.0
PZ-22 PZ-22-01-020314 No 0 0 NA
PZ-24 PZ-24-01-020714 Yes 1.9E-10 0.0000047 24736.8
PZ-26 PZ-26-01-020514 Yes 0.00000028 0.0000014 5.0
Background Wells - LAZ
MW-24B MW-24B-GW-01-031219 No 0 0 NA
MW-24B MW-24B-GW-01-061319 Yes 1.2E-09 0.000019 15833.3
MW-24B MW-24B-GW-01-082919 Yes 0.00000021 0.000021 100.0
MW-24B MW-24B-GW-01-111418 No 0 0 NA
MW-25B MW-25B-GW-01-022519 Yes 0.00000016 0.000016 100.0
MW-25B MW-25B-GW-01-062419 Yes 0.00000018 0.000019 105.6
MW-25B MW-25B-GW-01-082619 Yes 0.00000014 0.000018 128.6
MW-25B MW-25B-GW-01-111318 No 0 0 NA
PMW-1D PMW-1D-GW-01-030619 Yes 1.1E-09 0.000017 15454.5
PMW-1D PMW-1D-GW-01-062519 Yes 0.00000019 0.000018 94.7
PMW-1D PMW-1D-GW-01-090519 No 0 0 NA
PMW-1D PMW-1D-GW-01-111218 Yes 0.00000006 0.000018 300.0
Site Wells - LAZ
MW-22B MW-22B-GW-01-061019 Yes 0.00000015 0.000018 120.0
MW-22B MW-22B-GW-01-110818 Yes 0.00000011 0.000017 154.5
MW-29B MW-29B-GW-01-052919 No 0 0 NA
MW-29B MW-29B-GW-01-091019 No 0 0 NA
MW-29B MW-29B-GW-01-112918 Yes 0.00000015 0.000017 113.3
MW-30B MW-30B-GW-01-053019 No 0 0 NA
MW-30B MW-30B-GW-01-112818 No 0 0 NA
MW-32B MW-32B-GW-01-061819 Yes 1.5E-09 0.000019 12666.7
MW-32B MW-32B-GW-01-120518 Yes 0.00000037 0.00002 54.1
Notes:
μg/L = Micrograms per liter
LAZ = Lower aquifer zone
ND=0 = Nondetect values replaced with 0
ND=1/2DL = Nondetect values replaced with half of the detection limit
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalence
UAZ = Upper aquifer zone
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - $SULO

ATTACHMENT 1 COPC REFINEMENT
Table B1-1
Groundwater Blank Comparison for FeCL GW Samples (April 2015)
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Dissolved Aluminum 7429-90-5 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Antimony 7440-36-0 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Arsenic 7440-38-2 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Barium 7440-39-3 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Barium 7440-39-3 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Beryllium 7440-41-7 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Cadmium 7440-43-9 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Chromium 7440-47-3 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 µg/L 1.19 5.95 ---
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 µg/L 1.19 5.95 ---
Dissolved Cobalt 7440-48-4 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Copper 7440-50-8 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Copper 7440-50-8 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Iron 7439-89-6 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Iron 7439-89-6 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Lead 7439-92-1 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Lead 7439-92-1 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Manganese 7439-96-5 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Molybdenum 7439-98-7 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Nickel 7440-02-0 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Selenium 7782-49-2 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Thallium 7440-28-0 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Vanadium 7440-62-2 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dissolved Zinc 7440-66-6 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)88-06-2 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)118-74-1 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-1
Groundwater Blank Comparison for FeCL GW Samples (April 2015)
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)87-68-3 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)87-86-5 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Naphthalene 91-20-3 FeCL GW Samples Apr2015 - ND ----
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
FeCL = Ferric chloride
GW = Groundwater
Max = Maximum
ND = Not detected
SIM = Selected ion monitoring mode. If a constituent has both SIM and non-SIM results, they are combined into one dataset for the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-2
Groundwater Blank Comparison for Phase 1A Sampling
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Dissolved Aluminum 7429-90-5 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dissolved Antimony 7440-36-0 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.2 1.0 0.54 9.0 TRUE
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.2 1.0 0.6 8.6 TRUE
Dissolved Arsenic 7440-38-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dissolved Barium 7440-39-3 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Barium 7440-39-3 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dissolved Beryllium 7440-41-7 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dissolved Cadmium 7440-43-9 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dissolved Chromium 7440-47-3 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.464 2.32 0.129 1.76 TRUE
Dissolved Cobalt 7440-48-4 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dissolved Copper 7440-50-8 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 1.72 8.6 2 47 TRUE
Total Copper 7440-50-8 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 1.72 8.6 2.3 53 TRUE
Dissolved Iron 7439-89-6 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 1680 8400 490 670000 TRUE
Total Iron 7439-89-6 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 1680 8400 490 680000 TRUE
Dissolved Lead 7439-92-1 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 100 500 3.1 51 TRUE
Total Lead 7439-92-1 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 100 500 3.1 51 TRUE
Dissolved Manganese 7439-96-5 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 3.3 16.5 43 16000 FALSE
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 3.3 16.5 60 16000 FALSE
Dissolved Mercury 7439-97-6 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 20.8 104 ---
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 20.8 104 0.53 0.53 TRUE
Dissolved Molybdenum 7439-98-7 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 23.3 116.5 2.8 190 TRUE
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 23.3 116.5 1.4 200 TRUE
Dissolved Nickel 7440-02-0 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dissolved Selenium 7782-49-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dissolved Thallium 7440-28-0 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.65 3.25 1.3 5.3 TRUE
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.65 3.25 1.6 5.1 TRUE
Dissolved Vanadium 7440-62-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dissolved Zinc 7440-66-6 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 5.2 26 9.1 690 TRUE
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 5.2 26 9.9 630 TRUE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (SIM)88-06-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)118-74-1 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)87-68-3 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-2
Groundwater Blank Comparison for Phase 1A Sampling
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)87-86-5 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.079 0.395 0.012 5.0 TRUE
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.00786 0.0393 0.036 0.036 TRUE
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Naphthalene 91-20-3 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.38 1.9 0.007 20 TRUE
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Benzene 71-43-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 1.1 5.5 0.92 130 TRUE
Bromoform 75-25-2 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.29 1.45 0.25 300 TRUE
Carbon Disulfide 75-15-0 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.96 4.8 0.24 88 TRUE
Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Chloroform 67-66-3 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 4.7 23.5 0.13 100 TRUE
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.47 2.35 0.95 240 TRUE
Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
m,p-Xylenes 179601-23-1 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Bromomethane 74-83-9 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Chloromethane 74-87-3 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride) 75-09-2 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
o-Xylene 95-47-6 Phase 1A Sampling µg/L 0.22 1.1 0.13 18 TRUE
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Xylene, Total 1330-20-7 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Cyanide - Filtered 74-90-8 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Trichloroacetic Acid 76-03-9 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Fluoride 16984-48-8 Phase 1A Sampling - ND ----
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
Max = Maximum
ND = Not detected
SIM = Selected ion monitoring mode. If a constituent has both SIM and non-SIM results, they are combined into one dataset for the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-3
Groundwater Blank Comparison for Phase2BHydro-Round1
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Dissolved Aluminum 7429-90-5 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Antimony 7440-36-0 Phase2BHydro-Round1 µg/L 0.487 2.435 2.6 18 FALSE
Dissolved Arsenic 7440-38-2 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Barium 7440-39-3 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Beryllium 7440-41-7 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Cadmium 7440-43-9 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Chromium 7440-47-3 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Cobalt 7440-48-4 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Copper 7440-50-8 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Iron 7439-89-6 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Lead 7439-92-1 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Manganese 7439-96-5 Phase2BHydro-Round1 µg/L 1.63 8.15 23 20000 FALSE
Dissolved Mercury 7439-97-6 Phase2BHydro-Round1 µg/L 0.121 0.605 0.11 4.2 TRUE
Dissolved Molybdenum 7439-98-7 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Nickel 7440-02-0 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Selenium 7782-49-2 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Thallium 7440-28-0 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Vanadium 7440-62-2 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dissolved Zinc 7440-66-6 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)118-74-1 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)87-68-3 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)87-86-5 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Naphthalene 91-20-3 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Bromoform 75-25-2 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Carbon Disulfide 75-15-0 Phase2BHydro-Round1 µg/L 0.49 2.45 0.19 2.8 TRUE
Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Chloroform 67-66-3 Phase2BHydro-Round1 µg/L 9.3 46.5 0.14 17 TRUE
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 Phase2BHydro-Round1 µg/L 0.14 0.7 0.43 51 TRUE
Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
m,p-Xylenes 179601-23-1 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Bromomethane 74-83-9 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
o-Xylene 95-47-6 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-3
Groundwater Blank Comparison for Phase2BHydro-Round1
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Xylene, Total 1330-20-7 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Trichloroacetic Acid 76-03-9 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Fluoride 16984-48-8 Phase2BHydro-Round1 - ND ----
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
Max = Maximum
ND = Not detected
SIM = Selected ion monitoring mode. If a constituent has both SIM and non-SIM results, they are combined into one dataset for the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-4
Groundwater Blank Comparison for Phase2BHydro-Round2
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Dissolved Aluminum 7429-90-5 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Antimony 7440-36-0 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Arsenic 7440-38-2 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Barium 7440-39-3 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Beryllium 7440-41-7 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Cadmium 7440-43-9 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Chromium 7440-47-3 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 Phase2BHydro-Round2 µg/L 0.004 0.02 ---
Dissolved Cobalt 7440-48-4 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Copper 7440-50-8 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Iron 7439-89-6 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Lead 7439-92-1 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Manganese 7439-96-5 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Mercury 7439-97-6 Phase2BHydro-Round2 µg/L 0.116 0.58 0.11 1.1 TRUE
Dissolved Molybdenum 7439-98-7 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Nickel 7440-02-0 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Selenium 7782-49-2 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Thallium 7440-28-0 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Vanadium 7440-62-2 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Dissolved Zinc 7440-66-6 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)118-74-1 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)87-68-3 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)87-86-5 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Naphthalene 91-20-3 Phase2BHydro-Round2 µg/L 0.373 1.865 2.5 2.5 FALSE
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Bromoform 75-25-2 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Carbon Disulfide 75-15-0 Phase2BHydro-Round2 µg/L 0.736 3.68 0.17 10 TRUE
Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Chloroform 67-66-3 Phase2BHydro-Round2 µg/L 0.44 2.2 1.1 16 TRUE
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
m,p-Xylenes 179601-23-1 Phase2BHydro-Round2 µg/L 0.273 1.365 0.2 6 TRUE
Bromomethane 74-83-9 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
o-Xylene 95-47-6 Phase2BHydro-Round2 µg/L 0.166 0.83 0.81 0.81 TRUE
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Xylene, Total 1330-20-7 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-4
Groundwater Blank Comparison for Phase2BHydro-Round2
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Trichloroacetic Acid 76-03-9 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Fluoride 16984-48-8 Phase2BHydro-Round2 - ND ----
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
Max = Maximum
ND = Not detected
SIM = Selected ion monitoring mode. If a constituent has both SIM and non-SIM results, they are combined into one dataset for the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-5
Groundwater Blank Comparison for Phase2BHydro-Round3
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Dissolved Aluminum 7429-90-5 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Antimony 7440-36-0 Phase2BHydro-Round3 µg/L 0.265 1.325 1 17 TRUE
Dissolved Arsenic 7440-38-2 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Barium 7440-39-3 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Beryllium 7440-41-7 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Cadmium 7440-43-9 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Chromium 7440-47-3 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Cobalt 7440-48-4 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Copper 7440-50-8 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Iron 7439-89-6 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Lead 7439-92-1 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Manganese 7439-96-5 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Mercury 7439-97-6 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Molybdenum 7439-98-7 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Nickel 7440-02-0 Phase2BHydro-Round3 µg/L 1.74 8.7 5.4 140 TRUE
Dissolved Selenium 7782-49-2 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Thallium 7440-28-0 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Vanadium 7440-62-2 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dissolved Zinc 7440-66-6 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)118-74-1 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)87-68-3 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)87-86-5 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Naphthalene 91-20-3 Phase2BHydro-Round3 µg/L 0.221 1.105 0.17 3.5 TRUE
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Bromoform 75-25-2 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Carbon Disulfide 75-15-0 Phase2BHydro-Round3 µg/L 0.41 2.05 0.37 3 TRUE
Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Chloroform 67-66-3 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
m,p-Xylenes 179601-23-1 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Bromomethane 74-83-9 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
o-Xylene 95-47-6 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Xylene, Total 1330-20-7 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-5
Groundwater Blank Comparison for Phase2BHydro-Round3
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Trichloroacetic Acid 76-03-9 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Fluoride 16984-48-8 Phase2BHydro-Round3 - ND ----
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
Max = Maximum
ND = Not detected
SIM = Selected ion monitoring mode. If a constituent has both SIM and non-SIM results, they are combined into one dataset for the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-6
Groundwater Blank Comparison for Phase2BHydro-Round4
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Dissolved Aluminum 7429-90-5 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Antimony 7440-36-0 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Arsenic 7440-38-2 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Barium 7440-39-3 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Beryllium 7440-41-7 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Cadmium 7440-43-9 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Chromium 7440-47-3 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Cobalt 7440-48-4 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Copper 7440-50-8 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Iron 7439-89-6 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Lead 7439-92-1 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Manganese 7439-96-5 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Mercury 7439-97-6 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Molybdenum 7439-98-7 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Nickel 7440-02-0 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Selenium 7782-49-2 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Thallium 7440-28-0 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Vanadium 7440-62-2 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dissolved Zinc 7440-66-6 Phase2BHydro-Round4 µg/L 9.98 49.9 21 610 TRUE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)118-74-1 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)87-68-3 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)87-86-5 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Naphthalene 91-20-3 Phase2BHydro-Round4 µg/L 0.409 2.045 0.16 2.8 TRUE
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Bromoform 75-25-2 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Carbon Disulfide 75-15-0 Phase2BHydro-Round4 µg/L 1.7 8.5 0.25 3.4 TRUE
Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Chloroform 67-66-3 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 Phase2BHydro-Round4 µg/L 0.126 0.63 1.3 24 FALSE
m,p-Xylenes 179601-23-1 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Bromomethane 74-83-9 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
o-Xylene 95-47-6 Phase2BHydro-Round4 µg/L 0.126 0.63 0.11 0.97 TRUE
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Xylene, Total 1330-20-7 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-6
Groundwater Blank Comparison for Phase2BHydro-Round4
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Event Units
Blank Max
or ND BCV
Minimum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Maximum
Detected
Sample
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Trichloroacetic Acid 76-03-9 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Fluoride 16984-48-8 Phase2BHydro-Round4 - ND ----
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
Max = Maximum
ND = Not detected
SIM = Selected ion monitoring mode. If a constituent has both SIM and non-SIM results, they are combined into one dataset for the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-7
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for 2-Methylnaphthalene (CAS # 91-57-6) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 0.54 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.46 FALSE TRUE 0.54 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114 0.76 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.045 FALSE TRUE 0.76 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714 0.19 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.48 TRUE FALSE 0.48 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 0.64 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.46 FALSE TRUE 0.64 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 0.018 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.045 TRUE FALSE 0.045 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 0.14 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.14 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 0.33 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.33 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814 1.5 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.46 FALSE TRUE 1.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814 1.5 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.46 FALSE TRUE 1.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-6-01-020714 0.14 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.48 TRUE FALSE 0.48 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614 2.7 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.046 FALSE TRUE 2.7 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 0.049 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.049 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714 5.0 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.45 FALSE TRUE 5.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114 0.045 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.041 TRUE TRUE 0.045 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 1.4 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.045 FALSE TRUE 1.4 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 0.46 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.49 FALSE FALSE 0.46 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 0.012 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.046 TRUE FALSE 0.046 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 0.094 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.49 TRUE FALSE 0.49 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 0.092 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.49 TRUE FALSE 0.49 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 0.17 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.48 TRUE FALSE 0.48 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-01-01-021714 0.043 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.047 TRUE FALSE 0.047 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714 2.9 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.45 FALSE TRUE 2.9 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 3.8 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.046 FALSE TRUE 3.8 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 1.7 TRUE 0.079 0.395 0.047 FALSE TRUE 1.7 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-8
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Benzo(a)anthracene (CAS # 56-55-3) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 0.036 TRUE 0.00786 0.0393 0.047 TRUE FALSE 0.047 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-9
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Bromodichloromethane (CAS # 75-27-4) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 79 TRUE 1.1 5.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 79 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314 9.9 TRUE 1.1 5.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 9.9 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 0.92 TRUE 1.1 5.5 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 57 TRUE 1.1 5.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 57 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 79 TRUE 1.1 5.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 79 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 74 TRUE 1.1 5.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 74 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 73 TRUE 1.1 5.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 73 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 120 TRUE 1.1 5.5 7.0 FALSE FALSE 120 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 130 TRUE 1.1 5.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 130 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 44 TRUE 1.1 5.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 44 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-10
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Bromoform (CAS # 75-25-2) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 120 TRUE 0.29 1.45 5.0 FALSE FALSE 120 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314 16 TRUE 0.29 1.45 1.0 FALSE TRUE 16 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 0.29 TRUE 0.29 1.45 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 0.71 TRUE 0.29 1.45 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 110 TRUE 0.29 1.45 2.0 FALSE FALSE 110 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 0.31 TRUE 0.29 1.45 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 0.34 TRUE 0.29 1.45 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 120 TRUE 0.29 1.45 5.0 FALSE FALSE 120 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 0.25 TRUE 0.29 1.45 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 97 TRUE 0.29 1.45 3.0 FALSE TRUE 97 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 100 TRUE 0.29 1.45 3.0 FALSE FALSE 100 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 180 TRUE 0.29 1.45 7.0 FALSE FALSE 180 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 300 TRUE 0.29 1.45 5.0 FALSE FALSE 300 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 78 TRUE 0.29 1.45 1.0 FALSE TRUE 78 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-11
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Carbon disulfide (CAS # 75-15-0) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 71 TRUE 0.96 4.8 10 FALSE TRUE 71 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 PZ-7-GW-01-061219 0.37 TRUE 0.41 2.05 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 PZ-6-GW-11-040119 0.17 TRUE 0.736 3.68 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 PZ-6-GW-01-040119 0.23 TRUE 0.736 3.68 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-4-GW-01-110818 2.2 TRUE 0.49 2.45 10 TRUE TRUE 2.2 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 4.9 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 FALSE TRUE 4.9 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 1.7 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314 0.34 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 88 TRUE 0.96 4.8 4.0 FALSE TRUE 88 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 PZ-1-GW-01-022719 1.2 TRUE 0.736 3.68 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 PZ-1-GW-01-061819 3.0 TRUE 0.41 2.05 2.0 FALSE TRUE 3.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 PZ-1-GW-01-091819 3.4 TRUE 1.7 8.5 2.0 TRUE TRUE 3.4 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-1-GW-01-112618 2.8 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 FALSE TRUE 2.8 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814 0.24 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614 4.3 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 TRUE TRUE 4.3 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 0.8 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-32B-GW-11-061819 1.1 TRUE 0.41 2.05 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-32B-GW-11-120518 1.0 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-32B-GW-01-061819 0.82 TRUE 0.41 2.05 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-31-GW-01-022819 0.51 TRUE 0.736 3.68 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-32B-GW-01-120518 0.54 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-31-GW-01-111318 0.19 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-30B-GW-01-112818 0.29 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-30A-GW-01-022719 2.6 TRUE 0.736 3.68 2.0 TRUE TRUE 2.6 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-29B-GW-01-112918 0.62 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-29A-GW-01-112918 0.48 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-28-GW-01-032119 10 TRUE 0.736 3.68 2.0 FALSE FALSE 10 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-28-GW-01-110618 1.3 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-27-GW-01-110618 0.24 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-26-GW-01-110618 1.4 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-26-GW-01-032119 1.5 TRUE 0.736 3.68 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-25B-GW-01-111318 0.99 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-25A-GW-01-111318 0.25 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-25A-GW-01-022519 0.32 TRUE 0.736 3.68 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-24B-GW-01-031219 0.56 TRUE 0.736 3.68 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-22B-GW-01-110818 0.37 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-11
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Carbon disulfide (CAS # 75-15-0) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-22B-GW-01-061019 0.83 TRUE 0.41 2.05 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114 0.27 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-20A-GW-01-091219 0.80 TRUE 1.7 8.5 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 0.29 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 5.0 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 FALSE TRUE 5.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 22 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 FALSE TRUE 22 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 53 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 FALSE TRUE 53 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 0.30 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-13B-GW-01-091219 0.25 TRUE 1.7 8.5 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 28 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 FALSE TRUE 28 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 28 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 FALSE TRUE 28 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 27 TRUE 0.96 4.8 2.0 FALSE TRUE 27 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-13B-GW-01-110818 0.28 TRUE 0.49 2.45 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-12
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Chloroform (CAS # 67-66-3) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 100 TRUE 4.7 23.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 100 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-24A-GW-01-031219 7.1 TRUE 0.44 2.2 1.0 FALSE TRUE 7.1 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 PZ-5-GW-01-031419 1.5 TRUE 0.44 2.2 1.0 TRUE TRUE 1.5 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-5-GW-01-110718 0.73 TRUE 9.3 46.5 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-4-GW-01-110818 12 TRUE 9.3 46.5 5.0 TRUE FALSE 5.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 PZ-4-GW-01-031119 16 TRUE 0.44 2.2 5.0 FALSE FALSE 16 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 74 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 74 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314 5.5 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 5.5 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 5.1 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 5.1 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314 0.77 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714 23 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 23 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-13-GW-01-110718 0.47 TRUE 9.3 46.5 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 PZ-13-GW-01-032619 3.0 TRUE 0.44 2.2 1.0 FALSE TRUE 3.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-01-020314 7.2 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 7.2 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-11-020314 7.5 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 7.5 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 PZ-1-GW-01-022719 1.1 TRUE 0.44 2.2 1.0 TRUE TRUE 1.1 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 19 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 19 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 74 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 74 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414 1.4 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 1.4 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-1-GW-01-112618 5.5 TRUE 9.3 46.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 5.5 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814 24 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 24 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814 22 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 22 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-5A-GW-01-112618 3.5 TRUE 9.3 46.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 3.5 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-5A-GW-01-031919 10 TRUE 0.44 2.2 1.0 FALSE TRUE 10 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 4.8 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 4.8 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714 2.5 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 2.5 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-28-GW-01-110618 0.17 TRUE 9.3 46.5 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-27-GW-01-110618 17 TRUE 9.3 46.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 17 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-27-GW-01-032819 15 TRUE 0.44 2.2 1.0 FALSE TRUE 15 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-26-GW-01-110618 4.0 TRUE 9.3 46.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-24A-GW-11-031219 7.4 TRUE 0.44 2.2 1.0 FALSE TRUE 7.4 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114 0.13 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-20A-GW-01-111518 0.14 TRUE 9.3 46.5 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 0.13 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 0.14 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-18-01-021314 0.33 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-12
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Chloroform (CAS # 67-66-3) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19A-01-021414 1.4 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 1.4 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 90 TRUE 4.7 23.5 7.0 FALSE TRUE 90 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 76 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 76 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 83 TRUE 4.7 23.5 3.0 FALSE TRUE 83 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 86 TRUE 4.7 23.5 3.0 FALSE TRUE 86 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 100 TRUE 4.7 23.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 100 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 61 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 FALSE TRUE 61 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714 2.0 TRUE 4.7 23.5 1.0 TRUE TRUE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-13
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Chromium, Hexavalent (CAS # 18540-29-9) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 0.671 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.54 TRUE TRUE 0.671 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114 0.129 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.52 TRUE FALSE 0.52 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 0.40 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.52 TRUE FALSE 0.52 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314 0.379 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.52 TRUE FALSE 0.52 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-01-020314 0.158 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.52 TRUE FALSE 0.52 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-11-020314 0.15 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.52 TRUE FALSE 0.52 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 0.159 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.55 TRUE FALSE 0.55 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 0.251 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.55 TRUE FALSE 0.55 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614 1.06 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.52 TRUE TRUE 1.06 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-6-01-020714 1.36 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.52 TRUE TRUE 1.36 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 0.231 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.52 TRUE FALSE 0.52 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-18-01-021314 1.76 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.52 TRUE TRUE 1.76 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 0.558 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.54 TRUE TRUE 0.558 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 0.634 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.54 TRUE TRUE 0.634 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 0.543 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.54 TRUE TRUE 0.543 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 0.667 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.54 TRUE TRUE 0.667 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 0.49 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.55 TRUE FALSE 0.55 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 0.377 TRUE 0.464 2.32 0.55 TRUE FALSE 0.55 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-14
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dibromochloromethane (CAS # 124-48-1) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 99 TRUE 0.47 2.35 5.0 FALSE TRUE 99 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-4-GW-01-110818 51 TRUE 0.14 0.7 5.0 FALSE TRUE 51 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314 17 TRUE 0.47 2.35 1.0 FALSE TRUE 17 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 0.95 TRUE 0.47 2.35 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 95 TRUE 0.47 2.35 2.0 FALSE TRUE 95 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-1-GW-01-112618 0.43 TRUE 0.14 0.7 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 180 TRUE 0.47 2.35 7.0 FALSE FALSE 180 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 120 TRUE 0.47 2.35 5.0 FALSE FALSE 120 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 100 TRUE 0.47 2.35 3.0 FALSE FALSE 100 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 110 TRUE 0.47 2.35 3.0 FALSE FALSE 110 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 240 TRUE 0.47 2.35 5.0 FALSE FALSE 240 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 75 TRUE 0.47 2.35 1.0 FALSE TRUE 75 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-15
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Antimony (CAS # 7440-36-0) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514-FF 0.67 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514-FF 0.73 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-18-01-021314-FF 2.1 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 FALSE FALSE 2.1 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19A-01-021414-FF 1.4 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.4 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-24A-GW-01-111418 2.6 TRUE 0.487 2.435 20 FALSE FALSE 2.6 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-7-GW-01-102918 4.3 TRUE 0.487 2.435 20 FALSE TRUE 4.3 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 PZ-7-GW-01-061219-FF 3.5 TRUE 0.265 1.325 10 FALSE TRUE 3.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114-FF 1.9 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.9 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-6-GW-01-102918 3.9 TRUE 0.487 2.435 20 FALSE TRUE 3.9 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 PZ-6-GW-01-060419-FF 6.1 TRUE 0.265 1.325 10 FALSE TRUE 6.1 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 PZ-4-GW-01-062419-FF 2.8 TRUE 0.265 1.325 10 FALSE TRUE 2.8 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514-FF 0.97 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314-FF 2.3 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 FALSE FALSE 2.3 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-4-GW-01-110818 4.5 TRUE 0.487 2.435 20 FALSE TRUE 4.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-11-020314-FF 0.56 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314-FF 0.74 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314-FF 1.4 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.4 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714-FF 0.63 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414-FF 0.76 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-01-020314-FF 0.56 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 PZ-1-GW-01-061819-FF 17 TRUE 0.265 1.325 10 FALSE TRUE 17 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-1-GW-01-112618 18 TRUE 0.487 2.435 20 FALSE FALSE 18 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414-FF 9.0 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 FALSE TRUE 9.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714-FF 1.2 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514-FF 0.54 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-30A-GW-01-053019-FF 1.7 TRUE 0.265 1.325 10 FALSE FALSE 1.7 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-29A-GW-01-052919-FF 2.9 TRUE 0.265 1.325 10 FALSE TRUE 2.9 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-29B-GW-01-052919-FF 5.2 TRUE 0.265 1.325 10 FALSE TRUE 5.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-24B-GW-01-061319-FF 1.0 TRUE 0.265 1.325 10 TRUE FALSE 10 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-24A-GW-01-061319-FF 2.0 TRUE 0.265 1.325 10 FALSE TRUE 2.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-22B-GW-01-061019-FF 2.9 TRUE 0.265 1.325 10 FALSE TRUE 2.9 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414-FF 0.98 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414-FF 0.75 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514-FF 1.0 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514-FF 1.0 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514-FF 0.91 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-15
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Antimony (CAS # 7440-36-0) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19B-01-021414-FF 5.0 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 FALSE TRUE 5.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114-FF 0.92 TRUE 0.20 1.0 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-16
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Copper (CAS # 7440-50-8) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514-FF 2.5 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314-FF 3.6 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314-FF 2.0 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714-FF 3.2 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414-FF 2.1 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414-FF 6.4 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE TRUE 6.4 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814-FF 5.9 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE TRUE 5.9 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-18-01-021314-FF 2.7 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514-FF 42 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 FALSE TRUE 42 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514-FF 2.5 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514-FF 8.2 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE TRUE 8.2 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414-FF 47 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 FALSE TRUE 47 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-17
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Iron (CAS # 7439-89-6) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514-FF 80,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 80,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114-FF 1,400 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,400 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514-FF 290,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 500 FALSE FALSE 290,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314-FF 2,300 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 2,300 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314-FF 690 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 690 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714-FF 70,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 70,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-01-020314-FF 1,500 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,500 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-11-020314-FF 1,400 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,400 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414-FF 240,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 500 FALSE FALSE 240,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414-FF 160,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 160,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414-FF 1,600 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,600 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814-FF 160,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 160,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814-FF 160,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 160,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-6-01-020714-FF 880 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 880 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514-FF 160,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 160,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714-FF 88,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 88,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114-FF 82,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 500 FALSE TRUE 82,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114-FF 670,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 500 FALSE TRUE 670,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-18-01-021314-FF 490 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 490 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19A-01-021414-FF 490 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 490 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514-FF 27,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 27,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514-FF 91,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 91,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514-FF 1,600 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,600 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514-FF 59,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 59,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514-FF 60,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 60,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-01-01-021714-FF 4,800 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 4,800 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714-FF 18,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 18,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414-FF 31,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 31,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414-FF 69,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 69,000 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-18
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Lead (CAS # 7439-92-1) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314-FF 3.1 TRUE 100 500 2.0 TRUE TRUE 3.1 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414-FF 51 TRUE 100 500 2.0 TRUE TRUE 51 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-19
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Manganese (CAS # 7439-96-5) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514-FF 9,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 9,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-7-GW-01-102918 20,000 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE FALSE 20,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-24A-GW-01-111418 8,500 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 8,500 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114-FF 1,200 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 1,200 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-6-GW-01-102918 1,500 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE FALSE 1,500 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PMW-1D-GW-01-111218 23 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE FALSE 23 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-5-GW-01-110718 13,000 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE FALSE 13,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-4-GW-01-110818 4,300 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 4,300 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714-FF 6,200 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 6,200 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514-FF 14,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 14,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314-FF 610 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 610 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-11-020314-FF 8,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 8,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314-FF 780 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 780 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314-FF 5,500 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 5,500 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414-FF 12,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 12,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-01-020314-FF 8,100 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 8,100 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-1-GW-01-112618 8,800 TRUE 1.63 8.15 130 FALSE TRUE 8,800 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414-FF 16,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 16,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414-FF 4,900 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 4,900 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PMW-1S-GW-01-111218 26 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 26 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8B-01-021814-FF 43 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 43 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8B-11-021814-FF 62 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 62 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614-FF 1,200 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 1,200 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814-FF 5,500 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 5,500 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814-FF 5,800 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 5,800 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714-FF 3,200 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 3,200 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-6-01-020714-FF 520 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 520 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514-FF 5,200 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 5,200 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-34-GW-01-111218 320 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 320 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-31-GW-01-111318 2,100 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE FALSE 2,100 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-30B-GW-01-112818 26 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 26 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-30A-GW-01-112818 240 TRUE 1.63 8.15 130 FALSE TRUE 240 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-29B-GW-01-112918 31 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 31 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-28-GW-01-110618 370 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 370 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-25A-GW-01-111318 370 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 370 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-27-GW-01-110618 10,000 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE FALSE 10,000 TRUE FALSE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-19
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Manganese (CAS # 7439-96-5) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-26-GW-01-110618 2,800 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 2,800 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-25B-GW-01-111318 81 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 81 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-24B-GW-01-111418 49 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 49 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114-FF 12,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 25 FALSE FALSE 12,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114-FF 4,100 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 4,100 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-20A-GW-01-111518 11,000 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE FALSE 11,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-2-GW-11-111518 75 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 75 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19B-01-021414-FF 190 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 190 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-2-GW-01-111518 73 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 73 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514-FF 1,600 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 1,600 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-18-01-021314-FF 1,500 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 1,500 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19A-01-021414-FF 3,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 3,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514-FF 11,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 11,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514-FF 16,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 16,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514-FF 11,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 11,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514-FF 10,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 10,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414-FF 11,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 11,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414-FF 8,200 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 8,200 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-13B-GW-01-110818 410 TRUE 1.63 8.15 25 FALSE TRUE 410 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-01-01-021714-FF 2,200 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 2,200 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714-FF 5,400 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 5,400 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-20
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Mercury (CAS # 7439-97-6) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-6-GW-01-102918 0.17 TRUE 0.121 0.605 0.20 TRUE FALSE 0.20 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-5-GW-01-110718 1.2 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PZ-4-GW-01-110818 1.4 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.4 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 PZ-1-GW-01-022719-FF 1.1 TRUE 0.116 0.58 1.0 FALSE TRUE 1.1 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PMW-1S-GW-01-111218 1.8 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.8 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 PMW-1D-GW-01-111218 1.2 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-34-GW-01-111218 1.0 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-34-GW-01-031119-FF 0.13 TRUE 0.116 0.58 0.20 TRUE FALSE 0.20 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-31-GW-01-022819-FF 0.11 TRUE 0.116 0.58 0.20 TRUE FALSE 0.20 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-32B-GW-01-120518 0.11 TRUE 0.121 0.605 0.20 TRUE FALSE 0.20 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-31-GW-01-111318 1.7 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.7 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-30A-GW-01-022719-FF 0.17 TRUE 0.116 0.58 0.20 TRUE FALSE 0.20 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-29B-GW-01-112918 0.15 TRUE 0.121 0.605 0.20 TRUE FALSE 0.20 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-27-GW-01-110618 4.0 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE TRUE 4.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-25B-GW-01-111318 1.2 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-25A-GW-01-111318 1.1 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.1 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-24B-GW-01-111418 1.2 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-22B-GW-01-110818 1.7 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.7 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-24A-GW-01-111418 1.5 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-20A-GW-01-111518 4.2 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE TRUE 4.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round1 MW-13B-GW-01-110818 1.7 TRUE 0.121 0.605 2.0 FALSE FALSE 1.7 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-21
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Molybdenum (CAS # 7439-98-7) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514-FF 5.4 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 5.4 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514-FF 44 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 44 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514-FF 3.0 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-18-01-021314-FF 66 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 66 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19A-01-021414-FF 44 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 44 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114-FF 27 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514-FF 8.9 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 8.9 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314-FF 94 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 94 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314-FF 110 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414-FF 8.4 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 8.4 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-01-020314-FF 10 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-11-020314-FF 10 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414-FF 110 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814-FF 6.7 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 6.7 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714-FF 40 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 40 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614-FF 2.8 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814-FF 6.3 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 6.3 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514-FF 20 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-01-01-021714-FF 12 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714-FF 5.6 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 5.6 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414-FF 15 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414-FF 17 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514-FF 9.5 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 9.5 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514-FF 9.5 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 9.5 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514-FF 190 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 FALSE FALSE 190 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-22
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Nickel (CAS # 7440-02-0) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase2BHydro-Round3 PZ-4-GW-01-062419-FF 49 TRUE 1.74 8.7 10 FALSE TRUE 49 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 PZ-1-GW-01-061819-FF 90 TRUE 1.74 8.7 10 FALSE TRUE 90 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-31-GW-01-062019-FF 37 TRUE 1.74 8.7 10 FALSE TRUE 37 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-31-GW-11-062019-FF 38 TRUE 1.74 8.7 10 FALSE TRUE 38 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-30A-GW-01-053019-FF 19 TRUE 1.74 8.7 10 FALSE TRUE 19 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-27-GW-01-062719-FF 140 TRUE 1.74 8.7 50 FALSE FALSE 140 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-25A-GW-01-062419-FF 5.4 TRUE 1.74 8.7 10 TRUE TRUE 5.4 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-24A-GW-01-061319-FF 110 TRUE 1.74 8.7 100 FALSE TRUE 110 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-20A-GW-01-062719-FF 140 TRUE 1.74 8.7 50 FALSE FALSE 140 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-23
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Thallium (CAS # 7440-28-0) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314-FF 5.3 TRUE 0.65 3.25 2.0 FALSE TRUE 5.3 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414-FF 1.8 TRUE 0.65 3.25 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414-FF 1.3 TRUE 0.65 3.25 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-24
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Dissolved Zinc (CAS # 7440-66-6) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase2BHydro-Round4 PZ-7-GW-01-082819-FF 21 TRUE 9.98 49.9 25 TRUE FALSE 25 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514-FF 19 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 19 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514-FF 12 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 12 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 PZ-1-GW-01-091819-FF 250 TRUE 9.98 49.9 25 FALSE TRUE 250 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414-FF 70 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 70 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414-FF 100 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 100 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814-FF 27 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 27 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614-FF 91 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 91 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814-FF 25 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 25 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514-FF 54 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 54 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-30A-GW-01-090919-FF 610 TRUE 9.98 49.9 25 FALSE TRUE 610 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114-FF 690 TRUE 5.2 26 50 FALSE TRUE 690 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114-FF 18 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 18 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714-FF 9.1 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 9.1 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514-FF 97 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 97 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514-FF 76 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 76 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514-FF 360 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 360 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514-FF 11 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 11 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514-FF 94 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 94 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414-FF 470 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 470 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414-FF 350 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 350 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-25
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Ethylbenzene (CAS # 100-41-4) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-31-GW-01-091719 1.3 TRUE 0.126 0.63 1.0 FALSE TRUE 1.3 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-20A-GW-01-091219 24 TRUE 0.126 0.63 1.0 FALSE TRUE 24 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-26
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for m,p-Xylenes (CAS # 179601-23-1) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-31-GW-01-022819 0.20 TRUE 0.273 1.365 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-20A-GW-01-022819 6.0 TRUE 0.273 1.365 1.0 FALSE TRUE 6.0 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-27
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Naphthalene (CAS # 91-20-3) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 0.32 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.46 TRUE FALSE 0.46 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 0.32 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.46 TRUE FALSE 0.46 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114 0.59 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.045 TRUE TRUE 0.59 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114 0.59 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.045 TRUE TRUE 0.59 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314 0.007 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.045 TRUE FALSE 0.045 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314 0.007 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.045 TRUE FALSE 0.045 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714 1.3 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.48 TRUE TRUE 1.3 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714 1.3 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.48 TRUE TRUE 1.3 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 0.40 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.46 TRUE FALSE 0.46 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 0.40 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.46 TRUE FALSE 0.46 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 0.10 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.10 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 0.10 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.10 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 0.054 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.054 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 0.054 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.054 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814 13 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.46 FALSE TRUE 13 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814 13 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.46 FALSE TRUE 13 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-6-01-020714 0.73 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.48 TRUE TRUE 0.73 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-6-01-020714 0.73 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.48 TRUE TRUE 0.73 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614 20 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.46 FALSE TRUE 20 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614 20 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.46 FALSE TRUE 20 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814 13 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.46 FALSE TRUE 13 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814 13 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.46 FALSE TRUE 13 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 0.083 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.083 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 0.083 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.083 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714 7.0 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.45 FALSE TRUE 7.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714 7.0 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.45 FALSE TRUE 7.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-29B-GW-01-091019 0.16 TRUE 0.409 2.045 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-29B-GW-01-091019 0.16 TRUE 0.409 2.045 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-27-GW-01-062719 0.25 TRUE 0.221 1.105 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-27-GW-01-062719 0.25 TRUE 0.221 1.105 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-25B-GW-01-062419 0.17 TRUE 0.221 1.105 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-25B-GW-01-062419 0.17 TRUE 0.221 1.105 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114 0.87 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.041 TRUE TRUE 0.87 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114 0.87 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.041 TRUE TRUE 0.87 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-20A-GW-01-022819 2.5 TRUE 0.373 1.865 1.0 FALSE TRUE 2.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-20A-GW-01-022819 2.5 TRUE 0.373 1.865 1.0 FALSE TRUE 2.5 TRUE FALSE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-27
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Naphthalene (CAS # 91-20-3) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-20A-GW-01-062719 3.5 TRUE 0.221 1.105 1.0 FALSE TRUE 3.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round3 MW-20A-GW-01-062719 3.5 TRUE 0.221 1.105 1.0 FALSE TRUE 3.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-20A-GW-01-091219 2.8 TRUE 0.409 2.045 1.0 FALSE TRUE 2.8 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-20A-GW-01-091219 2.8 TRUE 0.409 2.045 1.0 FALSE TRUE 2.8 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 3.5 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.045 FALSE TRUE 3.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 3.5 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.045 FALSE TRUE 3.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-01-01-021714 0.18 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.047 TRUE TRUE 0.18 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-01-01-021714 0.18 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.047 TRUE TRUE 0.18 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714 11 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.45 FALSE TRUE 11 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714 11 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.45 FALSE TRUE 11 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 3.2 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.046 FALSE TRUE 3.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 3.2 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.046 FALSE TRUE 3.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 0.088 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.48 TRUE FALSE 0.48 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 0.088 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.48 TRUE FALSE 0.48 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 0.12 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.49 TRUE FALSE 0.49 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 0.12 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.49 TRUE FALSE 0.49 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 0.14 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.14 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 0.14 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.046 TRUE TRUE 0.14 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 0.10 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.49 TRUE FALSE 0.49 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 0.10 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.49 TRUE FALSE 0.49 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 0.10 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.49 TRUE FALSE 0.49 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 0.10 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.49 TRUE FALSE 0.49 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 1.9 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.047 FALSE TRUE 1.9 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 1.9 TRUE 0.38 1.9 0.047 FALSE TRUE 1.9 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-28
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for o-Xylene (CAS # 95-47-6) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714 2.5 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 FALSE TRUE 2.5 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 0.14 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 0.13 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814 18 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 FALSE TRUE 18 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814 16 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 FALSE TRUE 16 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-6-01-020714 0.65 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614 6.7 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 FALSE TRUE 6.7 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714 2.2 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 FALSE TRUE 2.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-31-GW-01-091719 0.11 TRUE 0.126 0.63 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round4 MW-20A-GW-01-091219 0.97 TRUE 0.126 0.63 1.0 FALSE FALSE 0.97 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114 0.35 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase2BHydro-Round2 MW-20A-GW-01-022819 0.81 TRUE 0.166 0.83 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 2.1 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 FALSE TRUE 2.1 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 0.54 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-01-01-021714 0.19 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714 2.1 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 FALSE TRUE 2.1 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 0.24 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 0.17 TRUE 0.22 1.1 1.0 TRUE FALSE 1.0 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-29
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Total Antimony (CAS # 7440-36-0) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 0.70 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 0.78 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-18-01-021314 2.0 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 FALSE FALSE 2.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114 2.0 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 FALSE FALSE 2.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 0.89 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314 2.0 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 FALSE FALSE 2.0 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 0.93 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314 1.4 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.4 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714 0.71 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 0.85 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-01-020314 1.2 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-11-020314 0.60 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414 8.6 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 FALSE TRUE 8.6 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714 1.2 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.2 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 0.65 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 1.3 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.3 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 0.9 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 0.97 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 0.92 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 0.90 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19A-01-021414 1.4 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 FALSE FALSE 1.4 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19B-01-021414 6.7 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 FALSE TRUE 6.7 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 0.80 TRUE 0.2 1 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-30
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Total Copper (CAS # 7440-50-8) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 2.7 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314 2.3 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414 6.7 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE TRUE 6.7 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 4.4 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE TRUE 4.4 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 3.5 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 30 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 FALSE FALSE 30 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 53 TRUE 1.72 8.6 4.0 FALSE TRUE 53 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-31
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Total Iron (CAS # 7439-89-6) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 83,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 83,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114 1,500 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,500 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 290,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 500 FALSE FALSE 290,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314 750 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 750 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714 70,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 70,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-01-020314 1,500 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,500 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-11-020314 1,500 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,500 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 2,800 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 2,800 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 240,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 500 FALSE FALSE 240,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 160,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 160,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414 1,700 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,700 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814 160,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 160,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814 170,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 170,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-6-01-020714 1,100 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,100 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 170,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 170,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714 90,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 90,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114 78,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 500 FALSE TRUE 78,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 680,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 500 FALSE TRUE 680,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19A-01-021414 490 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 490 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 93,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 93,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 1,500 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 1,500 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 60,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 60,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 61,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 61,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 27,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 27,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-01-01-021714 4,900 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 TRUE TRUE 4,900 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714 18,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 18,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 32,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 32,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 67,000 TRUE 1,680 8,400 100 FALSE TRUE 67,000 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-32
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Total Lead (CAS # 7439-92-1) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314 3.1 TRUE 100 500 2.0 TRUE TRUE 3.1 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414 51 TRUE 100 500 2.0 TRUE TRUE 51 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-33
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Total Manganese (CAS # 7439-96-5) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected
?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 9,500 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 9,500 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114 1,200 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 1,200 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714 6,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 6,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 15,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 15,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314 600 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 600 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-11-020314 8,700 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 8,700 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 810 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 810 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314 5,400 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 5,400 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-01-020314 8,300 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 8,300 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 16,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 16,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 12,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 12,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414 4,900 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 4,900 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814 6,200 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 6,200 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8B-01-021814 66 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 66 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8B-11-021814 60 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 60 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614 1,300 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 1,300 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814 5,900 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 5,900 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714 3,300 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 3,300 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-6-01-020714 500 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 500 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 5,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 5,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114 11,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 25 FALSE FALSE 11,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 4,400 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 4,400 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19A-01-021414 3,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 3,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19B-01-021414 210 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 210 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 1,600 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 1,600 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-18-01-021314 1,500 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 1,500 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 11,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 11,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 16,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 16,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 11,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 11,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 11,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 11,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 11,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 11,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 8,000 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 8,000 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-01-01-021714 2,200 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE FALSE 2,200 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714 5,400 TRUE 3.3 16.5 5.0 FALSE TRUE 5,400 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-34
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Total Mercury (CAS # 7439-97-6) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 0.53 TRUE 20.8 104 0.20 TRUE TRUE 0.53 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-35
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Total Molybdenum (CAS # 7439-98-7) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 8.4 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 8.4 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 50 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 50 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 4.6 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 4.6 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-18-01-021314 74 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 74 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114 31 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 14 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314 96 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 96 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-18-01-020314 1.4 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-22-01-020314 120 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 FALSE FALSE 120 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 13 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-01-020314 11 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-16-11-020314 11 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 2.4 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414 110 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814 8.1 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 8.1 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814 8.2 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 8.2 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-5A-01-020714 42 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 42 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-6-01-020714 1.7 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614 5.2 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 5.2 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 21 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-01-01-021714 12 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling LF-03-01-021714 5.5 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 5.5 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 15 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 23 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 11 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 12 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 200 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 FALSE FALSE 200 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-19A-01-021414 43 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE TRUE 43 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 2.2 TRUE 23.3 116.5 4.0 TRUE FALSE 4.0 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-36
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Total Thallium (CAS # 7440-28-0) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-04-01-021314 5.1 TRUE 0.65 3.25 2.0 FALSE TRUE 5.1 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414 1.6 TRUE 0.65 3.25 2.0 TRUE FALSE 2.0 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 2.1 TRUE 0.65 3.25 2.0 TRUE TRUE 2.1 FALSE TRUE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B1-37
Refined Groundwater Sample Chemistry for Total Zinc (CAS # 7440-66-6) After Comparison to Blanks
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Event Sample Name
Original
Result
Original
Detect
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result Less
Than BCV?
Original
Value
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Refined
Result
Detected?
Did
Sample
Results
Change?
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-08-01-020514 15 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 15 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-06-01-013114 9.9 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 9.9 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-24-01-020714 15 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 15 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-26-01-020514 11 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 11 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-10-01-020414 11 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 11 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-12-01-020414 69 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 69 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling PZ-01-01-020414 100 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 100 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8B-11-021814 21 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 21 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-01-021814 25 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 25 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8A-11-021814 23 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 23 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-8B-01-021814 23 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 23 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-7-01-020614 78 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 78 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-4A-01-020514 56 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 56 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20B-01-013114 630 TRUE 5.2 26 50 FALSE TRUE 630 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-20A-01-013114 17 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 17 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-11-020514 110 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 110 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15A-01-020514 71 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 71 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-15B-01-020514 370 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 370 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-17-01-020514 13 TRUE 5.2 26 10 TRUE TRUE 13 FALSE TRUE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-14-01-020514 110 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 110 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13A-01-020414 460 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 460 TRUE FALSE
Phase 1A Sampling MW-13B-01-020414 350 TRUE 5.2 26 10 FALSE TRUE 350 TRUE FALSE
Notes:
Concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
BCV = Blank Comparison Value. Standard value is 5x the maximum detected blank concentration, except for common lab contaminants which are 10x.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022

ATTACHMENT 2 RISK CALCULATIONS
Table B2-1
Summary Intake Factors, Unit Hazard Quotients, and Unit Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risks for
Groundwater Exposure to Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Concentration
Noncancer
Summary
Intake Factor
Cancer
Summary
Intake Factor RfD SFO Unit HQ Unit ILCR
(µg/L) (mg/kg-day) (mg/kg-day) (mg/kg-day) (mg/kg-day)
-1 (unitless) (unitless)
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 7.0 E-10 1.3 E+5 1.5 E+4 5.0 E-1
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 NA 2.0 E+0 NA 7.6 E-6
Aluminum 7429-90-5 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 1.0 E+0 NA 1.1 E-5 NA
Antimony 7440-36-0 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 4.0 E-4 NA 2.7 E-2 NA
Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 3.0 E-4 1.5 E+0 3.6 E-2 5.7 E-6
Barium 7440-39-3 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-1 NA 5.4 E-5 NA
Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-3 NA 5.4 E-3 NA
Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 5.0 E-4 NA 2.1 E-2 NA
Chromium 7440-47-3 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 NA NA NA NA
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 3.0 E-3 5.0 E-1 3.6 E-3 1.9 E-6
Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 3.0 E-4 NA 3.6 E-2 NA
Copper 7440-50-8 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 4.0 E-2 NA 2.7 E-4 NA
Iron 7439-89-6 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 7.0 E-1 NA 1.5 E-5 NA
Lead 7439-92-1 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 NA NA NA NA
Manganese 7439-96-5 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.4 E-2 NA 4.5 E-4 NA
Mercury 7439-97-6 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 3.0 E-4 NA 3.6 E-2 NA
Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 5.0 E-3 NA 2.1 E-3 NA
Nickel 7440-02-0 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-2 NA 5.4 E-4 NA
Selenium 7782-49-2 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 5.0 E-3 NA 2.1 E-3 NA
Thallium 7440-28-0 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 1.0 E-5 NA 1.1 E+0 NA
Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 5.0 E-3 NA 2.1 E-3 NA
Zinc 7440-66-6 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 3.0 E-1 NA 3.6 E-5 NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 3.0 E-4 NA 3.6 E-2 NA
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 1.0 E-3 1.1 E-2 1.1 E-2 4.2 E-8
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 8.0 E-5 NA 1.3 E-1 NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 8.0 E-4 1.6 E+0 1.3 E-2 6.1 E-6
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 1.0 E-3 7.8 E-2 1.1 E-2 3.0 E-7
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 8.0 E-4 NA 1.3 E-2 NA
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 5.0 E-3 4.0 E-1 2.1 E-3 1.5 E-6
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 4.0 E-3 NA 2.7 E-3 NA
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 NA 1.0 E+0 NA 3.8 E-6
Naphthalene 91-20-3 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-2 1.2 E-1 5.4 E-4 4.6 E-7
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-1 5.7 E-3 5.4 E-5 2.2 E-8
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 6.0 E-3 9.1 E-2 1.8 E-3 3.5 E-7
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-3 NA 5.4 E-3 NA
Chemical of Potential Concern CAS No.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B2-1
Summary Intake Factors, Unit Hazard Quotients, and Unit Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risks for
Groundwater Exposure to Worker
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Concentration
Noncancer
Summary
Intake Factor
Cancer
Summary
Intake Factor RfD SFO Unit HQ Unit ILCR
(µg/L) (mg/kg-day) (mg/kg-day) (mg/kg-day) (mg/kg-day)
-1 (unitless) (unitless)Chemical of Potential Concern CAS No.
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 1.0 E-2 2.9 E-2 1.1 E-3 1.1 E-7
Benzene 71-43-2 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 4.0 E-3 5.5 E-2 2.7 E-3 2.1 E-7
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-2 6.2 E-2 5.4 E-4 2.4 E-7
Bromoform 75-25-2 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-2 7.9 E-3 5.4 E-4 3.0 E-8
Bromomethane 74-83-9 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 1.4 E-3 NA 7.6 E-3 NA
Carbon Disulfide 75-15-0 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 1.0 E-1 NA 1.1 E-4 NA
Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 4.0 E-3 7.0 E-2 2.7 E-3 2.7 E-7
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-2 8.4 E-2 5.4 E-4 3.2 E-7
Chloroform 67-66-3 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 1.0 E-2 3.1 E-2 1.1 E-3 1.2 E-7
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 1.0 E-1 1.1 E-2 1.1 E-4 4.2 E-8
Dichloromethane (Methylene Chloride) 75-09-2 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 6.0 E-3 2.0 E-3 1.8 E-3 7.6 E-9
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 6.0 E-3 2.1 E-3 1.8 E-3 8.0 E-9
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 5.0 E-4 4.6 E-2 2.1 E-2 1.8 E-7
Vinyl Chloride 75-01-4 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 3.0 E-3 7.2 E-1 3.6 E-3 2.8 E-6
m,p-Xylenes 179601-23-1 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-1 NA 5.4 E-5 NA
o-Xylene 95-47-6 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-1 NA 5.4 E-5 NA
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 6.0 E-4 NA 1.8 E-2 NA
Fluoride 16984-48-8 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 4.0 E-2 NA 2.7 E-4 NA
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 4.0 E-3 5.0 E-2 2.7 E-3 1.9 E-7
Trichloroacetic Acid 76-03-9 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 2.0 E-2 7.0 E-2 5.4 E-4 2.7 E-7
Nitrite as N 14797-65-0 1.0 E+0 1.1 E-5 3.8 E-6 1.0 E-1 NA 1.1 E-4 NA
Notes:
Unit HQ or Unit ILCR = HQ or ILCR for the COPC assuming a groundwater concentration of 1 µg/L
HQ = Hazard quotient
ILCR = Incremental lifetime cancer risk
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not applicable
ND=0 = Nondetected values substituted with 0
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
RfD = Reference dose
SFO = Oral Slope Factor
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Toxic Equivalence
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B2-2
Summary of Upper Aquifer Zone Exposure Point Concentrations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Well or
Piezometer
Name
1,1-
Dichloro-
ethane
1,2-
Dichloro-
ethane
1,2,4-
Trichloro-
benzene
1,2,4,5-
Tetrachloro-
benzene
2-Methyl-
naph-
thalene
2,4,6-
Trichloro-
phenol Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Benzene Beryllium
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane Bromoform
Bromo-
methane Cadmium
Carbon
disulfide
Carbon
tetra-
chloride Chloroform
Chromium,
Hexavalent
cis-1,2-
Dichloro-
ethene Cobalt Copper
Dibenzo(a,h)-
anthracene
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane
Dichloro-
acetic
Acid
Dichloro-
methane
(Methylene
chloride)
CAS No. 75-34-3 107-06-2 120-82-1 95-94-3 91-57-6 88-06-2 7429-90-5 7440-36-0 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 71-43-2 7440-41-7 75-27-4 75-25-2 74-83-9 7440-43-9 75-15-0 56-23-5 67-66-3 18540-29-9 156-59-2 7440-48-4 7440-50-8 53-70-3 124-48-1 79-43-6 75-09-2
Background Wells
MW-25A 1.1 31 28
MW-34 35 40
PMW-1S 30 0.117
Site Wells
LF-01 0.22 11 42 7.5
LF-03 2.6 0.55 2.9 0.2 11 99 0.26 15 1.4
MW-4A 0.15 6.60E-01 1.5 0.26 46 540 0.38 60
MW-5A 13 4.40E+00 10 5.0 0.85 1.2 28 240 0.4 0.19 0.85 11 4.0 0.61
MW-6 1.0 2.1 1,200 0.61 7.5
MW-7 0.39 2.80E-01 2.7 4.3 3,400 0.48 18
MW-8A 1.9 4.50E-01 0.53 1.5 3.6 80 31 200 0.75 0.38 24 29 10 0.91
MW-8B 1.5 6.1 54 0.23 1.4
MW-13A 1.0 0.29 3.8 6,300 1.3 15 190 2.5 130 300 1.5 4.6 5.0 2.6 100 98 53 240 1,500 2.4
MW-13B 0.52 1.7 5,600 30 350 2.5 44 78 0.49 1.9 27 0.28 61 52 0.071 75 980 5.5
MW-14 0.8 0.39 220 1.0 25 340 0.15 0.92 74 100 0.56 28 0.79 86 0.11 75 8.2 110 730 4.9
MW-15A 1.7 0.4 1,500 20 230 0.15 0.76 120 180 1.9 4.7 22 4.2 90 140 42 180 1,400 3.7
MW-15B 1.3 0.37 0.46 6,200 43 330 0.13 2.5 79 120 0.72 53 1.9 76 85 120 990 3.7
MW-17 5.8 28 72 0.51 9.4
MW-18 1.0 54 2.1 66 130 0.37 1.7 3.0
MW-19A 2.0 1.4 38 55 4.1 2.7
MW-19B 6.7 85 53 0.6 0.54
MW-20A 1.7 1.7 0.29 1.5 50 1,600 1.1 0.61 1.6 0.45 21 140 1.1 20
MW-20B 1.4 0.008 92 2,100 2.8 21 0.43
MW-24A 2.6 180 190 9.0 26
MW-26 210 220 0.94 0.13 7.5
MW-27 81 420 15 62
MW-28 19 130 10 0.48 3.8
MW-29A 2.9 5.3 37
MW-30A 120,000 38 490 910 4.6 2.7 0.17 31 160
MW-31 78 150 17
PZ-1 1.5 20 190 18 6.8 70 4.6 3.0 2.7 7.3 61 16 11 74 0.64
PZ-4 0.18 62 4.5 290 680 0.76 26 100 18 20 0.29 27 64 73
PZ-5 34 640 0.27 0.33 2.8 21 0.4 160
PZ-6 0.76 6.6 59 290 3.0
PZ-7 4.3 81 2,900 25 86
PZ-8 1.8 0.53 0.54 56 130 160 0.95 79 120 71 1.3 100 65 99 500 13
PZ-10 0.56 0.29 51 53 110 0.30 0.39 29 0.41
PZ-12 1.1 0.36 0.47 3,600 49 210 0.15 2.3 57 110 0.84 88 1.7 74 81 95 470 9.9
PZ-16 0.38 0.29 1.2 57 98 0.36 0.62 1.0 17
PZ-18 19 55 0.34 14 0.99
PZ-22 1.7 1.4 69 20 1.7 23
PZ-24 7.2 0.27 40 85 0.43 16 8.4
PZ-26 0.84 0.41 0.64 700 62 250 0.33 0.85 4.9 74 0.18 34 11
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Well or
Piezometer
Name
CAS No.
Background W
MW-25A
MW-34
PMW-1S
Site Wells
LF-01
LF-03
MW-4A
MW-5A
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8A
MW-8B
MW-13A
MW-13B
MW-14
MW-15A
MW-15B
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19A
MW-19B
MW-20A
MW-20B
MW-24A
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29A
MW-30A
MW-31
PZ-1
PZ-4
PZ-5
PZ-6
PZ-7
PZ-8
PZ-10
PZ-12
PZ-16
PZ-18
PZ-22
PZ-24
PZ-26
4,6-
Dinitro-2-
methyl-
phenol
Ethyl-
benzene Fluoride
Hexachloro-
benzene
Hexachloro-
butadiene
Total
Cyanide -
Unfiltered Iron Lead
m,p-
Xylenes
Mammalian
TEQ, ND=0 Manganese Mercury Molybdenum
Naph-
thalene Nickel
Nitrite
as N o-Xylene
PCBs,
Total
Penta-
chloro-
phenol Selenium
Tetra-
chloro-
ethene Thallium
Trichloro-
acetic acid
Trichloro-
ethene Vanadium
Vinyl
chloride Zinc
534-52-1 100-41-4 16984-48-8 118-74-1 87-68-3 74-90-8 7439-89-6 7439-92-1 179601-23-1 calc-dx-0 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 91-20-3 7440-02-0 14797-65-0 95-47-6 1336-36-3 87-86-5 7782-49-2 127-18-4 7440-28-0 76-03-9 79-01-6 7440-62-2 75-01-4 7440-66-6
4,300 0.00000099 370 1.1 52 11
3,300 0.00000031 320 1.0 27 0.00114
790 0.00000038 26 1.8 7.3 0.00119
0.54 2,200 1.4 2,200 3.1 0.00016 2.9 3.5 0.8
1.9 5,900 18,000 2.3 5,400 11 7.4 2.1 0.0055 6.3 14 0.29
6,700 0.19 14 170,000 1.7E-10 5,200 130 0.0035 2.1 0.5 0.53 56
1.5 25,000 180,000 3.6 0.00000018 3,300 7.0 2.2 2.2 0.088 1.2 1.4
4.9 5,100 4.5 0.00000055 520 0.061 13
6.3 11,000 97 9.6 0.00000014 1,300 20 6.7 0.0072 4.0 1.0 91
7.3 9.3 16,000 2.0 0.095 9.1 170,000 22 0.00000095 6,200 13 21 18 0.34 5.5 5.1 0.46 32 0.43 27
6.0 0.000000021 66 3.4 0.002 2.3 0.37
16,000 32 32,000 0.46 2.7E-11 11,000 3.2 310 0.0067 4.0 0.27 1,300 0.23 470
18,000 30 69,000 0.31 0.000000063 8,200 1.7 1.9 180 0.0043 2.8 420 0.24 7.3 350
16,000 32 61,000 0.0000003 11,000 210 0.0044 3.0 0.15 570 0.45 110
9,700 40 27,000 16,000 200 310 0.0067 3.2 0.39 960 0.27 76
20,000 56 93,000 11,000 260 0.014 2.4 0.28 590 0.38 8.5 370
0.16 2,800 1,600 4.9 0.00015 21
4,700 0.00000028 1,500 24 0.00012 2.0 0.69 0.42 19
4,500 3,000 19 0.000084 0.27 8.8
770 210 0.00013 3.5
24 11,000 3,700,000 7.4 0.000000097 11,000 4.2 6.5 1,600 2.1 0.000895 64 8.5 8.8 24 13 41
13,000 120,000 0.000000018 12,000 14 0.55 0.00034 16 1.0 7.9 0.43 690
11,000 0.00000027 9,200 1.5 13 110 860 0.00131 4.9 23
6,700 21,000 0.00000024 2,800 7.6 19 0.00039
40,000 72,000 0.00000023 12,000 4.0 8.6 150 0.00507 5.6 0.15 20
1,800 600 0.00000018 2,200
1,300 0.0000012 19 0.000813
2,800 960,000 63 0.00000003 2,300 300 250 0.000857 2.6 0.44 0.37 1400 610
1.4 9,300 7,900 0.25 0.00000015 2,400 1.7 13 45 0.11 0.00164 1.1
13,000 1,100 300 0.00000012 11,000 1.1 180 140 0.000096 4.2 6.2 4.0 26 270
9,500 5.7 23 0.00000023 4,600 1.4 130 58 0.000046 2.3 1.2 5.3 130 1.8 17
25,000 23,000 0.0000012 19,000 1.2 27 0.0028 0.15 39
9,000 2,200 3.1 0.00000022 1,500 140 26 0.00904
28,000 38,000 0.00000015 22,000 0.16 19 35 0.0115
13,000 29 83,000 1.4E-10 9,500 180 0.0029 6.4 0.59 410 0.38 6.7
16,000 23 240,000 0.3 9.3E-11 16,000 46 0.00034 4.4 0.11 0.3
15,000 15 160,000 0.000000072 12,000 200 0.015 3.2 0.31 540 0.29 70
4,800 7.3 0.000000012 8,700 48 0.000078 2.2 13 0.14
1,900 0.000000002 810 2.0 0.00018 18
3,400 5,500 120 66 0.000068 4.0 1.4 7.3
1.4 13,000 9.3 70,000 2.2 1.9E-10 6,200 36 2.5 0.0017 0.66 26 0.27
17,000 5.7 290,000 0.28 0.00000028 15,000 64 0.038 2.1 0.47 23 0.86 9.9
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B2-2
Summary of Upper Aquifer Zone Exposure Point Concentrations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
ND=0 = Nondetected values substituted with 0
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Toxic Equivalence
Table B2-3
Summary of Lower Aquifer Zone Exposure Point Concentrations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Well or
Piezometer
Name
Calculated TEQ
(ND=0),
Mammalian
Chromium,
Hexavalent Antimony Arsenic Barium Iron Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Zinc
Ethyl-
benzene Fluoride
Naph-
thalene
Total
PCBs
CAS No. calc-dx-0 18540-29-9 7440-36-0 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 7439-89-6 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 7440-66-6 100-41-4 16984-48-8 91-20-3 1336-36-3
Background Wells
MW-24B 2.10E-07 25 62 49 1.2 1,200
MW-25B 1.80E-07 0.083 1.7 23 81 1.2 0.1 870
PMW-1D 1.90E-07 29 23 1.2 7.2 930 0.00102
Site Wells
MW-9 9.5 28 29 49 28 5,000
MW-22B 1.50E-07 2.9 45 22 1.7 1,900
MW-29B 1.50E-07 0.082 5.2 14 21 31 0.1 1,200 0.89 0.000383
MW-30B 18 26 450 0.000621
MW-32B 3.70E-07 36 26 2,200 0.19
Notes:
ND=0 = Nondetected values substituted with 0
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Toxic Equivalence
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B2-4
Summary of Upper Aquifer Zone Hazard Index
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Well or
Piezometer
Name
1,1-
Dichloro-
ethane
1,2-
Dichloro-
ethane
1,2,4-
Trichloro-
benzene
1,2,4,5-
Tetrachloro-
benzene
2-Methyl-
naph-
thalene
2,4,6-
Trichloro-
phenol Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Benzene Beryllium
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane
Bromo-
form
Bromo-
methane Cadmium
Carbon
disulfide
Carbon
tetra-
chloride
Chloro-
form
Chromium,
Hexavalent
cis-1,2-
Dichloro-
ethene Cobalt Copper
Dibenzo(a,h)-
anthracene
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane
Dichloro-
acetic
Acid
Dichloro-
methane
(Methylene
chloride)
4,6-Dinitro-
2-methyl-
phenol
Ethyl-
benzene Fluoride
Hexachloro-
benzene
Hexachloro-
butadiene
CAS No. 75-34-3 107-06-2 120-82-1 95-94-3 91-57-6 88-06-2 7429-90-5 7440-36-0 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 71-43-2 7440-41-7 75-27-4 75-25-2 74-83-9 7440-43-9 75-15-0 56-23-5 67-66-3 18540-29-9 156-59-2 7440-48-4 7440-50-8 53-70-3 124-48-1 79-43-6 75-09-2 534-52-1 100-41-4 16984-48-8 118-74-1 87-68-3
Background Wells
MW-25A NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.03 1 0.001 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1 NC NC
MW-34 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1 0.002 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.9 NC NC
PMW-1S NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.002 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.0004 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.2 NC NC
Site Wells
LF-01 NC NC NC NC NC 0.002 NC NC 0.4 0.002 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.0001 0.6 NC NC
LF-03 0.0001 NC 0.0006 NC 0.008 0.002 NC NC 0.4 0.005 0.001 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 0.05 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.0002 2 NC NC
MW-4A 0.00001 NC 0.0007 0.05 NC 0.003 NC NC 2 0.03 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.002 2 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2 NC 0.002
MW-5A 0.0007 NC 0.005 0.4 0.01 0.009 NC 0.03 1.0 0.01 0.001 NC 0.0001 0.0005 NC NC NC NC 0.01 NC 0.02 NC NC NC 0.0003 NC NC NC 0.0002 7 NC NC
MW-6 0.00005 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 0.06 0.002 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.001 1 NC NC
MW-7 0.00002 NC 0.0003 NC 0.007 NC NC NC 0.2 0.2 0.001 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.001 3 NC NC
MW-8A 0.0001 NC 0.0005 0.02 0.004 0.04 0.0009 NC 1 0.01 0.002 0.002 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.03 NC 0.2 0.4 NC NC NC NC 0.002 1 0.001 4 0.03 0.001
MW-8B 0.00008 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.2 0.003 0.001 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-13A 0.00005 0.0005 NC NC 0.01 NC 0.07 0.03 0.5 0.01 NC 0.01 0.1 0.2 0.01 0.1 0.001 0.01 0.1 NC NC 3 0.01 NC 0.1 4 0.004 NC NC 4 NC NC
MW-13B 0.00003 NC NC NC 0.005 NC 0.06 NC 1 0.02 NC 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.004 0.04 0.003 0.001 0.1 NC NC 2 NC NC 0.04 3 0.01 NC NC 5 NC NC
MW-14 0.00004 NC NC NC NC 0.004 0.002 0.03 0.9 0.02 0.0004 0.005 0.04 0.1 0.004 NC 0.003 0.002 0.1 NC 0.001 3 0.002 NC 0.06 2 0.01 NC NC 4 NC NC
MW-15A 0.00009 0.0007 NC NC NC NC 0.02 NC 0.7 0.01 0.0004 0.004 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.002 0.01 0.1 NC NC 5 0.01 NC 0.1 4 0.01 NC NC 3 NC NC
MW-15B 0.00007 0.0007 NC NC 0.001 NC 0.07 NC 2 0.02 0.0003 0.01 0.04 0.1 0.01 NC 0.01 0.01 0.1 NC NC 3 NC NC 0.06 3 0.01 NC NC 5 NC NC
MW-17 0.0003 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1 0.004 0.001 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.00002 0.7 NC NC
MW-18 NC NC 0.001 NC NC NC 0.0006 0.06 2 0.007 NC 0.002 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.01 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1 NC NC
MW-19A 0.0001 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.04 1 0.003 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.02 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1 NC NC
MW-19B NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.2 3 0.003 0.002 0.003 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.2 NC NC
MW-20A 0.00009 NC NC NC 0.005 0.003 NC 0.04 2 0.09 0.003 NC 0.0003 0.001 NC NC NC NC 0.0005 NC 0.1 5 NC NC 0.001 0.05 NC NC 0.003 3 NC NC
MW-20B 0.00007 NC NC NC 0.00002 NC NC NC 3 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC 0.06 0.001 NC NC 3 NC NC
MW-24A NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.07 6 0.01 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC 0.9 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3 NC NC
MW-26 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 7 0.01 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.001 0.0005 NC 0.3 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2 NC NC
MW-27 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3 0.02 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.02 NC NC 2 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 11 NC NC
MW-28 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.7 0.007 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.001 NC 0.001 NC NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.5 NC NC
MW-29A NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.08 0.2 0.002 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.3 NC NC
MW-30A NC NC NC NC NC NC 1 1 17 0.05 NC 0.02 NC NC NC 0.1 NC NC 0.0002 NC NC 1 0.04 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.7 NC NC
MW-31 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3 0.008 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.6 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.0001 2 NC NC
PZ-1 0.00008 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.5 7 0.001 NC NC 0.004 0.04 NC 0.1 0.0003 0.01 0.01 NC NC 2 0.004 NC 0.01 0.2 0.001 NC NC 3 NC NC
PZ-4 0.00001 NC NC NC NC NC 0.0007 0.1 10 0.04 NC 0.004 0.01 0.1 NC 0.4 NC NC 0.02 NC 0.002 1 NC NC 0.03 0.2 NC NC NC 3 NC NC
PZ-5 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1 0.03 NC NC 0.0001 0.0002 NC NC NC NC 0.003 NC NC 0.7 NC NC 0.0002 0.4 NC NC NC 7 NC NC
PZ-6 NC NC NC NC 0.002 NC NC 0.2 2 0.02 NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2 NC NC
PZ-7 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 3 0.2 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.9 NC NC NC 0.2 NC NC NC 7 NC NC
PZ-8 0.0001 0.0009 NC NC 0.001 NC 0.0006 NC 5 0.009 NC 0.01 0.04 0.1 NC NC 0.01 0.003 0.1 NC NC 2 NC NC 0.05 1 0.02 NC NC 3 NC NC
PZ-10 0.00003 0.0005 NC NC NC NC 0.0005 NC 2 0.006 0.001 0.002 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1 NC NC NC NC 0.001 NC NC 4 NC NC
PZ-12 0.00006 0.0006 NC NC NC 0.005 0.04 NC 2 0.01 0.0004 0.01 0.03 0.1 0.01 NC 0.01 0.005 0.1 NC NC 3 NC NC 0.05 1 0.02 NC NC 4 NC NC
PZ-16 0.00002 0.0005 NC NC NC NC NC 0.03 2 0.005 0.001 0.003 NC NC NC 0.02 NC NC NC NC NC 0.6 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1 NC NC
PZ-18 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.7 0.003 0.001 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.04 0.002 NC NC 0.5 NC NC
PZ-22 0.00009 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.04 2 0.001 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.01 0.8 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.9 NC NC
PZ-24 0.0004 0.0005 NC NC NC NC NC NC 1 0.005 0.001 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 0.3 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.0001 3 NC NC
PZ-26 0.00004 0.0007 NC NC 0.002 NC 0.007 NC 2 0.01 0.001 0.005 NC NC NC NC 0.001 NC 0.1 NC 0.001 1 NC NC NC NC 0.02 NC NC 5 NC NC
Notes:
HI = Hazard Index
NC = Not able to be calculated as exposure point concentration or toxicity data is lacking
ND=0 = Nondetected values substituted with 0
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Toxic Equivalence
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Well or
Piezometer
Name
CAS No.
Background W
MW-25A
MW-34
PMW-1S
Site Wells
LF-01
LF-03
MW-4A
MW-5A
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8A
MW-8B
MW-13A
MW-13B
MW-14
MW-15A
MW-15B
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19A
MW-19B
MW-20A
MW-20B
MW-24A
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29A
MW-30A
MW-31
PZ-1
PZ-4
PZ-5
PZ-6
PZ-7
PZ-8
PZ-10
PZ-12
PZ-16
PZ-18
PZ-22
PZ-24
PZ-26
Total
Cyanide -
Unfiltered Iron Lead
m,p-
Xylenes
Mammalian
TEQ, ND=0 Manganese Mercury Molybdenum
Naph-
thalene Nickel
Nitrite
as N o-Xylene
PCBs,
Total
Penta-
chloro-
phenol Selenium
Tetra-
chloro-
ethene Thallium
Trichloro-
acetic acid
Trichloro-
ethene Vanadium
Vinyl
chloride Zinc
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
74-90-8 7439-89-6 7439-92-1 179601-23-1 calc-dx-0 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 91-20-3 7440-02-0 14797-65-0 95-47-6 1336-36-3 87-86-5 7782-49-2 127-18-4 7440-28-0 76-03-9 79-01-6 7440-62-2 75-01-4 7440-66-6 Arsenic Cobalt Fluoride
Dichloro-
acetic Acid Iron Manganese Thallium
NC NC NC NC 0.02 0.2 0.04 0.1 NC 0.006 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3 42% -- 44% -- -- 6% --
NC NC NC NC 0.005 0.1 0.04 0.06 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2 53% -- 37% -- -- 6% --
NC NC NC NC 0.006 0.01 0.06 0.02 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.3 -- -- 68% -- -- 4% --
NC NC NC 0.0001 NC 1 NC NC NC 0.002 NC NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC 0.07 NC 0.003 NC 2 19% -- 28% -- -- 47% --
NC 0.3 NC 0.0001 NC 2 NC NC 0.01 0.004 NC 0.0001 NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC 0.3 NC 0.001 NC 5 8% 1% 31% -- 5% 47% --
0.2 3 NC NC 0.000003 2 NC NC NC 0.07 NC NC NC NC 0.004 0.001 NC NC 0.01 NC NC 0.002 11 15% 20% 16% -- 24% 21% --
NC 3 NC 0.0002 0.003 1 NC NC 0.004 0.001 NC 0.0001 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.03 NC 0.005 NC 12 8% -- 54% -- 22% 12% --
NC NC NC 0.0002 0.01 0.2 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.05 NC 2 4% -- 74% -- -- 13% --
2 NC NC 0.001 0.002 0.6 NC NC 0.01 NC NC 0.0004 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.09 NC 0.004 0.003 6 3% -- 51% -- -- 10% --
0.2 3 NC 0.001 0.01 3 NC NC 0.01 0.01 NC 0.001 NC 0.01 0.01 0.001 NC NC 0.68 NC 0.002 0.001 13 8% 3% 32% -- 20% 21% --
0.1 NC NC NC 0.0003 0.03 NC NC NC 0.002 NC NC NC NC 0.005 NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC 0.4 57% -- -- -- -- 8% --
0.6 0.5 NC 0.00002 0.0000004 5 NC NC 0.002 0.2 NC NC NC NC 0.01 0.0005 NC 0.7 0.005 NC NC 0.02 20 3% 18% 21% 20% 2% 25% --
0.5 1 NC 0.00002 0.001 4 0.06 NC 0.001 0.1 NC NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC 0.2 0.01 0.02 NC 0.01 16 7% 11% 29% 16% 6% 22% --
0.6 0.9 NC NC 0.005 5 NC NC NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC 0.01 0.0003 NC 0.3 0.01 NC NC 0.004 17 5% 16% 25% 12% 5% 29% --
0.7 0.4 NC NC NC 7 NC 0.4 NC 0.2 NC NC NC NC 0.01 0.001 NC 0.5 0.01 NC NC 0.003 22 3% 23% 12% 17% 2% 32% --
1 1 NC NC NC 5 NC NC NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC 0.01 0.0005 NC 0.3 0.01 0.02 NC 0.01 21 7% 15% 26% 13% 7% 24% --
NC NC NC NC NC 0.7 NC NC NC 0.003 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.45 NC NC NC 3 34% -- 25% -- -- 24% --
NC NC NC NC 0.004 0.7 NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC 0.004 0.001 NC NC 0.01 0.04 NC NC 5 52% 2% 28% -- -- 15% --
NC NC NC NC NC 1 NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC NC 0.0005 NC NC 0.2 NC NC NC 4 32% 2% 28% -- -- 31% --
NC NC NC NC NC 0.09 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 4 86% -- 6% -- -- 3% --
NC 57 NC 0.0004 0.001 5 0.1 NC 0.003 0.9 NC 0.0001 NC NC 0.1 0.02 NC 0.005 0.5 NC 0.05 0.001 73 2% 7% 4% 0.1% 77% 7% --
NC 2 NC NC 0.0003 5 NC 0.03 0.0003 NC NC NC NC NC 0.03 0.002 NC NC 0.2 NC 0.002 0.02 14 23% -- 24% 0.4% 13% 37% --
NC NC NC NC 0.004 4 0.05 0.03 NC 0.06 0.09 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.003 NC 0.05 NC NC 15 43% 6% 20% -- -- 28% --
NC 0.3 NC NC 0.004 1 NC 0.02 NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 11 67%2%16%--3%11%--
NC 1 NC NC 0.004 5 0.1 0.02 NC 0.08 NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC 0.003 NC NC 0.001 23 13% 10% 47%--5%24%--
NC 0.01 NC NC 0.003 1 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2 30%6%21%--0%43%--
NC NC NC NC 0.02 0.01 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.6 29%--54%----1%--
NC 15 NC NC 0.0005 1 NC 0.6 NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC 3 0.0002 0.01 3 NC 0.02 44 40%3%2%--33%2%6%
NC 0.1 NC 0.00001 0.002 1 0.06 0.03 NC 0.02 NC 0.00001 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.02 NC NC NC 7 39%8%34%--2%15%--
NC 0.02 NC NC 0.002 5 0.04 0.4 NC 0.07 NC NC NC 0.01 0.01 NC 4 NC NC 0.06 NC 0.01 23 29%9%15%1%0%21% 19%
0.1 NC NC NC 0.004 2 0.05 0.3 NC 0.03 NC NC NC NC 0.005 0.002 6 0.07 0.04 0.04 NC NC 23 45%4%11%1%--9%25%
NC 0.4 NC NC 0.02 8 0.04 NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.003 NC NC 0.001 18 7%4%37%2%2%47%--
NC 0.03 NC NC 0.003 0.7 NC 0.3 NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 6 36%--42%NC 1%12%--
NC 0.6 NC NC 0.002 10 0.01 0.04 NC 0.02 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 22 13%4%34%1%3%44%--
0.5 1 NC NC 0.000002 4 NC NC NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC 0.01 0.001 NC 0.2 0.01 0.01 NC NC 18 25% 13% 19%7%7%23%--
0.4 4 NC 0.00002 0.000001 7 NC NC NC 0.02 NC NC NC NC 0.01 0.0002 NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC 18 10%6%23%NC 20% 39%--
0.3 2 NC NC 0.001 5 NC NC NC 0.11 NC NC NC NC 0.01 0.001 NC 0.3 0.01 NC NC 0.002 19 9%15% 21%7%13% 29%--
0.1 NC NC NC 0.0002 4 NC NC NC 0.03 NC NC NC NC 0.005 NC NC 0.01 0.003 NC NC NC 8 25%8%16%NC --48%--
NC NC NC NC 0.00003 0.4 NC NC NC 0.001 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC 2 42%--32%2%--23%--
NC NC NC NC NC 2 NC 0.3 NC 0.04 NC NC NC NC 0.01 NC NC NC 0.03 0.02 NC NC 7 35% 12% 13%----35%--
0.2 1 NC 0.0001 0.000003 3 NC NC NC 0.02 NC 0.0001 NC NC NC 0.001 NC NC 0.6 NC 0.001 NC 10 14%3%35%--11% 28%--
0.1 4 NC 0.00001 0.004 7 NC NC NC 0.03 NC NC NC NC 0.004 0.001 NC 0.01 0.02 0.02 NC NC 19 11%6%23%--23% 34%--
HI
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B2-4
Summary of Upper Aquifer Zone Hazard Index
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
HI = Hazard Index
NC = Not able to be calculated as exposure point concentration or toxicity data is lacking
ND=0 = Nondetected values substituted with 0
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Toxic Equivalence
Table B2-5
Summary of Lower Aquifer Zone Hazard Index
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Well or
Piezometer
Name
Calculated
TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Chromium,
Hexavalent Antimony Arsenic Barium Iron Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Zinc
Ethyl-
benzene Fluoride
Naph-
thalene
Total
PCBs
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
CAS No. calc-dx-0 18540-29-9 7440-36-0 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 7439-89-6 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 7440-66-6 100-41-4 16984-48-8 91-20-3 1336-36-3 Arsenic Fluoride
Background Wells
MW-24B 0.003 NC NC 1 0.003 NC 0.02 0.04 NC NC NC 0.3 NC NC 1 69% 25%
MW-25B 0.003 0.0003 0.05 NC 0.001 NC 0.04 0.04 NC NC 0.00001 0.2 NC NC 0.4 --64%
PMW-1D 0.003 NC NC NC 0.002 NC 0.01 0.04 0.02 NC NC 0.2 NC NC 0.3 --77%
Site Wells
MW-9 NC NC 0.3 1 0.002 NC 0.02 NC NC 0.001 NC 1 NC NC 3 38% 51%
MW-22B 0.002 NC 0.08 2 0.001 NC NC 0.06 NC NC NC 0.5 NC NC 2 71% 23%
MW-29B 0.002 0.0003 0.1 0.5 0.001 NC 0.01 NC NC NC 0.00001 0.3 0.0005 NC 1 51% 33%
MW-30B NC NC NC NC 0.001 NC 0.01 NC NC NC NC 0.1 NC NC 0.1 --91%
MW-32B 0.006 NC NC 1 0.001 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.6 0.0001 NC 2 68% 31%
Notes:
HI = Hazard Index
NC = Not able to be calculated as exposure point concentration or toxicity data is lacking
ND=0 = Nondetected values substituted with 0
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Toxic Equivalence
HI
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B2-6
Summary of Upper Aquifer Zone Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Well or
Piezometer
Name
1,1-
Dichloro-
ethane
1,2-
Dichloro-
ethane
1,2,4-
Trichloro-
benzene
1,2,4,5-
Tetrachloro-
benzene
2-Methyl-
naph-
thalene
2,4,6-
Trichloro-
phenol Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Benzene Beryllium
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane
Bromo-
form
Bromo-
methane Cadmium
Carbon
disulfide
Carbon
tetra-
chloride
Chloro-
form
Chromium,
Hexavalent
cis-1,2-
Dichloro-
ethene Cobalt Copper
Dibenzo(a,h)-
anthracene
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane
Dichloro-
acetic
Acid
Dichloro-
methane
(Methylene
chloride)
4,6-Dinitro-
2-methyl-
phenol
Ethyl-
benzene Fluoride
Hexachloro-
benzene
Hexachloro-
butadiene
Total
Cyanide -
Unfiltered
CAS No. 75-34-3 107-06-2 120-82-1 95-94-3 91-57-6 88-06-2 7429-90-5 7440-36-0 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 71-43-2 7440-41-7 75-27-4 75-25-2 74-83-9 7440-43-9 75-15-0 56-23-5 67-66-3 18540-29-9 156-59-2 7440-48-4 7440-50-8 53-70-3 124-48-1 79-43-6 75-09-2 534-52-1 100-41-4 16984-48-8 118-74-1 87-68-3 74-90-8
Background Wells
MW-25A NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-34 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
PMW-1S NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
Site Wells
LF-01 NC NC NC NC NC 9.E-09 NC NC 6.E-05 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-08 NC NC NC NC
LF-03 6.E-08 NC 6.E-08 NC NC 8.E-09 NC NC 6.E-05 NC 5.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 8.E-08 NC NC NC NC
MW-4A 3.E-09 NC 7.E-08 NC NC 1.E-08 NC NC 3.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 6.E-08 NC
MW-5A 3.E-07 NC 5.E-07 NC NC 4.E-08 NC NC 2.E-04 NC 8.E-08 NC 5.E-08 3.E-08 NC NC NC NC 1.E-06 NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-07 NC NC NC 6.E-08 NC NC NC NC
MW-6 2.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-05 NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-07 NC NC NC NC
MW-7 8.E-09 NC 3.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-05 NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-07 NC NC NC NC
MW-8A 4.E-08 NC 5.E-08 NC NC 2.E-07 NC NC 2.E-04 NC 2.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-06 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 7.E-09 NC 4.E-07 NC 1.E-05 3.E-08 NC
MW-8B 3.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-05 NC 5.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-13A 2.E-08 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC 9.E-05 NC NC NC 3.E-05 9.E-06 NC NC NC 7.E-07 1.E-05 NC NC NC NC NC 8.E-05 3.E-04 2.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-13B 1.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 NC NC NC 1.E-05 2.E-06 NC NC NC 7.E-08 7.E-06 NC NC NC NC 3.E-07 2.E-05 2.E-04 4.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-14 2.E-08 NC NC NC NC 2.E-08 NC NC 1.E-04 NC 3.E-08 NC 2.E-05 3.E-06 NC NC NC 2.E-07 1.E-05 NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-05 1.E-04 4.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-15A 4.E-08 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-04 NC 3.E-08 NC 3.E-05 5.E-06 NC NC NC 1.E-06 1.E-05 NC NC NC NC NC 6.E-05 3.E-04 3.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-15B 3.E-08 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 NC 3.E-08 NC 2.E-05 4.E-06 NC NC NC 5.E-07 9.E-06 NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-05 2.E-04 3.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-17 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 7.E-09 NC NC NC NC
MW-18 NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-19A 4.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-19B NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-04 NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-20A 4.E-08 NC NC NC NC 1.E-08 NC NC 3.E-04 NC 2.E-07 NC 1.E-07 5.E-08 NC NC NC NC 5.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-07 4.E-06 NC NC 1.E-06 NC NC NC NC
MW-20B 3.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-06 3.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-24A NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-03 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-06 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-26 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-03 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-07 2.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-27 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-06 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-28 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 6.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-29A NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-05 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-30A NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-03 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
MW-31 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 6.E-08 NC NC NC NC
PZ-1 3.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-03 NC NC NC 2.E-06 2.E-06 NC NC NC 7.E-07 9.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-06 1.E-05 5.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-4 4.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-03 NC NC NC 6.E-06 3.E-06 NC NC NC NC 2.E-06 NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-05 1.E-05 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-5 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 NC NC NC 6.E-08 1.E-08 NC NC NC NC 3.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-07 3.E-05 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-6 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-7 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-05 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-8 4.E-08 2.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC 7.E-04 NC NC NC 2.E-05 4.E-06 NC NC NC 3.E-07 1.E-05 NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-10 1.E-08 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-04 NC 6.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-12 2.E-08 1.E-07 NC NC NC 2.E-08 NC NC 3.E-04 NC 3.E-08 NC 1.E-05 3.E-06 NC NC NC 5.E-07 9.E-06 NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-05 9.E-05 8.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-16 8.E-09 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-04 NC 8.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-18 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-04 NC 7.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-06 8.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-22 4.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
PZ-24 2.E-07 9.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 NC 9.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 6.E-08 NC NC NC NC
PZ-26 2.E-08 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-04 NC 7.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 9.E-06 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 8.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Well or
Piezometer
Name
CAS No.
Background We
MW-25A
MW-34
PMW-1S
Site Wells
LF-01
LF-03
MW-4A
MW-5A
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8A
MW-8B
MW-13A
MW-13B
MW-14
MW-15A
MW-15B
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19A
MW-19B
MW-20A
MW-20B
MW-24A
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29A
MW-30A
MW-31
PZ-1
PZ-4
PZ-5
PZ-6
PZ-7
PZ-8
PZ-10
PZ-12
PZ-16
PZ-18
PZ-22
PZ-24
PZ-26
p y p
Iron Lead
m,p-
Xylenes
Mammalian
TEQ, ND=0 Manganese Mercury Molybdenum
Naph-
thalene Nickel
Nitrite
as N o-Xylene
PCBs,
Total
Penta-
chloro-
phenol Selenium
Tetra-
chloro-
ethene Thallium
Trichloro-
acetic
acid
Trichloro-
ethene Vanadium
Vinyl
chloride Zinc
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
Percent
Contribution
7439-89-6 7439-92-1 179601-23-1 calc-dx-0 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 91-20-3 7440-02-0 14797-65-0 95-47-6 1336-36-3 87-86-5 7782-49-2 127-18-4 7440-28-0 76-03-9 79-01-6 7440-62-2 75-01-4 7440-66-6 Arsenic Bromoform Chloroform
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane
Dichloro-
acetic Acid
Trichloro-
acetic acid
Vinyl
chloride
NC NC NC 5.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 100% -- -- -- -- -- -- --
NC NC NC 2.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 9.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 100% -- -- -- -- -- -- --
NC NC NC 2.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 9.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-07 ----------------
NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC 6.E-07 NC 2.E-06 NC 7.E-05 96%------------3%
NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-06 NC NC NC 4.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-06 NC 8.E-07 NC 7.E-05 88%------------1%
NC NC NC 8.E-11 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-08 NC NC 4.E-09 NC NC 9.E-08 NC NC NC 3.E-04 100%--------------
NC NC NC 9.E-08 NC NC NC 3.E-06 NC NC NC 7.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-07 NC 4.E-06 NC 2.E-04 94% 0.015% 1% 0.03% 0.1%----2%
NC NC NC 3.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-05 NC 5.E-05 25%------------73%
NC NC NC 7.E-08 NC NC NC 9.E-06 NC NC NC 6.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC 7.E-07 NC 3.E-06 NC 4.E-05 65%------------7%
NC NC NC 5.E-07 NC NC NC 6.E-06 NC NC NC 3.E-06 8.E-06 NC 4.E-09 NC NC 6.E-06 NC 1.E-06 NC 2.E-04 82%--1%--------1%
NC NC NC 1.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC 7.E-08 NC NC NC 4.E-05 100%--------------
NC NC NC 1.E-11 NC NC NC 1.E-06 NC NC NC 5.E-08 NC NC 2.E-09 NC 3.E-04 4.E-08 NC NC NC 9.E-04 10% 1%1%4%9% 34% 41%--
NC NC NC 3.E-08 NC NC NC 9.E-07 NC NC NC 3.E-08 NC NC NC NC 1.E-04 4.E-08 NC NC NC 5.E-04 33% 0%1%2%5% 36% 22%--
NC NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-08 NC NC 1.E-09 NC 2.E-04 8.E-08 NC NC NC 5.E-04 29% 1%2%3%7% 28% 30%--
NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-08 NC NC 3.E-09 NC 3.E-04 5.E-08 NC NC NC 7.E-04 15% 1%1%4%8% 36% 35%--
NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC 2.E-09 NC 2.E-04 7.E-08 NC NC NC 7.E-04 37% 1%1%3%6% 28% 24%--
NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-06 NC NC NC 2.E-04 98%--------------
NC NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 9.E-10 NC NC 6.E-09 NC NC 7.E-08 NC NC NC 4.E-04 100%--------------
NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 6.E-10 NC NC 2.E-09 NC NC 2.E-06 NC NC NC 2.E-04 99%--------------
NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-04 100%--------------
NC NC NC 5.E-08 NC NC NC 3.E-06 NC NC NC 7.E-09 NC NC 7.E-08 NC 2.E-06 4.E-06 NC 4.E-05 NC 3.E-04 85% 0.01% 0.02% 0.04% 0.1% 1%1% 11%
NC NC NC 9.E-09 NC NC NC 3.E-07 NC NC NC 3.E-09 NC NC 8.E-09 NC NC 1.E-06 NC 1.E-06 NC 5.E-04 99%--------1%--0.2%
NC NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-08 NC NC NC NC 1.E-06 NC NC NC NC 1.E-03 100%--0.1%------0.1%--
NC NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-03 100%-- 0.01% ----------
NC NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-08 9.E-06 NC NC NC NC 3.E-08 NC NC NC 5.E-04 98%--0.4%----------
NC NC NC 9.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-04 100%-- 0.05% ----------
NC NC NC 6.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 6.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-05 98%--------------
NC NC NC 1.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 7.E-09 NC NC NC NC 1.E-07 7.E-08 NC NC NC 3.E-03 100%-- 0.00% ------ 0.004% --
NC NC NC 7.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-07 NC NC NC 4.E-04 100%--------------
NC NC NC 6.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 7.E-10 6.E-06 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-03 97% 0.2% 0.08% 0.1% 0.3% 1%----
NC NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-10 NC NC 1.E-08 NC 3.E-05 3.E-07 NC NC NC 2.E-03 95% 0.2% 0.1% 0.4% 1%1%2%--
NC NC NC 6.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-08 NC NC NC 2.E-04 86% 0.004% 0.1% 0.03% 0.1% 13%----
NC NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 7.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-04 100%--------------
NC NC NC 7.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 9.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-04 97%--------3%----
NC NC NC 7.E-11 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-08 NC NC 5.E-09 NC 1.E-04 7.E-08 NC NC NC 1.E-03 73% 0.4% 1%2%3%9% 11%--
NC NC NC 5.E-11 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-09 NC NC 9.E-10 NC NC 5.E-08 NC NC NC 3.E-04 100%--------------
NC NC NC 4.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC 2.E-09 NC 1.E-04 5.E-08 NC NC NC 6.E-04 49% 1%2%2%5% 16% 25%--
NC NC NC 6.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 6.E-10 NC NC NC NC 3.E-06 2.E-08 NC NC NC 3.E-04 99%----------1%--
NC NC NC 1.E-09 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-09 NC NC NC NC 5.E-06 NC NC NC NC 1.E-04 93%--------2%4%--
NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-10 NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-07 NC NC NC 4.E-04 100%--------------
NC NC NC 9.E-11 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-08 NC NC 5.E-09 NC NC 5.E-06 NC 7.E-07 NC 2.E-04 98%------------0.3%
NC NC NC 1.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-07 NC NC 4.E-09 NC 6.E-06 2.E-07 NC NC NC 4.E-04 96%--2%------2%--
ILCR
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
Table B2-6
Summary of Upper Aquifer Zone Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
NC = Not able to be calculated as exposure point concentration or toxicity data is lacking
ND=0 = Nondetected values substituted with 0
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Toxic Equivalence
Table B2-7
Summary of Lower Aquifer Zone Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Well or
Piezometer
Name
Calculated
TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Chromium,
Hexavalent
Antimon
y Arsenic Barium Iron Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Zinc
Ethyl-
benzene Fluoride
Naph-
thalene
Total
PCBs
Percent
Contribution
CAS No. calc-dx-0 18540-29-9 7440-36-0 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 7439-89-6 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 7440-66-6 100-41-4 16984-48-8 91-20-3 1336-36-3 Arsenic
Background Wells
MW-24B 1.E-07 NC NC 1.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.E-04 100%
MW-25B 9.E-08 2.E-07 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-09 NC NC NC 3.E-07 --
PMW-1D 9.E-08 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 8.E-09 1.E-07 --
Site Wells
MW-9 NC NC NC 2.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.E-04 100%
MW-22B 7.E-08 NC NC 3.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 3.E-04 100%
MW-29B 7.E-08 2.E-07 NC 8.E-05 NC NC NC NC NC NC 4.E-09 NC 4.E-07 3.E-09 8.E-05 99%
MW-30B NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 5.E-09 5.E-09 --
MW-32B 2.E-07 NC NC 2.E-04 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 9.E-08 NC 2.E-04 100%
Notes:
ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
NC = Not able to be calculated as exposure point concentration or toxicity data is lacking
ND=0 = Nondetected values substituted with 0
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Toxic Equivalence
ILCR
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/11/2022
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
APPENDIX C BHHRA DATA TABLES (EXCLUDING GROUNDWATER)
APPENDIX C – LIST OF TABLES 
Table C‐1: Sitewide Air Summary  
Table C‐2: PRI 2 Solids Summary  
Table C‐3: PRI 4 Solids Summary  
Table C‐4: PRI 5 Solids Summary  
Table C‐5: PRI 6 Solids Summary 
Table C‐6: PRI 7 Solids Summary  
Table C‐7: PRI 8 Solids Summary 
Table C‐8: PRI 9 Solids Summary  
Table C‐9: PRI 10 Solids Summary 
Table C‐10: PRI 11 Solids Summary 
Table C‐11: PRI 12 Solids Summary 
Table C‐12: PRI 13 Solids Summary 
Table C‐13: PRI 14 Solids Summary 
Table C‐14: PRI 15 Solids Summary  
Table C‐15: PRI 16 Solids Summary  
Table C‐16: Lakebed Background Solids Summary 
Table C‐17: Upland Background Solids Summary 
Table C‐18: PRI 15 Plant Summary  
Table C‐19: PRI 3 Surface Water Summary 
Table C‐20: PRI 4 Surface Water Summary 
Table C‐21: PRI 5 Surface Water Summary 
Table C‐22: PRI 6 Surface Water Summary  
Table C‐23: PRI 8 Surface Water Summary 
Table C‐24: Surface Water Summary – pH 
Table C‐25: Notes and Abbreviations 
Table C-1
Sitewide Air Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001
Sample Date 23-Aug-14 23-Aug-14 23-Aug-14 26-Aug-14 26-Aug-14 26-Aug-14 01-Sep-14 01-Sep-14 01-Sep-14 05-Sep-14 05-Sep-14 05-Sep-14 17-Sep-14 17-Sep-14
Sample Type N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Sample ID PRI18-001-TO13-
01-082314
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
01-082314
PRI18-001-TSP-
01-082314
PRI18-001-TO13-
02-082614
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
02-082614
PRI18-001-TSP-
02-082614
PRI18-001-TO13-
04-090114
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
04-090114
PRI18-001-TSP-
04-090114
PRI18-001-TO13-
05-090514
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
05-090514
PRI18-001-TSP-
05-090514
PRI18-001-TO13-
01-091714
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
01-091714
Analyte Unit
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/m3 1.9E-02 1.5E-02 1.3E-02 1.3E-02 5.6E-02
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/m3 1.7E-01 6.2E-02 3.4E-02 2.9E-02 7.1E-02
PCBs, Total µg/m3 266.7 J 213.7 J 167.3 J 109.9 J 229.3 J
Arsenic µg/m3 3.1E-03 1.1E-03 3.0E-03 3.6E-03
Chromium µg/m3 0.0037 J 0.0018 J 0.0045 J 0.0051 J
Manganese µg/m3 1.6E-02 0.0077 J 1.4E-02 1.2E-02
Mercury µg/m3 0.0000096 J 9.5 E-06 J 6.64E-06 J 0.000012 J
Hexachlorobenzene µg/m3 0.017 J 0.0066 J-0.0063 J 0.010 J 0.019
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/m3 0.0011 J < 0.00055 UJ < 0.0011 U 0.0025 J+ 0.0016 J
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-1
Sitewide Air Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/m3
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/m3
PCBs, Total µg/m3
Arsenic µg/m3
Chromium µg/m3
Manganese µg/m3
Mercury µg/m3
Hexachlorobenzene µg/m3
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/m3
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001
17-Sep-14 23-Sep-14 23-Sep-14 23-Sep-14 26-Sep-14 26-Sep-14 26-Sep-14 29-Sep-14 29-Sep-14 29-Sep-14 02-Oct-14 02-Oct-14 02-Oct-14 05-Oct-14
NN N NN N NN N N N N NN
PRI18-001-TSP-
01-091714
PRI18-001-TO13-
01-092314
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
01-092314
PRI18-001-TSP-
01-092314
PRI18-001-TO13-
02-092614
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
02-092614
PRI18-001-TSP-
01-092614
PRI18-001-TO13-
01-092914
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
01-092914
PRI18-001-TSP-01-
092914
PRI18-001-TO13-
01-100214
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
01-100214
PRI18-001-TSP-
01-100214
PRI18-001-TO13-
01-100514
4.3E-03 2.0E-02 1.5E-02 7.4E-03
2.8E-02 2.9E-02 4.3E-02 2.2E-02
113.9 J 195.5 J 2.5E+02 7.0E+01
2.1E-03 1.7E-03 0.00052 J 0.00036 J < 0.00032 U
0.0069 J 0.0064 J 0.0039 J 0.0042 J 0.0034 J
2.0E-02 0.010 J 0.0074 J 0.0042 J 0.0014 J
0.000012 J 3.2E-05 7.41 E-06 J-0.000018 J-< 5.4 E-06 UJ
0.012 J 0.014 J+0.011 J 0.0055 J+0.012 J
< 0.0014 UJ 0.0011 J < 0.00068 UJ < 0.00071 UJ 0.0015 J
ERM Page 2 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-1
Sitewide Air Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/m3
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/m3
PCBs, Total µg/m3
Arsenic µg/m3
Chromium µg/m3
Manganese µg/m3
Mercury µg/m3
Hexachlorobenzene µg/m3
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/m3
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-001 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002
05-Oct-14 05-Oct-14 08-Oct-14 08-Oct-14 08-Oct-14 22-Aug-14 22-Aug-14 22-Aug-14 25-Aug-14 25-Aug-14 25-Aug-14 28-Aug-14 28-Aug-14 28-Aug-14
NNN NNN NNN NNN NN
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
01-100514
PRI18-001-TSP-
01-100514
PRI18-001-TO13-
01-100814
PRI18-001-TO4TO9-
01-100814
PRI18-001-TSP-
01-100814
PRI18-002-TO13-
01-082214
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
01-082214
PRI18-002-TSP-
01-082214
PRI18-002-TO13-
02-082514
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
02-082514
PRI18-002-TSP-
02-082514
PRI18-002-TO13-
03-082814
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
03-082814
PRI18-002-TSP-
03-082814
1.9E-02 1.0E-01 1.2E-02 1.6E+00 1.1E-01
3.4E-02 1.3E-01 6.8E-02 1.6E+00 1.6E-01
1.8E+02 243.8 J 178.0 J 494.9 J 283.0 J
0.00075 J 0.00060 J 4.0E-03 0.0035 0.0067
0.0025 J 0.0027 J 0.0027 J 0.0076 J 0.044 J
0.0020 J 0.0037 J 1.6E-02 0.018 0.028
0.000041 J-0.000013 J-0.000012 J 0.000021 0.000030
0.016 J 0.010 J 0.017 J 0.014 J
0.0012 J 0.0012 J 0.0020 J 0.0012 J
ERM Page 3 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-1
Sitewide Air Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/m3
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/m3
PCBs, Total µg/m3
Arsenic µg/m3
Chromium µg/m3
Manganese µg/m3
Mercury µg/m3
Hexachlorobenzene µg/m3
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/m3
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002
31-Aug-14 31-Aug-14 31-Aug-14 03-Sep-14 03-Sep-14 03-Sep-14 16-Sep-14 16-Sep-14 16-Sep-14 22-Sep-14 22-Sep-14 22-Sep-14 25-Sep-14 25-Sep-14
NNNNNNNNNNNNNN
PRI18-002-TO13-
04-083114
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
04-083114
PRI18-002-TSP-
04-083114
PRI18-002-TO13-
05-090314
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
05-090314
PRI18-002-TSP-
05-090314
PRI18-002-TO13-
01-091614
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
01-091614
PRI18-002-TSP-
01-091614
PRI18-002-TO13-
01-092214
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
01-092214
PRI18-002-TSP-
01-092214
PRI18-002-TO13-
02-092514
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
02-092514
1.1E-01 7.2E-03 9.3E-02 4.1E-02 4.5E-03
1.6E-01 3.4E-02 1.1E-01 5.6E-02 3.8E-02
149.5 J 1.5E+02 217.9 J 190.5 J 164.9 J
0.0032 0.013 0.006 0.0014
0.0078 J 0.0068 J 0.0076 J 0.0068 J
0.015 0.012 0.016 0.019
8.24E-06 J 0.000011 J 0.000012 J 1.8E-05
0.0056 J 0.0065 J 0.010 0.0098 0.019 J+
< 0.0011 UJ 0.0033 J+0.0021 J 0.0013 J-< 0.0011 UJ
ERM Page 4 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-1
Sitewide Air Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/m3
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/m3
PCBs, Total µg/m3
Arsenic µg/m3
Chromium µg/m3
Manganese µg/m3
Mercury µg/m3
Hexachlorobenzene µg/m3
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/m3
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-002 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003
25-Sep-14 28-Sep-14 28-Sep-14 28-Sep-14 01-Oct-14 01-Oct-14 01-Oct-14 06-Oct-14 06-Oct-14 06-Oct-14 21-Aug-14 21-Aug-14 21-Aug-14 24-Aug-14 27-Aug-14
NN N N N N NN N NN N NN N
PRI18-002-TSP-
01-092514
PRI18-002-TO13-
01-092814
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
01-092814
PRI18-002-TSP-
01-092814
PRI18-002-TO13-
01-100114
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
01-100114
PRI18-002-TSP-
01-100114
PRI18-002-TO13-
01-100614
PRI18-002-TO4TO9-
01-100614
PRI18-002-TSP-
01-100614
PRI18-003-TO13-
01-082114
PRI18-003-TO4TO9-
01-082114
PRI18-003-TSP-
01-082114
PRI18-003-TO13-
02-082414
PRI18-003-TO13-
03-082714
6.1E-03 9.4E-02 4.0E-02 5.0E-01
1.4E-02 1.1E-01 5.9E-02 5.4E-01
8.7E+01 8.8E+01 1.7E+02 9.3E+01
0.0059 0.00029 J 0.00038 J 0.0039 0.0053
0.0065 J 0.0033 J 0.0035 J 0.0025 J 0.0041 J
0.013 J 0.0046 J 0.0029 J 0.0049 J 0.020
0.000017 5.9E-06 J-6.5E-06 J-0.000046 J-0.000016 J
0.0026 J+0.0039 J+0.011 J 0.012 J 0.024 J 0.019
< 0.00050 UJ 0.00083 J 0.0020 J 0.0011 J 0.0019 J 0.00055 J
ERM Page 5 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-1
Sitewide Air Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/m3
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/m3
PCBs, Total µg/m3
Arsenic µg/m3
Chromium µg/m3
Manganese µg/m3
Mercury µg/m3
Hexachlorobenzene µg/m3
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/m3
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003
27-Aug-14 02-Sep-14 02-Sep-14 02-Sep-14 06-Sep-14 06-Sep-14 06-Sep-14 15-Sep-14 15-Sep-14 15-Sep-14 18-Sep-14 18-Sep-14 18-Sep-14 24-Sep-14 24-Sep-14
NN N NN N NN N NN N NN N
PRI18-003-TSP-
03-082714
PRI18-003-TO13-
05-090214
PRI18-003-TO4TO9-
05-090214
PRI18-003-TSP-
05-090214
PRI18-003-TO13-
06-090614
PRI18-003-TO4TO9-
06-090614
PRI18-003-TSP-
06-090614
PRI18-003-TO13-
01-091514
PRI18-003-TO4TO9-
01-091514
PRI18-003-TSP-
01-091514
PRI18-003-TO13-
01-091814
PRI18-003-TO4TO9-
01-091814
PRI18-003-TSP-
01-091814
PRI18-003-TO13-
01-092414
PRI18-003-TO4TO9-
01-092414
1.4E-01 3.7E-02 4.0E-02 6.1E-02 2.4E-03
1.7E-01 5.5E-02 5.1E-02 7.1E-02 4.2E-02
191.9 J 171.0 J 236.7 J 278.5 J 218.3 J
0.0075 0.0088 0.0031 0.0032 0.0056
0.028 J 0.0084 J 0.0095 J 0.0077 J 0.0077 J
0.012 0.019 0.022 0.017 0.026
0.000027 0.000024 0.000020 0.000019 0.000014 J
0.017 0.015 J 0.010 0.018 < 0.0017 UJ
0.0038 0.00085 J+ 0.0025 J < 0.0011 U < 0.0011 UJ
ERM Page 6 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-1
Sitewide Air Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/m3
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/m3
PCBs, Total µg/m3
Arsenic µg/m3
Chromium µg/m3
Manganese µg/m3
Mercury µg/m3
Hexachlorobenzene µg/m3
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/m3
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003 PRI18-003
24-Sep-14 27-Sep-14 27-Sep-14 27-Sep-14 30-Sep-14 30-Sep-14 30-Sep-14 04-Oct-14 04-Oct-14 04-Oct-14 07-Oct-14 07-Oct-14 07-Oct-14
NN N NN N NN N NN N N
PRI18-003-TSP-
01-092414
PRI18-003-TO13-
02-092714
PRI18-003-TO4TO9-
02-092714
PRI18-003-TSP-
01-092714
PRI18-003-TO13-
01-093014
PRI18-003-TO4TO9-
01-093014
PRI18-003-TSP-
01-093014
PRI18-003-TO13-
01-100414
PRI18-003-TO4TO9-
01-100414
PRI18-003-TSP-
01-100414
PRI18-003-TO13-
01-100714
PRI18-003-TO4TO9-
01-100714
PRI18-003-TSP-
01-100714
2.6E-03 1.3E+00 7.2E-02 2.1E-02
1.3E-02 1.3E+00 8.4E-02 3.4E-02
68.1 J 2.3E+02 1.6E+02 125.4 J
0.0032 < 0.00032 U 0.0011 0.0026 0.0022
0.0061 J 0.0035 J 0.0033 J 0.0034 J 0.0027 J
0.0091 J 0.0062 J 0.0036 J 0.0041 J 0.0038 J
0.000035 < 5.4E-06 UJ 0.000026 J- 0.000043 J- 0.000040 J-
0.0018 J+ 0.0096 J+ 0.0075 J 0.012 J
< 0.00054 UJ 0.00081 J 0.0020 J 0.0012 J
ERM Page 7 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-2
PRI 2 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI2-001 PRI2-002 PRI2-003 PRI2-004 PRI2-005 PRI2-006 PRI2-007 PRI2-008 PRI2-009 PRI2-010 PRI2-011 PRI2-012 PRI2-013 PRI2-014
Sample Date 09-Jan-14 09-Jan-14 08-Jan-14 09-Jan-14 09-Jan-14 08-May-14 09-Jan-14 09-Jan-14 08-May-14 08-Jan-14 08-Jan-14 08-Jan-14 09-Jan-14 08-May-14
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID PRI2-001-SS01-
010914
PRI2-002-SS01-
010914
PRI2-003-SS01-
010814
PRI2-004-SS01-
010914
PRI2-005-SS01-
010914
PRI2-006-SS01-
050814
PRI2-007-SS01-
010914
PRI2-008-SS01-
010914
PRI2-009-SS01-
050814
PRI2-010-SS01-
010814
PRI2-011-SS01-
010814
PRI2-012-SS01-
010814
PRI2-013-SS01-
010914
PRI2-014-SS01-
050814
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 27 U < 35 U < 250 U < 270 U < 250 U < 300 U < 29 UJ < 300 U < 290 U < 250 U < 230 U < 300 U < 31 U < 280 U
Arsenic µg/kg 3,000 3,700 5,500 7,300 12,000 9,900 7,600 7,200 6,100 6,000 6,600 7,700 5,200 6,800
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.0011 0.11 1.8 1.7 9.8 1.6 0.13 2.1 0.66 1.2 0.35 2.4 0.012 0.68
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammal µg/kg 0.0016 0.12 1.8 1.7 9.9 1.6 0.13 2.2 0.67 1.2 0.35 2.4 0.019 0.69
Chromium µg/kg 860 51,000 14,000 31,000 34,000 3,500 6,800 14,000 6,900 5,500 7,700 6,500 6,300 7,500
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg 4.2 J 260 6,200 9,300 50,000 5,700 220 J-7,500 10,000 4,600 2,400 J 10,000 95 2,500 J
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 3.9 U < 5 U < 35 U < 38 U < 36 U < 42 U < 4.2 UJ < 42 U < 41 U < 35 U < 33 U < 43 U < 4.4 U < 40 U
Mercury µg/kg < 27 U < 12 U < 10 U < 20 U < 21 U < 10 U < 20 U < 9.9 U 25 J+< 26 U < 9.0 U < 10 U < 10 U 24 J+
PCBs, Total µg/kg 1.2 590 1,900 960 11,000 850 150 1,400 450 760 340 1,800 23 410
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-3
PRI 4 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID 4-01 4-02 4-03 4-04 4-05 4-06 4-07 4-08 4-09 4-10 4-11 4-12 4-13 4-14 DMA-Gyp-PRI04-1 DMA-Gyp-PRI04-2 UH-01-A
Sample Date 19-Oct-15 19-Oct-15 20-Oct-15 23-Oct-15 20-Oct-15 20-Oct-15 20-Oct-15 23-Oct-15 23-Oct-15 21-Oct-15 21-Oct-15 29-Oct-15 29-Oct-15 29-Oct-15 05-Oct-12 05-Oct-12 29-Sep-16
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNN N N N
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID 4-01-SS-01-
101915
4-02-SS-01-
101915
4-03-SS-01-
102015
4-04-SS-01-
102315
4-05-SS-01-
102015
4-06-SS-01-
102015
4-07-SS-01-
102015
4-08-SS-01-
102315
4-09-SS-01-
102315
4-10-SS-01-
102115
4-11-SS-01-
102115
4-12-SS-01-
102915
4-13-SS-01-
102915
4-14-SS-01-
102915
DMA-GYP-PRI4-1 DMA-GYP-PRI4-2 UH01A-SS-01-
092916
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 3,400 U < 2,900 U < 3,500 U < 3,500 U < 3,300 U < 3,300 U < 4,100 U < 4,000 U < 3,800 U < 3,700 U < 4,300 U < 3,900 U < 3,900 U < 4,300 U < 310 U < 410 U
Arsenic µg/kg 23,000 9,200 17,000 18,000 20,000 17,000 19,000 18,000 13,000 18,000 16,000 23,000 20,000 30,000 13,900 24,300 J- 4,800
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 7.3 2.5 0.63 7.5 1 2 1 6 4.7 5.3 3.1 9.3 5.2 7.7 2.0 1.6 0.053
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammal µg/kg 7.4 2.5 0.65 7.5 1.1 2 1 6 4.7 5.3 3.2 9.3 5.2 7.7 2.0 1.6 0.054
Chromium µg/kg 13,000 3,600 5,900 6,600 7,000 11,000 9,100 7,700 6,500 5,400 4,100 11,000 8,200 8,500 9,100 7,800 J- 10,000
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg 21,000 5,700 4,200 14,000 5,300 14,000 15,000 14,000 14,000 26,000 23,000 28,000 38,000 76,000 13,000 18,000 < 250 U
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 490 U < 410 U < 500 U < 490 U < 460 U < 470 U < 580 U < 560 U < 540 U < 520 U < 610 U < 560 U < 560 U < 610 U < 1,000 U < 1,300 U
Mercury µg/kg 84 29 J 70 32 J 22 J 50 53 J 67 31 J 56 J 68 240 64 89 < 10 U < 14 U 12 J
PCBs, Total µg/kg 1,320 847 349 757 862 418 336 815 1,760 1,840 1,880 1,960 1,890 3,140 589.4317 502.7043 47
Pentachlorobenzene µg/kg < 1,700 U < 1,400 U < 1,800 U < 1,700 U < 1,600 U < 1,700 U < 2,000 U < 2,000 U < 1,900 U < 1,800 U < 2,200 U < 2,000 U < 2,000 U < 2,200 U
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-4
PRI 5 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID 5-01 5-02 5-03 5-04 5-05 5-06 5-07 5-08 5-09 5-10 5-11 5-12 5-13 5-14 5-15 5-16 5-17 5-18 5-19
Sample Date 15-Oct-15 27-Oct-15 25-Sep-15 25-Sep-15 25-Sep-15 15-Oct-15 27-Oct-15 27-Oct-15 17-Sep-15 15-Oct-15 27-Oct-15 27-Oct-15 27-Oct-15 27-Oct-15 17-Sep-15 15-Oct-15 18-Sep-15 18-Sep-15 18-Sep-15
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 4 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 4 in 0 - 3 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 4 in 0 - 3 in 0 - 5 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID 5-01-SS-01-
101515
5-02-SS-01-
102715
5-03-SS-01-
092515
5-04-SS-01-
092515
5-05-SS-01-
092515
5-06-SS-01-
101515
5-07-SS-01-
102715
5-08-SS-01-
102715
5-09-SS-01-
091715
5-10-SS-01-
101515
5-11-SS-01-
102715
5-12-SS-01-
102715
5-13-SS-01-
102715
5-14-SS-01-
102715
5-15-SS-01-
091715
5-16-SS-01-
101515
5-17-SS-01-
091815
5-18-SS-01-
091815
5-19-SS-01-
091815
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 150 U < 5,200 U < 140 U < 150 U < 130 U < 150 U < 2,800 U < 4,000 U < 28 U < 130 U < 3,100 U < 2,200 U < 5,800 U < 4,900 U < 28 U < 3,100 U < 290 U < 280 U < 27 U
Arsenic µg/kg 4,600 5,700 4,300 5,100 4,900 8,600 4,500 2,600 4,000 5,600 5,500 4,900 3,700 17,000 4,900 13,000 19,000 15,000 7,500
Benzo(a)pyrene µg/kg < 0.48 U 130 < 0.41 U < 0.44 U < 0.39 U < 0.45 U < 5.1 U < 7.5 U < 0.38 U < 2.1 U < 6.4 U < 4.5 U 42 J 200 < 0.40 U < 4.8 U < 5.4 U < 5.1 U < 0.45 U
Bromodichloromethane µg/kg < 0.74 U 39 < 0.74 U < 0.56 U < 0.66 U < 0.55 U 8.7 23 < 0.57 U < 1.1 U 19 23 75 12 < 0.55 U 72 < 2.4 U < 0.85 U < 0.36 U
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.017 17 0.0015 0.00011 0.0011 0.0022 0.38 0.83 0.0012 0.087 1.4 0.027 5.5 28 0.0020 0.63 3.1 0.0066 0.0012
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.017 17 0.0016 0.00019 0.0012 0.0022 0.39 0.85 0.0014 0.087 1.5 0.028 5.8 29 0.0021 0.65 3.1 0.0068 0.0013
Chromium µg/kg 9,100 8,000 2,900 5,300 4,000 7,900 7,900 6,400 2,000 3,300 6,600 14,000 5,500 9,200 3,700 11,000 28,000 15,000 4,400
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg 67 J 310,000 < 12 U < 13 U 19 J < 13 U 3,600 11,000 12 J 77 J 17,000 320 J 63,000 610,000 26 3,100 8,000 < 24 U 6.9 J
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 22 U < 740 U < 20 U < 21 U < 19 U < 22 U < 400 U < 570 U < 3.9 U < 19 U < 450 U < 320 U < 820 U < 700 U < 4.0 U < 440 U < 41 U < 40 U < 3.9 U
Iron µg/kg 8,000,000 5,700,000 2,400,000 4,200,000 3,400,000 7,000,000 7,300,000 2,500,000 1,800,000 2,700,000 4,300,000 11,000,000 3,600,000 8,000,000 2,600,000 12,000,000 35,000,000 19,000,000 3,700,000
Mercury µg/kg 19 J 25 J < 8.3 U < 9.4 U < 8.0 U 18 J 40 J 19 J < 9.0 U 18 J 32 J 36 J 22 J 26 J < 8.2 U 78 27 J 17 J < 8.3 U
PCBs, Total µg/kg 23 27,400 1.6 0.19 0.86 2.5 176 997 1.6 35 1,950 35 6,530 36,300 2.2 221 171 19 1.6
Pentachlorobenzene µg/kg < 77 U 3,800 J-< 70 U < 75 U < 67 U < 77 U < 1,400 UJ < 2,000 UJ < 14 U < 67 U < 1,600 UJ < 1,100 UJ < 2,900 UJ 11,000 J-< 14 U < 1,600 U < 150 U < 140 U < 14 U
Thallium µg/kg 120 < 69 U < 52 U 43 J 77 J 110 110 < 64 U < 52 U < 52 U 49 J 130 < 74 U 98 J < 51 U 45 J 210 100 J 64 J
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-4
PRI 5 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Depth
Sample ID
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg
Arsenic µg/kg
Benzo(a)pyrene µg/kg
Bromodichloromethane µg/kg
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg
Chromium µg/kg
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg
Iron µg/kg
Mercury µg/kg
PCBs, Total µg/kg
Pentachlorobenzene µg/kg
Thallium µg/kg
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
5-20 5-21 5-22 5-23 DMA-Sed/W-PRI05-1 DMA-Sed-PRI05-2 DMA-Soil-PRI05 SH-03-A SM-X-A SM-X-B UH-02-A UH-02-B (ALT) UH-03-A UM-07-A UM-09-A UM-X-A
18-Sep-15 24-Sep-19 24-Sep-19 24-Sep-19 03-Oct-12 02-Oct-12 05-Oct-12 28-Sep-16 12-Aug-16 28-Sep-16 29-Sep-16 29-Sep-16 29-Sep-16 27-Sep-16 27-Sep-16 27-Sep-16
NNNN N N N N N N N N N N N N
0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
5-20-SS-01-
091815
5-21-SS-01-
092419
5-22-SS-01-
092419
5-23-SS-01-
092419
DMA-SED-PRI5-1 DMA-SED-PRI5-2 DMA-SOIL-PRI5 SH03A-SD-01-
092816
SMXA-SD-01-
081216
SMXB-SD-01-
092816
UH02A-SS-01-
092916
UH02BALT-SS-
01-092916
UH03A-SS-01-
092916
UM07A-SS-01-
092716
UM09A-SS-01-
092716
UMXA-SS-01-
092716
< 28 U < 870 U < 27 U < 28 U < 80,000 U < 320 U < 29 U
6,900 30,000 3,600 6,800 9,200 8,600 5,300 18,000 5,900 J- 10,000 6,000 4,900 9,900 4,300 18,000 5,000
< 0.44 U < 32 U < 0.47 U < 0.45 U
< 0.51 U < 1.0 U < 0.65 U < 0.70 U
0.038 2.4 0.00024 0.080 0.64 0.0040 0.0046 0.29 0.0018 0.026 0.027 0.0022 0.24 0.0040 7.9 0.0013
0.039 2.4 0.00031 0.081 0.64 0.0046 0.0052 0.29 0.0018 0.027 0.027 0.0023 0.24 0.0040 7.9 0.0014
9,100 25,000 J-3,700 J- 5,500 J-15,200 15,000 12,900 21,000 2,800 J- 13,000 4,700 5,000 15,000 3,500 22,000 3,100
26 10,000 < 2.3 U 58 < 270,000 U < 1,100 U < 100 U 340 3.1 J < 270 U 48 J 36 J 380 33 J 21,000 16 J
< 4.0 U < 120 U < 3.8 U < 4.0 U < 250,000 U < 1,000 U < 93 U
8,900,000 11,000,000 11,800,000 9,250,000 28,000,000 2,000,000 19,000,000 3,800,000 3,600,000 10,000,000 2,600,000 25,000,000 2,600,000
15 J 29 J 22 J 11 J 23 J < 9.5 U 16 J < 9.0 U < 7.8 U 14 J < 8.6 U 12 J < 8.6 U
53 2,000 0.21 38 487 471 5.5 160 1.9 47 37 2.2 280 5.2 5,700 0.92
< 14 U < 430 U < 13 U < 14 U
100 J < 790 U < 600 U 140 100 J 39 J-110 J < 55 U 59 J 250 < 51 U 110 J 63 J
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-5
PRI 6 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID 6-01 6-02 6-03 6-04 6-05 6-06 6-07 6-08 6-09 6-10 6-11 6-12 6-13 6-14 6-15 DMA-Sed/W-PRI06 DMA-Soil-PRI06 SH-01-A SH-02-B UH-01-B UM-06-A
Sample Date 16-Oct-15 28-Oct-15 17-Sep-15 16-Oct-15 28-Oct-15 17-Sep-15 16-Oct-15 28-Oct-15 28-Oct-15 28-Oct-15 28-Oct-15 28-Oct-15 28-Oct-15 16-Sep-15 16-Sep-15 04-Oct-12 02-Oct-12 28-Sep-16 28-Sep-16 29-Sep-16 27-Sep-16
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNN
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 4 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 4 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 5.5 in 0 - 4 in 0 - 4 in 0 - 3 in 0 - 4 in 0 - 3 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID 6-01-SS-01-
101615
6-02-SS-01-
102815
6-03-SS-01-
091715
6-04-SS-01-
101615
6-05-SS-01-
102815
6-06-SS-01-
091715
6-07-SS-01-
101615
6-08-SS-01-
102815
6-09-SS-01-
102815
6-10-SS-01-
102815
6-11-SS-01-
102815
6-12-SS-01-
102815
6-13-SS-01-
102815
6-14-SS-01-
091615
6-15-SS-01-
091615
DMA-SED-PRI6 DMA-SOIL-PRI6 SH01A-SD-01-
092816
SH02B-SD-01-
092816
UH01B-SS-01-
092916
UM06A-SS-01-
092716
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 29 U < 3,500 U < 28 U < 3,000 U < 3,300 U < 28 U < 3,100 U < 4,900 U < 4,200 U < 4,100 U < 3,000 U < 4,400 U < 4,700 U < 27 U < 33 U < 380 U < 520 U
Arsenic µg/kg 4,500 5,300 4,800 6,500 14,000 5,500 5,500 9,100 5,800 7,700 5,200 4,200 5,900 4,900 16,000 30,400 4,800 11,000 18,000 4,700 8,100
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.0023 2.5 0.00030 0.05 2.9 0.011 0.0085 10 3 4.5 1.2 2.6 3.5 0.011 0.3 0.93 0.020 0.079 0.019 0.11 0.2
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.0024 2.5 0.00048 0.05 3 0.011 0.0091 10 3 4.6 1.2 2.6 3.5 0.012 0.3 0.93 0.021 0.08 0.024 0.11 0.2
Chromium µg/kg 14,000 9,000 2,300 14,000 J+ 11,000 16,000 13,000 11,000 9,400 12,000 7,600 8,100 10,000 5,500 37,000 18,600 9,700 12,000 17,000 13,000 16,000
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg 24 14,000 < 2.4 U < 250 U 31,000 30 < 260 U 220,000 37,000 35,000 7,300 58,000 57,000 28 390 13,000 < 1,800 U 370 J < 310 U 390 J 17 J
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 4.1 U < 500 U < 4.0 U < 420 U < 460 U < 4.0 U < 440 U < 700 U < 590 U < 580 U < 430 U < 620 U < 660 U < 3.9 U < 4.6 U < 1,200 U < 1,600 U
Mercury µg/kg 31 J 18 J < 8.2 U 220 J 52 J < 8.8 U 220 J 32 J 19 J 30 J 21 J 16 J 23 J < 8.9 U 28 J 17 J 15 J < 11 U 17 J < 9.6 U 17 J
PCBs, Total µg/kg 1.8 1,560 0.41 48 2,080 16 16 7,470 2,350 3,600 673 2,300 2,970 14 340 546.2 33.78 89 19 58 350
Pentachlorobenzene µg/kg < 15 UJ < 1,800 UJ < 14 U < 1,500 U < 1,600 UJ < 14 U < 1,500 U 3,500 J-< 2,100 UJ < 2,000 UJ < 1,500 UJ < 2,200 UJ < 2,300 UJ < 14 U < 16 U
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-6
PRI 7 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID 7-01 7-02 7-03 7-04 7-05 7-06 7-07 7-08 7-09 7-10 7-11 7-12 7-13
Sample Date 23-Sep-15 24-Sep-15 24-Sep-15 29-Sep-15 24-Sep-15 28-Sep-15 23-Sep-15 23-Sep-15 28-Sep-15 28-Sep-15 21-Sep-15 21-Sep-15 22-Sep-15
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNN
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID 7-01-SS-01-
092315
7-02-SS-01-
092415
7-03-SS-01-
092415
7-04-SS-01-
092915
7-05-SS-01-
092415
7-06-SS-01-
092815
7-07-SS-01-
092315
7-08-SS-01-
092315
7-09-SS-01-
092815
7-10-SS-01-
092815
7-11-SS-01-
092115
7-12-SS-01-
092115
7-13-SS-01-
092215
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 1,600 U < 1,800 U < 320 U < 1,900 U < 310 U < 390 U < 380 U < 32 U < 370 U < 370 U < 39 U < 340 U < 340 U
Arsenic µg/kg 29,000 17,000 13,000 29,000 14,000 12,000 16,000 9,200 22,000 17,000 14,000 18,000 24,000 J-
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 2.5 0.72 0.36 19 0.72 0.15 0.79 0.041 0.3 0.15 0.031 0.35 0.33
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 2.5 0.73 0.38 19 0.72 0.17 0.8 0.042 0.3 0.16 0.032 0.35 0.33
Chromium µg/kg 64,000 20,000 11,000 40,000 15,000 13,000 11,000 7,600 64,000 25,000 15,000 17,000 43,000 J
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg 6,500 1,200 350 87,000 1,600 110 J 3,700 21 210 J 230 J < 3.3 U 170 J 190 J
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 230 U < 260 U < 46 U < 280 U < 44 U < 55 U < 54 U < 4.6 U < 53 U < 53 U < 5.6 U < 49 U < 49 U
Mercury µg/kg 110 40 J 37 J 35 J 33 J 30 J 14 J < 10 U 76 32 J 14 J 25 J 77
PCBs, Total µg/kg 403 91.7 36.5 1,860 300 J 26.3 96.2 24 360 63.1 32 340 400
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-6
PRI 7 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Depth
Sample ID
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg
Arsenic µg/kg
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg
Chromium µg/kg
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg
Mercury µg/kg
PCBs, Total µg/kg
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
7-14 7-15 7-16 7-17 7-22 7-23 7-24 DMA-Sed/W-PRI07-1 DMA-Sed-PRI07-2 SM-06-B
22-Sep-15 22-Sep-15 29-Sep-15 29-Sep-15 02-Oct-19 25-Sep-19 02-Oct-19 09-Oct-12 02-Oct-12 12-Aug-16
NNNNNNN N N N
0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 3 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
7-14-SS-01-
092215
7-15-SS-01-
092215
7-16-SS-01-
092915
7-17-SS-01-
092915
7-22-SS-01-
100219
7-23-SS-01-
092519
7-24-SS-01-
100219
DMA-SED-PRI7-1 DMA-SED-PRI7-2 SM06B-SD-01-
081216
< 380 U < 310 U < 1,100 U < 950 U < 2,000 U < 180 U < 160 U < 410 U < 910 U
14,000 J- 8,300 J- 9,500 5,700 21,000 13,000 12,000 24,100 32,700 5,000 J-
0.51 0.041 0.094 0.0012 0.96 0.36 0.16 0.88 9.4 0.00074
0.52 0.042 0.094 0.0013 0.96 0.36 0.16 0.89 9.4 0.00079
21,000 J 10,000 J 5,800 3,300 30,000 J 16,000 J 25,000 J 29,400 J+36,600 J+1,600 J-
500 93 J < 95 U < 81 U < 170 UJ 280 210 J-8,600 49,000 < 2.7 U
< 55 U < 44 U < 160 U < 140 U < 280 UJ < 26 U < 22 UJ < 1,300 U < 2,900 U
38 J 19 J 21 J 17 J 34 J 26 J < 9.9 U
106 58 40 1.8 930 420 250 678.72 2,382.5 1.1
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-7
PRI 8 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID 8-22 8-23 8-24 8-25 8-26 8-27 8-28 8-29 PRI8-001 PRI8-002 PRI8-003 PRI8-004 PRI8-005A PRI8-005B PRI8-006
Sample Date 10-Oct-19 10-Oct-19 09-Oct-19 13-Jan-20 13-Jan-20 13-Jan-20 14-Jan-20 14-Jan-20 17-Dec-13 17-Dec-13 21-May-19 06-Nov-19 06-Nov-19 21-May-19 06-Nov-19
Sample Type NNNNNNNN N N NNNNN
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID 8-22-SS-01-
101019
8-23-SS-01-
101019
8-24-SS-01-
100919
8-25-SS-01-
011320
8-26-SS-01-
011320
8-27-SS-01-
011320
8-28-SS-01-
011420
8-29-SS-01-
011420
PRI8-001-SS01-
121713
PRI8-002-SS01-
121713
PRI8-003-SS-
01-052119
PRI8-004-SS-
01-110619
PRI8-005A-SS-
01-110619
PRI8-005B-SS-
01-052119
PRI8-006-SS-
01-110619
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 30 U < 31 U < 31 UJ < 30 U
Arsenic µg/kg 9,100 6,700 7,200 8,500 8,000 4,000 4,900 9,800 5,900 J 28,000 J 8,600 7,300 J
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.0042 0.0041 0.031 0.55 0.17 0.070 0.78 0.00071 0.00031 0.000078 0.0071 0.00066 0.031 0.0081 0.0040
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.012 0.013 0.040 0.57 0.18 0.078 0.83 0.0092 0.00066 0.00033 0.0073 0.0086 0.041 0.0092 0.012
Chromium µg/kg 23,000 17,000 20,000 8,800 12,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 16,000 J 9,300 J 19,000 19,000 J
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg < 2.9 UJ < 3.0 UJ 160 J- 2,000 J 1,100 J 450 < 1,600 U < 2.8 U < 2.5 U < 2.6 U 34 < 24 UJ < 30 UJ 39 < 26 UJ
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 4.2 U < 4.4 U < 4.4 U < 4.3 U
Mercury µg/kg 22 J < 11 U < 12 U < 14 U 15 J 10 J < 9.7 U 16 J < 9.3 U 14 J < 10 U 21 J
PCBs, Total µg/kg 2.56 3.60 43.8 362 267 105 783 0.821 0.97 0.76 10 1.31 35.8 16 8.39
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-7
PRI 8 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Depth
Sample ID
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg
Arsenic µg/kg
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg
Chromium µg/kg
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg
Mercury µg/kg
PCBs, Total µg/kg
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
PRI8-007 PRI8-008 PRI8-009 PRI8-011 PRI8-012 PRI8-013 SL-09-A TTGP-A TTGP-A-OW TTGP-B TTGP-B-OW TTGP-C
18-Dec-13 18-Dec-13 21-May-19 17-Dec-13 17-Dec-13 18-Dec-13 06-Nov-19 25-Nov-19 25-Nov-19 18-Dec-19 25-Nov-19 18-Dec-19
NNNNNNNNNNNN
0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
PRI8-007-SS01-
121813
PRI8-008-SS01-
121813
PRI8-009-SS-
01-052119
PRI8-011-SS01-
121713
PRI8-012-SS01-
121713
PRI8-013-SS01-
121813
SL-09-A-SS-01-
110619
TTGP-A-SS-01-
112519
TTGP-A-OW-
SS-01-112519
TTGP-B-SS-
01-121819
TTGP-B-OW-
SS-01-112519
TTGP-C-SS-01-
121819
< 29 U < 30 U < 30 U < 28 U < 27 U < 31 U
5,600 4,600 6,800 4800 5,800 5,200 29,000 J 6,900 J- 4,400 J- 9,600 J 8,000 J- 20,000 J
0.0051 0.00031 0.013 0.0018 0.014 0.00031 0.0029 0.16 1.9 0.16 0.49 0.71
0.0052 0.00059 0.013 0.0021 0.014 0.00058 0.012 0.18 2.0 0.17 0.51 0.75
7,800 15,000 15,000 6200 5,700 15,000 22,000 J 66,000 J+ 51,000 J+ 16,000 79,000 J+ 17,000
3.1 J < 2.6 U 51 2.5 J 29 < 2.6 U < 27 UJ 1,500 J- 18,000 J- 2,200 J 3,600 8,100
< 4.2 U < 4.3 U < 4.3 U < 4 U < 3.9 U < 4.4 U
15 J < 11 U < 9.8 U 15 J < 9.7 U 9.5 J < 12 U 13 J < 12 U 21 J < 13 U < 16 U
8.3 0.96 19 3.5 20 1 0.746 306 836 58.7 271 821
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-8
PRI 9 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID DMA-Smut-PRI09-1 DMA-Smut-PRI09-2 PRI9-001 PRI9-002 PRI9-003 PRI9-004 PRI9-005 PRI9-006 PRI9-007 PRI9-008 PRI9-009 PRI9-010 PRI9-011 PRI9-012 PRI9-013 PRI9-014
Sample Date 01-Oct-12 01-Oct-12 06-Jan-14 06-Jan-14 06-Jan-14 07-Jan-14 07-Jan-14 07-Jan-14 07-Jan-14 07-Jan-14 07-Jan-14 07-Jan-14 06-Jan-14 20-Dec-13 20-Dec-13 20-Dec-13
Sample Type N N NNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID DMA-SMUT-PRI09-1 DMA-SMUT-PRI09-2
PRI9-001-SS01-
010614
PRI9-002-SS01-
010614
PRI9-003-SS01-
010614
PRI9-004-SS01-
010714
PRI9-005-SS01-
010714
PRI9-006-SS01-
010714
PRI9-007-SS01-
010714
PRI9-008-SS01-
010714
PRI9-009-SS01-
010714
PRI9-010-SS01-
010714
PRI9-011-SS01-
010614
PRI9-012-SS01-
122013
PRI9-013-SS01-
122013
PRI9-014-SS01-
122013
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 34 U < 32 U < 35 U < 42 U < 41 U < 32 U < 39 U < 40 U < 32 U < 39 U < 44 U < 35 U < 36 U < 32 U < 39 U < 42 U
Arsenic µg/kg 2,000 J < 1,800 U 340 1,100 < 510 U 1,800 1,200 < 470 U 4,100 1,300 1,400 2,700 690 5,600 1,100 10,000
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.00060 0.000053 0.000026 0.0057 0.00049 0.000095 0.0047 0.00014 0.0023 0.092 0.06 0.06 0.0042 0.0018 0.034 0.0077
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.00077 0.00021 0.00014 0.0058 0.00063 0.00021 0.0051 0.00026 0.0028 0.092 0.06 0.06 0.0043 0.0019 0.034 0.0094
Chromium µg/kg 7,800 J+11,800 7,500 8,000 34,000 4,100 15,000 11,000 11,000 22,000 13,000 14,000 4,100 15,000 59,000 22,000
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg < 120 U < 110 U < 3 U 39 < 3.5 U < 2.7 U < 3.3 U < 3.4 U 18 J 75 17 J 48 9.4 J 12 J 320 J 18 J
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 110 U < 100 U < 5 U < 5.9 U < 5.9 U < 4.5 U < 5.6 U < 5.7 U < 4.5 U < 5.5 U < 6.3 U < 5 U < 5.2 U < 4.6 U < 5.6 U < 5.9 U
Manganese µg/kg 262,000 249,000 1,200,000 1,800,000 7,300,000 52,000 260,000 170,000 290,000 290,000 200,000 110,000 710,000 390,000 670,000 570,000
Mercury µg/kg < 11 U < 10 U 73 J-< 13 UJ < 14 UJ < 11 UJ 50 J-73 J-13 J-< 13 UJ 48 J-160 J-< 10 UJ < 10 U < 14 U < 15 U
PCBs, Total µg/kg 3.64 0.1137 0.4 7 0.59 0.47 19 0.36 4.9 79 14 66 10 4.9 37 71
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-9
PRI 10 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI10-001 PRI10-002 PRI10-003 PRI10-004 PRI10-005 PRI10-006 PRI10-007 PRI10-008 PRI10-009 PRI10-010 PRI10-011 PRI10-012 PRI10-013 PRI10-014
Sample Date 12-Dec-13 12-Dec-13 12-Dec-13 12-Dec-13 13-Dec-13 13-Dec-13 13-Dec-13 17-Dec-13 13-Dec-13 17-Dec-13 17-Dec-13 16-Dec-13 12-Dec-13 16-Dec-13
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID PRI10-001-SS01-
121213
PRI10-002-SS01-
121213
PRI10-003-SS01-
121213
PRI10-004-SS01-
121213
PRI10-005-SS01-
121313
PRI10-006-SS01-
121313
PRI10-007-SS01-
121313
PRI10-008-SS01-
121713
PRI10-009-SS01-
121313
PRI10-010-SS01-
121713
PRI10-011-SS01-
121713
PRI10-012-SS01-
121613
PRI10-013-SS01-
121213
PRI10-014-SS01-
121613
Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 30 U < 32 U < 30 U < 32 U < 31 U < 33 U < 32 U < 31 U < 31 U < 33 U < 33 U < 30 U < 32 U < 31 U
Arsenic µg/kg 8,100 13,000 9,200 9,700 6,900 9,500 9,900 7,200 7,300 9,500 8,600 6,300 6,200 6,200
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.000030 0.000020 0.000027 0.0024 0.00033 0.00017 0.00074 0.00038 0.00032 0.000061 0.000032 0.00075 0.00018 0.00058
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.00018 0.0014 0.00019 0.0025 0.00044 0.00037 0.0015 0.00066 0.00039 0.00019 0.00019 0.0011 0.00073 0.00082
Chromium µg/kg 7,300 17,000 16,000 15,000 6,600 12,000 18,000 14,000 11,000 17,000 17,000 10,000 14,000 11,000
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg < 2.5 U < 2.7 U < 2.5 U < 2.7 U < 2.6 U < 2.8 U < 2.7 U < 2.6 U < 2.6 U < 2.8 U < 2.8 U 7.7 J < 2.7 U < 2.6 U
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 4.2 U < 4.6 U < 4.2 U < 4.5 U < 4.4 U < 4.7 U < 4.5 U < 4.4 U < 4.4 U < 4.7 U < 4.6 U < 4.3 U < 4.6 U < 4.4 U
Mercury µg/kg < 10 U 20 J < 9.1 U 17 J 11 J 22 J 20 J < 11 U < 11 U 14 J < 11 U < 9.2 U 20 J < 11 U
PCBs, Total µg/kg 0.095 J 0.12 J 0.038 J 3.1 0.31 0.31 3 0.75 0.33 0.16 J 0.39 1.3 1.8 0.43
See Table C-24 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-10
PRI 11 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI11-001 PRI11-002 PRI11-003 PRI11-004 PRI11-005 PRI11-006 PRI11-007 PRI11-008 PRI11-009 PRI11-010 PRI11-011 PRI11-012 PRI11-013 PRI11-014
Sample Date 07-May-14 07-May-14 06-May-14 07-May-14 07-May-14 07-May-14 07-May-14 07-May-14 07-May-14 07-May-14 06-May-14 06-May-14 06-May-14 06-May-14
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Depth 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in
Sample ID PRI11-001-SS01-
050714
PRI11-002-SS01-
050714
PRI11-003-SS01-
050614
PRI11-004-SS01-
050714
PRI11-005-SS01-
050714
PRI11-006-SS01-
050714
PRI11-007-SS01-
050714
PRI11-008-SS01-
050714
PRI11-009-SS01-
050714
PRI11-010-SS01-
050714
PRI11-011-SS01-
050614
PRI11-012-SS01-
050614
PRI11-013-SS01-
050614
PRI11-014-SS01-
050614
Analyte Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 29 U < 29 U < 28 U < 28 U < 30 U < 31 U < 29 U < 30 U < 29 U < 30 U < 27 U < 27 U < 29 U < 30 U
Arsenic µg/kg 4,500 4,600 4,500 4,000 4,400 11,000 6,100 4,800 4,900 4,300 7,000 7,500 6,200 23,000
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.00068 0.0015 0.017 0.0051 0.0052 0.00052 0.0011 0.00011 0.00074 0.00070 0.0023 0.0054 0.0015 0.0016
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.0011 0.0020 0.018 0.0055 0.0060 0.0012 0.0012 0.00024 0.00085 0.00087 0.0026 0.0060 0.0018 0.0019
Chromium µg/kg 20,000 8,500 9,300 6,200 7,800 14,000 13,000 7,800 7,000 5,900 17,000 15,000 12,000 21,000
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg < 2.4 U 3.5 J 67 < 2.4 U 5.9 J < 2.6 U < 2.5 U 4.5 J 2.8 J < 2.5 U 6.2 J 58 10 J < 2.5 U
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 4.1 U < 4.1 UJ < 3.9 U < 4 U < 4.2 U < 4.3 U < 4.2 U < 4.3 U < 4.1 U < 4.2 U < 3.9 U < 3.9 U < 4.1 U < 4.2 U
Mercury µg/kg 16 J < 20 U 12 J < 12 U < 10 U 92 < 9.3 U 21 J 16 J < 9.5 U 27 J < 9.0 U < 19 U < 13 U
PCBs, Total µg/kg 0.39 2.5 73 4.6 29 3.6 0.87 0.21 J 0.82 0.91 2.6 6.9 1.3 1.1
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-11
PRI 12 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI12-001 PRI12-002 PRI12-003 PRI12-004 PRI12-005 PRI12-006 PRI12-007 PRI12-008 PRI12-009 PRI12-010 PRI12-011 PRI12-012 PRI12-013 PRI12-014
Sample Date 10-Dec-13 10-Dec-13 10-Dec-13 10-Dec-13 10-Dec-13 10-Dec-13 10-Dec-13 10-Dec-13 10-Dec-13 10-Dec-13 11-Dec-13 12-Dec-13 12-Dec-13 12-Dec-13
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID PRI12-001-SS01-
121013
PRI12-002-SS01-
121013
PRI12-003-SS01-
121013
PRI12-004-SS01-
121013
PRI12-005-SS01-
121013
PRI12-006-SS01-
121013
PRI12-007-SS01-
121013
PRI12-008-SS01-
121013
PRI12-009-SS01-
121013
PRI12-010-SS01-
121013
PRI12-011-SS01-
121113
PRI12-012-SS01-
121213
PRI12-013-SS01-
121213
PRI12-014-SS01-
121213
Analyte Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 27 UJ < 29 UJ < 29 UJ < 28 UJ < 28 UJ < 34 UJ < 29 UJ < 29 UJ < 29 UJ < 38 UJ < 30 U < 29 U < 29 U < 28 U
Arsenic µg/kg 3,700 3,800 5,300 4,000 5,400 2,700 5,300 5,200 5,400 4,900 5,800 4,300 5,900 4,700
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.0074 0.019 0.028 0.15 0.038 0.012 0.0083 0.0048 0.09 0.0058 0.0072 0.0024 0.0037 0.00081
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.0075 0.019 0.029 0.15 0.038 0.013 0.0085 0.0050 0.091 0.0060 0.0074 0.0025 0.0040 0.00088
Chromium µg/kg 4,800 6,800 10,000 9,000 8,900 5,100 12,000 13,000 6,200 1,100 3,900 9,100 9,800 5,500
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg 16 J-28 J-59 J-48 J-25 J-13 J-9 J-7.4 J-54 J-< 3.2 UJ < 2.6 U 7.2 J 15 J 15 J
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 3.9 UJ < 4.1 UJ < 4.2 UJ < 4 UJ < 4 UJ < 4.8 UJ < 4.2 UJ < 4.2 UJ < 4.1 UJ < 5.5 UJ < 4.3 U < 4.1 U < 4.1 U < 4 U
Mercury µg/kg 11 J-15 J-18 J-56 J-67 J-110 J-22 J-24 J-20 J-< 12 UJ < 10 U 12 J 20 J < 9.1 U
PCBs, Total µg/kg 9.8 24 43 140 36 9.9 8.7 4.6 52 4.4 2.1 2.2 3.9 0.75
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-12
PRI 13 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID IC-1 IC-1OB IC-2 IC-2OB IC-3 IC-3OB IC-4 IC-4OB SL-11-A SL-11-A-OB SL-11-B SL-11-B-OB IC-2 IC-2OB IC-3 IC-3OB IC-4 IC-4OB PRI13-001 PRI13-002
Sample Date 29-Oct-19 29-Oct-19 31-Oct-19 29-Oct-19 31-Oct-19 05-Nov-19 31-Oct-19 31-Oct-19 08-Aug-16 05-Nov-19 08-Aug-16 05-Nov-19 31-Oct-19 29-Oct-19 31-Oct-19 05-Nov-19 31-Oct-19 31-Oct-19 06-Dec-13 07-Dec-13
Sample Type N N N N N N N N N N N N NNNNNN N N
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID IC-1-SS-
01-102919
IC-1OB-SS-
01-102919
IC-2-SS-
01-103119
IC-2OB-SS-
01-102919
IC-3-SS-01-
103119
IC-3OB-SS-
01-110519
IC-4-SS-01-
103119
IC-4OB-SS-
01-103119
SL11A-SD-
01-080816
SL-11-A-OB-
SS-01-
SL11B-SD-
01-080816
SL-11-B-OB-
SS-01-110519
IC-2-SS-01-
103119
IC-2OB-SS-
01-102919
IC-3-SS-01-
103119
IC-3OB-SS-
01-110519
IC-4-SS-01-
103119
IC-4OB-SS-
01-103119
PRI13-001-
SS01-120613
PRI13-002-
SS01-120713
Analyte Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 35 UJ < 34 UJ
Arsenic µg/kg 7,500 J- 7,800 J- 7,700 11,000 J-10,000 10,000 3,300 9,900 J- 9,000 5,500 J- 8,200 7,700 11,000 J- 10,000 10,000 3,300 20,000 8,900
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.0076 0.0024 0.37 0.039 0.0040 0.0011 0.00047 < 0.22 U 0.88 0.038 0.12 0.072 0.37 0.039 0.0040 0.0011 0.00047 < 0.22 U 0.0023 0.0034
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.016 0.010 0.39 0.047 0.013 0.0089 0.0088 < 0.0072 U 0.88 0.046 0.12 0.079 0.39 0.047 0.013 0.0089 0.0088 < 0.0072 U 0.0023 0.0037
Chromium µg/kg 5,900 14,000 12,000 6,200 8,000 9,600 2,300 15,000 J- 10,000 4,400 J- 6,300 12,000 6,200 8,000 9,600 2,300 12,000 4,900
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg < 3.0 UJ < 2.8 UJ 31 J-< 2.5 U < 3.0 U < 2.6 U < 2.9 U 16 J 32 J- 70 J 140 J 31 J-< 2.5 U < 3.0 U < 2.6 U < 2.9 U < 3 UJ < 2.9 UJ
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 5 UJ < 4.9 UJ
Mercury µg/kg 26 J < 10 U < 11 UJ < 11 UJ
PCBs, Total µg/kg 3.02 1.83 391 22.4 2.26 0.605 0.234 J 0.213 J 330 28.3 52 48.8 391 22.4 2.26 0.605 0.234 J 0.213 J 1.6 3
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-12
PRI 13 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Depth
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg
Arsenic µg/kg
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg
Chromium µg/kg
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg
Mercury µg/kg
PCBs, Total µg/kg
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
PRI13-003 PRI13-004 PRI13-005 PRI13-006 PRI13-007 PRI13-008 PRI13-009 PRI13-010 PRI13-011 PRI13-012 PRI13-013 PRI13-014 SL-10-A SL-10-B SL-11-A SL-11-A-OB SL-11-B SL-11-B-OB
06-Dec-13 07-Dec-13 07-Dec-13 07-Dec-13 07-Dec-13 06-Dec-13 06-Dec-13 05-Dec-13 05-Dec-13 06-Dec-13 05-Dec-13 05-Dec-13 12-Aug-16 12-Aug-16 08-Aug-16 05-Nov-19 08-Aug-16 05-Nov-19
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
PRI13-003-
SS01-120613
PRI13-004-
SS01-120713
PRI13-005-
SS01-120713
PRI13-006-
SS01-120713
PRI13-007-
SS01-120713
PRI13-008-
SS01-120613
PRI13-009-
SS01-120613
PRI13-010-
SS01-120513
PRI13-011-
SS01-120513
PRI13-012-
SS01-120613
PRI13-013-
SS01-120513
PRI13-014-
SS01-120513
SL10A-SD-
01-081216
SL10B-SD-
01-081216
SL11A-SD-
01-080816
SL-11-A-OB-
SS-01-110519
SL11B-SD-
01-080816
SL-11-B-OB-
SS-01-110519
< 36 U < 37 UJ < 36 UJ < 29 UJ < 33 UJ < 29 U < 28 U < 35 U < 28 U < 74 U < 30 U < 32 U
20,000 11,000 6,500 6,600 7,100 7,900 7,300 8,400 6,700 12,000 6,600 8,500 5,000 J- 7,500 J- 9,900 J- 9,000 5,500 J- 8,200
0.0025 0.017 0.00083 0.00035 0.00041 0.0073 0.00066 0.00093 0.00011 0.0013 0.0018 0.0067 0.0086 0.014 0.88 0.038 0.12 0.072
0.0026 0.017 0.00090 0.00041 0.00055 0.0074 0.00080 0.0010 0.00042 0.0018 0.0022 0.0070 0.0087 0.015 0.88 0.046 0.12 0.079
18,000 13,000 14,000 2,300 8,800 4,500 2,600 16,000 1,800 4,000 3,500 3,800 4,600 J- 3,900 J- 15,000 J- 10,000 4,400 J- 6,300
3.1 J < 3.1 UJ < 3.1 UJ < 2.4 UJ < 2.8 UJ 32 < 2.4 U < 2.9 U 3.4 J < 6.2 U < 2.5 U < 2.7 U < 3.4 U < 3.2 U 16 J 32 J- 70 J 140 J
< 5.1 U < 5.2 UJ < 5.1 UJ < 4.1 UJ < 4.7 UJ < 4.1 U < 4 U < 5 U < 3.9 U < 10 U < 4.2 U < 4.5 U
13 J- 13 J- 21 J-< 8.5 UJ 11 J-< 10 UJ < 9.5 UJ 17 J-< 8.0 UJ < 25 UJ < 9.8 UJ 12 J- 12 J < 11 U 26 J < 10 U
2.3 13 0.48 0.28 0.26 4.3 0.54 0.62 0.4 0.52 J 1.4 4.2 8.3 14 330 28.3 52 48.8
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-13
PRI 14 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID 14-16 14-17 14-18 14-19 14-20 14-21 14-22 14-23 14-24 14-25 14-26 14-27 14-28 14-29 14-30 14-31 14-32 14-33 14-34 14-35 14-36 14-37 DMA-Sed/W-PRI14
Sample Date 22-May-19 22-May-19 22-May-19 19-Feb-19 20-Feb-19 19-Feb-19 20-Feb-19 20-Feb-19 20-Feb-19 15-Oct-19 16-Oct-19 16-Oct-19 16-Oct-19 28-Oct-19 28-Oct-19 15-Oct-19 15-Oct-19 15-Oct-19 15-Oct-19 08-Oct-19 08-Oct-19 08-Oct-19 10-Oct-12
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N
Depth 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID 14-16-SS-
01-052219
14-17-SS-
01-052219
14-18-SS-
01-052219
14-19-SS-
01-021919
14-20-SS-
01-022019
14-21-SS-
01-021919
14-22-SS-
01-022019
14-23-SS-
01-022019
14-24-SS-
01-022019
14-25-SS-
01-101519
14-26-SS-
01-101619
14-27-SS-
01-101619
14-28-SS-
01-101619
14-29-SS-
01-102819
14-30-SS-
01-102819
14-31-SS-
01-101519
14-32-SS-
01-101519
14-33-SS-
01-101519
14-34-SS-
01-101519
14-35-SS-
01-100819
14-36-SS-
01-100819
14-37-SS-
01-100819
DMA-SED-PRI14
Analyte Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 56 UJ < 38 U < 41 U < 44 UJ < 47 U < 36 UJ < 45 U < 38 U < 36 UJ < 330 U
Arsenic µg/kg 12,000
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.0024 0.0024 0.017 0.19 0.27 0.0055 0.18 0.040 0.00036 0.00098 0.00025 0.00054 0.000055 0.000089 0.00013 0.00021 0.00060 0.00024 0.00087 0.0014 0.0050 0.00085 0.0077
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.0050 0.0026 0.017 0.19 0.27 0.0056 0.18 0.040 0.0013 0.0081 0.0097 0.0090 0.010 0.0074 0.0077 0.0079 0.0082 0.0079 0.0074 0.0086 0.013 0.0086 0.0080
Chromium µg/kg 2,400 J
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg < 4.8 UJ < 3.3 U 31 360 J- 1,200 < 3.0 UJ 460 J < 3.2 U < 3.1 UJ < 12 U < 3.1 UJ < 2.9 UJ < 3.5 UJ < 2.8 U < 2.6 U < 25 U < 53 U < 23 U < 23 U < 24 U < 26 U < 14 U < 1,100 U
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 8.0 UJ < 5.5 U < 5.9 U < 6.3 UJ < 6.7 U < 5.1 UJ < 6.4 U < 5.4 U < 5.1 UJ < 1,000 U
Mercury µg/kg 29 J
PCBs, Total µg/kg 16 8.6 41 290 490 11 280 55 1.1 1.18 3.11 1.82 0.882 0.444 0.395 0.190 J 0.904 0.447 0.841 1.41 13.1 1.06 5.304
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-13
PRI 14 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Depth
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg
Arsenic µg/kg
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg
Chromium µg/kg
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg
Mercury µg/kg
PCBs, Total µg/kg
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
PRI14-001 PRI14-002 PRI14-003 PRI14-004 PRI14-005 PRI14-006 PRI14-007 PRI14-008 PRI14-009 PRI14-010 PRI14-011 PRI14-012 PRI14-013 PRI14-014 PRI14-015 PRI14-CANALS-1 SH-04-A SM-08-A SM-08-B
02-Dec-13 03-Dec-13 04-Dec-13 04-Dec-13 11-Dec-13 03-Dec-13 03-Dec-13 02-Dec-13 02-Dec-13 02-Dec-13 02-Dec-13 25-Nov-13 25-Nov-13 25-Nov-13 25-Nov-13 09-Oct-19 28-Sep-16 12-Aug-16 12-Aug-16
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N NNN
0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
PRI14-001-
SS01-120213
PRI14-002-
SS01-120313
PRI14-003-
SS01-120413
PRI14-004-
SS01-120413
PRI14-005-
SS01-121113
PRI14-006-
SS01-120313
PRI14-007-
SS01-120313
PRI14-008-
SS01-120213
PRI14-009-
SS01-120213
PRI14-010-
SS01-120213
PRI14-011-
SS01-120213
PRI14-012-
SS01-112513
PRI14-013-
SS01-112513
PRI14-014-
SS01-112513
PRI14-015-
SS01-112513
PRI14-CANALS-
1-SS-01-100919
SH04A-SD-
01-092816
SM08A-SD-
01-081216
SM08B-SD-
01-081216
< 29 UJ < 33 U < 52 U < 41 U < 48 UJ < 220 U < 39 U < 36 U < 26 U < 30 U < 30 U < 29 U < 34 U < 30 U < 30 U
5,600 14,000 15,000 17,000 11,000 11,000 12,000 13,000 4,200 8,300 9,600 9,600 1,600 11,000 8,300 9,900 10,000 7,400 J- 5,800 J-
0.018 0.00056 0.017 0.0024 0.27 0.91 0.11 0.0060 0.0015 0.032 0.01 0.0032 0.0013 0.0083 0.00064 0.00094 0.35 0.015 0.0060
0.018 0.00071 0.017 0.0025 0.27 0.91 0.11 0.0060 0.0016 0.032 0.01 0.0035 0.0017 0.0085 0.00090 0.0093 0.35 0.015 0.0061
7,700 18,000 12,000 11,000 9,000 11,000 15,000 12,000 2,300 5,100 9,300 5,800 990 3,900 3,200 6,800 4,000 2,100 J- 1,900 J-
71 J-< 2.8 U < 4.4 U < 3.4 U 580 J 9,700 120 26 12 J 140 21 22 12 J < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 14 U 730 < 2.9 U 42 J
< 4.1 UJ < 4.7 U < 7.4 U < 5.8 U < 6.8 UJ < 6.3 U < 5.6 U < 5.1 U < 3.7 U < 4.3 U < 4.3 U < 4.2 U < 4.8 U < 4.2 U < 4.2 U
< 9.2 U 12 J < 16 U 25 J 54 J < 14 U 22 J 12 J < 8.7 U 13 J < 11 U < 9.7 U < 11 U < 9.9 U < 10 U < 10 U < 11 U < 9.6 U
11 1.7 22 7.2 370 760 110 18 1.6 38 11 6.7 7.1 5.6 0.56 1.87 610 16 11
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-14
PRI 15 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID DMA-Soil-PRI15 PRI15-001 PRI15-002 PRI15-003 PRI15-004 PRI15-005 PRI15-006 PRI15-007 PRI15-008 PRI15-009 PRI15-010 PRI15-011 PRI15-012 PRI15-013 PRI15-014 UL-10-B UL-10-C UL-10-D UL-10-E UL-10-G (ALT) UM-05-A
Sample Date 08-Oct-12 23-Nov-13 24-Nov-13 23-Nov-13 24-Nov-13 22-Nov-13 23-Nov-13 22-Nov-13 13-Jan-14 23-Nov-13 24-Nov-13 23-Nov-13 24-Nov-13 24-Nov-13 24-Nov-13 27-Sep-16 26-Sep-16 26-Sep-16 26-Sep-16 26-Sep-16 27-Sep-16
Sample Type N NNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Depth 0 - 4.5 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in 0 - 6 in
Sample ID DMA-SOIL-
PRI15
PRI15-001-
SS01-112313
PRI15-002-
SS01-112413
PRI15-003-
SS01-112313
PRI15-004-
SS01-112413
PRI15-005-
SS01-112213
PRI15-006-
SS01-112313
PRI15-007-
SS01-112213
PRI15-008-
SS01-011314
PRI15-009-
SS01-112313
PRI15-010-
SS01-112413
PRI15-011-
SS01-112313
PRI15-012-
SS01-112413
PRI15-013-
SS01-112413
PRI15-014-
SS01-112413
UL10B-SS-
01-092716
UL10C-SS-
01-092616
UL10D-SS-
01-092616
UL10E-SS-
01-092616
UL10G-SS-01-
092616
UM05A-SS-
01-092716
Analyte Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 25 U < 29 U < 27 U < 29 U < 31 U < 27 U < 27 U < 27 U < 29 U < 29 U < 28 U < 28 U < 28 U < 28 U < 28 U
Arsenic µg/kg 3,000 5,300 4,200 4,900 6,800 3,400 4,200 4,300 3,000 4,800 6,000 4,700 5,100 5,000 5,100 3,800 3,800 4,100 4,100 3,600 6,700
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.000075 0.00030 0.00025 0.00035 0.0052 0.00028 0.0024 0.00046 0.00031 0.0018 0.00038 0.00039 0.0010 0.000094 0.00020 0.00055 0.00024 0.00021 0.00043 0.00038 0.0015
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.00016 0.00038 0.00059 0.00042 0.0055 0.00045 0.0025 0.00053 0.00059 0.0021 0.00073 0.00073 0.0012 0.00048 0.00052 0.00058 0.00030 0.00030 0.00054 0.00042 0.0016
Chromium µg/kg 9,500 J+ 15,000 5,500 13,000 11,000 7,600 12,000 11,000 7,700 17,000 12,000 14,000 13,000 12,000 14,000 7,600 9,900 9,300 12,000 8,800 17,000
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg < 87 U < 2.4 U < 2.3 U < 2.4 U 35 < 2.3 UJ 3 J < 2.3 UJ < 2.5 U 3.2 J < 2.4 U < 2.4 U < 2.4 U < 2.3 U < 2.4 U < 2.4 U < 2.4 U < 2.4 U < 2.5 U < 2.4 U 10 J
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 80 U < 4.1 U < 3.9 U < 4.1 U < 4.3 U < 3.9 UJ < 3.8 U < 3.9 UJ < 4.1 U < 4.1 U < 4 U < 4 U < 4 U < 3.9 U < 4 U
Mercury µg/kg 13 J 10 J 8.8 J 30 J 41 J 16 J < 8.5 U 20 J 14 J 20 J < 8.9 U 12 J 25 J 14 J 10 J 13 J 20 J 16 J 15 J 15 J 19 J
PCBs, Total µg/kg 0.32 0.38 0.68 0.51 24 0.42 2.4 0.84 0.54 2.5 0.86 0.72 0.6 0.45 0.46 0.71 0.4 0.43 0.4 0.46 1.5
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-15
PRI 16 Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI16-001 PRI16-002 PRI16-003 PRI16-004 PRI16-005 PRI16-006 PRI16-007 PRI16-008 PRI16-009 PRI16-010 PRI16-011 PRI16-012 PRI16-013 PRI16-014
Sample Date 22-Nov-13 22-Nov-13 20-Nov-13 20-Nov-13 20-Nov-13 19-Nov-13 19-Nov-13 20-Nov-13 19-Nov-13 19-Nov-13 23-Nov-13 19-Nov-13 22-Nov-13 21-Nov-13
Sample Type N N N NNNNNNNNNNN
Depth 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in
Sample ID PRI16-001-
SS01-112213
PRI16-002-
SS01-112213
PRI16-003-
SS01-112013
PRI16-004-
SS01-112013
PRI16-005-
SS01-112013
PRI16-006-
SS01-111913
PRI16-007-
SS01-111913
PRI16-008-
SS01-112013
PRI16-009-
SS01-111913
PRI16-010-
SS01-111913
PRI16-011-
SS01-112313
PRI16-012-
SS01-111913
PRI16-013-
SS01-112213
PRI16-014-
SS01-112113
Analyte Unit
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/kg < 27 U < 27 U < 29 U < 28 U < 28 U < 26 U < 28 U < 27 U < 28 U < 28 U < 29 U < 32 U < 30 U < 30 U
Arsenic µg/kg 3,600 5,300 5,800 6,100 2,500 2,900 7,100 5,100 5,300 6,900 5,200 7,200 5,400 4,000
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=0), Mammals µg/kg 0.00016 0.00019 0.00030 0.00031 0.000054 0.00018 0.00061 0.00075 0.00044 0.00063 0.00024 0.00021 0.00024 0.00018
Calculated Dioxin/Furan TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammals µg/kg 0.00024 0.00027 0.00035 0.00038 0.00010 0.00021 0.00069 0.00080 0.00055 0.00070 0.00053 0.00027 0.00031 0.00031
Chromium µg/kg 8,700 12,000 13,000 12,000 6,200 5,000 18,000 11,000 11,000 12,000 13,000 13,000 12,000 8,900
Hexachlorobenzene µg/kg < 2.3 UJ < 2.2 UJ < 2.4 U < 2.3 U < 2.3 U < 2.2 U < 2.4 U < 2.3 U < 2.4 U < 2.3 U < 2.4 U < 2.7 U < 2.5 UJ < 2.5 UJ
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/kg < 3.9 UJ < 3.8 UJ < 4.1 U < 3.9 U < 3.9 U < 3.7 U < 4 U < 3.9 U < 4 U < 3.9 U < 4.1 U < 4.6 U < 4.2 UJ < 4.2 UJ
Mercury µg/kg 15 J 27 J 38 J 29 J 10 J < 8.4 U 24 J 24 J 43 J 21 J 27 J 38 J 21 J 24 J
PCBs, Total µg/kg 0.34 0.24 0.65 0.56 0.13 J 0.29 1 1 1.2 0.96 0.29 0.48 0.43 0.52
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-16
Lakebed Background Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID LBB-01 LBB-03 LBB-05 LBB-07 LBB-09 LBB-10 LBN-02 LBN-04 LBN-06 LBN-08 LBN-09 LBN-10 LBSE-01 LBSE-03 LBSE-05 LBSE-09 LBSE-10
Sample Date 09-Oct-15 09-Oct-15 09-Oct-15 08-Oct-15 08-Oct-15 08-Oct-15 02-Oct-15 02-Oct-15 05-Oct-15 05-Oct-15 05-Oct-15 05-Oct-15 06-Oct-15 06-Oct-15 06-Oct-15 07-Oct-15 07-Oct-15
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNN N NNNNN
Depth 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in
Sample ID LBB-1-SS-01-
100915
LBB-3-SS-01-
100915
LBB-5-SS-01-
100915
LBB-7-SS-01-
100815
LBB-9-SS-01-
100815
LBB-10-SS-01-
100815
LBN-2-SS-01-
100215
LBN-4-SS-01-
100215
LBN-6-SS-01-
100515
LBN-8-SS-01-
100515
LBN-9-SS-01-
100515
LBN-10-SS-01-
100515
LBSE-1-SS-01-
100615
LBSE-3-SS-01-
100615
LBSE-5-SS-01-
100615
LBSE-9-SS-01-
100715
LBSE-10-SS-
01-100715
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian pg/g 1 0.32 0.51 0.048 0.012 0.042 0.29 0.73 0.29 0.92 0.59 0.45 0.061 0.14 2.3 0.46 2.8
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian pg/g 1.1 0.39 0.66 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.43 0.79 0.42 0.99 0.87 0.64 0.13 0.2 2.3 0.52 2.9
Total PCBs mg/kg 0.00037 0.00016 0.00039 0.00015 0.00015 0.00014 0.00075 0.00077 0.00034 0.00079 0.0011 0.00073 0.00014 0.00011 0.0024 0.00026 0.0019
Total Arsenic mg/kg 7.7 7.7 7 7 5.3 4.9 23 14 12 14 16 15 11 7.1 9.1 8.2 8.5
Total Chromium mg/kg 1.8 1.2 1.9 3.2 1.2 1.5 19 16 18 20 18 16 6.3 2.5 4.7 3.4 5.7
Total Iron mg/kg 1,100 770 1,200 2,100 740 1,100 17,000 J 12,000 15,000 17,000 15,000 12,000 4,300 1,800 3,500 2,200 5,100
Total Manganese mg/kg 41 30 45 62 22 26 320 260 340 360 350 320 140 52 110 77 150
Total Mercury mg/kg 0.015 J 0.012 J 0.016 J 0.057 0.021 J 0.020 J 0.014 J 0.077 0.025 J- 0.044 J- 0.047 J- 0.036 J- 0.018 J- 0.011 J- 0.060 J- 0.018 J- 0.16 J-
Total Thallium mg/kg < 0.049 U < 0.050 U < 0.051 U < 0.054 U 0.044 J 0.034 J 0.22 0.14 J- 0.18 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.11 < 0.051 U 0.081 0.085 0.12
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0087 J < 0.0023 U 0.0032 J-< 0.0024 UJ < 0.0028 UJ < 0.0028 UJ < 0.0032 UJ < 0.0027 UJ < 0.0029 U < 0.0027 UJ < 0.0027 UJ < 0.0028 UJ < 0.0023 UJ < 0.0023 UJ < 0.0029 UJ < 0.0028 UJ < 0.0030 UJ
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-17
Upland Background Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID UPN-01 UPN-02 UPN-03 UPN-04 UPN-05 UPN-06 UPN-06 UPN-07 UPN-08 UPN-09 UPN-10 UPS-01 UPS-02 UPS-03 UPS-04 UPS-05 UPS-06
Sample Date 14-Oct-15 14-Oct-15 14-Oct-15 14-Oct-15 14-Oct-15 14-Oct-15 14-Oct-15 14-Oct-15 14-Oct-15 14-Oct-15 14-Oct-15 12-Oct-15 12-Oct-15 12-Oct-15 12-Oct-15 12-Oct-15 13-Oct-15
Sample Type N N NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Depth 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 2 - 36 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in
Sample ID UPN-1-SS-01-
101415
UPN-2-SS-01-
101415
UPN-3-SS-01-
101415
UPN-4-SS-01-
101415
UPN-5-SS-01-
101415
UPN-6-SS-01-
101415
UPN-6-SB-01-
02-36-101415
UPN-7-SS-01-
101415
UPN-8-SS-01-
101415
UPN-9-SS-01-
101415
UPN-10-SS-01-
101415
UPS-1-SS-01-
101215
UPS-2-SS-01-
101215
UPS-3-SS-01-
101215
UPS-4-SS-01-
101215
UPS-5-SS-01-
101215
UPS-6-SS-01-
101315
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian pg/g 0.051 0.049 0.11 0.007 0.095 0.069 0.1 0.17 0.22 0.25 0.28
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian pg/g 0.14 0.15 0.18 0.067 0.18 0.29 0.21 0.25 0.28 0.33 0.34
Total PCBs mg/kg 0.00019 0.00016 0.00021 0.000012 0.00016 0.00066 0.00037 0.00021 0.0003 0.00034 0.00034
Total Arsenic mg/kg 5.8 4.7 4.8 5.2 4.6 4.7 7 5.4 6.5 5.5 6 4.7 4.6 6.2 5.6 4.3 4.4
Total Chromium mg/kg 12 8.2 8.7 11 11 12 14 13 14 14 15 12 11 10 12 9.6 10
Total Iron mg/kg 11,000 10,000 8,700 11,000 10,000 9,800 11,000 11,000 13,000 12,000 13,000 9,500 9,100 11,000 9,000 10,000 8,400
Total Manganese mg/kg 400 340 330 330 410 380 360 440 410 400 450 430 450 320 380 420 340
Total Mercury mg/kg 0.035 J 0.032 J 0.033 J 0.029 J 0.032 J 0.030 J 0.026 J 0.031 J 0.038 J 0.028 J 0.071 0.045 0.046 0.05 0.044 0.036 J 0.038 J
Total Thallium mg/kg 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.21 0.18 0.21 0.19 0.2 0.17 0.15 0.22 0.17 0.14 0.15
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg < 0.0023 U < 0.0024 UJ < 0.0024 UJ < 0.0025 U < 0.0023 UJ < 0.0023 UJ < 0.0025 U < 0.0023 UJ < 0.0023 UJ < 0.0023 UJ < 0.0023 UJ
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-17
Upland Background Solids Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID
Sample Date
Sample Type
Depth
Sample ID
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian pg/g
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian pg/g
Total PCBs mg/kg
Total Arsenic mg/kg
Total Chromium mg/kg
Total Iron mg/kg
Total Manganese mg/kg
Total Mercury mg/kg
Total Thallium mg/kg
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
UPS-06 UPS-07 UPS-08 UPS-09 UPS-10 UPSE-01 UPSE-02 UPSE-03 UPSE-04 UPSE-05 UPSE-05 UPSE-06 UPSE-07 UPSE-08 UPSE-09 UPSE-10
13-Oct-15 13-Oct-15 13-Oct-15 13-Oct-15 13-Oct-15 01-Oct-15 01-Oct-15 01-Oct-15 01-Oct-15 01-Oct-15 01-Oct-15 30-Sep-15 30-Sep-15 30-Sep-15 30-Sep-15 30-Sep-15
N NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
2 - 36 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 2 - 36 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in 0 - 2 in
UPS-6-SB-01-
02-36-101315
UPS-7-SS-01-
101315
UPS-8-SS-01-
101315
UPS-9-SS-01-
101315
UPS-10-SS-01-
101315
UPSE-1-SS-01-
100115
UPSE-2-SS-01-
100115
UPSE-3-SS-01-
100115
UPSE-4-SS-01-
100115
UPSE-5-SS-01-
100115
UPSE-5-SB-01-
02-36-100115
UPSE-6-SS-01-
093015
UPSE-7-SS-01-
093015
UPSE-8-SS-01-
093015
UPSE-9-SS-01-
093015
UPSE-10-SS-
01-093015
0.0033 0.54 0.12 0.26 0.2 0.13 0.0071 0.15 0.17 0.33
0.068 0.71 0.22 0.33 0.27 0.22 0.09 0.23 0.27 0.4
0.0000093 0.00045 0.00031 0.00031 0.00019 0.00023 0.000013 0.00018 0.00025 0.00026
5.1 4.4 4.1 4.8 4.6 7.5 10 7.9 8.7 7.4 9.8 8 7.8 6.2 8 6.2
8.1 9.8 7.7 9.5 10 14 10 11 9.1 12 16 11 13 12 11 9
8,600 11,000 8,800 10,000 11,000 18,000 J 15,000 J 17,000 J 15,000 J 19,000 J 20,000 J 16,000 J 17,000 J 14,000 J 14,000 J 11,000 J
220 410 270 410 430 580 630 510 450 440 510 540 580 470 530 350
0.037 J 0.040 J 0.029 J 0.032 J 0.033 J 0.032 J 0.030 J 0.020 J 0.019 J 0.026 J 0.017 J 0.024 J 0.030 J 0.027 J 0.026 J 0.021 J
0.17 0.14 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.27 0.17 0.16 0.13 0.15 0.25 0.17 0.2 0.21 0.18 0.15
< 0.0024 U < 0.0022 UJ < 0.0023 UJ < 0.0023 UJ < 0.0022 UJ < 0.0022 UJ < 0.0025 UJ < 0.0023 UJ < 0.0022 UJ < 0.0022 UJ
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-18
PRI 15 Plant Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID UL-10-B UL-10-C UL-10-D UL-10-E UL-10-G (ALT) UM-05-A
Sample Date 28-Jul-16 28-Jul-16 28-Jul-16 28-Jul-16 28-Jul-16 28-Jul-16
Sample Type N NNNNN
Sample ID UL10+C9:G9-B-PL-
01-072816
UL10-C-PL-01-
072816
UL10-D-PL-01-
072816
UL10-E-PL-01-
072816
UL10-G-PL-01-
072816
UM05-A-PL-01-
072816
Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian pg/g < 9.20 U < 6.68 U < 38.7 U < 42.2 U < 10.5 U
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian pg/g < 5.35 U < 3.93 U < 6.52 U < 6.81 U < 6.07 U
Total PCBs mg/kg 0.0000808 0.000313 0.0000469 0.0000279 0.000241
Total Arsenic mg/kg 0.08 J- 0.26 J- 0.15 J- 0.10 J- 0.28 J-0.22 J-
Total Chromium mg/kg 2.52 J 7.23 J 4.32 J 1.04 J 13.1 J 0.55 J
Total Mercury mg/kg 0.00194 0.00621 0.00332 0.00101 0.00706 0.00655
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.00058 J 0.0010 0.00037 J 0.00048 J 0.00067 J
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-19
PRI 3 Surface Water Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI3-003 PRI3-003 PRI3-009 PRI3-009
Sample Date 07-Jul-15 07-Jul-15 07-Jul-15 07-Jul-15
Sample Type NNNN
Sample ID PRI3-003-SW01-
070715
PRI3-003-SW01-
070715-FF
PRI3-009-SW01-
070715
PRI3-009-SW01-
070715-FF
Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian µg/L 0.00011 0.00003
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian µg/L 0.00011 0.000033
Total PCBs µg/L 0.09 0.043
Total Aluminum µg/L 740 650
Dissolved Aluminum µg/L < 50 550
Total Antimony µg/L 0.75 J 0.68 J
Dissolved Antimony µg/L 0.53 J 0.66 J
Total Arsenic µg/L 3.8 J 9.5 J
Dissolved Arsenic µg/L < 2.0 10
Total Barium µg/L 46 310
Dissolved Barium µg/L 24 310
Total Beryllium µg/L < 0.20 < 0.20
Dissolved Beryllium µg/L < 0.20 < 0.20
Total Cadmium µg/L < 1.0 < 1.0
Dissolved Cadmium µg/L < 1.0 < 1.0
Chromium, Hexavalent µg/L 0.14 J < 0.13
Total Cobalt µg/L < 1.2 2.4
Dissolved Cobalt µg/L < 1.2 2.7
Total Copper µg/L 26 3.5 J
Dissolved Copper µg/L < 2.0 3.4 J
Total Iron µg/L 6,600 2,400
Dissolved Iron µg/L < 50 2,100
Total Lead µg/L 7.6 < 1.2
Dissolved Lead µg/L < 1.2 < 1.2
Total Manganese µg/L 38 610
Dissolved Manganese µg/L < 2.8 620
Total Mercury µg/L 0.13 J < 0.10
Dissolved Mercury µg/L < 0.10 < 0.10
Total Molybdenum µg/L 3.5 J 18
Dissolved Molybdenum µg/L 418
Total Nickel µg/L 10 15
Dissolved Nickel µg/L < 3.9 15
Total Thallium µg/L < 1.0 < 1.0
Dissolved Thallium µg/L < 1.0 < 1.0
Total Vanadium µg/L 6.1 J < 6.0
Dissolved Vanadium µg/L < 6.0 < 6.0
Total Zinc µg/L 56 J-16 J-
Dissolved Zinc µg/L < 8.0 J 13 J-
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/L < 0.55 < 0.53
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether µg/L < 1.5 < 1.5
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate µg/L 1.4 J 1.3 J
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)µg/L < 0.071 < 0.069
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)µg/L < 0.081 < 0.079
Pentachlorobenzene µg/L < 0.46 < 0.45
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)µg/L < 2 < 2
2-Methylnaphthalene µg/L 0.0079 J-0.0079 J-
Naphthalene µg/L 0.0077 J-0.0079 J-
1,1-Dichloroethane µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50
1,2-Dibromoethane µg/L < 1.1 < 1.1
1,2-Dichloropropane µg/L < 0.75 < 0.75
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/L < 0.40 < 0.40
1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/L 6.3 < 0.65
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/L < 0.45 < 0.45
Benzene µg/L < 0.65 < 0.65
Bromochloromethane µg/L < 0.70 < 0.70
Bromodichloromethane µg/L < 0.70 < 0.70
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-19
PRI 3 Surface Water Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI3-003 PRI3-003 PRI3-009 PRI3-009
Sample Date 07-Jul-15 07-Jul-15 07-Jul-15 07-Jul-15
Sample Type NNNN
Sample ID PRI3-003-SW01-
070715
PRI3-003-SW01-
070715-FF
PRI3-009-SW01-
070715
PRI3-009-SW01-
070715-FF
UnitAnalyte
Bromoform µg/L 3.0 J < 0.50
Bromomethane µg/L < 1.5 < 1.5
Carbon tetrachloride µg/L < 0.75 < 0.75
Dibromochloromethane µg/L 1.0 J < 0.65
Chloroform µg/L 0.74 J < 0.60
Chloromethane µg/L < 1.3 < 1.3
Ethyl benzene µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50
Tetrachloroethene µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50
Trichloroethene µg/L < 0.65 < 0.65
o-Xylene µg/L 1.0 J < 0.50
m,p Xylenes µg/L 1.1 J < 0.90
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L < 0.0050 < 0.0050
Fluoride mg/L 0.22 J 1.2
Nitrate as N mg/L 0.87 < 0.022
Perchlorate µg/L 0.57 < 0.082
Dichloroacetic Acid µg/L 6.7 J < 0.98
Trichloroacetic acid µg/L 3.3 < 0.38
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L 0.013 < 0.0050
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-20
PRI 4 Surface Water Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI4-008 PRI4-008 PRI4-013 PRI4-013
Sample Date 26-Nov-13 26-Nov-13 25-Nov-13 25-Nov-13
Sample Type NNNN
Sample ID PRI4-008-SW01-
112613
PRI4-008-SW01-
112613-FF
PRI4-013-SW01-
112513
PRI4-013-SW01-
112513-FF
Analyte Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian µg/L 0.00089 0.00035
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian µg/L 0.00091 0.00036
Total PCBs µg/L 0.66 0.16
Total Aluminum µg/L 3,500 9,400
Dissolved Aluminum µg/L 2,900 < 50
Total Antimony µg/L 16 19
Dissolved Antimony µg/L 17 5.6
Total Arsenic µg/L 330 390
Dissolved Arsenic µg/L 330 240
Total Barium µg/L 2,900 2,800
Dissolved Barium µg/L 2,700 2,400
Total Beryllium µg/L 1.8 J 1.2 J
Dissolved Beryllium µg/L 0.72 J < 0.20
Total Cadmium µg/L 4.7 4.7
Dissolved Cadmium µg/L 4.7 5.0
Chromium, Hexavalent µg/L 3.63 < 1.51
Total Cobalt µg/L 14 8.1
Dissolved Cobalt µg/L 8.0 < 1.2
Total Copper µg/L 25 28
Dissolved Copper µg/L 17 11
Total Iron µg/L 220,000 300,000
Dissolved Iron µg/L 220,000 J < 50 J
Total Lead µg/L 28 58
Dissolved Lead µg/L 24 15
Total Manganese µg/L 5,300 3,700
Dissolved Manganese µg/L 4,100 350
Total Mercury µg/L < 0.10 2.6
Dissolved Mercury µg/L < 0.10 1.8
Total Molybdenum µg/L 5.4 36
Dissolved Molybdenum µg/L 6.9 < 1.2
Total Nickel µg/L 230 370
Dissolved Nickel µg/L 190 140
Total Thallium µg/L 7.3 6.6
Dissolved Thallium µg/L 6.9 7.1
Total Vanadium µg/L 200 570
Dissolved Vanadium µg/L 260 < 6.0
Total Zinc µg/L 450 J-740 J-
Dissolved Zinc µg/L 420 J-230 J-
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/L < 5.4 < 5.4
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether µg/L < 15 < 15
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate µg/L < 10 11 J
Hexachlorobenzene µg/L 400 J-
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)µg/L 1.5 J
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)µg/L < 0.8 < 0.8 J
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)µg/L < 20 < 20
2-Methylnaphthalene µg/L < 0.055 < 0.055
Naphthalene µg/L < 0.12 < 0.15
1,1-Dichloroethane µg/L < 0.40 < 2.5
1,2-Dichloroethane µg/L < 0.88 < 5.5
1,2-Dichloropropane µg/L < 0.60 < 3.8
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/L < 0.32 < 2.0
1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.52 < 3.3 J
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.40 < 2.5 J
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/L < 0.36 < 2.3
Benzene µg/L < 0.52 < 3.3 J
Bromochloromethane µg/L < 0.56 < 3.5
Bromodichloromethane µg/L 27 210
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-20
PRI 4 Surface Water Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI4-008 PRI4-008 PRI4-013 PRI4-013
Sample Date 26-Nov-13 26-Nov-13 25-Nov-13 25-Nov-13
Sample Type NNNN
Sample ID PRI4-008-SW01-
112613
PRI4-008-SW01-
112613-FF
PRI4-013-SW01-
112513
PRI4-013-SW01-
112513-FF
Analyte Unit
Bromoform µg/L 100 990
Bromomethane µg/L < 1.2 < 7.3
Carbon tetrachloride µg/L < 0.60 < 3.8
Dibromochloromethane µg/L 45 340
Chloroform µg/L 4.3 33
Chloromethane µg/L 2.4 J < 6.3
Ethyl benzene µg/L < 0.40 < 2.5 J
Tetrachloroethene µg/L < 0.40 < 2.5
Trichloroethene µg/L < 0.52 < 3.3
o-Xylene µg/L < 0.40 < 2.5 J
m,p Xylenes µg/L < 0.72 < 4.5 J
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L 0.011 0.021
Fluoride mg/L 15 J 3.7 J
Nitrate as N mg/L 3.8 J+4.0
Perchlorate µg/L 0.82 J 0.78 J
Dichloroacetic Acid µg/L 1,400 1,200
Trichloroacetic acid µg/L 720 710
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-21
PRI 5 Surface Water Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-008 PRI5-008 PRI5-010 PRI5-010 PRI5-017 PRI5-017 PRI5-018 PRI5-018
Sample Date 09-Jul-15 09-Jul-15 31-Oct-18 27-Feb-19 27-Feb-19 30-May-19 30-May-19 09-Sep-19 09-Sep-19 09-Jul-15 09-Jul-15 13-Jul-15 13-Jul-15 13-Jul-15 13-Jul-15 18-May-15 18-May-15
Sample Type N N NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Sample ID PRI5-002-SW01-
070915
PRI5-002-SW01-
070915-FF
PRI5-002-SW-01-
103118
PRI5-002-SW-01-
022719
PRI5-002-SW-01-
022719-FF
PRI5-002-SW-
01-053019
PRI5-002-SW-01-
053019-FF
PRI5-002-SW-
01-090919
PRI5-002-SW-01-
090919-FF
PRI5-008-SW01-
070915
PRI5-008-SW01-
070915-FF
PRI5-010-SW01-
071315
PRI5-010-SW01-
071315-FF
PRI5-017-SW01-
071315
PRI5-017-SW01-
071315-FF
PRI5-018-SW01-
051815
PRI5-018-SW01-
051815-FF
Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian µg/L 0.0021 0.0013 0.0039 0.0012 0.0018 0.0018 0.0017 0.00011 0.0000082
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian µg/L 0.0022 0.0014 0.0047 0.0014 0.0020 0.0018 0.0017 0.00016 0.00001
Total PCBs µg/L 2.7 1.72 13.4 2.66 2.88 4.1 1.9 0.29 0.061
Total Aluminum µg/L 66,000 26,000 34,000 120,000 78,000 82,000 130,000 < 250
Dissolved Aluminum µg/L 71,000 51,000 24,000 39,000 < 630 81,000 73,000 120,000 870
Total Antimony µg/L 13 14 14 37 11 12 8.9 2.0 J
Dissolved Antimony µg/L 14 22 15 15 2.4 J 11 12 9.5 2.3 J
Total Arsenic µg/L 330 J 210 300 460 340 J 360 J 420 J 28
Dissolved Arsenic µg/L 340 260 200 310 66 340 340 J 440 J 28
Total Barium µg/L 720 490 J+680 1,000 790 760 J-900 J-540
Dissolved Barium µg/L 810 300 460 640 120 790 730 J+950 J+580
Total Beryllium µg/L 3.4 1.6 J 2.7 J 4.3 J 4.0 3.6 J-5.2 J-< 1.0
Dissolved Beryllium µg/L 4.3 2.2 J 1.4 J 2.6 J < 0.50 J 4.5 3.8 4.9 < 1.0
Total Cadmium µg/L 1.3 J < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 J 1.7 J 1.8 J-2.0 J-< 5.0
Dissolved Cadmium µg/L 1.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 1.5 J 1.4 J 2.2 < 5.0
Chromium, Hexavalent µg/L 2.03 J-0.960 J-< 1.64 J 0.910 J 0.18 J-7.74 J-6.36 J-1.01 J
Total Cobalt µg/L 29 19 24 31 33 30 J-40 J-19
Dissolved Cobalt µg/L 30 17 19 23 < 15 33 29 40 20
Total Copper µg/L 140 70 110 160 J-160 140 J-180 J-11 J-
Dissolved Copper µg/L 150 99 71 J-100 < 25 160 140 180 < 10
Total Iron µg/L 860,000 400,000 720,000 970,000 910,000 960,000 1,000,000 5,700
Dissolved Iron µg/L 900,000 510,000 400,000 640,000 < 630 870,000 870,000 1,000,000 4,700
Total Lead µg/L 53 33 45 63 63 59 J-83 J-< 6.0
Dissolved Lead µg/L 62 32 33 45 < 3.0 63 59 83 < 6.0
Total Manganese µg/L 2,900 2,000 2,100 2,300 3,400 3,500 4,100 15,000
Dissolved Manganese µg/L 3,000 1,500 2,000 2,100 510 3,300 3,500 4,300 15,000
Total Mercury µg/L 0.66 0.32 0.38 1.1 J-0.82 0.84 0.92 < 0.10
Dissolved Mercury µg/L 0.72 1.6 0.43 0.37 0.76 0.80 0.84 0.91 < 0.10
Total Molybdenum µg/L 180 99 130 300 200 210 270 19 J
Dissolved Molybdenum µg/L 190 170 98 130 21 200 200 270 20
Total Nickel µg/L 210 130 200 260 J-220 210 J 240 J 74 J-
Dissolved Nickel µg/L 230 140 130 J-190 < 25 210 200 240 71
Total Thallium µg/L 1.8 J < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 2.1 2.0 2.7 < 5.0
Dissolved Thallium µg/L 1.5 J < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 2.5 < 1.0 1.9 J 1.7 J < 5.0
Total Vanadium µg/L 1,100 510 1,100 1,400 1,200 1,100 1,300 < 30
Dissolved Vanadium µg/L 1,200 660 510 1,100 < 75 1,200 1,100 1,400 < 30
Total Zinc µg/L 390 J-360 J-370 580 J-420 J-420 J-560 J-77 J
Dissolved Zinc µg/L 380 J-380 340 J-380 < 20 410 J-410 560 76 J+
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/L < 5.4 < 5.4 J < 5.2 < 25 < 10 J < 5.4 J < 5.4 J < 5.4 J < 0.49
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether µg/L < 15 < 15 J < 15 J < 15 J < 1.3
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate µg/L < 17 < 25 < 9.6 < 47 < 19 J < 17 J < 15 J < 15 J < 0.90
Hexachlorobenzene µg/L 20 J 31 J
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)µg/L < 0.70 < 3.3 9.7 J-12 J-7.2 J-< 0.7 J 0.32 J
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)µg/L < 0.81 < 0.80 J < 0.76 < 3.7 < 0.77 J < 0.8 J < 0.79 J < 0.8 J < 0.072
Pentachlorobenzene µg/L < 4.6 J < 4.6 J < 4.4 < 21 < 8.8 J < 4.6 J < 4.6 J < 4.6 J < 0.41
Pentachlorophenol µg/L
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)µg/L < 20 < 20 J < 19 140 J < 19 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 1.8
2-Methylnaphthalene µg/L < 0.055 < 0.056 < 0.055 < 0.055 < 0.053
Naphthalene µg/L < 0.05 < 0.75 < 0.15 < 0.60 0.29 J < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.048
1,1-Dichloroethane µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.10
1,2-Dichloroethane µg/L < 1.1 < 1.1 < 1.1 < 1.1 < 0.22
1,2-Dichloropropane µg/L < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.15
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/L < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.080
1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.13
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.10
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/L < 0.45 < 0.45 < 0.45 < 0.45 < 0.090
Benzene µg/L < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.13
Bromochloromethane µg/L < 0.70 < 0.70 < 0.70 < 0.70 0.78 J
Bromodichloromethane µg/L 18 9.1 6.8 11 3.6 4.5 J 3.3 J 2.6 J 8.5
Bromoform µg/L 95 88 72 J 110 16 19 16 9.8 46
Bromomethane µg/L < 1.5 2.2 J < 0.29 < 1.2 < 0.29 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 0.29
Carbon tetrachloride µg/L 5.5 9.6 3.1 4.6 7.3 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.15
Dibromochloromethane µg/L 28 22 11 24 6.2 10 8.0 6.1 19
Chloroform µg/L 5.1 2.5 J < 0.87 2.0 J 1.6 2.1 J 1.8 J 1.0 J 7.8
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-21
PRI 5 Surface Water Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-002 PRI5-008 PRI5-008 PRI5-010 PRI5-010 PRI5-017 PRI5-017 PRI5-018 PRI5-018
Sample Date 09-Jul-15 09-Jul-15 31-Oct-18 27-Feb-19 27-Feb-19 30-May-19 30-May-19 09-Sep-19 09-Sep-19 09-Jul-15 09-Jul-15 13-Jul-15 13-Jul-15 13-Jul-15 13-Jul-15 18-May-15 18-May-15
Sample Type N N NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Sample ID PRI5-002-SW01-
070915
PRI5-002-SW01-
070915-FF
PRI5-002-SW-01-
103118
PRI5-002-SW-01-
022719
PRI5-002-SW-01-
022719-FF
PRI5-002-SW-
01-053019
PRI5-002-SW-01-
053019-FF
PRI5-002-SW-
01-090919
PRI5-002-SW-01-
090919-FF
PRI5-008-SW01-
070915
PRI5-008-SW01-
070915-FF
PRI5-010-SW01-
071315
PRI5-010-SW01-
071315-FF
PRI5-017-SW01-
071315
PRI5-017-SW01-
071315-FF
PRI5-018-SW01-
051815
PRI5-018-SW01-
051815-FF
UnitAnalyte
Chloromethane µg/L 2.7 J < 1.3 < 1.3 < 1.3 0.63 J
Ethyl benzene µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.10 < 0.40 < 0.10 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.10
Tetrachloroethene µg/L 1.7 J < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.10
Trichloroethene µg/L < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.13 < 0.52 < 0.13 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.13
o-Xylene µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.10 < 0.40 < 0.10 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.10
m,p Xylenes µg/L < 0.90 < 0.90 < 0.18 < 0.72 < 0.18 < 0.90 < 0.90 < 0.90 < 0.18
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L 0.013 0.014 0.0059 J 0.012 0.017 < 0.0050 0.0068 J
Fluoride mg/L 6.8 J-3.8 J-5.0 J 5.4 J 4.1 J+6.2 J-12 J-6.6 J-6.3 J
Nitrate as N mg/L 3.2 2.8 J 2.1 J+1.7 J+3.2 J 3.5 6.7 J 4.4 < 0.44
Perchlorate µg/L 1.9 J 1.9 J 1.9 J 2.4 J 0.72 J
Dichloroacetic Acid µg/L 860 < 9.8 740 J 480 J 870 1,000 870 1,000 400
Trichloroacetic acid µg/L 830 < 3.8 470 J 350 J 710 980 660 820 360
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L 0.014 0.014 0.020 0.0046 J 0.091 J-0.0078 J 0.016 < 0.0050 0.0085 J
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-22
PRI 6 Surface Water Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-004 PRI6-004 PRI6-006 PRI6-006 PRI6-008 PRI6-008 PRI6-017 PRI6-017
Sample Date 10-Jul-15 10-Jul-15 01-Nov-18 01-Nov-18 05-Mar-19 05-Mar-19 16-Sep-19 16-Sep-19 08-Jul-15 08-Jul-15 10-Jul-15 10-Jul-15 10-Jul-15 10-Jul-15 08-Jul-15 08-Jul-15
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Sample ID PRI6-002-SW01-
071015
PRI6-002-SW01-
071015-FF
PRI6-002-SW-01-
110118
PRI6-002-SW-01-
110118-NF
PRI6-002-SW-01-
030519
PRI6-002-SW-01-
030519-FF
PRI6-002A-SW-01-
091619
PRI6-002A-SW-01-
091619-FF
PRI6-004-SW01-
070815
PRI6-004-SW01-
070815-FF
PRI6-006-SW01-
071015
PRI6-006-SW01-
071015-FF
PRI6-008-SW01-
071015
PRI6-008-SW01-
071015-FF
PRI6-017-SW01-
070815
PRI6-017-SW01-
070815-FF
Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian µg/L 0.0035 0.0002 0.00015 0.0089 0.00042 0.0078 0.0029 0.0013
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian µg/L 0.0036 0.00025 0.0002 0.0099 0.00045 0.0079 0.0029 0.0013
Total PCBs µg/L 2.3 0.699 J-0.782 14.8 3.5 2 3.3 2.1
Total Aluminum µg/L 100,000 85,000 32,000 210,000 99,000 110,000 97,000 90,000
Dissolved Aluminum µg/L 110,000 82,000 J-31,000 180,000 120,000 110,000 97,000 90,000
Total Antimony µg/L 10 20 11 28 9.6 11 10 12
Dissolved Antimony µg/L 10 20 11 28 9.9 9.7 10 11
Total Arsenic µg/L 460 370 230 650 430 460 440 400
Dissolved Arsenic µg/L 460 360 J-230 640 420 490 430 380
Total Barium µg/L 1,000 480 630 2,800 820 1,200 830 800
Dissolved Barium µg/L 880 410 J-580 1,600 850 900 780 770
Total Beryllium µg/L < 5.4 3.8 J 2.2 J 8.2 5.5 < 6.8 < 6.3 4.6
Dissolved Beryllium µg/L 5.2 3.4 J-2.3 J 6.4 5.6 5.9 4.8 4.9
Total Cadmium µg/L 2.1 < 5.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 J 1.7 J 1.9 J 1.8 J 1.8 J
Dissolved Cadmium µg/L 1.8 J < 5.0 J < 2.5 < 2.5 1.8 J 2.0 1.8 J 1.8 J
Chromium, Hexavalent µg/L 6.62 J-1.15 < 1.72 < 1.04 0.22 J 6.26 J-6.11 J-0.26 J
Total Cobalt µg/L 45 29 28 58 47 45 43 40
Dissolved Cobalt µg/L 41 28 J-28 54 47 41 39 40
Total Copper µg/L 180 130 89 230 190 190 180 170
Dissolved Copper µg/L 170 J-130 J-85 230 190 170 J-160 J-170
Total Iron µg/L 1,200,000 740,000 J 450,000 1,400,000 1,100,000 1,200,000 1,100,000 1,100,000
Dissolved Iron µg/L 1,100,000 690,000 430,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 1,000,000
Total Lead µg/L 91 48 49 120 79 93 85 69
Dissolved Lead µg/L 81 49 J-47 120 81 83 74 69
Total Manganese µg/L 5,300 2,600 2,800 4,500 5,000 5,100 4,700 4,400
Dissolved Manganese µg/L 5,000 2,500 2,800 4,400 5,100 5,000 4,700 4,400
Total Mercury µg/L 0.88 3.5 J 0.41 0.73 0.87 0.91 0.88 0.85
Dissolved Mercury µg/L 0.89 1.1 J-0.51 0.74 0.87 0.87 0.85 0.80
Total Molybdenum µg/L 240 210 87 360 230 250 240 220
Dissolved Molybdenum µg/L 240 200 86 360 230 250 230 210
Total Nickel µg/L 260 210 160 360 270 270 260 240
Dissolved Nickel µg/L 240 200 J-150 360 280 240 240 250
Total Thallium µg/L 2.6 < 5.0 < 2.5 2.8 J 2.5 2.8 2.7 2.2
Dissolved Thallium µg/L < 1.0 < 5.0 J < 2.5 < 2.5 2.4 1.5 J 1.7 J 2.3
Total Vanadium µg/L 1,500 970 580 2,000 1,500 1,500 1,400 1,400
Dissolved Vanadium µg/L 1,400 950 J-560 2,000 1,500 1,400 1,300 1,400
Total Zinc µg/L 510 520 380 J-810 510 J-520 510 480 J-
Dissolved Zinc µg/L 540 J-530 J-370 760 490 J-550 J-520 J-440 J-
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/L < 5.4 J < 5.4 J < 4.9 < 5.0 < 5.4 J < 5.4 J < 5.4 J < 5.4 J
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether µg/L < 15 J < 15 J < 15 J < 15 J < 15 J
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate µg/L < 16 J < 21 < 9.1 < 9.2 < 14 J < 17 J < 17 J < 14 J
Hexachlorobenzene µg/L 19 J-92 J-25 J-20 J-
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)µg/L < 0.70 < 0.63 130 28 J-
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)µg/L < 0.8 J < 0.80 J < 0.73 < 0.74 < 0.81 J < 0.8 J < 0.79 J < 0.8 J
Pentachlorobenzene µg/L < 4.6 J < 4.6 J < 4.2 < 4.2 < 4.6 J < 4.6 J < 4.6 J < 4.6 J
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)µg/L < 20 < 20 J < 18 29 J < 20 J < 20 < 20 J < 20 J
2-Methylnaphthalene µg/L < 0.055 < 0.053 J < 0.054 < 0.055 J < 0.055 J
Naphthalene µg/L < 0.05 < 0.30 < 0.30 < 0.15 < 0.049 J < 0.049 < 0.05 J < 0.05 J
1,1-Dichloroethane µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
1,2-Dichloroethane µg/L < 1.1 < 1.1 < 1.1 < 1.1 < 1.1
1,2-Dichloropropane µg/L < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/L < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40
1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/L < 0.45 < 0.45 < 0.45 < 0.45 < 0.45
Benzene µg/L < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65
Bromochloromethane µg/L < 0.70 < 0.70 < 0.70 < 0.70 < 0.70
Bromodichloromethane µg/L 3.2 J 5.6 5.4 1.5 3.6 J 4.3 J 4.6 J 7.2
Bromoform µg/L 13 42 48 J-9.9 15 17 J-18 28
Bromomethane µg/L < 1.5 < 0.58 < 0.58 < 0.29 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5
Carbon tetrachloride µg/L < 0.75 0.69 J 1.2 J 0.22 J < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75
Dibromochloromethane µg/L 7.4 13 9.2 2.9 8.8 10 9.5 15
Chloroform µg/L 1.3 J 2.6 < 1.7 0.74 J 1.5 J 1.8 J 2.2 J 2.7 J
Chloromethane µg/L < 1.3 < 1.3 < 1.3 1.3 J < 1.3
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-22
PRI 6 Surface Water Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-002 PRI6-004 PRI6-004 PRI6-006 PRI6-006 PRI6-008 PRI6-008 PRI6-017 PRI6-017
Sample Date 10-Jul-15 10-Jul-15 01-Nov-18 01-Nov-18 05-Mar-19 05-Mar-19 16-Sep-19 16-Sep-19 08-Jul-15 08-Jul-15 10-Jul-15 10-Jul-15 10-Jul-15 10-Jul-15 08-Jul-15 08-Jul-15
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Sample ID PRI6-002-SW01-
071015
PRI6-002-SW01-
071015-FF
PRI6-002-SW-01-
110118
PRI6-002-SW-01-
110118-NF
PRI6-002-SW-01-
030519
PRI6-002-SW-01-
030519-FF
PRI6-002A-SW-01-
091619
PRI6-002A-SW-01-
091619-FF
PRI6-004-SW01-
070815
PRI6-004-SW01-
070815-FF
PRI6-006-SW01-
071015
PRI6-006-SW01-
071015-FF
PRI6-008-SW01-
071015
PRI6-008-SW01-
071015-FF
PRI6-017-SW01-
070815
PRI6-017-SW01-
070815-FF
UnitAnalyte
Ethyl benzene µg/L < 0.50 < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.10 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
Tetrachloroethene µg/L < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
Trichloroethene µg/L < 0.65 < 0.26 < 0.26 < 0.13 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65
o-Xylene µg/L < 0.50 < 0.20 < 0.20 < 0.10 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
m,p Xylenes µg/L < 0.90 < 0.36 < 0.36 < 0.18 < 0.90 < 0.90 < 0.90 < 0.90
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L < 0.0050 0.021 0.011 0.061 J-0.0084 J 0.011 < 0.0050 < 0.0050
Fluoride mg/L 6.5 J-3.7 J 5.2 J-4.1 J+5.8 J 6.5 J-7.4 J-6.0 J
Nitrate as N mg/L 3.4 J 2.9 J+2.1 J+< 5.0 3.4 3.4 J 3.4 J 3.4
Perchlorate µg/L 2.0 J 2.0 J 2.2 J 2.1 J 2.0 J
Dichloroacetic Acid µg/L 1,100 900 110 J 940 1,100 1,100 990 4.5
Trichloroacetic acid µg/L 950 730 J 280 J 620 900 850 890 4.5
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L < 0.0050 0.011 0.010 J-0.038 J-0.0052 J 0.0082 J < 0.0050 < 0.0050
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-23
PRI 8 Surface Water Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI8-005 PRI8-005 PRI8-005 PRI8-005 PRI8-005 PRI8-005 PRI8-018 PRI8-018 PRI8-019 PRI8-019 PRI8-020 PRI8-020 PRI8-021 PRI8-021
Sample Date 25-Nov-13 25-Nov-13 04-Mar-19 04-Mar-19 20-Jun-19 20-Jun-19 12-Feb-14 12-Feb-14 12-Feb-14 12-Feb-14 11-Feb-14 11-Feb-14 11-Feb-14 11-Feb-14
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Sample ID PRI8-005-SW01-
112513
PRI8-005-SW01-
112513-FF
PRI8-005-SW-01-
030419
PRI8-005-SW-01-
030419-FF
PRI8-005-SW-01-
062019
PRI8-005-SW-01-
062019-FF
PRI8-018-SW-01-
021214
PRI8-018-SW-01-
021214-FF
PRI8-019-SW-01-
021214
PRI8-019-SW-01-
021214-FF
PRI8-020-SW01-
021114
PRI8-020-SW01-
021114-FF
PRI8-021-SW01-
021114
PRI8-021-SW01-
021114-FF
Unit
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian µg/L 0.00000034 0.00000020 0.000016 0.00011 0.000015 0.000038 0.000015
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian µg/L 0.0000028 0.000019 0.000035 0.00011 0.000018 0.000041 0.000017
Total PCBs µg/L 0.0032 0.00373 0.00895 0.28 0.057 0.12 0.04
Total Aluminum µg/L 4,400 < 130 < 630 22,000 17,000 24,000 25,000
Dissolved Aluminum µg/L 3,200 < 130 < 130 J 23,000 16,000 24,000 24,000
Total Antimony µg/L 0.75 J < 1.0 1.2 J 3.8 J 1.7 J 3.1 J 2.7 J
Dissolved Antimony µg/L 0.75 J < 1.0 < 1.0 4.0 1.7 J 3.5 J 2.8 J
Total Arsenic µg/L 47 48 73 J 97 65 94 97
Dissolved Arsenic µg/L 39 44 66 98 65 96 96
Total Barium µg/L 260 440 J-1,100 390 280 340 350
Dissolved Barium µg/L 230 410 860 370 J+260 J+340 J+340 J+
Total Beryllium µg/L 0.38 J < 0.50 J < 2.5 2.0 1.3 J 2.1 2.0
Dissolved Beryllium µg/L 0.37 J < 0.50 < 0.50 2.0 1.2 J 2.3 2.3
Total Cadmium µg/L < 1.0 < 2.5 J < 2.5 J 2.4 2.6 2.1 2.1
Dissolved Cadmium µg/L < 1.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 J 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.2
Chromium, Hexavalent µg/L < 1.23 < 0.316 < 0.312 0.531 J 0.388 J 0.532 J 0.489 J
Total Cobalt µg/L 41 87 J-140 35 31 33 34
Dissolved Cobalt µg/L 38 84 100 J 36 31 34 33
Total Copper µg/L 15 < 5.0 J < 25 52 26 54 56
Dissolved Copper µg/L 5.0 < 5.0 J < 5.0 J 53 J-26 J-56 J-56 J-
Total Iron µg/L 25,000 140,000 140,000 210,000 88,000 210,000 220,000
Dissolved Iron µg/L 21,000 J 110,000 J 4,200 J 220,000 88,000 210,000 220,000
Total Lead µg/L < 1.2 < 3.0 J < 3.0 J 30 17 32 32
Dissolved Lead µg/L < 1.2 < 3.0 < 3.0 J 31 17 31 32
Total Manganese µg/L 9,500 11,000 19,000 5,000 5,800 4,700 4,500
Dissolved Manganese µg/L 8,800 11,000 16,000 J 5,200 5,800 4,600 4,500
Total Mercury µg/L < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.50 0.20 < 0.10 0.22 0.22
Dissolved Mercury µg/L < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.50 0.21 < 0.10 0.18 J 0.21
Total Molybdenum µg/L 2.2 J 8.2 J < 15 J 48 21 45 44
Dissolved Molybdenum µg/L 2.3 J 7.4 J 15 48 21 46 44
Total Nickel µg/L 140 220 J-350 140 110 140 140
Dissolved Nickel µg/L 130 210 260 J-150 120 140 140
Total Thallium µg/L < 1.0 < 2.5 J < 2.5 J < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0
Dissolved Thallium µg/L < 1.0 < 2.5 < 2.5 J < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0
Total Vanadium µg/L < 6.0 < 15 < 75 310 140 310 320
Dissolved Vanadium µg/L < 6.0 < 15 < 15 J 310 140 320 320
Total Zinc µg/L 43 J-62 J-130 J 250 120 240 240
Dissolved Zinc µg/L 45 J-60 J-34 J-250 J-120 J-240 J-240 J-
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/L < 0.52 < 0.53 < 5.0 < 5.4 < 5.4 J < 5.4 < 5.4
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether µg/L < 1.4 < 15 < 15 J < 15 < 15
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate µg/L < 0.96 < 0.98 < 9.2 < 10 J < 9.9 J < 10 J < 10 J
Hexachlorobenzene (SIM)µg/L < 0.067 < 0.069 < 0.65 < 0.7 J < 0.69 J < 0.7 J < 0.7 J
Hexachlorobutadiene (SIM)µg/L < 0.077 < 0.078 < 0.74 < 0.81 J < 0.79 J < 0.8 J < 0.8 J
Pentachlorobenzene µg/L < 0.45 < 4.2
Pentachlorophenol (SIM)µg/L < 1.9 < 2.0 27 J < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20
2-Methylnaphthalene µg/L < 0.0050 < 0.055 < 0.055 < 0.055 < 0.055
Naphthalene µg/L < 0.013 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.037 < 0.037 < 0.15 < 0.18
1,1-Dichloroethane µg/L < 0.20 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
1,2-Dichloroethane µg/L < 0.44 < 1.1 < 1.1 < 1.1 < 1.1
1,2-Dichloropropane µg/L < 0.30 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/L < 0.16 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40
1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.26 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/L < 0.20 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/L < 0.18 < 0.45 < 0.45 < 0.45 < 0.45
Benzene µg/L < 0.26 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65
Bromochloromethane µg/L < 0.28 < 0.70 < 0.70 < 0.70 < 0.70
Bromodichloromethane µg/L 1.6 J < 0.14 < 0.14 25 11 17 12
Bromoform µg/L 2.9 < 0.10 < 0.10 56 22 37 30
Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-23
PRI 8 Surface Water Summary
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Location ID PRI8-005 PRI8-005 PRI8-005 PRI8-005 PRI8-005 PRI8-005 PRI8-018 PRI8-018 PRI8-019 PRI8-019 PRI8-020 PRI8-020 PRI8-021 PRI8-021
Sample Date 25-Nov-13 25-Nov-13 04-Mar-19 04-Mar-19 20-Jun-19 20-Jun-19 12-Feb-14 12-Feb-14 12-Feb-14 12-Feb-14 11-Feb-14 11-Feb-14 11-Feb-14 11-Feb-14
Sample Type NNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Sample ID PRI8-005-SW01-
112513
PRI8-005-SW01-
112513-FF
PRI8-005-SW-01-
030419
PRI8-005-SW-01-
030419-FF
PRI8-005-SW-01-
062019
PRI8-005-SW-01-
062019-FF
PRI8-018-SW-01-
021214
PRI8-018-SW-01-
021214-FF
PRI8-019-SW-01-
021214
PRI8-019-SW-01-
021214-FF
PRI8-020-SW01-
021114
PRI8-020-SW01-
021114-FF
PRI8-021-SW01-
021114
PRI8-021-SW01-
021114-FF
UnitAnalyte
Bromomethane µg/L < 0.58 < 0.29 < 0.29 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5
Carbon tetrachloride µg/L < 0.30 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75 < 0.75
Dibromochloromethane µg/L 2.1 < 0.13 < 0.13 41 20 25 21
Chloroform µg/L 5.8 6.8 0.61 J 18 9.6 11 8.9
Chloromethane µg/L < 0.50 < 1.3 < 1.3 < 1.3 < 1.3
Ethyl benzene µg/L < 0.20 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
Tetrachloroethene µg/L < 0.20 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
Trichloroethene µg/L < 0.26 < 0.13 < 0.13 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65 < 0.65
o-Xylene µg/L < 0.20 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
m,p Xylenes µg/L < 0.36 < 0.18 < 0.18 < 0.90 < 0.90 < 0.90 < 0.90
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L < 0.0050 < 0.0046 0.038 0.0078 J-0.0081 J-0.0053 J-0.0055 J-
Fluoride mg/L 16 24 90 J 1.9 J 1.6 J 1.6 J 1.7 J
Nitrate as N mg/L < 0.22 < 0.44 < 1.1 R 1.4 J+0.91 J+1.1 J+1.0 J+
Perchlorate µg/L 0.11 J-0.71 J 0.55 J 0.71 J 0.71 J
Dichloroacetic Acid µg/L 120 < 9.8 < 9.8 1,000 750 1,200 1,200
Trichloroacetic acid µg/L 110 11 J+12 J 1,100 1,000 1,300 1,400
Total Cyanide - Filtered mg/L 0.012 0.023 0.0079 J-0.0076 J-< 0.0050 J < 0.0050 J
See Table C-25 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-24
Surface Water Summary - pH
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
pH
pH units
PRI3-003-SW01-070715 7/7/2015 9.49
PRI3-009-SW01-070715 7/7/2015 7.85
PRI4-008-SW01-112613 11/26/2013 5.36
PRI4-013-SW01-112513 11/25/2013 5.62
PRI5-002-SW01-070915 7/9/2015 0.49
PRI5-002-SW-01-103118 10/31/2018 0
PRI5-002-SW-01-022719 2/27/2019 0.72
PRI5-002-SW-01-053019 5/30/2019 0.87
PRI5-002-SW-01-090919 9/9/2019 0.80
PRI5-008-SW01-070915 7/9/2015 0.51
PRI5-010-SW01-071315 7/13/2015 0.49
PRI5-017-SW01-051915 5/19/2015 7.95
PRI5-017-SW01-071315 7/13/2015 0.41
PRI5-018-SW01-051815 5/18/2015 6
PRI6-002-SW01-071015 7/10/2015 0.47
PRI6-002-SW-01-110118 11/1/2018 0
PRI6-002-SW-01-030519 3/5/2019 0.70
PRI6-002A-SW-01-091619 9/16/2019 0.25
PRI6-004-SW01-070815 7/8/2015 0.42
PRI6-006-SW01-071015 7/10/2015 0.53
PRI6-008-SW01-071015 7/10/2015 0.43
PRI6-017-SW01-070815 7/8/2015 0.46
PRI8-005-SW01-112513 11/25/2013 6.15
PRI8-005-SW-01-030419 3/4/2019 6.00
PRI8-005-SW-01-062019 6/20/2019 6.41
PRI8-018-SW-01-021214 2/12/2014 0.70
PRI8-019-SW-01-021214 2/12/2014 1.07
PRI8-020-SW01-021114 2/11/2014 0.44
PRI8-021-SW01-021114 2/11/2014 0.39
Sample ID Sample Date
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table C-25
Notes and Abbreviations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Notes:
< = Constituent not detected at concentrations above the laboratory reporting detection limit. The laboratory reporting detection limit is shown.
Results shown in bold font indicate a constituent was detected above the laboratory reporting detection limit.
µg/m 3 = micrograms per cubic meter
µg/kg = micrograms per kilogram
µg/sample = micrograms per sample
µg/L = micrograms per liter
DL = Detection limit
Empty cells = Not analyzed
in = inches
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
mg/L = milligrams per liter
N = Normal Environmental Sample
ND = Not detected
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pH units = Standard pH units
pg/g = picogram per gram
SIM = Selected ion monitoring mode. If a constituent has both SIM and non-SIM results, they are combined into one dataset for the BHHRA.
TEQ = Toxic Equivalence
pH analyses performed in the field at time of sample collection.
Qualifiers:
J = The result is an estimated quantity. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the analyte in the sample.
J+ = The result is an estimated quantity, biased high. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the analyte in the sample.
J- = The result is an estimated quantity, biased low. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the analyte in the sample.
U = Compound was analyzed for, but not detected. The associated numerical value is the laboratory reporting detection limit.
UQ = The result was qualified as non-detected at the listed concentration due to an estimated maximum possible concentration.
Analyses performed by TestAmerica - Sacramento, CA; TestAmerica - Savannah, GA; Alpha Analytical - Westborough, MA; TestAmerica - Irvine, CA;
TestAmerica - Denver, CO; IsoTech; BROOKS Applied Labs; BRL; and Eaton Analytical (Eurofins).
UJ = The nondetected analyte was qualified as estimated at the laboratory reporting detection limit. The reported sample quantitation limit is
approximate and may be inaccurate or imprecise.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
APPENDIX D COPC REFINEMENT (EXCLUDING GROUNDWATER)

www.erm.com Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page D-1
Final OU-1 Baseline BHHRA Appendix D
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
SELECTION AND REFINEMENT PROCESS
APPENDIX D – CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN SELECTION AND
REFINEMENT PROCESS
Initial constituents of potential concern (COPCs) for solids, surface water, and groundwater were selected
in the Final OU-1 Screening-Level Risk Assessment Report (OU-1 SLRA, ERM 2017a), and COPCs in air
were selected in the Final Operable Unit 2 Screening-level Risk Assessment Report (OU-2 SLRA, ERM
2017b) using data collected in Phase 1A and Phase 1A -B for air, solids (surface and subsurface
samples), surface water, and groundwater (ERM 2013, 2016a, 2016b). Air, surface water, and
groundwater COPCs were selected on a Site-wide basis; and COPCs for solids were selected on a
Preliminary Remedial Investigation (PRI) Area basis.
COPCs were identified by comparing the maximum detected concentration of an analyte in a given
medium against its respective RBSL. For this screening step, maximum detected concentrations in solids
were “corrected” to account for differences in concentration between bulk and fine fractions in accordance
with the Bulk vs. Fine Technical Memo for OU-1 RI Phase 1A (Appendix J to ERM 2016a). If the
corrected maximum detected concentration exceeded the RBSL (Max Detect / RBSL ratio > 1), the
constituent was identified as a COPC. Exceptions to this were:
 Bioaccumulative compounds1, which were carried through as COPCs in all PRI Areas, including for
non-bioaccumulative pathways, even if the maximum detected concentration was less than the
RBSL; and
 Essential nutrients, which were excluded from consideration as COPCs.
RBSLs used in the OU-1 SLRA were taken from the May 2016 Regional Screening Levels (RSL) tables
distributed by USEPA (2016), and RBSLs used the OU-2 SLRA were taken from the June 2017 RSL
tables (USEPA 2017). RBSL values were based on the lesser of the hazard quotient = 0.1 and cancer
risk level of 10-6 for the following:
 Ambient air – USEPA Industrial Air RSLs
 Solid media (soil/sediment) – USEPA Industrial Soil RSLs
 Aqueous media (surface water and groundwater) – USEPA Residential Tap Water RSLs
COPC SELECTION IN THE BHHRA
Additional solids, surface water, and groundwater data were collected after the OU-1 SLRA was
conducted. Table D-1 summarizes the remedial investigation (RI) data collection phases and the media
collected during each phase. The datasets described in Section 2.4 of the Final OU-1 Baseline Human
Health Risk Assessment (BHHRA ) were used to develop summary statistics tables for each PRI Area for
solids. Subsurface solids data were not included in the BHHRA. Surface water samples from the five PRI
Areas in which surface water exposure potentially occurs were combined into one summary statistics
table. These summary statistics tables were used to screen the BHHRA datasets for COPCs , using the
same process as in the OU-1 SLRA and OU-2 SLRA . The RBSLs were selected from the most recent
RSLs available at the time, from November 2020 (USEPA 2020).

1 Defined in Final Screening Level Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum (ERM 2014) as: mercury;
hexachlorobutadiene; hexachlorobenzene; pentachlorobenzene; 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene; TCDD and other
polychlorinated dioxins and furans; and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
www.erm.com Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page D-2
Final OU-1 Baseline BHHRA Appendix D
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
SELECTION AND REFINEMENT PROCESS
The ambient air COPC screening table (unchanged from the OU-2 SLRA) is provided as Table D-2.
Solids COPC screening results are shown in Tables D-3 through D-16, and surface water COPC
screening results are shown in Table D-17. The groundwater COPC screening table is included in
Appendix B.
COPC REFINEMENT PROCESS
As described in Section 3 of the Revised Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical
Memorandum (ERM 2018), refinement of COPCs was conducted for data used in the BHHRA other than
background data. The refinement process is based on Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Part A
(RAGS A) (USEPA 1989) Section 5.5, which recommends that when a chemical that is a common
laboratory contaminant (these include acetone, 2-butanone, methylene chloride, toluene, and phthalate
esters) is detected in blank samples, Site sample results should be ranked as nondetects unless the
amount of chemical in Site samples exceeds 10-times the level in any blank. For all other chemicals,
RAGS A recommends that s ite samples should be ranked as nondetects unless the amount of chemical
in site samples exceeds 5-times the level in any blank. These guidelines are known as the “5x -10x rule.”
In addition, RAGS A Section 5.9.3 identifies detection frequency as a valid factor to consider in the
refinement of COPCs, and indicates that any constituent detected in fewer than 5 percent of the samples
may be considered for exclusion if it is not detected at a high concentration in other environmental media
and if there is no reason to expect that it is site related. If, after application of the 5x -10x rule, a
constituent is detected in less than 5 percent of samples, it may be removed from the COPC list if the
other two criteria above also apply.
Sample data (uncorrected for fines concentrations) were compared to blank data generated during the
same phase of sample collection, as shown in Table D-1. COPC refinement did not need to be applied to
dioxin, furan, and PCB congeners because blank contamination is addressed during validation per
Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Chlorinated Dioxin/Furan Review
(USEPA 2011) and National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Organic Methods Data Review (USEPA
2014).
Blank Comparison Data Grouping
To apply the 5x -10x rule, sample data were grouped by matrix and the phase during which data were
collected (data groups), as follows (and shown in Table D-1):
1.Demonstration of Method Applicability – solids only
2.Phase 1A solids – 2013-2014
3.Phase 1A groundwater - 2014
4.Phase 1A surface water, Group 1 – 2013-2014
5.Phase 1A surface water, Group 2 – 2015
6.Phase 1AB solids
7.Phase 2A solids
8.Phase 2B surface water by event (four quarterly events)
9.Phase 2B groundwater by event (four quarterly events)
10.Phase 1AB SAP Mod 4 (solids – 2019)
11.Phase 1AB SAP Mod 5 (solids – 2019)
12.Phase 1AB SAP Mods 6 and 7 (solids – 2019 and 2020)
www.erm.com Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page D-3
Final OU-1 Baseline BHHRA Appendix D
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
SELECTION AND REFINEMENT PROCESS
The field and laboratory blanks 2 associated with each data group were pooled. The maximum
concentration of each constituent detected in any of the blanks was selected, and the 5x -10x rule was
applied to the associated sample data as described below.
Comparison of Sample Data to Blank Concentrations
For each COPC except toxicity equivalent (TEQ ) and PCB s 3 , the maximum detected blank concentration
for each COPC in the data group in which the samples were collected was determined.
1.Blank concentrations were adjusted to match the units in the sample data; for example, if the highest
blank concentration is reported in micrograms per kilogram and the sample data are in milligrams per
kilogram (mg/kg), the blank concentration was divided by 1,000 to convert to mg/kg. A number of
COPCs were never detected in blanks, and subsequent steps were not needed.4
2.Once t he maximum blank concentration for a COPC in a phase was identified, it was determined if
the COPC is a common lab contaminant:
Acetone
2-butanone
Methylene chloride
Toluene
Phthalate esters (any phthalate compound)
3.For COPCs other than lab contaminants, the max imum detected blank concentration was multiplied
by 5; for common lab contaminants , the maximum detected blank concentration was multiplied by 10.
4.For any COPCs that had blank detects, the range of detected sample concentrations was compiled to
determine if any of the sample concentrations were less than 5x or 10x the maximum blank, as
applicable. If none of the sample concentrations were less than 5x/10x the maximum blank, no further
comparison was needed within that data group for that COPC.
5.If one or more sample concentration was less than 5x/10x the maximum blank, the 5x or 10x blank
concentration was compared to each detected concentration for the COPC within that data group.
6.If a detected sample concentration was less than 5x/10x the maximum blank, the sample
concentration was compared to the reporting limit. If the reporting limit was higher than the sample
concentration, the sample result was changed to the reporting limit and a U qualifier was added,
indicating it was not detected. If the sample result was greater than the reporting limit, the result was
qualified with a U.
2 Laboratory blanks include method blanks, preparation blanks, and reagent blanks, as applicable to each matrix, and
field blanks include trip blanks (for volatile organic compounds), equipment blanks, and source blanks.
3 Blank concentrations for dioxins/furans and PCB congeners were evaluated and adjusted during data validation.
4 If any solid matrix samples were collected in a data group, some blank data will be in solid units (such as mg/kg)
and some will be in liquid units (such as milligrams per liter). This is because laboratory blanks for solids use a clean
solid matrix, while laboratory blanks for aqueous samples and all field blanks use a clean water source. All blank data
within a data group are applicable to all samples within a data group, so if both solid and aqueous matrix samples
were collected within a data group, it could be that the maximum blank concentration has solid units , but will also be
compared to aqueous samples.
www.erm.com Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page D-4
Final OU-1 Baseline BHHRA Appendix D
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
SELECTION AND REFINEMENT PROCESS
These steps were applied to each of the data groups that make up a COPC dataset. Some data groups
within a dataset may not have had blank detects, while others did. The overall dataset was evaluated
after application of the 5x/10x blank rule. The potential effect s on COPC selection at this point were:
1.The maximum detected concentration was not higher than the RBSL, and the constituent was
removed from the COPC list ; or
2.The maximum detected concentration was higher than the RBSL, and the next refinement step was
applied.
Review of Frequency of Detection
If some sample results within a dataset of at least 20 samples c hanged from det ected to not detected due
to blank c ontamination, the percent detected was calculated t o determine if t here were less t han
5 percent frequency of det ection. If t here were, t hen the constituent was no longer c onsidered a COPC,
unless it is a bioaccumulative compound (hex achlorobenzen e, 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene,
hexachlorobutadiene, pentac hlorobenzene, and mercury).
Blank comparison ste ps for eac h PRI for s olids are presented in the attached tables. A list of t ables is
presented following this text.
COPC REFINEMENT RESULTS
The results of t he COPC refinement are summarized in Tables D-18 (air), D-19 (solids), and D-20
(surface water). Results for groundwater are provided in Appendix B .
Air
Phase 1A Site-wide air dat a for COPCs underwent t he COPC refinement process. The initial blank
comparison step indicated two COPCs required comparison of blank c onc ent rations t o i ndividual s ample
concentrations. Table D-21A provides t he initial blank c omparison for air COPCs, and Table D-21B shows
the dataset refinement det ails.
Solids
COPC refinement was c onducted on a PRI bas is on solids dat a collected throughout t he remedial
investigation. Tables D-22A t hrough D-35B s how t he detailed COPC refinement process.
Surface Water
COPC refinement was c onducted on surface water dat a for P RIs where there is a complete exposure
pathway (PRIs 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8). Tables D-36A t hrough D-40B s how t he detailed COPC refinement
process.
Groundwater
COPC refinement results for Site groundwater are provided in Appendix B. Attachment 1 of A ppendix B,
Tables B1-1 through B1-6, s how t he o verall blank c omparison for COPCs det ected in blanks for each
phase of groundwater dat a collection. A tt achment 1, Tables B 1-7 t hrough B1-37, provide the comparison
of individual s ample COPC c oncentrations in cases where at least one sample was affected by t he 5 x-
10x rule. Ultimately, t he blank c omparison process only affected a few COPCs and had little effect on
selection of exposure point conce ntrations because the maximum det ected concentration in the well was
used to estimate risks (Appendix B, Section B4.4).

www.erm.com Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022 Page D-5
Final OU-1 Baseline BHHRA Appendix D
US Magnesium – Operable Unit 1, Rowley, Utah
CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
SELECTION AND REFINEMENT PROCESS
FINAL DATASETS FOR EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONS
The final datasets from the COPC refinement process were used, along with datasets not subject to
refinement (TEQs, PCBs, and COPCs without blank detects) to derive exposure point concentrations, as
described in Section 4.5 of the BHHRA.
REFERENCES
ERM -West, Inc. (ERM). 2013. Draft Phase 1A Laboratory Demonstration of Method Applicability
Technical Memorandum for Solids, Sediment, Waste, and Water. January.
ERM. 2014. Final Screening Level Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum . July.
ERM. 2016a. Final Phase 1A Data Report for PRI Areas 2 and 8 through 17. March.
ERM. 2016b. Final Phase 1A -B Remedial Investigation Data Report. October.
ERM. 2017a. Final OU-1 Screening-Level Risk Assessment Report . April.
ERM. 2017b. Final Operable Unit 2 Screening-level Risk Assessment Report. September.
ERM. 2018. Revised Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum. US
Magnesium Facility. Tooele County, Utah. December.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund:
Volume I – Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part A). Interim Final. EPA/540/1-89/002.
Washington, DC: Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. December.
USEPA. 2011. Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Chlorinated Dioxin/Furan
Data Review. EPA-540-R-11-016. September.
USEPA. 2014. National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Organic Methods Data Review (SOM02.2).
OSWER 9355.0-132. EPA 540-R-014-002. August.
USEPA. 2016. Regional Screening Levels . USEPA o n-line database: https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-
screening-levels -rsls . May.
USEPA. 2017. Regional Screening Levels . USEPA on-line database: https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-
screening-levels -rsls . June.
USEPA. 2020. Regional Screening Levels . USEPA on-line database: https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-
screening-levels -rsls . November.

TABLES
APPENDIX D – LIST OF TABLES 
Table D‐1: Summary of PRI Data Collection by Phase and Matrix 
Table D‐2: Ambient Air COPC Selection 
Table D‐3: PRI 2 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐4: PRI 4 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐5: PRI 5 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐6: PRI 6 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐7: PRI 7 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐8: PRI 8 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐9: PRI 9 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐10: PRI 10 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐11: PRI 11 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐12: PRI 12 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐13: PRI 13 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐14: PRI 14 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐15: PRI 15 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐16: PRI 16 COPC Selection ‐ Solids 
Table D‐17: Site‐Wide Surface Water COPC Selection 
Table D‐18: Summary of COPC Refinement – Ambient Air 
Table D‐19: Summary of COPC Refinement – Solids 
Table D‐20: Summary of COPC Refinement ‐ Surface Water 
Table D‐21A: Air Blank Comparison 
Table D‐21B: Air Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement 
Table D‐22A: PRI 2 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐22B: PRI 2 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐23A: PRI 4 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐23B: PRI 4 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐24A: PRI 5 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐24B: PRI 5 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐25A: PRI 6 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐25B: PRI 6 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐26A: PRI 7 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐26B: PRI 7 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐27A PRI 8 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐27B: PRI 8 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐28A: PRI 9 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐28B: PRI 9 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐29A: PRI 10 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐29B: PRI 10 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐30A: PRI 11 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐30B: PRI 11 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐31A: PRI 12 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐31B: PRI 12 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐32A: PRI 13 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐32B: PRI 13 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐33A: PRI 14 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐33B: PRI 14 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐34A: PRI 15 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐34B: PRI 15 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐35A: PRI 16 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern ‐ Solids 
Table D‐35B: PRI 16 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement ‐ Solids 
Table D‐36A: PRI 3 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern – Surface Water 
Table D‐36B: PRI 3 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement – Surface Water 
Table D‐37A: PRI 4 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern – Surface Water 
Table D‐37B: PRI 4 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement – Surface Water 
Table D‐38A: PRI 5 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern – Surface Water 
Table D‐38B: PRI 5 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement – Surface Water 
Table D‐39A: PRI 6 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern – Surface Water 
Table D‐39B: PRI 6 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement – Surface Water 
Table D‐40A: PRI 8 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern – Surface Water 
Table D‐40B: PRI 8 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement – Surface Water 
Table D‐41: Notes and Abbreviations 
Table D-1
Summary of PRI Data Collection by Phase and Matrix
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Phase PRI 2 PRI 3 PRI 4 PRI 5 PRI 6 PRI 7 PRI 8 PRI 9 PRI 10 PRI 11 PRI 12 PRI 13 PRI 14 PRI 15 PRI 16
Air - Site-wide 1A
1A DMA XXXX X XX
1AX XXXXXXXXX
1AB XXXX
2A XXXX XXX
SM 4 X X
SM 5 XX
SM 6/7 X
1A - 2014 XXXX X
1A - 2015
2B-1 X X
2B-2 X X X
2B-3 X X
2B-4 X X
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Solids
Surface Water
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-2
Ambient Air COPC Selection
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients and
Bioaccumulatives
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 µg/m3 32 32 100% 1.6E-06 1.8E-05 BioaccumulativeŦ 8.6E-02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 µg/m3 32 32 100% 1.6E-06 1.8E-05 BioaccumulativeŦ 9.1E-02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 µg/m3 32 32 100% 4.9E-04 2.1E-02 BioaccumulativeŦ 2.4E-02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Antimony 7440-36-0 µg/m3 33 32 97% 5.6E-04 2.8E-05 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Arsenic 7440-38-2 µg/m3 33 31 94% 1.3E-02 3.2E-04 2.9E-03 4.4E+00 1.1E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Beryllium 7440-41-7 µg/m3 33 27 82% 5.7E-05 6.1E-06 5.1E-03 1.1E-02 1.2E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Cadmium 7440-43-9 µg/m3 33 33 100% 3.4E-04 4.4E-03 7.7E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chromium*7440-47-3 µg/m3 33 33 100% 4.4E-02 1.5E-04 2.9E+02 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Cobalt 7440-48-4 µg/m3 33 33 100% 6.5E-04 1.4E-03 4.7E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Lead^7439-92-1 µg/m3 33 33 100% 6.5E-03 1.5E-01 4.4E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Magnesium 7439-95-4 µg/m3 33 33 100% 2.6E+00 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Manganese 7439-96-5 µg/m3 33 33 100% 2.8E-02 2.2E-02 1.3E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Mercury 7439-97-6 µg/m3 33 33 100% 4.6E-05 1.3E-01 BioaccumulativeŦ 3.6E-04 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Molybdenum 7439-98-7 µg/m3 33 33 100% 9.7E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Nickel 7440-02-0 µg/m3 33 33 100% 2.6E-02 3.9E-02 6.5E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Selenium 7782-49-2 µg/m3 33 29 88% 2.8E-03 3.2E-04 8.8E+00 3.1E-04 3.6E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Silver 7440-22-4 µg/m3 33 32 97% 2.5E-04 2.2E-05 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Thallium 7440-28-0 µg/m3 33 21 64% 1.4E-04 7.1E-06 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Vanadium 7440-62-2 µg/m3 33 29 88% 1.9E-03 4.1E-04 4.4E-02 4.4E-02 9.2E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Zinc 7440-66-6 µg/m3 33 33 100% 7.3E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 µg/m3 34 0 0%1.5E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 µg/m3 30 0 0%1.9E-03 4.0E+00 NA 4.8E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 µg/m3 27 0 0%1.9E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 µg/m3 30 0 0%1.9E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 µg/m3 11 0 0%1.3E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 µg/m3 34 0 0%1.9E-03 1.4E-01 NA 1.4E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 µg/m3 34 1 3% 9.9E-04 1.9E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 µg/m3 34 0 0%1.7E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 µg/m3 30 0 0%2.1E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 µg/m3 30 0 0%1.4E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 µg/m3 34 0 0%2.8E-03 3.6E-02 NA 7.7E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 µg/m3 23 0 0%3.5E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 µg/m3 34 0 0%2.8E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 µg/m3 32 0 0%1.2E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 µg/m3 34 1 3% 7.1E-03 2.1E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 µg/m3 7 0 0%2.4E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 µg/m3 34 27 79% 6.5E-03 2.0E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 µg/m3 34 0 0%2.3E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 µg/m3 34 2 6% 5.2E-03 2.3E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 µg/m3 34 0 0%2.4E-03 2.0E-01 NA 1.2E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 µg/m3 34 0 0%2.3E-03 8.8E-04 NA 2.6E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 µg/m3 34 0 0%3.8E-03 2.0E-01 NA 1.9E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 µg/m3 34 0 0%4.5E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 µg/m3 34 0 0%2.8E-03 2.0E+00 NA 1.4E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 µg/m3 34 0 0%1.3E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 µg/m3 34 0 0%1.5E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 µg/m3 34 0 0%1.7E-03 3.7E-02 NA 4.6E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 µg/m3 34 1 3% 1.0E-01 1.6E-02 5.1E+00 2.0E-02 3.2E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 µg/m3 34 0 0%2.8E-03 2.0E+01 NA 1.4E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 µg/m3 34 0 0%5.5E-03 2.0E-02 NA 2.8E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 µg/m3 34 0 0%9.0E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 µg/m3 34 1 3% 8.8E-04 2.1E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-2
Ambient Air COPC Selection
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients and
Bioaccumulatives
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 µg/m3 34 2 6% 2.1E-01 6.1E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 µg/m3 34 0 0%1.3E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 µg/m3 34 6 18% 2.9E-03 2.9E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 µg/m3 34 34 100% 1.2E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 µg/m3 34 33 97% 2.4E-02 1.7E-03 2.7E-02 BioaccumulativeŦ 9.0E-01 6.1E-02 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 µg/m3 34 23 68% 3.8E-03 1.4E-03 5.6E-01 BioaccumulativeŦ 6.8E-03 2.5E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 µg/m3 11 0 0%6.7E-03 8.8E-02 NA 7.6E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 µg/m3 34 0 0%2.3E-03 1.1E+00 NA 2.0E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 µg/m3 34 0 0%4.9E-03 2.0E-01 NA 2.4E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 µg/m3 34 0 0%1.2E-03 8.8E+02 NA 1.3E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 µg/m3 34 27 79% 3.1E-02 7.4E-03 3.6E-01 8.6E-02 2.1E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 µg/m3 34 0 0%1.2E-03 3.1E-01 NA 4.0E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 µg/m3 34 0 0%1.4E-03 6.1E-03 NA 2.3E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 µg/m3 34 0 0%2.4E-03 4.7E+00 NA 5.2E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 µg/m3 28 0 0%3.8E-03 2.4E+00 NA 1.6E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 µg/m3 34 28 82% 2.2E-02 7.6E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 µg/m3 30 2 7% 1.4E-02 4.6E-03 8.8E+01 1.6E-04 5.2E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 µg/m3 34 6 18% 5.9E-03 3.3E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 µg/m3 32 0 0%5.0E-01 2.2E+03 NA 2.3E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 µg/m3 32 1 3% 2.3E-02 2.3E-02 2.1E-01 1.1E-01 1.1E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon-1 76-13-1 µg/m3 32 31 97% 6.1E-01 5.0E-01 2.2E+03 2.8E-04 2.3E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 µg/m3 32 1 3% 2.1E-02 2.3E-02 8.8E-02 2.4E-01 2.6E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.7E-01 7.7E+00 NA 6.1E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 µg/m3 32 0 0%5.0E-01 8.8E+01 NA 5.7E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 µg/m3 32 0 0%3.1E-02 8.8E-01 NA 3.5E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 µg/m3 32 0 0%2.9E-01 2.0E-03 NA 1.5E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 µg/m3 32 0 0%3.0E-02 2.0E-02 NA 1.5E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.4E-01 8.8E+01 NA 5.0E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 µg/m3 32 32 100% 2.8E-01 4.7E-01 6.0E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 µg/m3 32 14 44% 3.8E-02 2.1E-02 1.8E+00 2.1E-02 1.2E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.4E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 µg/m3 32 2 6% 1.4E-02 2.7E-02 1.1E+00 1.3E-02 2.5E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.7E-01 2.5E+00 NA 1.9E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Butanone 78-93-3 µg/m3 32 28 88% 2.0E+00 4.0E-01 2.2E+03 9.3E-04 1.8E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Hexanone 591-78-6 µg/m3 32 2 6% 5.6E-01 4.7E-01 1.3E+01 4.3E-02 3.6E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.7E-01 1.3E+03 NA 3.6E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Acetone 67-64-1 µg/m3 32 32 100% 1.7E+01 1.4E+04 1.2E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzene 71-43-2 µg/m3 32 18 56% 1.4E+00 4.7E-01 1.6E+00 8.8E-01 2.9E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 µg/m3 32 26 81% 8.3E-02 2.6E-02 3.3E-01 2.5E-01 7.9E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromoform 75-25-2 µg/m3 32 3 9% 5.2E-01 4.4E-01 1.1E+01 4.7E-02 4.0E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromomethane 74-83-9 µg/m3 32 0 0%5.6E-01 2.2E+00 NA 2.5E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 µg/m3 32 7 22% 1.4E+00 4.4E-01 3.1E+02 4.6E-03 1.4E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 µg/m3 32 32 100% 1.1E+00 2.0E+00 5.5E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.7E-01 2.2E+01 NA 2.1E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chloroethane 75-00-3 µg/m3 32 0 0%5.0E-01 4.4E+03 NA 1.1E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chloroform 67-66-3 µg/m3 32 30 94% 1.5E-01 1.2E-02 5.3E-01 2.8E-01 2.3E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloromethane 74-87-3 µg/m3 32 28 88% 6.0E-01 4.4E-01 3.9E+01 1.5E-02 1.1E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.7E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-01-5 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.1E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Cyclohexane 110-82-7 µg/m3 32 2 6% 2.5E+00 8.6E-01 2.6E+03 9.6E-04 3.3E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 µg/m3 32 2 6% 1.6E-01 4.7E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon-12)75-71-8 µg/m3 32 32 100% 2.8E+00 4.4E+01 6.4E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-2
Ambient Air COPC Selection
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients and
Bioaccumulatives
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)75-09-2 µg/m3 32 31 97% 4.8E+00 3.9E-01 2.6E+02 1.8E-02 1.5E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.7E-01 4.9E+00 NA 9.6E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.4E-01 1.8E+02 NA 2.4E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 µg/m3 32 1 3% 6.2E-01 8.9E-01 4.4E+01 1.4E-02 2.0E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Methyl tertbutyl ether (MTBE)1634-04-4 µg/m3 32 0 0%5.0E-01 4.7E+01 NA 1.1E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
o-Xylene 95-47-6 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.4E-01 4.4E+01 NA 1.0E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Styrene 100-42-5 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.4E-01 4.4E+02 NA 1.0E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 µg/m3 32 1 3% 1.7E-01 4.1E-01 1.8E+01 9.4E-03 2.3E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Toluene 108-88-3 µg/m3 32 23 72% 6.0E+00 3.9E-01 2.2E+03 2.7E-03 1.8E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 µg/m3 32 0 0%5.6E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 µg/m3 32 0 0%4.7E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 µg/m3 32 21 66% 1.5E-01 2.1E-02 8.8E-01 1.7E-01 2.4E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon-11)75-69-4 µg/m3 32 32 100% 1.9E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 µg/m3 32 0 0%5.0E-01 2.8E+00 NA 1.8E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
TSP TSP µg/m3 33 33 100% 7.2E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
PM10^PM10 µg/m3 34 34 100% 4.3E+01 1.5E+02 2.9E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Notes:
^ RBSLs for PM10 and lead are the 24-hour NAAQS for 24-hour exposure
Ŧ Bioaccumulative constituents are retained as COPCs per the SLRA TM; however, bioaccumulation does not apply to the inhalation exposure pathway.
* = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used for comparison is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
µg/m 3 = Micrograms per cubic meter
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
DL = Detection limit
NA = Not applicable
NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards
ND = Not detected
NSV = No screening value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PM10 = Particulate material less than 10 microns in diameter
RBSL = Risk-based screening level (November 2020, for Industrial Air, THQ=0.1)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
TSP = Total suspended particulates
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-3
PRI 2 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 14 14 100% 9.8.E+03 1.1.E+04 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.5E+02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 14 14 100% 9.9.E+03 1.1.E+04 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.5E+02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 14 14 100% 1.1.E+07 1.4.E+07 9.4E+05 Bioaccumulative 1.5E+01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.2.E+03 6.4.E+03 1.1E+05 5.9E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.0.E+00 9.3.E-01 4.7E+01 2.0E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.2.E+01 1.2.E+01 3.0E+00 4.1E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 6.5.E+02 4.5.E+02 2.2E+04 2.1E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 4.3.E-01 4.9.E-01 2.3E+02 2.1E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 14 5 36% 4.4.E-01 4.1.E-01 1.E-01 9.8E+01 4.2E-03 1.3.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.7.E+05 3.0.E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.1.E+01 5.1.E+01 6.3E+00 8.1E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 14 14 100% 8.1.E+00 8.3.E+00 3.5E+01 2.4E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.2.E+02 1.2.E+02 4.7E+03 2.6E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.8.E+04 3.9.E+04 8.2E+04 4.8E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.9.E+01 2.7.E+01 8.0E+02 3.4E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 14 14 100% 7.6.E+04 8.2.E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.7.E+02 4.4.E+02 2.6E+03 1.7E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 14 2 14% 2.5.E-02 2.4.E-02 3.E-02 4.6E+00 Bioaccumulative 5.1E-03 5.9.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.6.E+01 1.3.E+01 5.8E+02 2.2E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.9.E+01 9.0.E+01 2.2E+03 4.1E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 14 13 93% 7.7.E+03 6.5.E+03 1.E+02 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 14 3 21% 2.8.E-01 3.3.E-01 3.E-01 5.8E+02 5.7E-04 4.5.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%8.E-02 5.8E+02 NA 1.4.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 4.4.E+03 3.1.E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 1.2E+00 NA 1.1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 4.1.E+01 4.3.E+01 5.8E+02 7.3E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 14 14 100% 8.0.E+01 8.4.E+01 3.5E+04 2.4E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E+00 2.0E+01 NA 9.5.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.E-01 3.5E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 8.6.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 2.5E+03 NA 3.8.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 8.2E+03 NA 1.2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.E-02 8.2E+01 NA 6.2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.E-01 4.7E+03 NA 2.0.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 2.5E+02 NA 4.0.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E+00 1.6E+03 NA 1.3.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.E+00 1.6E+02 NA 1.6.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 7.4E+00 NA 1.4.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 1.5E+00 NA 8.0.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 6.0E+03 NA 1.6.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 5.8E+02 NA 1.7.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.E-01 4.1E+03 NA 1.7.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 8.0E+02 NA 1.2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 5.1E+00 NA 2.2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-3
PRI 2 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 6.6E+00 NA 1.4.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 8.2E+03 NA 1.3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.E-01 1.1E+01 NA 6.2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.E+00 4.1E+03 NA 9.5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 1.1E+02 NA 9.1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.E-01 1.2E+04 NA 2.4.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E+00 8.2E+02 NA 2.3.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 14 1 7% 3.1.E-01 6.2.E-01 1.E+00 1.2E+03 5.2E-04 9.2.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 2.5E+02 NA 4.0.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 1.0E+00 NA 9.5.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 14 1 7% 1.1.E+00 1.1.E+00 1.E+00 1.6E+02 6.9E-03 6.9.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 1.0E+02 NA 1.0.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 6.6E+04 NA 1.7.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 8.2E+03 NA 1.3.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 8.2E+02 NA 1.3.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.0.E+01 6.7.E+01 9.6E-01 Bioaccumulative 7.0E+01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.E-02 5.3E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 8.6.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.E-01 7.5E-01 NA 9.7.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 8.0E+00 NA 1.2.E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 2.4E+03 NA 4.6.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.E-01 2.2E+01 NA 4.0.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 3.4E-02 NA 3.2.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 3.3E-01 NA 3.0.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 4.7E+02 NA 2.1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 14 1 7% 4.6.E-01 9.2.E-01 4.E-01 4.0E+00 2.3E-01 9.8.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E+00 2.5E+04 NA 3.9.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 14 12 86% 1.9.E-02 3.8.E-02 6.E-04 3.0E+02 1.3E-04 1.9.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 14 3 21% 4.3.E-03 8.6.E-03 7.E-04 4.5E+03 1.9E-06 1.5.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 14 7 50% 7.0.E-03 7.0.E-03 6.E-04 2.3E+04 3.0E-07 2.4.E-08 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 14 9 64% 1.9.E-02 3.8.E-02 4.E-04 2.1E+01 1.8E-03 2.0.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 14 8 57% 9.2.E-03 1.8.E-02 6.E-04 2.1E+00 8.8E-03 2.7.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 14 8 57% 4.7.E-02 9.4.E-02 7.E-04 2.1E+01 4.5E-03 3.4.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 14 5 36% 1.8.E-02 3.6.E-02 1.E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 14 3 21% 2.0.E-02 4.0.E-02 1.E-03 2.1E+02 1.9E-04 5.2.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 14 12 86% 6.2.E-02 1.2.E-01 4.E-04 2.1E+03 5.9E-05 2.0.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 14 2 14% 1.3.E-02 2.6.E-02 2.E-03 2.1E+00 1.2E-02 8.6.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-3
PRI 2 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 14 12 86% 3.6.E-02 7.2.E-02 4.E-04 3.0E+03 2.4E-05 1.2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 14 3 21% 3.3.E-03 6.6.E-03 3.E-03 3.0E+03 2.2E-06 9.0.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 14 5 36% 1.2.E-02 2.4.E-02 7.E-04 2.1E+01 1.1E-03 3.2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 14 12 86% 1.4.E-02 2.8.E-02 4.E-04 1.7E+01 1.6E-03 2.4.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 14 8 57% 2.5.E-02 5.0.E-02 4.E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 14 13 93% 7.4.E-02 1.5.E-01 4.E-04 2.3E+03 6.4E-05 1.9.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 14 1 7% 3.2.E-03 3.2.E-03 5.E-02 8.2E+01 3.9E-05 6.6.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 14 2 14% 4.7.E-01 4.7.E-01 3.E-01 1.5E+01 3.1E-02 1.8.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk Based Screening Level
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-4
PRI 4 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 17 17 100% 9.3E+03 9.3E+03 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 17 17 100% 9.3E+03 9.3E+03 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 17 17 100% 3.1E+06 4.1E+06 9.4E+05 Bioaccumulative 3.E+00 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 17 17 100% 9.1E+03 9.1E+03 1.1E+05 8.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 17 17 100% 8.5E+00 8.5E+00 4.7E+01 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 17 17 100% 3.0E+01 3.0E+01 3.0E+00 1.E+01 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 17 17 100% 3.4E+02 3.4E+02 2.2E+04 2.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 17 17 100% 4.2E-01 4.2E-01 2.3E+02 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 17 2 12% 3.2E-01 3.2E-01 7.3E-02 9.8E+01 3.E-03 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 17 17 100% 3.0E+05 3.0E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 17 17 100% 1.3E+01 1.3E+01 6.3E+00 2.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 17 17 100% 3.3E+00 3.3E+00 3.5E+01 9.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 17 17 100% 1.0E+01 2.6E+01 4.7E+03 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 17 17 100% 5.4E+04 5.4E+04 8.2E+04 7.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 17 16 94% 2.1E+00 2.1E+00 1.1E+01 8.0E+02 3.E-03 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 17 17 100% 3.1E+04 3.1E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 17 17 100% 4.8E+02 4.8E+02 2.6E+03 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 17 15 88% 2.4E-01 2.4E-01 1.4E-02 4.6E+00 Bioaccumulative 5.E-02 3.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 17 17 100% 4.6E+00 4.6E+00 5.8E+02 8.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 17 17 100% 1.3E+01 1.3E+01 2.2E+03 6.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 17 16 94% 3.9E+03 3.9E+03 1.1E+02 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 17 8 47% 1.9E-01 1.9E-01 1.6E-01 5.8E+02 3.E-04 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 17 2 12% 6.5E-02 6.5E-02 4.4E-02 5.8E+02 1.E-04 8.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 17 17 100% 4.2E+03 4.2E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 17 14 82% 1.3E-01 1.3E-01 6.7E-02 1.2E+00 1.E-01 6.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 17 17 100% 8.9E+01 8.9E+01 5.8E+02 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 17 15 88% 3.0E+01 3.0E+01 9.5E-01 3.5E+04 9.E-04 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 2.7E+01 2.0E+01 NA 1.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 4.3E+00 3.5E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 1.E-01 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.4E+01 2.5E+03 NA 6.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.4E+01 8.2E+03 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E+00 8.2E+01 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E+01 4.7E+03 NA 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E+01 2.5E+02 NA 6.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 2.8E+01 1.6E+03 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 3.6E+01 1.6E+02 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E+01 7.4E+00 NA 2.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.6E+01 1.5E+00 NA 1.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E+01 6.0E+03 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E+01 5.8E+02 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 9.6E+00 4.1E+03 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.4E+01 8.0E+02 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.4E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.6E+01 5.1E+00 NA 3.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 2.8E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E+01 6.6E+00 NA 2.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.4E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E+01 8.2E+03 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 9.6E+00 1.1E+01 NA 9.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 16 2 13% 7.7E+01 7.7E+01 5.5E+01 4.1E+03 2.E-02 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E+01 1.1E+02 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 4.6E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 5.4E+00 1.2E+04 NA 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 2.7E+01 8.2E+02 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.6E+01 1.2E+03 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E+01 2.5E+02 NA 6.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E+01 1.0E+00 NA 1.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.6E+01 1.6E+02 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.6E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.4E+01 1.0E+02 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E+01 6.6E+04 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.4E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-4
PRI 4 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.6E+01 8.2E+03 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.6E+01 8.2E+02 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 17 16 94% 7.6E+01 7.6E+01 2.5E-01 9.6E-01 Bioaccumulative 8.E+01 3.E-01 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E+00 5.3E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 2.E-01 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.0E+01 7.5E-01 NA 1.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E+01 8.0E+00 NA 2.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E+01 2.4E+03 NA 6.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E+01 2.2E+01 NA 6.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.6E+01 3.4E-02 NA 5.E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.4E+01 3.3E-01 NA 4.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.4E+01 4.7E+02 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.2E+00 9.3E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 2.E-02 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 4.0E+00 4.0E+00 NA 1.E+00 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.4E+01 2.5E+04 NA 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 16 1 6% 1.1E-03 1.1E-03 7.2E-03 3.0E+02 4.E-06 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 7.9E-03 4.5E+03 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 5.5E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 6.6E-03 2.3E+04 NA 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 5.1E-03 2.1E+01 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 16 4 25% 1.2E-02 1.2E-02 6.5E-03 2.1E+00 6.E-03 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 8.5E-03 2.1E+01 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.7E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E-02 2.1E+02 NA 6.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 5.8E-03 2.1E+03 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 2.0E-02 2.1E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 4.9E-03 3.0E+03 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 8.2E-03 3.0E+03 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 8.0E-03 2.1E+01 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 16 1 6% 7.7E-04 7.7E-04 5.1E-03 1.7E+01 5.E-05 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 16 2 13% 1.1E-03 1.1E-03 5.9E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 16 0 0%0.0E+00 5.9E-03 2.3E+03 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 9.8E-02 2.4E+01 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 7.3E-04 1.6E+01 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 mg/kg 14 1 7% 8.2E-04 8.2E-04 6.4E-04 1.0E+02 8.E-06 6.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.2E-03 6.4E-02 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 6.8E-04 1.6E-01 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.6E-03 9.3E+02 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.8E-03 2.0E+00 NA 9.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.2E-03 2.3E+02 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 9.5E-04 2.3E+03 NA 4.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E-03 6.6E+00 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 7.5E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-01-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.6E-03 8.2E+00 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-02-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.9E-03 8.2E+00 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.0E-03 1.1E+01 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 9.0E-04 3.6E+03 NA 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.1E-03 6.3E-01 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon-113)76-13-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.1E-03 2.8E+03 NA 8.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.9E-03 9.3E+01 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.9E-03 2.6E+01 NA 7.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.7E-03 2.7E+00 NA 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Butanone 78-93-3 mg/kg 14 4 29% 1.1E-02 1.1E-02 5.3E-03 1.9E+04 6.E-07 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Hexanone 591-78-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.9E-03 1.3E+02 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.3E-03 1.4E+04 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Acetone 67-64-1 mg/kg 14 2 14% 9.2E-02 9.2E-02 2.4E-02 6.7E+04 1.E-06 4.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzene 71-43-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 6.5E-04 5.1E+00 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.4E-03 6.3E+01 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/kg 14 2 14% 1.6E-01 1.6E-01 6.4E-03 1.3E+00 1.E-01 5.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/kg 14 12 86% 2.7E-01 2.7E-01 6.6E-04 8.6E+01 3.E-03 8.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromomethane 74-83-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.2E-03 3.0E+00 NA 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.2E-03 3.5E+02 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E-03 2.9E+00 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 7.3E-04 1.3E+02 NA 6.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Cyclohexane 110-82-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 6.6E-03 2.7E+03 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-4
PRI 4 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 mg/kg 14 6 43% 1.9E-01 1.9E-01 3.9E-03 3.9E+01 5.E-03 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloroethane 75-00-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.1E-03 5.7E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Chloroform 67-66-3 mg/kg 14 3 21% 8.2E-02 8.2E-02 3.4E-03 1.4E+00 6.E-02 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloromethane 74-87-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.5E-03 4.6E+01 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon-12)75-71-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.2E-03 3.7E+01 NA 6.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 mg/kg 14 5 36% 1.0E-03 1.0E-03 8.5E-04 2.5E+01 4.E-05 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.3E-03 9.9E+02 NA 1.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Methyl tertbutyl ether (MTBE)1634-04-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E-03 2.1E+02 NA 7.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)75-09-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 2.1E-03 3.2E+02 NA 7.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Styrene 100-42-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 7.8E-04 3.5E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 mg/kg 14 1 7% 7.2E-03 7.2E-03 1.5E-03 3.9E+01 2.E-04 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Toluene 108-88-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 1.5E-03 4.7E+03 NA 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 mg/kg 14 1 7% 3.2E-03 3.2E-03 1.5E-03 1.9E+00 2.E-03 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon-11)75-69-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 8.5E-04 3.5E+04 NA 2.E-08 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%0.0E+00 9.0E-04 1.7E+00 NA 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
o-Xylene 95-47-6 mg/kg 14 8 57% 1.6E-03 1.6E-03 8.3E-04 2.8E+02 6.E-06 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 mg/kg 14 9 64% 4.6E-03 4.6E-03 2.0E-03 2.4E+02 2.E-05 8.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 14 12 86% 1.6E-03 1.6E-03 5.6E-02 8.2E+01 2.E-05 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 16 1 6% 9.9E-01 9.9E-01 5.7E-01 1.5E+01 7.E-02 4.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected 4 = RBC listed is based on a mixture of cis- and trans-isomers (CAS 542-75-6).
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-5
PRI 5 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 35 35 100% 2.8E+04 2.8E+04 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 3.89E+02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 35 35 100% 2.9E+04 2.9E+04 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 4.03E+02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 35 35 100% 3.6E+07 4.7E+07 9.4E+05 Bioaccumulative 5.02E+01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 32 32 100% 1.6E+04 1.6E+04 1.1E+05 1.45E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 35 29 83% 4.3E+00 4.3E+00 1.6E+00 4.7E+01 9.15E-02 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 35 35 100% 3.0E+01 3.0E+01 3.0E+00 1.00E+01 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 35 35 100% 1.9E+03 1.9E+03 2.2E+04 8.64E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 32 29 91% 7.0E-01 7.0E-01 9.6E-02 2.3E+02 3.04E-03 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 32 24 75% 9.6E-01 9.6E-01 7.9E-01 9.8E+01 9.80E-03 8.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 32 32 100% 3.1E+05 3.1E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 35 35 100% 2.8E+01 2.8E+01 6.3E+00 4.44E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 32 31 97% 5.5E+00 5.5E+00 9.1E-01 3.5E+01 1.57E-01 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 32 32 100% 1.8E+01 4.7E+01 4.7E+03 9.90E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 32 32 100% 3.5E+04 3.5E+04 8.2E+04 4.27E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 32 32 100% 1.3E+01 1.3E+01 8.0E+02 1.63E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 32 32 100% 4.2E+04 4.2E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 32 32 100% 3.5E+02 3.5E+02 2.6E+03 1.35E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 32 21 66% 7.8E-02 7.8E-02 9.5E-03 4.6E+00 Bioaccumulative 1.70E-02 2.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 35 34 97% 3.2E+01 3.2E+01 9.7E-02 5.8E+02 5.52E-02 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 32 32 100% 1.4E+01 1.4E+01 2.2E+03 6.50E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 32 31 97% 6.5E+03 6.5E+03 8.2E+02 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 35 23 66% 1.9E+00 1.9E+00 1.6E+00 5.8E+02 3.28E-03 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 32 5 16% 1.1E-01 1.1E-01 4.7E-01 5.8E+02 1.90E-04 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 32 32 100% 1.5E+04 1.5E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 32 21 66% 2.5E-01 2.5E-01 7.9E-01 1.2E+00 2.08E-01 7.E-01 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 35 35 100% 5.4E+01 5.4E+01 5.8E+02 9.31E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 31 31 100% 4.2E+02 4.2E+02 3.5E+04 1.20E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 23 0 0%5.1E+02 2.0E+01 NA 3.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 26 0 0%8.0E+01 3.5E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 2.E+00 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.5E+02 2.5E+03 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.6E+02 8.2E+03 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.6E+02 8.2E+01 NA 3.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.4E+02 4.7E+03 NA 5.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.7E+02 2.5E+02 NA 1.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 23 0 0%5.1E+02 1.6E+03 NA 3.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 23 0 0%6.6E+02 1.6E+02 NA 4.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.7E+02 7.4E+00 NA 4.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 23 0 0%3.1E+02 1.5E+00 NA 2.E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.5E+02 6.0E+03 NA 4.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.7E+02 5.8E+02 NA 5.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 23 0 0%1.8E+02 4.1E+03 NA 4.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.6E+02 8.0E+02 NA 3.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.5E+02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.9E+02 5.1E+00 NA 6.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 23 0 0%5.1E+02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 26 0 0%2.5E+02 6.6E+00 NA 4.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.6E+02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.8E+02 8.2E+03 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 23 0 0%1.8E+02 1.1E+01 NA 2.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.9E+02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 23 0 0%1.0E+03 4.1E+03 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.7E+02 1.1E+02 NA 2.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 23 0 0%8.6E+02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 23 4 17% 2.4E+02 2.4E+02 7.6E+01 1.2E+04 2.00E-02 6.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 23 0 0%5.1E+02 8.2E+02 NA 6.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.9E+02 1.2E+03 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.7E+02 2.5E+02 NA 1.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.5E+02 1.0E+00 NA 3.E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 23 0 0%3.0E+02 1.6E+02 NA 2.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.9E+02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.6E+02 1.0E+02 NA 3.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.8E+02 6.6E+04 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.7E+02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 23 0 0%3.0E+02 8.2E+03 NA 4.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 23 0 0%3.0E+02 8.2E+02 NA 4.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 35 26 74% 6.1E+02 6.1E+02 2.7E+02 9.6E-01 Bioaccumulative 6.35E+02 3.E+02 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-5
PRI 5 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 26 0 0%2.5E+02 5.3E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 5.E+01 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 23 0 0%1.9E+02 7.5E-01 NA 3.E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.5E+02 8.0E+00 NA 3.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.9E+02 2.4E+03 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.3E+02 2.2E+01 NA 1.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 23 0 0%3.0E+02 3.4E-02 NA 9.E+03 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.6E+02 3.3E-01 NA 8.E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.6E+02 4.7E+02 NA 6.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 23 2 9% 1.1E+01 1.1E+01 2.9E+00 9.3E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.18E-01 3.E-02 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 23 0 0%1.6E+02 4.0E+00 NA 4.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 26 6 23% 2.1E+02 2.1E+02 2.6E+02 2.5E+04 8.40E-03 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 23 1 4% 3.5E+00 3.5E+00 1.1E-02 3.0E+02 1.17E-02 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 23 0 0%3.8E-02 4.5E+03 NA 8.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.7E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 23 0 0%3.2E-02 2.3E+04 NA 1.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 23 0 0%2.5E-02 2.1E+01 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 23 3 13% 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 3.2E-02 2.1E+00 9.52E-02 2.E-02 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 23 0 0%4.1E-02 2.1E+01 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 23 0 0%8.1E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 23 0 0%6.2E-02 2.1E+02 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 23 1 4% 4.6E-04 4.6E-04 2.8E-02 2.1E+03 2.19E-07 1.333E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 23 0 0%9.7E-02 2.1E+00 NA 5.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 23 3 13% 6.4E-04 6.4E-04 2.4E-02 3.0E+03 2.13E-07 8.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 23 1 4% 1.2E-01 1.2E-01 1.2E-02 3.0E+03 4.00E-05 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 23 0 0%3.9E-02 2.1E+01 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 23 1 4% 5.2E-01 5.2E-01 7.6E-03 1.7E+01 3.06E-02 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 23 3 13% 1.1E-01 1.1E-01 1.0E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 23 2 9% 4.6E-04 4.6E-04 2.8E-02 2.3E+03 2.00E-07 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 mg/kg 20 0 0%1.3E-01 2.4E+01 NA 5.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 mg/kg 23 0 0%9.9E-04 1.6E+01 NA 6.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 mg/kg 20 1 5% 1.4E-03 1.4E-03 8.9E-04 1.0E+02 1.40E-05 9.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 mg/kg 20 0 0%3.0E-03 6.4E-02 NA 5.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 mg/kg 20 0 0%9.3E-04 1.6E-01 NA 6.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.2E-03 9.3E+02 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.5E-03 2.0E+00 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 mg/kg 20 0 0%3.1E-03 2.3E+02 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 mg/kg 20 0 0%1.3E-03 2.3E+03 NA 6.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.1E-03 6.6E+00 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 mg/kg 20 0 0%1.0E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-01-5 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.2E-03 8.2E+00 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-02-6 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.6E-03 8.2E+00 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.7E-03 1.1E+01 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 mg/kg 20 0 0%1.2E-03 3.6E+03 NA 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 mg/kg 20 0 0%1.5E-03 6.3E-01 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon-113) 76-13-1 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.8E-03 2.8E+03 NA 1.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.6E-03 9.3E+01 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 mg/kg 23 1 4% 1.8E-02 1.8E-02 2.6E-03 2.6E+01 6.92E-04 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.3E-03 2.7E+00 NA 9.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Butanone 78-93-3 mg/kg 23 10 43% 3.7E-02 3.7E-02 6.9E-03 1.9E+04 1.95E-06 4.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Hexanone 591-78-6 mg/kg 20 1 5% 2.0E-03 2.0E-03 2.5E-03 1.3E+02 1.54E-05 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 mg/kg 20 0 0%3.2E-03 1.4E+04 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Acetone 67-64-1 mg/kg 23 10 43% 1.6E-01 1.6E-01 2.6E-02 6.7E+04 2.39E-06 4.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzene 71-43-2 mg/kg 20 0 0%8.9E-04 5.1E+00 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 mg/kg 20 0 0%3.2E-03 6.3E+01 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/kg 23 8 35% 7.5E-02 7.5E-02 2.4E-03 1.3E+00 5.77E-02 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/kg 23 13 57% 3.8E-01 3.8E-01 4.0E-03 8.6E+01 4.42E-03 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromomethane 74-83-9 mg/kg 23 0 0%3.0E-03 3.0E+00 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 mg/kg 23 4 17% 2.4E-02 2.4E-02 2.5E-03 3.5E+02 6.86E-05 7.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 mg/kg 20 6 30% 3.6E-03 3.6E-03 1.1E-03 2.9E+00 1.24E-03 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 mg/kg 20 0 0%9.9E-04 1.3E+02 NA 8.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Cyclohexane 110-82-7 mg/kg 20 0 0%9.0E-03 2.7E+03 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 mg/kg 23 10 43% 2.1E-01 2.1E-01 1.8E-03 3.9E+01 5.38E-03 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloroethane 75-00-3 mg/kg 20 1 5% 2.0E-03 2.0E-03 1.5E-03 5.7E+03 3.51E-07 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloroform 67-66-3 mg/kg 23 4 17% 7.5E-02 7.5E-02 1.2E-02 1.4E+00 5.36E-02 9.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloromethane 74-87-3 mg/kg 20 6 30% 1.3E-02 1.3E-02 1.0E-03 4.6E+01 2.83E-04 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon-12)75-71-8 mg/kg 20 0 0%3.1E-03 3.7E+01 NA 8.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-5
PRI 5 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 mg/kg 20 0 0%1.2E-03 2.5E+01 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 mg/kg 20 0 0%1.8E-03 9.9E+02 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Methyl tertbutyl ether (MTBE)1634-04-4 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.1E-03 2.1E+02 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)75-09-2 mg/kg 20 1 5% 2.2E-03 2.2E-03 2.9E-03 3.2E+02 6.88E-06 9.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Styrene 100-42-5 mg/kg 20 0 0%1.1E-03 3.5E+03 NA 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 mg/kg 23 1 4% 8.8E-04 8.8E-04 2.1E-03 3.9E+01 2.26E-05 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Toluene 108-88-3 mg/kg 20 0 0%2.1E-03 4.7E+03 NA 4.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 mg/kg 20 1 5% 2.5E-03 2.5E-03 2.1E-03 1.9E+00 1.32E-03 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon-11)75-69-4 mg/kg 20 0 0%1.2E-03 3.5E+04 NA 3.E-08 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 mg/kg 20 0 0%1.2E-03 1.7E+00 NA 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
o-Xylene 95-47-6 mg/kg 20 1 5% 5.9E-03 5.9E-03 1.1E-03 2.8E+02 2.11E-05 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 mg/kg 20 1 5% 6.7E-03 6.7E-03 2.8E-03 2.8E+02 2.39E-05 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 20 4 20% 1.8E-03 1.8E-03 4.7E-02 8.2E+01 2.20E-05 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 26 6 23% 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 4.7E-01 1.5E+01 1.27E-02 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected 4 = RBC listed is based on a mixture of cis- and trans-isomers (CAS 542-75-6).
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
pg/g = picograms per gram
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-6
PRI 6 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 21 21 100% 1.E+04 1.E+04 7.E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 21 21 100% 1.E+04 1.E+04 7.E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 21 21 100% 7.E+06 1.E+07 9.E+05 Bioaccumulative 1.E+01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 21 21 100% 2.E+04 2.E+04 1.E+05 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 21 20 95% 3.E+00 3.E+00 1.E+00 5.E+01 5.E-02 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 21 21 100% 3.E+01 3.E+01 3.E+00 1.E+01 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 21 21 100% 8.E+02 8.E+02 2.E+04 4.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 21 20 95% 8.E-01 8.E-01 1.E-01 2.E+02 4.E-03 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 21 13 62% 5.E-01 5.E-01 9.E-02 1.E+02 6.E-03 9.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 21 21 100% 3.E+05 3.E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 21 21 100% 4.E+01 4.E+01 6.E+00 6.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 21 21 100% 1.E+01 1.E+01 4.E+01 3.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 21 21 100% 3.E+01 7.E+01 5.E+03 2.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 21 21 100% 3.E+04 3.E+04 8.E+04 4.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 21 21 100% 2.E+01 2.E+01 8.E+02 2.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 21 21 100% 3.E+04 3.E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 21 21 100% 4.E+02 4.E+02 3.E+03 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 21 16 76% 2.E-01 2.E-01 1.E-02 5.E+00 Bioaccumulative 5.E-02 2.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 21 21 100% 3.E+01 3.E+01 6.E+02 5.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 21 21 100% 3.E+01 3.E+01 2.E+03 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 21 20 95% 8.E+03 8.E+03 1.E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 21 17 81% 2.E+00 2.E+00 2.E-01 6.E+02 3.E-03 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 21 9 43% 9.E-02 9.E-02 3.E-01 6.E+02 2.E-04 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 21 21 100% 4.E+03 4.E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 21 18 86% 3.E-01 3.E-01 5.E-01 1.E+00 2.E-01 4.E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 21 21 100% 6.E+01 6.E+01 6.E+02 1.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 21 21 100% 6.E+01 6.E+01 4.E+04 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%3.E+01 2.E+01 NA 2.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%5.E+00 4.E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 1.E-01 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 3.E+03 NA 6.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 8.E+03 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+00 8.E+01 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 5.E+03 NA 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 3.E+02 NA 7.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 17 0 0%3.E+01 2.E+03 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%4.E+01 2.E+02 NA 3.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 7.E+00 NA 2.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 2.E+00 NA 1.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 6.E+03 NA 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 6.E+02 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.E+01 4.E+03 NA 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 8.E+02 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 5.E+00 NA 4.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%3.E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 7.E+00 NA 2.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 8.E+03 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.E+01 1.E+01 NA 1.E+00 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%6.E+01 4.E+03 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 1.E+02 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%5.E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 1.E+04 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%3.E+01 8.E+02 NA 4.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 1.E+03 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 3.E+02 NA 7.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 1.E+00 NA 2.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 2.E+02 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-6
PRI 6 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 1.E+02 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 7.E+04 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 8.E+03 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 8.E+02 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 21 16 76% 2.E+02 2.E+02 2.E+00 1.E+00 Bioaccumulative 2.E+02 2.E+00 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+00 5.E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 3.E-01 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.E+01 8.E-01 NA 2.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 8.E+00 NA 2.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 2.E+03 NA 8.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.E+01 2.E+01 NA 6.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 3.E-02 NA 5.E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 3.E-01 NA 5.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E+01 5.E+02 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 15 1 7% 4.E+00 4.E+00 2.E+00 9.E+01 Bioaccumulative 4.E-02 2.E-02 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%5.E+00 4.E+00 NA 1.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 17 3 18% 2.E+01 2.E+01 2.E+01 3.E+04 9.E-04 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 17 0 0%9.E-03 3.E+02 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.E-02 5.E+03 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 17 1 6% 4.E-03 4.E-03 7.E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%9.E-03 2.E+04 NA 4.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%7.E-03 2.E+01 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 17 7 41% 8.E-02 8.E-02 7.E-03 2.E+00 4.E-02 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.E-02 2.E+01 NA 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.E-02 2.E+02 NA 8.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 17 1 6% 5.E-04 5.E-04 8.E-03 2.E+03 2.E-07 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%3.E-02 2.E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 17 0 0%6.E-03 3.E+03 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.E-02 3.E+03 NA 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.E-02 2.E+01 NA 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%7.E-03 2.E+01 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 17 1 6% 4.E-04 4.E-04 8.E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 17 0 0%8.E-03 2.E+03 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.E-01 2.E+01 NA 5.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 mg/kg 15 0 0%8.E-04 2.E+01 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%8.E-04 1.E+02 NA 8.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 mg/kg 15 0 0%3.E-03 6.E-02 NA 4.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%8.E-04 2.E-01 NA 5.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 9.E+02 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 2.E+00 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%3.E-03 2.E+02 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.E-03 2.E+03 NA 5.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 7.E+00 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-01-5 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 8.E+00 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-02-6 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 8.E+00 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 1.E+01 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.E-03 4.E+03 NA 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.E-03 6.E-01 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon-113) 76-13-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 3.E+03 NA 9.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 mg/kg 15 1 7% 3.E-03 3.E-03 2.E-03 9.E+01 3.E-05 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 3.E+01 NA 8.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 3.E+00 NA 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Butanone 78-93-3 mg/kg 15 10 67% 3.E-02 3.E-02 1.E-02 2.E+04 2.E-06 5.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Hexanone 591-78-6 mg/kg 15 1 7% 3.E-03 3.E-03 2.E-03 1.E+02 2.E-05 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 mg/kg 15 1 7% 1.E-03 1.E-03 3.E-03 1.E+04 1.E-07 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acetone 67-64-1 mg/kg 15 7 47% 1.E-01 1.E-01 5.E-02 7.E+04 2.E-06 8.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzene 71-43-2 mg/kg 15 1 7% 5.E-04 5.E-04 8.E-04 5.E+00 9.E-05 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 mg/kg 15 0 0%3.E-03 6.E+01 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/kg 15 5 33% 5.E-02 5.E-02 1.E-02 1.E+00 4.E-02 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-6
PRI 6 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/kg 15 10 67% 3.E-01 3.E-01 3.E-03 9.E+01 3.E-03 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromomethane 74-83-9 mg/kg 15 0 0%3.E-03 3.E+00 NA 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 mg/kg 15 8 53% 8.E-03 8.E-03 8.E-04 4.E+02 2.E-05 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 mg/kg 15 1 7% 2.E-03 2.E-03 1.E-03 3.E+00 7.E-04 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%8.E-04 1.E+02 NA 6.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Cyclohexane 110-82-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%8.E-03 3.E+03 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 mg/kg 15 8 53% 2.E-01 2.E-01 4.E-03 4.E+01 4.E-03 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloroethane 75-00-3 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.E-03 6.E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chloroform 67-66-3 mg/kg 15 5 33% 2.E-02 2.E-02 9.E-03 1.E+00 2.E-02 7.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloromethane 74-87-3 mg/kg 15 7 47% 1.E-02 1.E-02 1.E-03 5.E+01 2.E-04 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon-12)75-71-8 mg/kg 15 0 0%3.E-03 4.E+01 NA 7.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.E-03 3.E+01 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 1.E+03 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Methyl tertbutyl ether (MTBE)1634-04-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 2.E+02 NA 8.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)75-09-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 3.E+02 NA 8.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Styrene 100-42-5 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.E-04 4.E+03 NA 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 4.E+01 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Toluene 108-88-3 mg/kg 15 1 7% 1.E-03 1.E-03 2.E-03 5.E+03 2.E-07 4.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 2.E+00 NA 9.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon-11)75-69-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.E-03 4.E+04 NA 3.E-08 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.E-03 2.E+00 NA 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
o-Xylene 95-47-6 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.E-03 3.E+02 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.E-03 2.E+02 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 15 1 7% 1.E-03 1.E-03 4.E-02 8.E+01 1.E-05 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 17 0 0%4.E-01 2.E+01
NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Notes:
pg/g = picograms per gram '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
DL = Detection Limit 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 4 = RBC listed is based on a mixture of cis- and trans-isomers (CAS 542-75-6).
ND = Not Detected
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-7
PRI 7 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 23 23 100% 1.9E+04 1.9E+04 72 Bioaccumulative 2.6E+02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 23 23 100% 1.9E+04 1.9E+04 72 Bioaccumulative 2.6E+02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 23 23 100% 2.4E+06 3.1E+06 940000 Bioaccumulative 3.3E+00 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 20 20 100% 1.4E+04 1.4E+04 110000 1.3E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 23 22 96% 1.9E+00 1.9E+00 9.6E-02 47 4.0E-02 2.0E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 23 23 100% 3.3E+01 3.3E+01 3 1.1E+01 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 20 20 100% 2.9E+02 2.9E+02 22000 1.3E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 20 19 95% 5.8E-01 5.8E-01 1.7E-01 230 2.5E-03 7.4E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 23 20 87% 3.7E-01 3.7E-01 8.5E-01 98 3.8E-03 8.7E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 20 20 100% 2.4E+05 2.4E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 23 23 100% 6.4E+01 6.4E+01 6.3 1.0E+01 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 20 20 100% 5.3E+00 5.3E+00 35 1.5E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 20 20 100% 1.6E+01 4.2E+01 4700 8.9E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 23 23 100% 4.9E+04 4.9E+04 82000 6.0E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 20 20 100% 1.4E+01 1.4E+01 800 1.8E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 20 20 100% 4.4E+04 4.4E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 23 23 100% 5.2E+02 5.2E+02 2600 2.0E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 20 18 90% 1.1E-01 1.1E-01 1.0E-02 4.6 Bioaccumulative 2.4E-02 2.2E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 23 23 100% 2.1E+01 2.1E+01 580 3.7E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 20 20 100% 1.5E+01 1.5E+01 2200 6.8E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 20 20 100% 7.3E+03 7.3E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 23 23 100% 2.3E+00 2.3E+00 580 4.0E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 20 10 50% 8.8E-02 8.8E-02 5.1E-01 580 1.5E-04 8.8E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 20 20 100% 3.3E+04 3.3E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 20 18 90% 2.1E-01 2.1E-01 8.5E-01 1.2 1.8E-01 7.1E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 23 23 100% 4.9E+01 4.9E+01 580 8.4E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 20 20 100% 4.6E+01 4.6E+01 35000 1.3E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 19 0 0%1.2E+01 20 NA 6.0E-01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 22 0 0%2.0E+00 35 Bioaccumulative NA 5.7E-02 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.1E+00 2500 NA 2.4E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.2E+00 8200 NA 7.6E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%2.9E+00 82 NA 3.5E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 19 0 0%5.9E+00 4700 NA 1.3E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.6E+00 250 NA 2.6E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 19 0 0%1.2E+01 1600 NA 7.5E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 19 0 0%1.6E+01 160 NA 1.0E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.6E+00 7.4 NA 8.9E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%7.4E+00 1.5 NA 4.9E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.0E+00 6000 NA 1.0E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.6E+00 580 NA 1.1E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 19 0 0%4.3E+00 4100 NA 1.0E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.3E+00 800 NA 7.9E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.1E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 19 0 0%7.0E+00 5.1 NA 1.4E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%1.2E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.0E+00 6.6 NA 9.1E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.3E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.9E+00 8200 NA 8.4E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 19 0 0%4.3E+00 11 NA 3.9E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.9E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 19 0 0%2.5E+01 4100 NA 6.1E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.6E+00 110 NA 6.0E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 19 0 0%2.1E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%1.9E+00 12000 NA 1.6E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 19 0 0%1.2E+01 820 NA 1.5E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 19 0 0%7.1E+00 1200 NA 5.9E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.6E+00 250 NA 2.6E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.0E+00 1 NA 6.0E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 19 0 0%7.3E+00 160 NA 4.6E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 19 0 0%7.1E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-7
PRI 7 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.4E+00 100 NA 6.4E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.7E+00 66000 NA 1.0E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.5E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%7.2E+00 8200 NA 8.8E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 19 0 0%7.2E+00 820 NA 8.8E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 23 18 78% 8.7E+01 8.7E+01 1.7E-01 0.96 Bioaccumulative 9.1E+01 1.8E-01 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 22 0 0%2.9E+00 5.3 Bioaccumulative NA 5.5E-01 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 19 0 0%4.6E+00 0.75 NA 6.1E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.0E+00 8 NA 7.5E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.9E+00 2400 NA 2.9E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 19 0 0%5.7E+00 22 NA 2.6E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 19 0 0%7.2E+00 0.034 NA 2.1E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.3E+00 0.33 NA 1.9E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.4E+00 470 NA 1.4E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 20 1 5% 5.6E+00 5.6E+00 9.9E-01 93 Bioaccumulative 6.0E-02 1.1E-02 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 19 0 0%1.8E+00 4 NA 4.5E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%6.2E+00 25000 NA 2.5E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 19 5 26% 6.4E-02 6.4E-02 6.9E-03 300 2.1E-04 2.3E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 19 2 11% 2.2E-03 2.2E-03 8.4E-03 4500 4.9E-07 1.9E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 19 0 0%5.9E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 19 1 5% 2.7E-03 2.7E-03 7.1E-03 23000 1.2E-07 3.1E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 19 2 11% 3.3E-03 3.3E-03 5.4E-03 21 1.6E-04 2.6E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 19 1 5% 1.1E-03 1.1E-03 7.1E-03 2.1 5.2E-04 3.4E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 19 1 5% 2.4E-03 2.4E-03 9.0E-03 21 1.1E-04 4.3E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 19 0 0%1.8E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 19 0 0%1.4E-02 210 NA 6.7E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 19 3 16% 4.5E-03 4.5E-03 6.2E-03 2100 2.1E-06 3.0E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 19 0 0%2.1E-02 2.1 NA 1.0E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 19 3 16% 2.8E-03 2.8E-03 5.2E-03 3000 9.3E-07 1.7E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 19 3 16% 1.8E-02 1.8E-02 8.8E-03 3000 6.0E-06 2.9E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 19 0 0%8.6E-03 21 NA 4.1E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 19 3 16% 4.3E-03 4.3E-03 5.5E-03 17 2.5E-04 3.2E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 19 5 26% 5.8E-02 5.8E-02 1.1E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 19 3 16% 1.5E-02 1.5E-02 6.3E-03 2300 6.5E-06 2.7E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.1E-01 24 NA 4.6E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 mg/kg 20 1 5% 9.2E-04 9.2E-04 8.4E-04 16 5.8E-05 5.3E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%7.6E-04 100 NA 7.6E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.6E-03 0.064 NA 4.1E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%7.9E-04 0.16 NA 4.9E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.9E-03 930 NA 2.0E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.1E-03 2 NA 1.1E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.6E-03 230 NA 1.1E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.1E-03 2300 NA 4.8E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.7E-03 6.6 NA 2.6E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 mg/kg 17 4 24% 4.1E-03 4.1E-03 8.7E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-01-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.9E-03 8.2 NA 2.3E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-02-6 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.2E-03 8.2 NA 2.7E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.3E-03 11 NA 2.1E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.0E-03 3600 NA 2.8E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.3E-03 0.63 NA 2.1E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon-113) 76-13-1 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.4E-03 2800 NA 8.6E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.2E-03 93 NA 2.4E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 mg/kg 20 9 45% 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 2.2E-03 26 5.8E-03 8.5E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.0E-03 2.7 NA 7.4E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Butanone 78-93-3 mg/kg 20 15 75% 8.5E-02 8.5E-02 1.1E-02 19000 4.5E-06 5.8E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Hexanone 591-78-6 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.2E-03 130 NA 1.7E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 mg/kg 17 1 6% 3.5E-03 3.5E-03 2.7E-03 14000 2.5E-07 1.9E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acetone 67-64-1 mg/kg 20 19 95% 3.7E-01 3.7E-01 2.4E-03 67000 5.5E-06 3.6E-08 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzene 71-43-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%7.6E-04 5.1 NA 1.5E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.7E-03 63 NA 4.3E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/kg 17 2 12% 7.6E-03 7.6E-03 1.6E-03 1.3 5.8E-03 1.2E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-7
PRI 7 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/kg 17 5 29% 1.8E-02 1.8E-02 4.4E-03 86 2.1E-04 5.1E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromomethane 74-83-9 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.5E-03 3 NA 8.3E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 mg/kg 20 14 70% 1.7E-01 1.7E-01 1.2E-03 350 4.9E-04 3.4E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.5E-03 2.9 NA 5.2E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%8.4E-04 130 NA 6.5E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Cyclohexane 110-82-7 mg/kg 17 0 0%7.7E-03 2700 NA 2.9E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 mg/kg 17 5 29% 1.5E-02 1.5E-02 2.6E-03 39 3.8E-04 6.7E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloroethane 75-00-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.3E-03 5700 NA 2.3E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chloroform 67-66-3 mg/kg 17 6 35% 1.6E-02 1.6E-02 5.7E-03 1.4 1.1E-02 4.1E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloromethane 74-87-3 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.5E-03 46 NA 3.3E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon-12)75-71-8 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.6E-03 37 NA 7.0E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%9.9E-04 25 NA 4.0E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.5E-03 990 NA 1.5E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Methyl tertbutyl ether (MTBE)1634-04-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.7E-03 210 NA 8.1E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)75-09-2 mg/kg 17 0 0%2.4E-03 320 NA 7.5E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Styrene 100-42-5 mg/kg 17 0 0%9.0E-04 3500 NA 2.6E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 mg/kg 17 1 6% 2.8E-03 2.8E-03 1.8E-03 39 7.2E-05 4.6E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Toluene 108-88-3 mg/kg 17 1 6% 2.7E-03 2.7E-03 1.8E-03 4700 5.7E-07 3.8E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.7E-03 1.9 NA 8.9E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon-11)75-69-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%9.9E-04 35000 NA 2.8E-08 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 mg/kg 17 0 0%1.0E-03 1.7 NA 5.9E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
o-Xylene 95-47-6 mg/kg 17 2 12% 1.7E-03 1.7E-03 9.6E-04 280 6.1E-06 3.4E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 mg/kg 17 2 12% 3.2E-03 3.2E-03 2.4E-03 240 1.3E-05 1.0E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 17 0 0%7.3E-02 82 NA 8.9E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 19 0 0%4.6E-01 15 NA 3.1E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected 4 = RBC listed is based on a mixture of cis- and trans-isomers (CAS 542-75-6).
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-8
PRI 8 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 27 27 100% 1900 2.1E+03 72 Bioaccumulative 3.0E+01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 27 27 100% 2000 2.2E+03 72 Bioaccumulative 3.1E+01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 27 27 100% 836000 1.1E+06 940000 Bioaccumulative 1.1E+00 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 27 27 100% 20000 2.1E+04 110000 1.9E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 27 21 78% 1.3 1.2E+00 0.57 47 2.5E-02 1.2E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 24 24 100% 29 3.0E+01 3 9.9E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 27 27 100% 760 5.2E+02 22000 2.4E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 7 7 100% 0.62 6.9E-01 230 3.0E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 7 6 86% 0.44 4.1E-01 0.1 98 4.2E-03 1.0E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 7 7 100% 270000 2.2E+05 Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 24 24 100% 79 7.8E+01 6.3 1.2E+01 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 7 7 100% 5.3 5.6E+00 35 1.6E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 7 7 100% 16 2.8E+01 4700 6.0E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 7 7 100% 14000 1.5E+04 82000 1.9E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 7 7 100% 16 1.5E+01 800 1.9E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 7 7 100% 27000 2.9E+04 Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 7 7 100% 350 4.1E+02 2600 1.6E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 24 11 46% 0.022 1.9E-02 0.016 4.6 Bioaccumulative 4.2E-03 3.5E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 7 7 100% 1.1 1.2E+00 580 2.0E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 7 7 100% 13 1.8E+01 2200 8.2E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 7 7 100% 8100 6.7E+03 Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 7 2 29% 0.25 3.1E-01 0.25 580 5.4E-04 4.3E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.074 580 NA 1.3E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 7 7 100% 8600 5.2E+03 Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 7 2 29% 0.17 1.7E-01 0.12 1.2 1.4E-01 1.0E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 27 27 100% 69 7.0E+01 580 1.2E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 7 7 100% 54 5.9E+01 35000 1.7E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.2 20 NA 1.0E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 10 0 0%0.031 35 Bioaccumulative NA 8.9E-04 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.098 2500 NA 3.9E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.099 8200 NA 1.2E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.0053 82 NA 6.5E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.094 4700 NA 2.0E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 10 0 0%0.11 250 NA 4.4E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.2 1600 NA 1.3E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 24 0 0%160 160 NA 1.0E+00 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 7.4 NA 1.5E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.12 1.5 NA 8.0E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.097 6000 NA 1.6E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 580 NA 1.9E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.069 4100 NA 1.7E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.1 800 NA 1.3E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.098 NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 5.1 NA 2.2E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.2 NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 27 0 0%59 6.6 NA 8.9E+00 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.1 NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 8200 NA 1.3E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.069 11 NA 6.3E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.39 4100 NA 9.5E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 110 NA 1.0E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.33 NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.03 12000 NA 2.5E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.2 820 NA 2.4E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 1200 NA 9.2E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 250 NA 4.4E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.097 1 NA 9.7E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.12 160 NA 7.5E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-8
PRI 8 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.1 100 NA 1.0E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 66000 NA 1.7E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.1 NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.12 8200 NA 1.5E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.12 820 NA 1.5E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 27 15 56% 18 2.4E+01 1.6 0.96 Bioaccumulative 2.5E+01 1.7E+00 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 10 0 0%0.0044 5.3 Bioaccumulative NA 8.3E-04 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.074 0.75 NA 9.9E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.097 8 NA 1.2E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 2400 NA 4.6E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.091 22 NA 4.1E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.11 0.034 NA 3.2E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.1 0.33 NA 3.0E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.1 470 NA 2.1E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 27 3 11% 1.2 2.4E+00 37 4 6.0E-01 9.3E+00 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.099 25000 NA 4.0E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.00051 300 NA 1.7E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.00056 4500 NA 1.2E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.00039 NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.00047 23000 NA 2.0E-08 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 7 1 14% 0.00035 7.0E-04 0.00036 21 3.3E-05 1.7E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.00048 2.1 NA 2.3E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.0006 21 NA 2.9E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.0012 NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.00091 210 NA 4.3E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 7 5 71% 0.00091 1.8E-03 0.00041 2100 8.7E-07 2.0E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.0014 2.1 NA 6.7E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 7 3 43% 0.00059 1.2E-03 0.00035 3000 3.9E-07 1.2E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.00058 3000 NA 1.9E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.00057 21 NA 2.7E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.00037 17 NA 2.2E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 7 7 100% 0.0011 2.2E-03 NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 7 2 29% 0.00051 1.0E-03 0.00042 2300 4.4E-07 1.8E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acetone 67-64-1 mg/kg 20 6 30% 0.22 2.2E-01 0.011 67000 3.3E-06 1.6E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/kg 20 9 45% 0.089 8.9E-02 0.00072 86 1.0E-03 8.4E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloroform 67-66-3 mg/kg 20 9 45% 0.02 2.0E-02 0.00047 1.4 1.4E-02 3.4E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.024 82 NA 2.9E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 7 0 0%0.24 15
NA 1.6E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-9
PRI 9 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 16 16 100% 9.2E+01 1.0E+02 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+00 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 16 16 100% 9.2E+01 1.0E+02 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+00 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 16 16 100% 7.9E+04 1.0E+05 9.4E+05 Bioaccumulative 1.E-01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 16 16 100% 1.5E+04 1.6E+04 1.1E+05 1.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 16 4 25% 2.1E+00 1.9E+00 1.3E+00 4.7E+01 4.E-02 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 16 13 81% 1.0E+01 1.0E+01 1.8E+00 3.0E+00 3.E+00 6.E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 16 16 100% 8.4E+02 5.7E+02 2.2E+04 3.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 16 15 94% 2.0E+02 2.1E+02 1.2E-01 2.3E+02 9.E-01 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 16 6 38% 1.2E+00 1.1E+00 6.1E-01 9.8E+01 1.E-02 6.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 16 16 100% 8.7E+04 6.5E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 16 16 100% 5.9E+01 5.9E+01 6.3E+00 9.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 16 16 100% 2.4E+01 2.4E+01 3.5E+01 7.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 16 16 100% 1.4E+02 1.4E+02 4.7E+03 3.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 16 16 100% 6.8E+04 6.9E+04 8.2E+04 8.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 16 16 100% 6.9E+01 6.3E+01 8.0E+02 8.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 16 16 100% 1.8E+05 1.9E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 16 16 100% 7.3E+03 9.0E+03 2.6E+03 3.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 16 6 38% 1.6E-01 2.2E-01 1.5E-02 4.6E+00 Bioaccumulative 5.E-02 3.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 16 14 88% 1.5E+01 1.2E+01 4.9E-01 5.8E+02 2.E-02 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 16 16 100% 2.0E+02 3.1E+02 2.2E+03 1.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 16 16 100% 2.3E+04 1.7E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 16 3 19% 1.8E+00 1.2E+00 3.4E-01 5.8E+02 2.E-03 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 16 3 19% 1.2E-01 1.2E-01 3.8E-01 5.8E+02 2.E-04 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 16 16 100% 1.3E+05 6.7E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 16 1 6% 1.8E-01 1.8E-01 6.4E-01 1.2E+00 2.E-01 5.E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 16 16 100% 4.5E+01 4.6E+01 5.8E+02 8.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 16 15 94% 1.8E+02 1.8E+02 7.7E+00 3.5E+04 5.E-03 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%2.8E-01 2.0E+01 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%4.4E-02 3.5E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 1.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.4E-01 2.5E+03 NA 6.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.4E-01 8.2E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 16 2 13% 8.7E-03 1.7E-02 1.1E-01 8.2E+01 2.E-04 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.3E-01 4.7E+03 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.5E-01 2.5E+02 NA 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%2.9E-01 1.6E+03 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 16 2 13% 3.4E-01 6.8E-01 3.7E-01 1.6E+02 4.E-03 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.5E-01 7.4E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.7E-01 1.5E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.4E-01 6.0E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.5E-01 5.8E+02 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%9.9E-02 4.1E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.4E-01 8.0E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.4E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.6E-01 5.1E+00 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%2.9E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.4E-01 6.6E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.5E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.6E-01 8.2E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%9.9E-02 1.1E+01 NA 9.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.6E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%5.6E-01 4.1E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.5E-01 1.1E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%4.8E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 16 2 13% 5.5E-02 5.5E-02 4.0E-02 1.2E+04 5.E-06 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%2.8E-01 8.2E+02 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.6E-01 1.2E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.5E-01 2.5E+02 NA 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.4E-01 1.0E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.7E-01 1.6E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.6E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.5E-01 1.0E+02 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.5E-01 6.6E+04 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.5E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.7E-01 8.2E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 16 1 6% 1.4E-01 2.8E-01 1.7E-01 8.2E+02 3.E-04 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-9
PRI 9 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 16 9 56% 3.2E-01 4.3E-01 1.2E-01 9.6E-01 Bioaccumulative 4.E-01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.1E-01 5.3E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 2.E-02 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.1E-01 7.5E-01 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.4E-01 8.0E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.6E-01 2.4E+03 NA 7.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.3E-01 2.2E+01 NA 6.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.6E-01 3.4E-02 NA 5.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.4E-01 3.3E-01 NA 4.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.5E-01 4.7E+02 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 16 2 13% 5.2E-01 1.0E+00 6.6E-02 4.0E+00 3.E-01 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.4E-01 2.5E+04 NA 6.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 16 9 56% 6.0E-03 1.2E-02 6.6E-04 3.0E+02 4.E-05 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%7.8E-04 4.5E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%5.5E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%6.6E-04 2.3E+04 NA 3.E-08 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%5.0E-04 2.1E+01 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%6.6E-04 2.1E+00 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%8.4E-04 2.1E+01 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.7E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.3E-03 2.1E+02 NA 6.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 16 2 13% 7.4E-04 1.5E-03 5.8E-04 2.1E+03 7.E-07 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%2.0E-03 2.1E+00 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 16 2 13% 6.6E-04 1.3E-03 4.6E-04 3.0E+03 4.E-07 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%8.1E-04 3.0E+03 NA 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 16 0 0%8.0E-04 2.1E+01 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 16 14 88% 3.3E-03 6.6E-03 4.0E-04 1.7E+01 4.E-04 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 16 8 50% 4.8E-03 9.6E-03 2.6E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 16 2 13% 8.8E-04 1.8E-03 5.4E-04 2.3E+03 8.E-07 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.7E-01 8.2E+01 NA 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 16 5 31% 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 3.4E-01 1.5E+01
7.E-02 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-10
PRI 10 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 14 14 100% 2.E+00 3.E+00 7.E+01 Bioaccumulative 4.E-02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 14 14 100% 3.E+00 3.E+00 7.E+01 Bioaccumulative 4.E-02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 14 14 100% 3.E+03 4.E+03 9.E+05 Bioaccumulative 4.E-03 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.E+04 2.E+04 1.E+05 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 14 5 36% 6.E-01 5.E-01 5.E-01 5.E+01 1.E-02 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.E+01 1.E+01 3.E+00 4.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 9.E+02 6.E+02 2.E+04 3.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.E+00 1.E+00 2.E+02 6.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.E-01 3.E-01 1.E+02 3.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.E+05 2.E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.E+01 2.E+01 6.E+00 3.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 14 14 100% 7.E+00 7.E+00 4.E+01 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.E+01 3.E+01 5.E+03 7.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.E+04 2.E+04 8.E+04 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.E+01 1.E+01 8.E+02 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 14 14 100% 4.E+04 4.E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 4.E+02 4.E+02 3.E+03 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 14 7 50% 2.E-02 2.E-02 1.E-02 5.E+00 Bioaccumulative 4.E-03 2.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 14 7 50% 1.E+00 1.E+00 5.E-01 6.E+02 2.E-03 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.E+01 2.E+01 2.E+03 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.E+04 1.E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 14 12 86% 4.E-01 4.E-01 2.E-01 6.E+02 7.E-04 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 14 3 21% 9.E-02 9.E-02 8.E-02 6.E+02 2.E-04 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.E+04 8.E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E-01 1.E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 4.E+01 4.E+01 6.E+02 6.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 14 14 100% 7.E+01 8.E+01 4.E+04 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E-01 2.E+01 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.E-02 4.E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 9.E-04 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 3.E+03 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 8.E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.E-03 8.E+01 NA 7.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 5.E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 3.E+02 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E-01 2.E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.E-01 2.E+02 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 7.E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 2.E+00 NA 9.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 6.E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 6.E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.E-02 4.E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 8.E+02 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 5.E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 7.E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 8.E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.E-02 1.E+01 NA 7.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.E-01 4.E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 1.E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 14 1 7% 4.E-02 4.E-02 4.E-02 1.E+04 3.E-06 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E-01 8.E+02 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 1.E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 3.E+02 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 1.E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 2.E+02 NA 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-10
PRI 10 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 1.E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 7.E+04 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 8.E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 8.E+02 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 14 1 7% 8.E-03 1.E-02 3.E-03 1.E+00 Bioaccumulative 1.E-02 3.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.E-03 5.E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 9.E-04 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%8.E-02 8.E-01 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 8.E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 2.E+03 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 2.E+01 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 3.E-02 NA 4.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 3.E-01 NA 3.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 5.E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 14 1 7% 5.E-02 9.E-02 3.E-02 4.E+00 2.E-02 8.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-01 3.E+04 NA 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.E-04 3.E+02 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.E-04 5.E+03 NA 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.E-04 2.E+04 NA 2.E-08 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.E-04 2.E+01 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.E-04 2.E+00 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.E-04 2.E+01 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.E-03 2.E+02 NA 5.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.E-04 2.E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.E-03 2.E+00 NA 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 14 2 14% 8.E-04 2.E-03 4.E-04 3.E+03 5.E-07 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.E-04 3.E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.E-04 2.E+01 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 14 1 7% 5.E-04 1.E-03 6.E-04 2.E+01 6.E-05 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 14 13 93% 1.E-03 3.E-03 4.E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 14 1 7% 9.E-04 2.E-03 5.E-04 2.E+03 8.E-07 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.E-02 8.E+01 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 14 1 7% 3.E-01 3.E-01 3.E-01 2.E+01
2.E-02 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2)
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7)
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-11
PRI 11 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency of
Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected Max
Detect / RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 14 14 100% 1.7E+01 2.0E+01 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 3.E-01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 14 14 100% 1.8E+01 2.1E+01 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 3.E-01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 14 14 100% 7.3E+04 9.3E+04 9.4E+05 Bioaccumulative 1.E-01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.6E+04 1.7E+04 1.1E+05 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 14 3 21% 6.0E-01 5.8E-01 3.6E-01 4.7E+01 1.E-02 8.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 3.0E+00 8.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.6E+02 2.7E+02 2.2E+04 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 8.5E-01 9.3E-01 2.3E+02 4.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 14 13 93% 4.6E-01 4.3E-01 1.1E-01 9.8E+01 4.E-03 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.1E+05 8.4E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.1E+01 2.2E+01 6.3E+00 4.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 14 14 100% 8.9E+00 9.1E+00 3.5E+01 3.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.2E+02 2.1E+02 4.7E+03 4.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.8E+04 1.9E+04 8.2E+04 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.9E+01 1.8E+01 8.0E+02 2.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.0E+04 3.2E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.3E+02 6.3E+02 2.6E+03 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 14 6 43% 9.2E-02 1.2E-01 2.0E-02 4.6E+00 Bioaccumulative 3.E-02 4.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 14 12 86% 2.9E+01 2.3E+01 3.7E-01 5.8E+02 4.E-02 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.2E+01 3.2E+01 2.2E+03 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.9E+03 5.3E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 14 6 43% 4.3E-01 4.2E-01 2.4E-01 5.8E+02 7.E-04 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 14 1 7% 2.1E-01 2.1E-01 7.2E-02 5.8E+02 4.E-04 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.9E+03 2.3E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 14 3 21% 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 1.2E-01 1.2E+00 2.E-01 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.4E+01 3.6E+01 5.8E+02 6.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.9E+02 3.7E+02 3.5E+04 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.9E-01 2.0E+01 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.1E-02 3.5E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 9.E-04 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.6E-02 2.5E+03 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.8E-02 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.2E-03 8.2E+01 NA 6.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.3E-02 4.7E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 2.5E+02 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.0E-01 1.6E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 14 1 7% 2.8E-01 5.6E-01 2.5E-01 1.6E+02 4.E-03 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 7.4E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 1.5E+00 NA 8.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.5E-02 6.0E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 5.8E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.8E-02 4.1E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.9E-02 8.0E+02 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.6E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 5.1E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.0E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.5E-02 6.6E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.8E-02 1.1E+01 NA 6.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.9E-01 4.1E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 1.1E+02 NA 9.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.3E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.8E-02 1.2E+04 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.9E-01 8.2E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 14 2 14% 1.1E+00 2.2E+00 1.1E-01 1.2E+03 2.E-03 9.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 2.5E+02 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.5E-02 1.0E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 14 9 64% 1.8E-01 1.8E-01 1.1E-01 1.6E+02 1.E-03 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 1.0E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-11
PRI 11 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency of
Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected Max
Detect / RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 6.6E+04 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 8.2E+02 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 14 8 57% 6.7E-02 9.2E-02 2.6E-03 9.6E-01 Bioaccumulative 1.E-01 3.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.3E-03 5.3E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 8.E-04 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.3E-02 7.5E-01 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.5E-02 8.0E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 2.4E+03 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%8.9E-02 2.2E+01 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 3.4E-02 NA 3.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.9E-02 3.3E-01 NA 3.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 4.7E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 14 2 14% 4.5E-02 9.0E-02 2.8E-02 4.0E+00 2.E-02 7.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.8E-02 2.5E+04 NA 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 14 2 14% 6.3E-04 1.3E-03 5.1E-04 3.0E+02 4.E-06 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.6E-04 4.5E+03 NA 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.9E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 14 3 21% 1.2E-03 1.2E-03 4.7E-04 2.3E+04 5.E-08 2.E-08 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 14 7 50% 1.4E-02 2.8E-02 3.6E-04 2.1E+01 1.E-03 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 14 4 29% 2.1E-02 4.2E-02 4.8E-04 2.1E+00 2.E-02 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 14 8 57% 2.4E-02 4.8E-02 6.0E-04 2.1E+01 2.E-03 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 14 2 14% 1.1E-02 2.2E-02 1.2E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 14 3 21% 1.8E-02 3.6E-02 9.1E-04 2.1E+02 2.E-04 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 14 11 79% 2.0E-02 4.0E-02 4.1E-04 2.1E+03 2.E-05 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 14 1 7% 3.6E-03 7.2E-03 1.4E-03 2.1E+00 3.E-03 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 14 10 71% 8.4E-03 1.7E-02 3.5E-04 3.0E+03 6.E-06 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.9E-04 3.0E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 14 5 36% 1.3E-02 2.6E-02 5.7E-04 2.1E+01 1.E-03 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 14 3 21% 6.1E-04 1.2E-03 3.7E-04 1.7E+01 7.E-05 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 14 8 57% 2.1E-03 4.2E-03 1.6E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 14 10 71% 9.3E-03 1.9E-02 4.2E-04 2.3E+03 8.E-06 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.3E-02 8.2E+01 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 14 1 7% 4.4E-01 2.4E-01 1.5E+01
3.E-02 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-12
PRI 12 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency of
Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 14 14 100% 1.5E+02 1.7E+02 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 2.E+00 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 14 14 100% 1.5E+02 1.7E+02 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 2.E+00 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 14 14 100% 1.4E+05 1.8E+05 9.4E+05 Bioaccumulative 2.E-01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.3E+04 1.4E+04 1.1E+05 1.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 14 2 14% 8.7E+00 7.6E+00 3.4E-01 4.7E+01 2.E-01 7.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.9E+00 6.0E+00 3.0E+00 2.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.0E+02 2.4E+02 2.2E+04 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.8E-01 6.5E-01 2.3E+02 3.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 14 11 79% 4.7E-01 4.4E-01 1.5E-01 9.8E+01 4.E-03 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.1E+05 2.5E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.3E+01 1.4E+01 6.3E+00 2.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 14 14 100% 4.1E+00 4.4E+00 3.5E+01 1.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.6E+01 2.8E+01 4.7E+03 6.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.4E+04 1.5E+04 8.2E+04 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.4E+01 1.4E+01 8.0E+02 2.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.1E+05 1.2E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 4.2E+02 5.0E+02 2.6E+03 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 14 11 79% 1.1E-01 1.5E-01 1.2E-02 4.6E+00 Bioaccumulative 3.E-02 3.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 14 8 57% 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 5.5E-01 5.8E+02 2.E-03 9.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.0E+01 1.3E+01 2.2E+03 6.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 7.2E+04 4.9E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 14 2 14% 2.9E-01 3.4E-01 2.9E-01 5.8E+02 6.E-04 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%8.7E-02 5.8E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 3.2E+04 1.7E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.5E-01 1.2E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.2E+01 2.4E+01 5.8E+02 4.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 14 14 100% 7.5E+01 7.9E+01 3.5E+04 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.4E-01 2.0E+01 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.8E-02 3.5E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 1.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 2.5E+03 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.5E-03 8.2E+01 NA 8.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 4.7E+03 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-01 2.5E+02 NA 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.5E-01 1.6E+03 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 14 2 14% 2.6E-01 5.2E-01 3.2E-01 1.6E+02 3.E-03 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-01 7.4E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.5E-01 1.5E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 6.0E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-01 5.8E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%8.6E-02 4.1E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 8.0E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-01 5.1E+00 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.5E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 6.6E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-01 8.2E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%8.6E-02 1.1E+01 NA 8.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.9E-01 4.1E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-01 1.1E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.1E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.7E-02 1.2E+04 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.4E-01 8.2E+02 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-01 1.2E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-01 2.5E+02 NA 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 1.0E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-01 1.6E+02 NA 9.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-01 1.0E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-01 6.6E+04 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-12
PRI 12 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency of
Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-01 8.2E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-01 8.2E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 14 12 86% 5.9E-02 8.1E-02 3.2E-03 9.6E-01 Bioaccumulative 8.E-02 3.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.5E-03 5.3E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 1.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.2E-02 7.5E-01 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 8.0E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-01 2.4E+03 NA 6.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 2.2E+01 NA 5.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-01 3.4E-02 NA 4.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 3.3E-01 NA 4.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-01 4.7E+02 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 14 2 14% 6.7E-02 1.3E-01 3.5E-02 4.0E+00 3.E-02 9.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 2.5E+04 NA 5.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 14 6 43% 3.7E-03 7.4E-03 5.9E-04 3.0E+02 2.E-05 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.6E-04 4.5E+03 NA 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.6E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 14 2 14% 1.8E-03 1.8E-03 5.5E-04 2.3E+04 8.E-08 2.E-08 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 14 9 64% 3.5E-03 7.0E-03 4.1E-04 2.1E+01 3.E-04 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 14 8 57% 3.5E-03 7.0E-03 5.4E-04 2.1E+00 3.E-03 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 14 7 50% 4.9E-03 9.8E-03 6.9E-04 2.1E+01 5.E-04 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 14 5 36% 4.8E-03 9.6E-03 1.4E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 14 4 29% 1.6E-03 3.2E-03 1.0E-03 2.1E+02 2.E-05 5.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 14 12 86% 1.1E-02 2.2E-02 4.7E-04 2.1E+03 1.E-05 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 14 1 7% 1.6E-03 3.2E-03 1.7E-03 2.1E+00 2.E-03 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 14 10 71% 3.9E-03 7.8E-03 4.0E-04 3.0E+03 3.E-06 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.8E-04 3.0E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 14 4 29% 1.8E-03 3.6E-03 6.5E-04 2.1E+01 2.E-04 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 14 8 57% 1.4E-03 2.8E-03 4.4E-04 1.7E+01 2.E-04 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 14 14 100% 6.3E-03 1.3E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 14 11 79% 7.1E-03 1.4E-02 4.1E-04 2.3E+03 6.E-06 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.8E-01 8.2E+01 NA 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.7E-01 1.5E+01
NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
pg/g = picograms per gram
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-13
PRI 13 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 26 25 96% 8.8E+02 9.9E+02 2.2E+02 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+01 3.E+00 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 26 25 96% 8.8E+02 9.9E+02 7.2E+00 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+01 1.E-01 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 26 26 100% 3.9E+05 5.0E+05 9.4E+05 Bioaccumulative 5.E-01 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 16 16 100% 1.5E+04 1.6E+04 1.1E+05 1.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 25 22 88% 1.1E+00 1.0E+00 5.8E-01 4.7E+01 2.E-02 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 25 25 100% 2.0E+01 2.0E+01 3.0E+00 7.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 16 16 100% 4.6E+02 3.4E+02 2.2E+04 2.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 16 16 100% 6.6E-01 7.3E-01 2.3E+02 3.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 25 15 60% 2.9E-01 2.9E-01 2.9E-01 9.8E+01 3.E-03 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 16 16 100% 8.8E+05 7.4E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 25 25 100% 1.8E+01 1.9E+01 6.3E+00 3.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 16 16 100% 5.4E+00 5.7E+00 3.5E+01 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 16 16 100% 1.6E+01 2.8E+01 4.7E+03 6.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 25 25 100% 1.5E+04 1.6E+04 8.2E+04 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 16 16 100% 1.8E+01 1.7E+01 8.0E+02 2.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 16 16 100% 4.6E+04 5.0E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 25 25 100% 3.4E+02 4.0E+02 2.6E+03 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 16 7 44% 2.6E-02 2.5E-02 2.5E-02 4.6E+00 Bioaccumulative 5.E-03 5.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 25 18 72% 5.0E+00 4.2E+00 3.6E-01 5.8E+02 7.E-03 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 16 16 100% 1.5E+01 2.1E+01 2.2E+03 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 16 16 100% 6.7E+03 5.8E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 25 16 64% 6.2E-01 5.2E-01 5.8E-01 5.8E+02 9.E-04 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 16 2 13% 6.7E-02 6.7E-02 1.7E-01 5.8E+02 1.E-04 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 16 16 100% 5.0E+04 2.6E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 16 2 13% 2.6E-01 2.6E-01 2.8E-01 1.2E+00 2.E-01 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 25 25 100% 3.5E+01 3.7E+01 5.8E+02 6.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 25 25 100% 8.0E+01 8.4E+01 3.5E+04 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.7E-01 2.0E+01 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.4E-02 3.5E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 2.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.3E-01 2.5E+03 NA 9.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.4E-01 8.2E+03 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-02 8.2E+01 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.2E-01 4.7E+03 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.5E-01 2.5E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.7E-01 1.6E+03 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.1E-01 1.6E+02 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.5E-01 7.4E+00 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.8E-01 1.5E+00 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.3E-01 6.0E+03 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.5E-01 5.8E+02 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.6E-01 4.1E+03 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.4E-01 8.0E+02 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.3E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.7E-01 5.1E+00 NA 5.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.7E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.3E-01 6.6E+00 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.4E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.6E-01 8.2E+03 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.6E-01 1.1E+01 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.6E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.4E-01 4.1E+03 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.5E-01 1.1E+02 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.9E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.1E-02 1.2E+04 NA 6.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.7E-01 8.2E+02 NA 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.7E-01 1.2E+03 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.5E-01 2.5E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.3E-01 1.0E+00 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.8E-01 1.6E+02 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.7E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-13
PRI 13 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.4E-01 1.0E+02 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.6E-01 6.6E+04 NA 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.5E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.8E-01 8.2E+03 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.8E-01 8.2E+02 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 25 8 32% 1.4E-01 1.9E-01 6.2E-03 9.6E-01 Bioaccumulative 2.E-01 6.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-02 5.3E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 2.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.8E-01 7.5E-01 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.3E-01 8.0E+00 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.6E-01 2.4E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.2E-01 2.2E+01 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.7E-01 3.4E-02 NA 8.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.4E-01 3.3E-01 NA 7.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.4E-01 4.7E+02 NA 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 9 0 0%1.9E-02 9.3E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 2.E-04 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.8E-02 4.0E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.4E-01 2.5E+04 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-03 3.0E+02 NA 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.3E-03 4.5E+03 NA 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.3E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 14 1 7% 6.3E-04 6.3E-04 1.1E-03 2.3E+04 3.E-08 5.E-08 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%8.5E-04 2.1E+01 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-03 2.1E+00 NA 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-03 2.1E+01 NA 7.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.8E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.1E-03 2.1E+02 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 14 4 29% 1.0E-03 2.0E-03 9.7E-04 2.1E+03 1.E-06 5.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.4E-03 2.1E+00 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 14 4 29% 1.8E-03 3.6E-03 8.2E-04 3.0E+03 1.E-06 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-03 3.0E+03 NA 5.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 14 1 7% 5.3E-04 1.1E-03 1.3E-03 2.1E+01 5.E-05 6.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 14 2 14% 5.3E-04 1.1E-03 8.6E-04 1.7E+01 6.E-05 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 14 12 86% 2.1E-03 4.2E-03 9.8E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 14 3 21% 1.4E-03 2.8E-03 9.8E-04 2.3E+03 1.E-06 4.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 mg/kg 10 0 0%5.2E-04 1.6E+01 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 mg/kg 10 1 10% 9.3E-03 9.3E-03 1.4E-03 2.6E+01 4.E-04 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Butanone 78-93-3 mg/kg 10 4 40% 1.9E-02 1.9E-02 3.6E-03 1.9E+04 1.E-06 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acetone 67-64-1 mg/kg 10 4 40% 1.2E-01 1.2E-01 7.2E-03 6.7E+04 2.E-06 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 mg/kg 10 2 20% 6.3E-03 6.3E-03 8.9E-04 3.5E+02 2.E-05 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.7E-02 8.2E+01 NA 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%6.0E-01 1.5E+01
NA 4.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-14
PRI 14 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 42 42 100% 9.1E+02 1.0E+03 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+01 NA COPC (Bioacumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 42 42 100% 9.1E+02 1.0E+03 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+01 NA COPC (Bioacumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 42 42 100% 7.6E+05 9.7E+05 9.4E+05 Bioaccumulative 1.E+00 NA COPC (Bioacumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 19 19 100% 1.7E+04 1.8E+04 1.1E+05 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 42 38 90% 1.1E+00 1.0E+00 1.3E+00 4.7E+01 2.E-02 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 20 20 100% 1.7E+01 1.7E+01 3.0E+00 6.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 19 19 100% 4.3E+02 3.2E+02 2.2E+04 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 19 19 100% 7.1E-01 7.8E-01 2.3E+02 3.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 20 12 60% 2.2E-01 2.3E-01 6.3E-01 9.8E+01 2.E-03 6.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 19 19 100% 2.8E+05 2.3E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 20 20 100% 1.8E+01 1.9E+01 6.3E+00 3.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 19 19 100% 6.3E+00 6.5E+00 3.5E+01 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 19 19 100% 1.4E+01 2.6E+01 4.7E+03 6.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 20 20 100% 1.4E+04 1.5E+04 8.2E+04 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 19 19 100% 1.4E+01 1.4E+01 8.0E+02 2.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 19 19 100% 5.6E+04 6.1E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 42 42 100% 1.9E+03 2.3E+03 2.6E+03 9.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 19 7 37% 5.4E-02 6.6E-02 1.6E-02 4.6E+00 Bioaccumulative 1.E-02 3.E-03 COPC (Bioacumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 20 16 80% 5.6E+00 4.7E+00 3.2E-01 5.8E+02 8.E-03 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 19 19 100% 1.6E+01 2.3E+01 2.2E+03 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 19 19 100% 9.1E+03 7.4E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 20 9 45% 4.0E-01 4.0E-01 1.3E+00 5.8E+02 7.E-04 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 19 3 16% 4.5E-02 4.5E-02 3.8E-01 5.8E+02 8.E-05 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 19 19 100% 2.2E+05 1.1E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 19 5 26% 1.8E-01 1.8E-01 6.3E-01 1.2E+00 2.E-01 5.E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 20 20 100% 4.0E+01 4.2E+01 5.8E+02 7.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 20 20 100% 5.2E+01 5.7E+01 3.5E+04 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 2.1E+00 2.0E+01 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 25 0 0%NA 3.3E-01 3.5E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 9.E-03 COPC (Bioacumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 2.5E+03 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 8.2E+01 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.0E+00 4.7E+03 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 2.5E+02 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 2.1E+00 1.6E+03 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 2.7E+00 1.6E+02 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 7.4E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.3E+00 1.5E+00 NA 9.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.0E+00 6.0E+03 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 5.8E+02 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 7.4E-01 4.1E+03 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 8.0E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.0E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.2E+00 5.1E+00 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%2.1E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.0E+00 6.6E+00 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.1E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.2E+00 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 7.4E-01 1.1E+01 NA 7.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.2E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%4.2E+00 4.1E+03 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 1.1E+02 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%3.6E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 16 7 44% 4.5E-01 4.5E-01 3.1E-01 1.2E+04 4.E-05 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 2.1E+00 8.2E+02 NA 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.2E+00 1.2E+03 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 2.5E+02 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 NA 1.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.3E+00 1.6E+02 NA 8.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.2E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 1.0E+02 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.2E+00 6.6E+04 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%1.1E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.2E+00 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-14
PRI 14 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.2E+00 8.2E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 42 16 38% 9.7E+00 1.3E+01 1.1E+00 9.6E-01 Bioaccumulative 1.E+01 1.E+00 COPC (Bioacumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 25 0 0%NA 1.0E+00 5.3E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 2.E-01 COPC (Bioacumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 7.9E-01 7.5E-01 NA 1.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.0E+00 8.0E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.2E+00 2.4E+03 NA 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 9.7E-01 2.2E+01 NA 4.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.2E+00 3.4E-02 NA 4.E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 3.3E-01 NA 3.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 1.1E+00 4.7E+02 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 mg/kg 1 0 0%NA 8.4E-02 9.3E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 9.E-04 COPC (Bioacumulative)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 6.5E-01 4.0E+00 NA 2.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 38 3 8% 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 2.0E+00 2.5E+04 8.E-06 8.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 16 3 19% 2.0E-02 4.0E-02 2.8E-03 3.0E+02 1.E-04 9.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 16 1 6% 2.7E-02 5.4E-02 3.1E-03 4.5E+03 1.E-05 7.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 16 1 6% 1.1E-02 1.1E-02 2.2E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 16 1 6% 5.6E-04 5.6E-04 2.6E-03 2.3E+04 2.E-08 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 2.0E-03 2.1E+01 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 2.6E-03 2.1E+00 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 3.3E-03 2.1E+01 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 16 0 0%6.5E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 5.0E-03 2.1E+02 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 16 4 25% 1.0E-03 2.0E-03 2.3E-03 2.1E+03 1.E-06 1.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 7.8E-03 2.1E+00 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 16 4 25% 5.8E-04 1.2E-03 1.9E-03 3.0E+03 4.E-07 6.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 16 1 6% 1.0E-03 2.0E-03 3.2E-03 3.0E+03 7.E-07 1.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 16 0 0%NA 3.1E-03 2.1E+01 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 16 1 6% 1.4E-03 2.8E-03 9.0E-03 1.7E+01 2.E-04 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 16 7 44% 1.4E-02 2.8E-02 2.3E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 16 1 6% 4.7E-04 9.4E-04 2.3E-03 2.3E+03 4.E-07 1.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 8.6E-02 2.4E+01 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 mg/kg 8 0 0%NA 6.4E-04 1.6E+01 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 5.7E-04 1.0E+02 NA 6.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.9E-03 6.4E-02 NA 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 5.9E-04 1.6E-01 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.4E-03 9.3E+02 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.6E-03 2.0E+00 NA 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 2.0E-03 2.3E+02 NA 9.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 8.3E-04 2.3E+03 NA 4.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.3E-03 6.6E+00 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%6.6E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-01-5 mg/kg 7 0 0%1.4E-03 8.2E+00 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-02-6 mg/kg 7 0 0%1.6E-03 8.2E+00 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.7E-03 1.1E+01 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 7.9E-04 3.6E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 9.7E-04 6.3E-01 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon-113)76-13-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.8E-03 2.8E+03 NA 6.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.6E-03 9.3E+01 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 mg/kg 8 0 0%NA 1.6E-03 2.6E+01 NA 6.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.5E-03 2.7E+00 NA 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Butanone 78-93-3 mg/kg 8 7 88% 2.4E-02 2.4E-02 1.6E-03 1.9E+04 1.E-06 8.E-08 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Hexanone 591-78-6 mg/kg 7 1 14% 1.1E-03 1.1E-03 1.6E-03 1.3E+02 8.E-06 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 mg/kg 7 1 14% 1.5E-03 1.5E-03 2.0E-03 1.4E+04 1.E-07 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acetone 67-64-1 mg/kg 30 20 67% 4.7E-01 4.7E-01 2.3E-03 6.7E+04 7.E-06 3.E-08 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzene 71-43-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 5.7E-04 5.1E+00 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 2.1E-03 6.3E+01 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.2E-03 1.3E+00 NA 9.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bromoform 75-25-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 8.8E-04 8.6E+01 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bromomethane 74-83-9 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.9E-03 3.0E+00 NA 6.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 mg/kg 8 6 75% 4.0E-03 4.0E-03 1.1E-02 3.5E+02 1.E-05 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.2E-03 2.9E+00 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 6.4E-04 1.3E+02 NA 5.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Cyclohexane 110-82-7 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 5.8E-03 2.7E+03 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 4.6E-04 3.9E+01 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-14
PRI 14 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Chloroethane 75-00-3 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 9.9E-04 5.7E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chloroform 67-66-3 mg/kg 7 1 14% 1.1E-03 1.1E-03 5.7E-04 1.4E+00 8.E-04 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chloromethane 74-87-3 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.1E-03 4.6E+01 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon-12)75-71-8 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 2.0E-03 3.7E+01 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 7.5E-04 2.5E+01 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.1E-03 9.9E+02 NA 1.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Methyl tertbutyl ether (MTBE)1634-04-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.3E-03 2.1E+02 NA 6.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)75-09-2 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.8E-03 3.2E+02 NA 6.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Styrene 100-42-5 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 6.8E-04 3.5E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.3E-03 3.9E+01 NA 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Toluene 108-88-3 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.3E-03 4.7E+03 NA 3.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 1.3E-03 1.9E+00 NA 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon-11)75-69-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 7.5E-04 3.5E+04 NA 2.E-08 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 7.9E-04 1.7E+00 NA 5.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
o-Xylene 95-47-6 mg/kg 7 0 0%NA 7.2E-04 2.8E+02 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 mg/kg 7 0 0%1.8E-03 2.4E+02 NA 8.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 15 0 0%NA 2.6E-01 8.2E+01 NA 3.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 38 11 29% 4.3E+00 4.3E+00 4.0E-01 1.5E+01
3.E-01 3.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected 4 = RBC listed is based on a mixture of cis- and trans-isomers (CAS 542-75-6).
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-15
PRI 15 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 21 21 100% 5.2E+00 6.3E+00 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 9.E-02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 21 21 100% 5.5E+00 6.6E+00 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 9.E-02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 21 21 100% 2.4E+04 3.0E+04 9.4E+05 Bioaccumulative 3.E-02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 21 21 100% 1.5E+04 1.6E+04 1.1E+05 1.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 21 19 90% 4.2E-01 4.3E-01 2.3E-01 4.7E+01 9.E-03 5.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 21 21 100% 6.8E+00 7.0E+00 3.0E+00 2.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 21 21 100% 4.2E+02 3.1E+02 2.2E+04 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 21 21 100% 7.2E-01 7.9E-01 2.3E+02 3.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 21 21 100% 5.1E-01 4.7E-01 9.8E+01 5.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 21 21 100% 2.0E+05 1.6E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 21 21 100% 1.7E+01 1.8E+01 6.3E+00 3.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 21 21 100% 5.5E+00 5.8E+00 3.5E+01 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 21 21 100% 2.1E+01 3.3E+01 4.7E+03 7.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 21 21 100% 1.3E+04 1.4E+04 8.2E+04 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 21 21 100% 2.2E+01 2.1E+01 8.0E+02 3.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 21 21 100% 3.2E+04 3.5E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 21 21 100% 5.5E+02 6.6E+02 2.6E+03 3.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 21 19 90% 4.1E-02 4.7E-02 8.9E-03 4.6E+00 Bioaccumulative 1.E-02 2.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 21 21 100% 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 5.8E+02 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 21 21 100% 1.5E+01 2.1E+01 2.2E+03 1.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 21 21 100% 6.4E+03 5.6E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 21 17 81% 3.9E-01 3.9E-01 2.3E-01 5.8E+02 7.E-04 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 21 12 57% 8.5E-02 8.5E-02 7.0E-02 5.8E+02 1.E-04 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 21 21 100% 1.6E+04 9.0E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 21 10 48% 1.9E-01 1.9E-01 1.2E-01 1.2E+00 2.E-01 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 21 21 100% 2.7E+01 2.9E+01 5.8E+02 5.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 21 21 100% 6.3E+01 6.8E+01 3.5E+04 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.9E-01 2.0E+01 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 15 0 0%3.1E-02 3.5E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 9.E-04 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.6E-02 2.5E+03 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.7E-02 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%8.2E-02 8.2E+01 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.3E-02 4.7E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.0E-01 2.5E+02 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.0E-01 1.6E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.5E-01 1.6E+02 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.0E-01 7.4E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.2E-01 1.5E+00 NA 8.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.5E-02 6.0E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.0E-01 5.8E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%6.8E-02 4.1E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.9E-02 8.0E+02 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.6E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-01 5.1E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.0E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.5E-02 6.6E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.0E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-01 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 15 0 0%6.8E-02 1.1E+01 NA 6.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%3.9E-01 4.1E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.0E-01 1.1E+02 NA 9.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%3.3E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%2.9E-02 1.2E+04 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.9E-01 8.2E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-01 1.2E+03 NA 9.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.0E-01 2.5E+02 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.5E-02 1.0E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.2E-01 1.6E+02 NA 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.0E-01 1.0E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-15
PRI 15 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio)Conclusion
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-01 6.6E+04 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.0E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-01 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-01 8.2E+02 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 21 4 19% 3.5E-02 4.9E-02 8.7E-02 9.6E-01 Bioaccumulative 5.E-02 9.E-02 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 15 0 0%8.0E-02 5.3E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 2.E-02 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 15 0 0%7.3E-02 7.5E-01 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.5E-02 8.0E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-01 2.4E+03 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 15 0 0%8.9E-02 2.2E+01 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-01 3.4E-02 NA 3.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.9E-02 3.3E-01 NA 3.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.0E-01 4.7E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 15 1 7% 2.7E-02 5.4E-02 5.0E-02 4.0E+00 1.E-02 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%9.7E-02 2.5E+04 NA 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 15 1 7% 9.1E-04 1.8E-03 1.0E-03 3.0E+02 6.E-06 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.1E-03 4.5E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 15 0 0%4.0E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 15 1 7% 4.7E-04 4.7E-04 4.8E-04 2.3E+04 2.E-08 2.E-08 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 15 7 47% 6.7E-04 1.3E-03 3.5E-04 2.1E+01 6.E-05 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 15 2 13% 6.2E-04 1.2E-03 4.6E-04 2.1E+00 6.E-04 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 15 4 27% 1.0E-03 2.0E-03 5.8E-04 2.1E+01 1.E-04 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.2E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 15 1 7% 1.0E-03 2.0E-03 8.8E-04 2.1E+02 1.E-05 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 15 12 80% 2.0E-03 4.0E-03 4.0E-04 2.1E+03 2.E-06 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 15 0 0%1.4E-03 2.1E+00 NA 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 15 12 80% 1.5E-03 3.0E-03 3.4E-04 3.0E+03 1.E-06 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 15 1 7% 7.3E-04 1.5E-03 5.9E-04 3.0E+03 5.E-07 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 15 1 7% 7.6E-04 1.5E-03 5.5E-04 2.1E+01 7.E-05 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 15 7 47% 7.0E-03 1.4E-02 5.1E-03 1.7E+01 8.E-04 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 15 3 20% 1.7E-03 3.4E-03 2.1E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 15 11 73% 1.3E-03 2.6E-03 4.1E-04 2.3E+03 1.E-06 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 3 0 0%2.2E-02 8.2E+01 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 15 2 13% 2.3E-01 2.3E-01 2.4E-01 1.5E+01
2.E-02 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-16
PRI 16 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 pg/g 14 14 100% 7.5E-01 1.3E+00 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 2.E-02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 pg/g 14 14 100% 8.0E-01 1.3E+00 7.2E+01 Bioaccumulative 2.E-02 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 pg/g 14 14 100% 1.2E+03 1.5E+03 9.4E+05 Bioaccumulative 2.E-03 NA COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.6E+04 1.7E+04 1.1E+05 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 14 12 86% 3.8E-01 3.9E-01 2.1E-01 4.7E+01 8.E-03 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 7.2E+00 7.4E+00 3.0E+00 2.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Barium 7440-39-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.1E+02 1.8E+02 2.2E+04 8.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 7.4E-01 8.1E-01 2.3E+02 4.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.1E-01 4.7E-01 9.8E+01 5.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.7E+05 1.4E+05 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium1 7440-47-3 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.8E+01 1.9E+01 6.3E+00 3.E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.5E+00 5.8E+00 3.5E+01 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.0E+01 3.2E+01 4.7E+03 7.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.7E+04 1.8E+04 8.2E+04 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.8E+01 2.6E+01 8.0E+02 3.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 mg/kg 14 14 100% 4.5E+04 4.9E+04 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.0E+02 6.0E+02 2.6E+03 2.E-01 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 mg/kg 14 13 93% 4.3E-02 5.0E-02 8.4E-03 4.6E+00 Bioaccumulative 1.E-02 2.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.1E+00 1.2E+00 5.8E+02 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 14 14 100% 1.2E+01 1.7E+01 2.2E+03 8.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 mg/kg 14 14 100% 4.9E+03 4.6E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 14 9 64% 3.4E-01 3.6E-01 2.3E-01 5.8E+02 6.E-04 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 14 5 36% 7.5E-02 7.5E-02 7.8E-02 5.8E+02 1.E-04 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 mg/kg 14 14 100% 5.1E+02 1.1E+03 NSV Essential Nutrient NA NA Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 14 4 29% 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 1.3E-01 1.2E+00 1.E-01 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 mg/kg 14 14 100% 2.6E+01 2.8E+01 5.8E+02 5.E-02 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 14 14 100% 6.2E+01 6.7E+01 3.5E+04 2.E-03 NA Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.0E-01 2.0E+01 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.2E-02 3.5E+01 Bioaccumulative NA 9.E-04 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 2.5E+03 NA 4.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.5E-03 8.2E+01 NA 7.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.8E-02 4.7E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 2.5E+02 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.1E-01 1.6E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.7E-01 1.6E+02 NA 2.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 7.4E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 1.5E+00 NA 8.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 6.0E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 5.8E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.2E-02 4.1E+03 NA 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 8.0E+02 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 5.1E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.1E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 6.6E+00 NA 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.2E-02 1.1E+01 NA 7.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.1E-01 4.1E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 1.1E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.5E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.1E-02 1.2E+04 NA 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%2.0E-01 8.2E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 1.2E+03 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 2.5E+02 NA 4.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 1.0E+00 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 1.6E+02 NA 8.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 1.0E+02 NA 1.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 6.6E+04 NA 2.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-16
PRI 16 COPC Selection - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS # Units
Number of
Samples
Number of
Detections
Frequency
of Detect
Maximum
Detection
Corrected
Maximum
Detection
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Essential Nutrients
and
Bioaccumulatives
Corrected
Max Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Max DL /
RBSL
(ratio) Conclusion
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 8.2E+03 NA 1.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 8.2E+02 NA 1.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.9E-03 2.7E-03 9.6E-01 Bioaccumulative NA 3.E-03 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.6E-03 5.3E+00 Bioaccumulative NA 9.E-04 COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 mg/kg 14 0 0%7.7E-02 7.5E-01 NA 1.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 8.0E+00 NA 1.E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 2.4E+03 NA 5.E-05 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.4E-02 2.2E+01 NA 4.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-01 3.4E-02 NA 4.E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 3.3E-01 NA 3.E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.1E-01 4.7E+02 NA 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.0E-02 4.0E+00 NA 8.E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.0E-01 2.5E+04 NA 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 mg/kg 14 2 14% 1.4E-03 2.8E-03 7.9E-04 3.0E+02 9.E-06 3.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 mg/kg 14 0 0%9.9E-04 4.5E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 mg/kg 14 0 0%3.9E-04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Anthracene 120-12-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%4.6E-04 2.3E+04 NA 2.E-08 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 mg/kg 14 2 14% 6.2E-04 1.2E-03 3.5E-04 2.1E+01 6.E-05 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 mg/kg 14 1 7% 7.2E-04 1.4E-03 4.7E-04 2.1E+00 7.E-04 2.E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 mg/kg 14 1 7% 1.4E-03 2.8E-03 5.9E-04 2.1E+01 1.E-04 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.2E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 mg/kg 14 1 7% 8.5E-04 1.7E-03 8.9E-04 2.1E+02 8.E-06 4.E-06 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 mg/kg 14 10 71% 1.9E-03 3.8E-03 4.0E-04 2.1E+03 2.E-06 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 mg/kg 14 0 0%1.4E-03 2.1E+00 NA 7.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 mg/kg 14 9 64% 2.0E-03 4.0E-03 3.4E-04 3.0E+03 1.E-06 1.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 mg/kg 14 0 0%5.7E-04 3.0E+03 NA 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 mg/kg 14 1 7% 1.0E-03 2.0E-03 5.6E-04 2.1E+01 1.E-04 3.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 mg/kg 14 11 79% 5.8E-03 1.2E-02 3.3E-04 1.7E+01 7.E-04 2.E-05 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 mg/kg 14 11 79% 3.0E-03 6.0E-03 1.2E-03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No RBSL)
Pyrene 129-00-0 mg/kg 14 8 57% 1.9E-03 3.8E-03 4.1E-04 2.3E+03 2.E-06 2.E-07 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 mg/kg 13 0 0%2.4E-02 8.2E+01 NA 3.E-04 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL < RBSL)
Cyanide, Total 74-90-8 mg/kg 14 4 29% 4.6E-01 4.6E-01 2.3E-01 1.5E+01 3.E-02 2.E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern '-- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
DL = Detection Limit 1 = The CAS number presented is for chromium (CAS 7440-47-3). The RBC used in analysis is for chromium (VI) (CAS 18540-29-2).
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBC used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
ND = Not Detected
NSV = No Screening Value
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Industrial Soil, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-17
Site-Wide Surface Water COPC Selection
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent CAS No. Units
Total
Samples
Collected
Number of
Detects
Frequency
of Detection
Maximum
Detection
Minimum
Detection
Average of
Detections
Minimum
Detection
Limit
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Maximum
Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Maximum DL /
RBSL
(ratio)
Bioaccumulative or
Essential Nutrient Conclusion
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC-DX-0 µg/L 28 28 100% 8.9E-03 2.0E-07 1.5E-03 1.2E-06 7.4E+03 NA Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC-DX-2 µg/L 28 28 100% 9.9E-03 2.8E-06 1.6E-03 1.2E-06 8.3E+03 NA Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 µg/L 28 28 100% 1.5E+01 3.2E-03 2.2E+00 4.4E-02 3.4E+02 NA Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 µg/L 27 24 89% 2.1E+05 6.5E+02 6.1E+04 1.3E+02 6.3E+02 2.0E+03 1.1E+02 3.2E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Aluminum 7429-90-5 µg/L 28 23 82% 1.8E+05 5.5E+02 6.0E+04 5.0E+01 6.3E+02 2.0E+03 9.0E+01 3.2E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 µg/L 27 26 96% 3.7E+01 6.8E-01 1.1E+01 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 7.8E-01 4.7E+01 1.3E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Antimony 7440-36-0 µg/L 28 26 93% 2.8E+01 5.3E-01 9.6E+00 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 7.8E-01 3.6E+01 1.3E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 µg/L 27 27 100% 6.5E+02 3.8E+00 2.6E+02 5.2E-02 1.3E+04 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Arsenic 7440-38-2 µg/L 28 27 96% 6.4E+02 1.0E+01 2.5E+02 2.0E+00 2.0E+00 5.2E-02 1.2E+04 3.8E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Barium 7440-39-3 µg/L 27 27 100% 2.9E+03 4.6E+01 8.8E+02 3.8E+02 7.6E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Barium 7440-39-3 µg/L 28 28 100% 2.7E+03 2.4E+01 7.3E+02 3.8E+02 7.1E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 µg/L 27 19 70% 8.2E+00 3.8E-01 3.2E+00 2.0E-01 6.8E+00 2.5E+00 3.3E+00 2.7E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Beryllium 7440-41-7 µg/L 28 21 75% 6.4E+00 3.7E-01 3.4E+00 2.0E-01 1.0E+00 2.5E+00 2.6E+00 4.0E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 µg/L 27 15 56% 4.7E+00 1.3E+00 2.3E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E+00 9.2E-01 5.1E+00 5.4E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Cadmium 7440-43-9 µg/L 28 15 54% 5.0E+00 1.4E+00 2.3E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E+00 9.2E-01 5.4E+00 5.4E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Calcium 7440-70-2 µg/L 27 27 100% 3.9E+07 7.5E+04 8.1E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Dissolved Calcium 7440-70-2 µg/L 28 28 100% 4.0E+07 6.2E+04 8.1E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 µg/L 27 22 81% 6.4E+02 1.7E+01 2.4E+02 2.0E+00 2.5E+01 3.5E-02 1.8E+04 7.1E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Chromium 7440-47-3 µg/L 28 20 71% 6.4E+02 4.2E+01 2.5E+02 2.0E+00 2.5E+01 3.5E-02 1.8E+04 7.1E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Chromium, Hexavalent 1 18540-29-9 µg/L 27 19 70% 7.7E+00 1.4E-01 2.4E+00 1.3E-01 1.7E+00 3.5E-02 2.2E+02 4.9E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 µg/L 27 26 96% 1.4E+02 2.4E+00 3.8E+01 1.2E+00 1.2E+00 6.0E-01 2.3E+02 2.0E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Cobalt 7440-48-4 µg/L 28 25 89% 1.0E+02 2.7E+00 3.6E+01 1.2E+00 1.5E+01 6.0E-01 1.7E+02 2.5E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Copper 7440-50-8 µg/L 27 25 93% 2.3E+02 3.5E+00 1.0E+02 5.0E+00 2.5E+01 8.0E+01 2.9E+00 3.1E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dissolved Copper 7440-50-8 µg/L 28 23 82% 2.3E+02 3.4E+00 1.1E+02 2.0E+00 2.5E+01 8.0E+01 2.9E+00 3.1E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Total Iron 7439-89-6 µg/L 27 27 100% 1.4E+06 2.4E+03 5.8E+05 1.4E+03 1.0E+03 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Iron 7439-89-6 µg/L 28 25 89% 1.4E+06 2.1E+03 5.8E+05 5.0E+01 6.3E+02 1.4E+03 1.0E+03 4.5E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Lead 7439-92-1 µg/L 27 22 81% 1.2E+02 7.6E+00 5.6E+01 1.2E+00 6.0E+00 1.5E+01 8.0E+00 4.0E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Lead 7439-92-1 µg/L 28 21 75% 1.2E+02 1.5E+01 5.4E+01 1.2E+00 6.0E+00 1.5E+01 8.0E+00 4.0E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Magnesium 7439-95-4 µg/L 27 27 100% 3.7E+07 4.2E+04 7.2E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Dissolved Magnesium 7439-95-4 µg/L 28 28 100% 3.7E+07 3.4E+04 7.2E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 µg/L 27 27 100% 1.9E+04 3.8E+01 5.1E+03 4.3E+01 4.4E+02 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Manganese 7439-96-5 µg/L 28 27 96% 1.6E+04 3.5E+02 4.8E+03 2.8E+00 2.8E+00 4.3E+01 3.7E+02 6.5E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Mercury2 7439-97-6 µg/L 27 20 74% 3.5E+00 1.3E-01 8.7E-01 1.0E-01 5.0E-01 6.3E-02 5.6E+01 7.9E+00 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Dissolved Mercury 7439-97-6 µg/L 28 20 71% 1.8E+00 1.8E-01 7.7E-01 1.0E-01 5.0E-01 6.3E-02 2.9E+01 7.9E+00 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 µg/L 27 26 96% 3.6E+02 2.2E+00 1.3E+02 1.5E+01 1.5E+01 1.0E+01 3.6E+01 1.5E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Molybdenum 7439-98-7 µg/L 28 27 96% 3.6E+02 2.3E+00 1.2E+02 1.2E+00 1.2E+00 1.0E+01 3.6E+01 1.2E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 µg/L 27 27 100% 3.7E+02 1.0E+01 2.0E+02 3.9E+01 9.5E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Nickel 7440-02-0 µg/L 28 26 93% 3.6E+02 1.5E+01 1.9E+02 3.9E+00 2.5E+01 3.9E+01 9.2E+00 6.4E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Potassium 7440-09-7 µg/L 27 27 100% 1.8E+06 2.5E+04 2.6E+05 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Dissolved Potassium 7440-09-7 µg/L 28 28 100% 1.8E+06 2.6E+04 2.6E+05 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 µg/L 27 17 63% 8.5E+00 2.7E+00 6.1E+00 2.0E+00 2.5E+01 1.0E+01 8.5E-01 2.5E+00 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dissolved Selenium 7782-49-2 µg/L 28 17 61% 7.8E+00 2.2E+00 5.0E+00 2.0E+00 1.0E+01 1.0E+01 7.8E-01 1.0E+00 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Silver 7440-22-4 µg/L 27 2 7% 2.4E+00 2.3E+00 2.4E+00 6.0E-01 3.0E+00 9.4E+00 2.6E-01 3.2E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dissolved Silver 7440-22-4 µg/L 28 2 7% 2.6E+00 2.3E+00 2.5E+00 6.0E-01 3.0E+00 9.4E+00 2.8E-01 3.2E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Total Sodium 7440-23-5 µg/L 27 27 100% 9.7E+06 6.1E+05 2.5E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Dissolved Sodium 7440-23-5 µg/L 28 28 100% 1.0E+07 6.3E+05 2.5E+06 NSV NA NA Essential Nutrient Not a COPC (Essential Nutrient)
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 µg/L 27 12 44% 7.3E+00 1.8E+00 3.2E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E+00 2.0E-02 3.7E+02 2.5E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Thallium 7440-28-0 µg/L 28 9 32% 7.1E+00 1.5E+00 3.0E+00 1.0E+00 5.0E+00 2.0E-02 3.6E+02 2.5E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 µg/L 27 22 81% 2.0E+03 6.1E+00 9.3E+02 6.0E+00 7.5E+01 8.6E+00 2.3E+02 8.7E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Vanadium 7440-62-2 µg/L 28 20 71% 2.0E+03 1.4E+02 9.5E+02 6.0E+00 7.5E+01 8.6E+00 2.3E+02 8.7E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 µg/L 27 27 100% 8.1E+02 1.6E+01 3.6E+02 6.0E+02 1.4E+00 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dissolved Zinc 7440-66-6 µg/L 28 26 93% 7.6E+02 1.3E+01 3.4E+02 8.0E+00 2.0E+01 6.0E+02 1.3E+00 3.3E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 µg/L 19 0 0%4.5E+00 5.0E+01 8.3E-02 NA 6.0E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 µg/L 28 0 0%4.9E-01 2.5E+01 1.7E-01 NA 1.5E+02 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
2,2-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)108-60-1 µg/L 17 0 0%1.2E+00 1.3E+01 7.1E+01 NA 1.8E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 µg/L 19 0 0%2.3E+00 2.5E+01 2.4E+01 NA 1.04E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 µg/L 19 0 0%1.8E+00 2.0E+01 1.2E+02 NA 1.7E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 µg/L 19 0 0%1.7E-01 1.9E+00 1.2E+00 NA 1.6E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 µg/L 19 0 0%2.3E+00 2.6E+01 4.6E+00 NA 5.7E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 µg/L 19 0 0%2.0E+00 2.2E+01 3.6E+01 NA 6.1E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 µg/L 19 0 0%1.8E+01 2.0E+02 3.9E+00 NA 5.1E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 µg/L 19 0 0%1.8E+00 2.0E+01 2.4E-01 NA 8.3E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 µg/L 19 0 0%1.8E+00 2.0E+01 4.9E-02 NA 4.1E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 µg/L 19 0 0%1.2E+00 1.3E+01 7.5E+01 NA 1.7E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 µg/L 19 0 0%1.4E+00 1.6E+01 9.1E+00 NA 1.8E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 µg/L 19 0 0%8.4E-01 9.4E+00 9.3E+01 NA 1.0E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 µg/L 19 0 0%1.8E+00 2.0E+01 1.9E+01 NA 1.1E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 µg/L 19 0 0%1.7E+00 1.9E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 µg/L 19 0 0%8.6E-01 9.7E+00 1.3E-01 NA 7.5E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-17
Site-Wide Surface Water COPC Selection
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent CAS No. Units
Total
Samples
Collected
Number of
Detects
Frequency
of Detection
Maximum
Detection
Minimum
Detection
Average of
Detections
Minimum
Detection
Limit
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Maximum
Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Maximum DL /
RBSL
(ratio)
Bioaccumulative or
Essential Nutrient Conclusion
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 µg/L 19 0 0%1.3E+00 1.4E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 µg/L 19 0 0%2.0E+00 2.2E+01 1.5E-01 NA 1.5E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 µg/L 19 0 0%9.9E-01 1.1E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 µg/L 19 0 0%1.8E+00 2.0E+01 1.4E+02 NA 1.4E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 µg/L 19 0 0%1.8E+00 2.0E+01 3.7E-01 NA 5.4E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 7005-72-3 µg/L 19 0 0%9.9E-01 1.1E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
3 & 4 Methylphenol3 15831-10-4 µg/L 19 3 16% 6.6E+00 2.0E+00 4.1E+00 1.1E+00 1.2E+01 9.3E+01 7.1E-02 NA
Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 µg/L 19 0 0%1.3E+00 1.5E+01 3.8E+00 NA 3.9E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 µg/L 28 0 0%5.5E+00 2.9E+02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Acetophenone 98-86-2 µg/L 19 1 5% 9.0E-01 9.0E-01 9.0E-01 7.0E-01 7.9E+00 1.9E+02 4.7E-03 4.2E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 µg/L 19 0 0%7.5E+00 8.4E+01 1.9E+01 NA 4.4E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Benzylbutylphthalate 85-68-7 µg/L 19 0 0%1.3E+00 1.4E+01 1.6E+01 NA 8.8E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 µg/L 19 0 0%9.0E-01 1.0E+01 5.9E+00 NA 1.7E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 µg/L 19 0 0%1.3E+00 1.5E+01 1.4E-02 NA 1.1E+03 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 µg/L 28 3 11% 1.1E+01 1.3E+00 4.6E+00 9.0E-01 4.7E+01 5.6E+00 2.0E+00 8.4E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Carbazole 86-74-8 µg/L 19 0 0%1.1E+00 1.2E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 µg/L 19 0 0%9.9E-01 1.1E+01 7.9E-01 NA 1.4E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 µg/L 19 1 5% 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 8.4E-01 9.4E+00 1.5E+03 1.1E-03 6.3E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 µg/L 19 0 0%7.9E-01 8.9E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 µg/L 19 0 0%9.9E-01 1.1E+01 9.0E+01 NA 1.2E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 µg/L 19 0 0%1.3E+00 1.5E+01 2.0E+01 NA 7.5E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 µg/L 28 14 52% 4.0E+02 3.2E-01 -- 6.7E-02 3.3E+00 9.8E-03 4.1E+04 3.4E+02 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 µg/L 28 0 0%7.2E-02 3.7E+00 1.4E-01 NA 2.6E+01 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 µg/L 19 0 0%4.5E+00 5.0E+01 4.1E-02 NA 1.2E+03 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 µg/L 19 0 0%1.3E+00 1.4E+01 3.3E-01 NA 4.2E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Isophorone 78-59-1 µg/L 19 0 0%9.0E-01 1.0E+01 7.8E+01 NA 1.3E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 µg/L 19 0 0%1.4E+00 1.6E+01 1.4E-01 NA 1.1E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
n-Nitrosodimethylamine 62-75-9 µg/L 19 0 0%6.3E-02 7.1E-01 1.1E-04 NA 6.5E+03 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 621-64-7 µg/L 19 0 0%1.3E+00 1.4E+01 1.1E-02 NA 1.3E+03 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 µg/L 19 0 0%4.9E-01 5.4E+00 1.2E+01 NA 4.5E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 µg/L 21 0 0%4.1E-01 2.1E+01 3.2E-01 NA 6.6E+01 Bioaccumulative COPC (Bioaccumulative)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 µg/L 28 3 14% 1.4E+02 2.7E+01 6.5E+01 1.8E+00 2.0E+01 4.1E-02 3.4E+03 4.9E+02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Phenol 108-95-2 µg/L 19 0 0%9.9E-01 1.1E+01 5.8E+02 NA 1.9E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 µg/L 19 2 11% 7.9E-03 7.9E-03 7.9E-03 5.0E-03 5.6E-02 3.6E+00 2.2E-03 1.6E-02 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 µg/L 19 1 5% 1.6E-02 1.6E-02 1.6E-02 2.9E-03 5.0E-02 5.3E+01 3.0E-04 9.4E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 µg/L 19 0 0%2.8E-03 5.0E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Anthracene 120-12-7 µg/L 19 1 5% 4.9E-03 4.9E-03 4.9E-03 4.1E-03 4.5E-02 1.8E+02 2.7E-05 2.5E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 µg/L 19 0 0%4.2E-03 4.6E-02 3.0E-02 NA 1.5E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 µg/L 19 0 0%4.0E-03 4.4E-02 2.5E-02 NA 1.8E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 µg/L 19 0 0%1.1E-02 1.2E-01 2.5E-01 NA 4.8E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191-24-2 µg/L 19 0 0%5.0E-03 5.6E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 µg/L 19 0 0%7.2E-03 7.9E-02 2.5E+00 NA 3.2E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chrysene 218-01-9 µg/L 19 0 0%3.7E-03 4.0E-02 2.5E+01 NA 1.6E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 µg/L 18 0 0%1.3E-02 1.5E-01 2.5E-02 NA 6.0E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 µg/L 19 3 16% 1.1E-01 1.3E-02 6.6E-02 4.1E-03 4.3E-02 8.0E+01 1.4E-03 5.4E-04 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Fluorene 86-73-7 µg/L 19 1 5% 7.8E-03 7.8E-03 7.8E-03 3.7E-03 4.1E-02 2.9E+01 2.7E-04 1.4E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 µg/L 18 0 0%1.3E-02 1.4E-01 2.5E-01 NA 5.6E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 µg/L 28 3 11% 2.9E-01 7.7E-03 1.0E-01 1.3E-02 7.5E-01 1.7E-01 1.7E+00 4.4E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 µg/L 19 3 16% 1.5E-01 6.2E-03 6.3E-02 6.0E-03 6.4E-02 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Pyrene 129-00-0 µg/L 19 3 16% 8.7E-02 1.2E-02 5.4E-02 3.9E-03 4.2E-02 1.2E+01 7.3E-03 3.5E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 µg/L 19 0 0%2.2E-01 6.3E+02 4.6E-01 NA 1.4E+03 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 µg/L 19 0 0%1.0E-01 2.5E+00 2.8E+00 NA 8.9E-01 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 µg/L 19 0 0%1.4E-01 3.5E+00 2.8E+01 NA 1.3E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 µg/L 19 0 0%3.2E-01 8.0E+00 3.3E-04 NA 2.4E+04 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 µg/L 19 0 0%2.2E-01 5.5E+00 7.5E-03 NA 7.3E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 µg/L 19 0 0%1.4E-01 3.5E+00 3.0E+01 NA 1.2E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 µg/L 19 0 0%2.2E-01 5.5E+00 1.7E-01 NA 3.2E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 µg/L 19 0 0%1.0E-01 2.5E+00 3.6E+00 NA 6.9E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 µg/L 19 0 0%1.1E-01 2.8E+00 3.6E+01 NA 7.8E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 µg/L 19 0 0%1.5E-01 3.8E+00 8.2E-01 NA 4.6E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 µg/L 19 0 0%1.1E-01 2.8E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-01-5 µg/L 19 0 0%2.2E-01 5.5E+00 4.7E-01 NA 1.2E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene4 10061-02-6 µg/L 19 0 0%8.0E-02 2.0E+00 4.7E-01 NA 4.3E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 µg/L 19 1 5% 6.3E+00 6.3E+00 6.3E+00 1.3E-01 3.3E+00 4.8E-01 1.3E+01 6.9E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 µg/L 19 0 0%1.9E-01 4.8E+00 8.0E+02 NA 6.0E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 µg/L 19 0 0%3.1E-01 7.8E+00 4.1E-02 NA 1.9E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon-113) 76-13-1 µg/L 19 0 0%2.5E-01 6.3E+00 1.0E+03 NA 6.3E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 µg/L 19 0 0%1.4E-01 3.5E+00 7.0E-01 NA 5.0E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 µg/L 19 0 0%1.0E-01 2.5E+00 4.0E-01 NA 6.3E+00 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-17
Site-Wide Surface Water COPC Selection
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent CAS No. Units
Total
Samples
Collected
Number of
Detects
Frequency
of Detection
Maximum
Detection
Minimum
Detection
Average of
Detections
Minimum
Detection
Limit
Maximum
Detection
Limit RBSL
Maximum
Detect /
RBSL
(ratio)
Maximum DL /
RBSL
(ratio)
Bioaccumulative or
Essential Nutrient Conclusion
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 µg/L 19 0 0%9.0E-02 2.3E+00 7.6E-02 NA 3.0E+01 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
2-Butanone 78-93-3 µg/L 19 17 89% 8.7E+00 2.7E+00 4.8E+00 1.8E+00 8.8E+00 5.6E+02 1.6E-02 1.6E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
2-Hexanone 591-78-6 µg/L 19 0 0% 1.7E-01 4.3E+00 3.8E+00 NA 1.1E+00 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 µg/L 19 1 5% 2.3E-01 2.3E-01 2.3E-01 3.6E-01 4.5E+00 6.3E+02 3.7E-04 7.1E-03 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Acetone 67-64-1 µg/L 19 16 84% 1.3E+02 1.3E+01 4.0E+01 1.1E+01 5.3E+01 1.4E+03 9.3E-02 3.8E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Benzene 71-43-2 µg/L 19 0 0% 1.3E-01 3.3E+00 4.6E-01 NA 7.2E+00 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 µg/L 19 1 5% 7.8E-01 7.8E-01 7.8E-01 2.8E-01 3.5E+00 8.3E+00 9.4E-02 4.2E-01 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 µg/L 28 24 86% 2.1E+02 1.5E+00 1.7E+01 1.4E-01 7.0E-01 1.3E-01 1.6E+03 5.4E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Bromoform 75-25-2 µg/L 28 25 89% 9.9E+02 2.9E+00 7.6E+01 1.0E-01 5.0E-01 3.3E+00 3.0E+02 1.5E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Bromomethane 74-83-9 µg/L 28 1 4% 2.2E+00 2.2E+00 2.2E+00 2.9E-01 7.3E+00 7.5E-01 2.9E+00 9.7E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 µg/L 28 6 21% 1.2E+00 3.4E-01 6.6E-01 2.1E-01 4.0E+00 8.1E+01 1.5E-02 4.9E-02 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 µg/L 28 8 29% 9.6E+00 2.2E-01 4.0E+00 1.5E-01 3.8E+00 4.6E-01 2.1E+01 8.3E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 µg/L 19 0 0% 1.2E-01 3.0E+00 7.8E+00 NA 3.8E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Cyclohexane 110-82-7 µg/L 19 0 0% 1.2E-01 3.0E+00 1.3E+03 NA 2.3E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 µg/L 28 25 89% 3.4E+02 1.0E+00 2.8E+01 1.3E-01 6.5E-01 8.7E-01 3.9E+02 7.5E-01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Chloroethane 75-00-3 µg/L 19 0 0% 3.4E-01 8.5E+00 2.1E+03 NA 4.0E-03 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Chloroform 67-66-3 µg/L 28 25 89% 3.3E+01 6.1E-01 5.4E+00 6.0E-01 1.7E+00 2.2E-01 1.5E+02 7.7E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Chloromethane 74-87-3 µg/L 19 4 21% 2.7E+00 6.3E-01 1.8E+00 5.0E-01 6.3E+00 1.9E+01 1.4E-01 3.3E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon-12) 75-71-8 µg/L 19 0 0% 1.6E-01 4.0E+00 2.0E+01 NA 2.0E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 µg/L 28 0 0% 1.0E-01 2.5E+00 1.5E+00 NA 1.7E+00 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 µg/L 19 0 0% 1.2E-01 3.0E+00 4.5E+01 NA 6.7E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Methyl tertbutyl ether (MTBE) 1634-04-4 µg/L 19 0 0% 1.9E-01 4.8E+00 1.4E+01 NA 3.4E-01 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride) 75-09-2 µg/L 19 1 5% 7.5E-01 7.5E-01 7.5E-01 7.0E-01 8.8E+00 1.1E+01 6.8E-02 8.0E-01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Styrene 100-42-5 µg/L 19 0 0% 1.5E-01 3.8E+00 1.2E+02 NA 3.2E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 µg/L 19 1 5% 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 1.7E+00 1.0E-01 2.5E+00 4.1E+00 4.1E-01 6.1E-01 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
Toluene 108-88-3 µg/L 28 0 0% 2.5E-01 6.3E+00 1.1E+02 NA 5.7E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 µg/L 28 0 0% 1.3E-01 3.3E+00 2.8E-01 NA 1.2E+01 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon-11) 75-69-4 µg/L 19 0 0% 2.3E-01 5.8E+00 5.2E+02 NA 1.1E-02 Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 µg/L 19 0 0% 2.2E-01 5.5E+00 1.9E-02 NA 2.9E+02 Evaluate Uncertainty (Not Detected, Max DL > RBSL)
o-Xylene 95-47-6 µg/L 28 1 4% 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 1.0E-01 2.5E+00 1.9E+01 5.3E-02 1.3E-01 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 µg/L 28 1 4% 1.1E+00 1.1E+00 1.1E+00 1.8E-01 4.5E+00 1.9E+01 5.8E-02 2.4E-01 COPC (Selected in SLRA)
Xylene, Total 5 1330-20-7 µg/L 9 0 0%1.8E-01 9.0E-01 1.9E+01 NA 4.7E-02
Not a COPC (Not Detected, Max DL <= RBSL)
Monochloroacetic Acid 79-11-8 µg/L 28 16 57% 1.3E+03 6.8E+01 7.6E+02 4.0E-01 4.0E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Monobromoacetic acid 79-08-3 µg/L 28 22 79% 1.7E+02 1.1E+00 5.8E+01 7.5E-01 7.5E+01 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 µg/L 28 24 86% 1.4E+03 4.5E+00 8.1E+02 9.8E-01 9.8E+00 1.5E+00 9.3E+02 6.5E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Dibromoacetic acid 631-64-1 µg/L 28 24 86% 3.1E+03 5.3E+00 1.6E+03 3.8E-01 3.8E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 µg/L 28 26 93% 1.4E+03 3.3E+00 6.5E+02 3.8E-01 3.8E+00 1.1E+00 1.3E+03 3.5E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Bromide 24959-67-9 mg/L 28 15 54% 7.9E+02 1.5E+00 1.2E+02 8.8E+00 1.7E+03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Chloride 16887-00-6 mg/L 28 28 100% 2.0E+05 8.4E+00 4.7E+04 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Chlorine, Field7 7782-50-5 mg/L 20 20 100% 1.9E-01 0.0E+00 3.0E-02 3.0E-05 6.3E+03 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Fluoride 16984-48-8 mg/L 28 28 100% 9.0E+01 2.2E-01 9.2E+00 8.0E-02 1.1E+03 NA COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 mg/L 28 22 79% 6.7E+00 8.7E-01 -- 2.2E-02 5.0E+00 3.2E+00 2.1E+00 1.6E+00 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Nitrite as N 14797-65-0 mg/L 25 1 4% 8.1E-02 8.1E-02 -- 1.6E-02 2.5E+00 2.0E-01 4.1E-01 1.3E+01 Not a COPC (Max Detect <= RBSL)
Sulfate 14808-79-8 mg/L 28 28 100% 7.0E+03 2.8E+01 2.3E+03 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 µg/L 19 18 95% 2.4E+00 1.1E-01 1.3E+00 8.2E-02 8.2E-02 1.4E+00 1.7E+00 5.9E-02 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Orthophosphate as P 4265-44-2-OR- mg/L 26 12 44% 6.7E+00 8.0E-01 -- 7.7E-02 4.1E+00 NSV NA NA Evaluate Uncertainty (No Screening Value)
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered mg/L 26 18 67% 6.1E-02 5.3E-03 -- 4.6E-03 5.0E-03 1.5E-04 4.1E+02 3.3E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Cyanide Amenable Total 57-12-5AM mg/L 2 0 0%1.0E-02 1.0E-02 1.5E-04 NA 6.7E+01 6
Total Cyanide - Filtered 74-90-8 mg/L 25 18 69% 9.1E-02 4.6E-03 -- 5.0E-03 5.0E-03 1.5E-04 6.1E+02 3.3E+01 COPC (Max Detect > RBSL)
Notes:
µg/L = micrograms per liter -- = No average detected concentration calculated; results from more than one analytical method were combined.
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern 1 = Data are based on the dissolved (filtered) fraction.
DL = Detection Limit 2 = The CAS number presented for total mercury is for elemental mercury (CAS 7439-97-6). The RBSL used in analysis is for mercuric salts (CAS 7487-94-7).
mg/L = milligrams per liter 3 = The RBSL listed for 3 & 4 Methylphenol is the USEPA Regional Screening Level for 3-Methylphenol (m-Cresol; 108-39-4) .
NA = Not Applicable; either all detected or no screening value (RSL) available 4 = The RBSL listed is based on a mixture of cis- and trans-isomers (CAS 542-75-6).
ND = Not Detected 5 = Total xylene was not consistently reported by the laboratory; m,p- and o-xylene risks are evaluated individually.
NSV = No Screening Value 6 = Amenable cyanide results are ND; risks are evaluated using Total cyanide - unfiltered results.
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl 7 = Maximum chlorine concentration is less than the level in most public drinking water systems (1 - 4 mg/L); chlorine is not evaluated in the BHHRA.
PRI = Preliminary Risk Investigation
RBSL = Risk-Based Screening Level (USEPA Regional Screening Level, Tap-Water, HQ = 0.1, November 2020)
SLRA = Screening Level Risk Assessment
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalency
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-18
Summary of COPC Refinement – Ambient Air
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Site-wide
Air
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 X
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 X
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 X
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 ◊
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 Changed
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 ND
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 ND
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 ND
Notes:
Blank cell = Not a COPC in this matrix and PRI
X = COPC, no adjustments due to blanks
BHHRA = Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
ND = Bioaccumulative constituent not detected; solids data not evaluated in BHHRA
Analyte CAS #
◊= COPC eliminated because at least 95 percent of sample concentrations are less
than 5 times the maximum blank concentration
Changed = dataset adjusted due to blank comparison; one or more samples
previously ranked as detects have been ranked as non-detects.
However, the analyte is still retained as a COPC.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-19
Summary of COPC Refinement – Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 2 PRI 4 PRI 5 PRI 6 PRI 7 PRI 8 PRI 9 PRI 10 PRI 11 PRI 12
PRI 13 PRI 14 PRI 15 PRI 16
Solids Solids Solids Solids Solids Solids Solids Solids Solids Solids Solids Solids Solids Solids
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Total Iron 7439-89-6 X
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 X
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 ◊Changed Changed Changed Changed Changed Changed ◊◊Changed Changed ◊Changed ◊
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 X
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 ND
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 Changed X Changed Changed Changed Changed Changed ◊Changed Changed Changed X Changed ND
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 1 ND X X X 11111NDND11
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 X
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 X
Notes:
Blank cell = Not a COPC in this matrix and PRI
X = COPC, no adjustments due to blanks
◊= COPC eliminated because at least 95 percent of sample concentrations are less than 5 times the maximum blank concentration
1 = Pentacholorobenzene was analyzed in Phase 1A-B and some Phase 1A-B SAP Modifications. These PRIs do not have sample data from Phase 1A-B or the SAP Modifications.
Changed = dataset adjusted due to blank comparison; one or more samples previously ranked as detects have been ranked as non-detects. However, the analyte is still retained as a COPC.
Only surface water and air exposures are evaluated in PRI 3.
BHHRA = Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
ND = Bioaccumulative constituent not detected; solids data not evaluated in BHHRA
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
SAP = Sampling and Analysis Plan
CAS #Analyte
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-20
Summary of COPC Refinement - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #PRI 3 PRI 4 PRI 5 PRI 6 PRI 8
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 ND (1) X X X ND (1)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 X ND (1) ND (1) ND (1) ND (1)
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 X ND (1) ND (1) ND (1) ND (1)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 ◊◊ND (1) ND (1) ND (1)
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 ND (1) ND (1) X ND (1) ND (1)
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 ND (1) X X X Changed
Bromomethane 74-83-9 ND (1) ND (1) X ND (1) ND (1)
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 ND (1) ND (1) X X ND (1)
Chloromethane 67-66-3 ND (1) X ◊◊ND (1)
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 X ND (1) ND (1) ND (1) ND (1)
Naphthalene 91-20-3 ◊ND (1)◊ND (1) ND (1)
o-Xylene 95-47-6 X ND (1) ND (1) ND (1) ND (1)
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 ND (1) ND (1) ND (1) X X
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 ND (1) ND (1) X ND (1) ND (1)
Notes:
X = COPC, no adjustments due to blanks
◊= COPC eliminated because at least 95 percent of sample concentrations are less than 5 times the maximum blank concentration
●= COPC only detected in PRI 1, which is not included in the BHHRA
For Remedial Investigation phases where total metals data were not available and dissolved data were available, dissolved data were used.
BHHRA = Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
COPC = Constituent of Potential Concern
ND (1) = Surface water PRIs were selected on a site-wide basis; COPC not detected in this PRI.
ND (2) = Bioaccumulative COPC selected by default; constituent not detected in this PRI.
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
Changed = dataset adjusted due to blank comparison; one or more samples previously ranked as detects have been ranked as non-detects.
However, the analyte is still retained as a COPC.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-21A
Air Blank Comparison
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Phase
1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 µg ND ND 1.4 57.9 NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 µg 27.9 139.5 8.09 199 TRUE
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 µg 6.31 31.55 6.39 128 TRUE
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 µg ND ND 0.0288 0.212 NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 µg ND ND 1.3 18 NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 µg ND ND 0.41 2.9 NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 2/24/2022
Table D-21B
Air Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Chromium 7440-47-3
Total
Manganese 7439-96-5
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
<BCV
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
<BCU
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
µg µg µg µg µg µg µg µg µg µg
PRI18-003-TSP-01-082114 18.5 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <18.5 89.3 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 89.3
PRI18-002-TSP-01-082214 12.3 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <12.3 74.3 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 74.3
PRI18-001-TSP-01-082314 16.9 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <16.9 73.5 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 73.5
PRI18-002-TSP-02-082514 34 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <34 81.8 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 81.8
PRI18-001-TSP-02-082614 8.09 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <8.09 34.7 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 34.7
PRI18-003-TSP-03-082714 129 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <129 55.2 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 55.2
PRI18-002-TSP-03-082814 199 27.9 139.5 4.2 FALSE TRUE 199 128 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 128
PRI18-002-TSP-04-083114 35 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <35 66.5 6.31 31.55 1.32 FALSE TRUE 66.5
PRI18-001-TSP-04-090114 20.2 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <20.2 63.9 6.31 31.55 1.32 FALSE TRUE 63.9
PRI18-003-TSP-05-090214 37.6 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <37.6 86.7 6.31 31.55 1.32 FALSE TRUE 86.7
PRI18-002-TSP-05-090314 30.8 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <30.8 52.9 6.31 31.55 1.32 FALSE TRUE 52.9
PRI18-001-TSP-05-090514 22.6 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <22.6 51.6 6.31 31.55 1.32 FALSE TRUE 51.6
PRI18-003-TSP-06-090614 43.8 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <43.8 99.1 6.31 31.55 1.32 FALSE TRUE 99.1
PRI18-003-TSP-01-091514 34.8 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <34.8 77.9 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 77.9
PRI18-002-TSP-01-091614 34.6 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <34.6 74.8 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 74.8
PRI18-001-TSP-01-091714 33.4 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <33.4 95.6 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 95.6
PRI18-003-TSP-01-091814 32.7 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <32.7 113 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 113
PRI18-002-TSP-01-092214 30.9 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <30.9 88.2 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 88.2
PRI18-001-TSP-01-092314 28.6 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <28.6 45.2 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 45.2
PRI18-003-TSP-01-092414 27.1 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <27.1 40.2 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 40.2
PRI18-002-TSP-01-092514 28.5 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <28.5 58.3 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 58.3
PRI18-001-TSP-01-092614 17.3 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <17.3 32.3 6.31 31.55 1.3 FALSE TRUE 32.3
PRI18-003-TSP-01-092714 15.5 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <15.5 27.5 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <27.5
PRI18-002-TSP-01-092814 16.5 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <16.5 22.8 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <22.8
PRI18-001-TSP-01-092914 18.9 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <18.9 19.1 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <19.1
PRI18-003-TSP-01-093014 15.6 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <15.6 16.9 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <16.9
PRI18-002-TSP-01-100114 15.7 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <15.7 13.2 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <13.2
PRI18-001-TSP-01-100214 15 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <15 6.39 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <6.39
PRI18-003-TSP-01-100414 15.6 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <15.6 18.4 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <18.4
PRI18-001-TSP-01-100514 11.4 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <11.4 9.23 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <9.23
PRI18-002-TSP-01-100614 11.7 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <11.7 22.3 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <22.3
PRI18-003-TSP-01-100714 12 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <12 16.7 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <16.7
PRI18-001-TSP-01-100814 12.1 27.9 139.5 4.2 TRUE TRUE <12.1 16.5 6.31 31.55 1.3 TRUE TRUE <16.5
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 33 33 33 33
Total number of detects 33 133 22
Frequency of detect (%)100 3 100.00 67
Result of blank comparison Not a
COPC
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-22A
PRI 2 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X mg 0.0208 0.104 0.024 0.025 TRUE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X µg 5.79 28.95 4.2 50000 TRUE
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-22B
PRI 2 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro-
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
Blank Comparison Group mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A PRI2-003-SS01-010814 < 0.01 0.0208 0.104 0.042 FALSE TRUE < 0.01 6200 5.79 28.95 3100 FALSE TRUE 6200
PRI2-010-SS01-010814 < 0.026 0.0208 0.104 0.048 FALSE TRUE < 0.026 4600 5.79 28.95 3200 FALSE TRUE 4600
PRI2-011-SS01-010814 < 0.0090 0.0208 0.104 0.042 FALSE TRUE < 0.0090 2400 5.79 28.95 2900 FALSE FALSE 2400
PRI2-012-SS01-010814 < 0.01 0.0208 0.104 0.049 FALSE TRUE < 0.01 10000 5.79 28.95 3900 FALSE TRUE 10000
PRI2-001-SS01-010914 < 0.027 0.0208 0.104 0.043 FALSE TRUE < 0.027 4.2 5.79 28.95 18 TRUE FALSE <18
PRI2-004-SS01-010914 < 0.02 0.0208 0.104 0.051 FALSE TRUE < 0.02 9300 5.79 28.95 3400 FALSE TRUE 9300
PRI2-008-SS01-010914 < 0.0099 0.0208 0.104 0.046 FALSE TRUE < 0.0099 7500 5.79 28.95 3800 FALSE TRUE 7500
PRI2-005-SS01-010914 < 0.021 0.0208 0.104 0.052 FALSE TRUE < 0.021 50000 5.79 28.95 3200 FALSE TRUE 50000
PRI2-013-SS01-010914 < 0.010 0.0208 0.104 0.048 FALSE TRUE < 0.010 95 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE 95
PRI2-007-SS01-010914 < 0.02 0.0208 0.104 0.043 FALSE TRUE < 0.02 220 5.79 28.95 370 FALSE FALSE 220
PRI2-002-SS01-010914 < 0.012 0.0208 0.104 0.055 FALSE TRUE < 0.012 260 5.79 28.95 23 FALSE TRUE 260
PRI2-009-SS01-050814 0.025 0.0208 0.104 0.042 TRUE FALSE <0.042 10000 5.79 28.95 3600 FALSE TRUE 10000
PRI2-006-SS01-050814 < 0.010 0.0208 0.104 0.048 FALSE TRUE < 0.010 5700 5.79 28.95 3800 FALSE TRUE 5700
PRI2-014-SS01-050814 0.024 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043 2500 5.79 28.95 3600 FALSE FALSE 2500
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 14 14 14 14
Total number of detects 2 014 13
Frequency of detect (%) 14.3 0.0 100.0 92.9
Result of blank comparison Not a
COPC
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-23A
PRI 4 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
DMA
Units
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
DMA
BCV
Phase 1A DMA
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 1AB
Units
Phase 1AB
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
BCV
Phase 1AB
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2A
Units
Phase 2A
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2A
BCV
Phase 2A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X mg 0.0011 0.0055 7.8 9.1 FALSE NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X NA ND ND NA NA NA mg 0.0103 0.0515 0.022 0.24 TRUE NA ND ND NA NA NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X NA ND ND NA NA NA µg 10 50 4200 76000 FALSE NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-23B
PRI 4 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Gyp-PRI04-1 < 0.010 ND ND --NA NA < 0.010
DMA-Gyp-PRI04-2 < 0.014 ND ND --NA NA < 0.014
Phase 1AB 4-01-SS-01-101915 0.084 0.0103 0.0515 0.051 FALSE TRUE 0.084
4-02-SS-01-101915 0.029 0.0103 0.0515 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043
4-03-SS-01-102015 0.07 0.0103 0.0515 0.054 FALSE TRUE 0.07
4-05-SS-01-102015 0.022 0.0103 0.0515 0.048 TRUE FALSE <0.048
4-06-SS-01-102015 0.05 0.0103 0.0515 0.050 TRUE FALSE <0.05
4-07-SS-01-102015 0.053 0.0103 0.0515 0.062 FALSE FALSE 0.053
4-11-SS-01-102115 0.068 0.0103 0.0515 0.065 FALSE TRUE 0.068
4-10-SS-01-102115 0.056 0.0103 0.0515 0.058 FALSE FALSE 0.056
4-08-SS-01-102315 0.067 0.0103 0.0515 0.063 FALSE TRUE 0.067
4-04-SS-01-102315 0.032 0.0103 0.0515 0.053 TRUE FALSE <0.053
4-09-SS-01-102315 0.031 0.0103 0.0515 0.056 TRUE FALSE <0.056
4-12-SS-01-102915 0.24 0.0103 0.0515 0.068 FALSE TRUE 0.24
4-13-SS-01-102915 0.064 0.0103 0.0515 0.058 FALSE TRUE 0.064
4-14-SS-01-102915 0.089 0.0103 0.0515 0.064 FALSE TRUE 0.089
Original Refined
Total number of samples 16 16
Total number of detects 14 9
Frequency of detect (%) 87.5 56.3
Result of blank
comparison
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-24A
PRI 5 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase
1A
DMA
Units
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
DMA BCV
Phase 1A DMA
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
1AB
Units
Phase 1AB
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
BCV
Phase 1AB
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X mg 0.0011 0.0055 12.9 15.2 FALSE NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Iron 7439-89-6 X mg 0.12 0.6 9250 11800 FALSE mg 16.7 83.5 5300 210000 FALSE
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X NA ND ND NA NA NA mg 0.0103 0.0515 0.013 0.11 TRUE
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X NA ND ND NA NA NA µg 10 50 6.9 5400000 TRUE
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 X NA ND ND NA NA NA µg 1.1 5.5 8.7 3400 FALSE
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Analyte CAS #
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2
Total Chromium 7440-47-3
Total Iron 7439-89-6
Total Mercury 7439-97-6
Total Thallium 7440-28-0
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 2A
Units
Phase 2A
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2A
BCV
Phase 2A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
1AB SAP
Mod 4
Units
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 4
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 4 BCV
(5x/10x Maximum
Blank
Concentration)
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 4
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 4
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-24A
PRI 5 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Table D-24B
PRI 5 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro-
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Soil-PRI05 0.011 ND ND ND NA NA 0.011 < 100 ND ND ND NA NA < 100
DMA-SED-PRI5-1 0.029 ND ND ND NA NA 0.029 < 270000 ND ND ND NA NA < 270000
DMA-Sed-PRI05-2 0.022 ND ND ND NA NA 0.022 < 1100 ND ND ND NA NA < 1100
Phase 1AB 5-09-SS-01-091715 < 0.009 0.0103 0.0515 0.042 FALSE TRUE < 0.009 12 10 50 18 TRUE FALSE <18
5-15-SS-01-091715 < 0.0082 0.0103 0.0515 0.038 FALSE TRUE < 0.0082 26 10 50 18 TRUE TRUE <26
5-17-SS-01-091815 0.027 0.0103 0.0515 0.05 TRUE FALSE <0.05 8000 10 50 3700 FALSE TRUE 8000
5-18-SS-01-091815 0.017 0.0103 0.0515 0.049 TRUE FALSE <0.049 < 24 10 50 180 FALSE TRUE < 24
5-19-SS-01-091815 < 0.0083 0.0103 0.0515 0.039 FALSE TRUE < 0.0083 6.9 10 50 18 TRUE FALSE <18
5-20-SS-01-091815 0.015 0.0103 0.0515 0.04 TRUE FALSE <0.04 26 10 50 18 TRUE TRUE <26
5-03-SS-01-092515 < 0.0083 0.0103 0.0515 0.039 FALSE TRUE < 0.0083 < 12 10 50 89 FALSE TRUE < 12
5-04-SS-01-092515 < 0.0094 0.0103 0.0515 0.044 FALSE TRUE < 0.0094 < 13 10 50 96 FALSE TRUE < 13
5-05-SS-01-092515 < 0.0080 0.0103 0.0515 0.037 FALSE TRUE < 0.0080 19 10 50 86 TRUE FALSE <86
5-02-SS-01-102715 0.025 0.0103 0.0515 0.09 TRUE FALSE <0.09 310000 10 50 66000 FALSE TRUE 310000
5-07-SS-01-102715 0.04 0.0103 0.0515 0.057 TRUE FALSE <0.057 3600 10 50 1800 FALSE TRUE 3600
5-08-SS-01-102715 0.019 0.0103 0.0515 0.077 TRUE FALSE <0.077 11000 10 50 2600 FALSE TRUE 11000
5-11-SS-01-102715 0.032 0.0103 0.0515 0.059 TRUE FALSE <0.059 17000 10 50 2000 FALSE TRUE 17000
5-12-SS-01-102715 0.036 0.0103 0.0515 0.044 TRUE FALSE <0.044 320 10 50 1400 FALSE FALSE 320
5-13-SS-01-102715 0.022 0.0103 0.0515 0.096 TRUE FALSE <0.096 63000 10 50 3700 FALSE TRUE 63000
5-14-SS-01-102715 0.026 0.0103 0.0515 0.086 TRUE FALSE <0.086 610000 10 50 63000 FALSE TRUE 610000
5-16-SS-01-101515 0.078 0.0103 0.0515 0.046 FALSE TRUE 0.078 3100 10 50 2000 FALSE TRUE 3100
5-01-SS-01-101515 0.019 0.0103 0.0515 0.042 TRUE FALSE <0.042 67 10 50 99 FALSE FALSE 67
5-06-SS-01-101515 0.018 0.0103 0.0515 0.047 TRUE FALSE <0.047 < 13 10 50 98 FALSE TRUE < 13
5-10-SS-01-101515 0.018 0.0103 0.0515 0.04 TRUE FALSE <0.04 77 10 50 86 FALSE FALSE 77
SMXA-SD-01-081216 < 9.5 ND ND ND NA NA < 9.5 3.1 ND ND ND NA NA 3
SH03A-SD-01-092816 23 ND ND ND NA NA 23 340 ND ND ND NA NA 340
SMXB-SD-01-092816 16 ND ND ND NA NA 16 < 270 ND ND ND NA NA < 270
UH02A-SS-01-092916 < 9.0 ND ND ND NA NA < 9.0 48 ND ND ND NA NA 48
UH02BALT-SS-01-092916 < 7.8 ND ND ND NA NA < 7.8 36 ND ND ND NA NA 36
UH03A-SS-01-092916 14 ND ND ND NA NA 14 380 ND ND ND NA NA 380
UM07A-SS-01-092716 < 8.6 ND ND ND NA NA < 8.6 33 ND ND ND NA NA 33
UM09A-SS-01-092716 12 ND ND ND NA NA 12 21000 ND ND ND NA NA 21000
UMXA-SS-01-092716 < 8.6 ND ND ND NA NA < 8.6 16 ND ND ND NA NA 16
5-21-SS-01-092419 NS ND ND ND NA NA NS 10000 ND ND ND NA NA 10000
5-22-SS-01-092419 NS ND ND ND NA NA NS < 2.3 ND ND ND NA NA < 2.3
5-23-SS-01-092419 NS ND ND ND NA NA NS 58 ND ND ND NA NA 58
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 35 35 35 35
Total number of detects 21 826 21
Frequency of detect (%) 60.0 22.9 74.3 60.0
Result of blank
comparison
dataset
changed
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase SAP Mod 4
Blank Comparison
Group Sample Name
Phase 2A
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 -April 2022
Table D-25A
PRI 6 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
DMA
Units
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
DMA
BCV
Phase 1A DMA
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
1AB
Units
Phase 1AB
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
BCV
Phase 1AB
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
2A
Units
Phase 2A
Maximum
Blank
Concentrati
on
Phase 2A
BCV
Phase 2A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X mg 0.0011 0.0055 9.7 18.6 FALSE NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X NA ND ND NA NA NA mg 0.0103 0.0515 0.016 0.22 TRUE NA ND ND NA NA NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X NA ND ND NA NA NA µg 10 50 24 220000 TRUE NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-25B
PRI 6 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro-
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Soil-PRI06 0.015 ND ND 0.041 NA NA 0.015 < 1800 ND ND 6600 NA NA < 1800
DMA-Sed-PRI6 0.017 ND ND 0.057 NA NA 0.017 13000 ND ND 4800 NA NA 13000
Phase 1AB 6-15-SS-01-091615 0.028 0.0103 0.0515 0.05 TRUE FALSE <0.05 390 10 50 21 FALSE TRUE 390
6-14-SS-01-091615 < 0.0089 0.0103 0.0515 0.041 FALSE TRUE < 0.0089 28 10 50 18 TRUE TRUE <28
6-06-SS-01-091715 < 0.0088 0.0103 0.0515 0.041 FALSE TRUE < 0.0088 30 10 50 18 TRUE TRUE <30
6-03-SS-01-091715 < 0.0082 0.0103 0.0515 0.038 FALSE TRUE < 0.0082 < 2.4 10 50 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
6-04-SS-01-101615 0.22 0.0103 0.0515 0.046 FALSE TRUE 0.22 < 250 10 50 1900 FALSE TRUE < 250
6-01-SS-01-101615 0.031 0.0103 0.0515 0.04 TRUE FALSE <0.04 24 10 50 19 TRUE TRUE <24
6-07-SS-01-101615 0.22 0.0103 0.0515 0.046 FALSE TRUE 0.22 < 260 10 50 2000 FALSE TRUE < 260
6-02-SS-01-102815 0.018 0.0103 0.0515 0.073 TRUE FALSE <0.073 14000 10 50 2300 FALSE TRUE 14000
6-05-SS-01-102815 0.052 0.0103 0.0515 0.057 FALSE FALSE 0.052 31000 10 50 2100 FALSE TRUE 31000
6-08-SS-01-102815 0.032 0.0103 0.0515 0.071 TRUE FALSE <0.071 220000 10 50 62000 FALSE TRUE 220000
6-09-SS-01-102815 0.019 0.0103 0.0515 0.063 TRUE FALSE <0.063 37000 10 50 2700 FALSE TRUE 37000
6-10-SS-01-102815 0.03 0.0103 0.0515 0.079 TRUE FALSE <0.079 35000 10 50 2600 FALSE TRUE 35000
6-11-SS-01-102815 0.021 0.0103 0.0515 0.063 TRUE FALSE <0.063 7300 10 50 1900 FALSE TRUE 7300
6-12-SS-01-102815 0.016 0.0103 0.0515 0.064 TRUE FALSE <0.064 58000 10 50 2800 FALSE TRUE 58000
6-13-SS-01-102815 0.023 0.0103 0.0515 0.073 TRUE FALSE <0.073 57000 10 50 3000 FALSE TRUE 57000
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 17 17 17 17
Total number of detects 14 513 10
Frequency of detect (%) 82.4 29.4 76.5 58.8
Result of blank
comparison
dataset
changed
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-26A
PRI 7 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
DMA
Units
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
DMA
BCV
Phase 1A DMA
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
1AB
Units
Phase 1AB
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
BCV
Phase 1AB
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2A
Units
Phase 2A
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2A
BCV
Phase 2A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
1AB SAP
Mod 4
Units
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 4
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 4
BCV
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 4 Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 4 Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X mg 0.0011 0.0055 29.4 36.6 FALSE NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X NA ND ND NA NA NA mg 0.0103 0.0515 0.014 0.11 TRUE NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X NA ND ND NA NA NA µg 10 50 21 87000 TRUE NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-26B
PRI 7 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro-
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Sed-PRI7-1 0.034 ND ND NA NA NA 0.034 8600 ND ND NA NA NA 8600
DMA-Sed-PRI07-2 0.026 ND ND NA NA NA 0.026 49000 ND ND NA NA NA 49000
Phase 1AB 7-13-SS-01-092215 0.014 0.0103 0.0515 0.055 TRUE FALSE <0.055 < 3.3 10 50 25 FALSE TRUE < 3.3
7-14-SS-01-092215 0.025 0.0103 0.0515 0.054 TRUE FALSE <0.054 170 10 50 220 FALSE FALSE 170
7-15-SS-01-092215 0.077 0.0103 0.0515 0.058 FALSE TRUE 0.077 190 10 50 220 FALSE FALSE 190
7-12-SS-01-092115 0.038 0.0103 0.0515 0.064 TRUE FALSE <0.064 500 10 50 250 FALSE TRUE 500
7-01-SS-01-092315 0.019 0.0103 0.0515 0.053 TRUE FALSE <0.053 93 10 50 200 FALSE FALSE 93
7-07-SS-01-092315 < 0.01 0.0103 0.0515 0.046 FALSE TRUE < 0.01 21 10 50 21 TRUE FALSE <21
7-08-SS-01-092315 0.014 0.0103 0.0515 0.055 TRUE FALSE <0.055 3700 10 50 240 FALSE TRUE 3700
7-11-SS-01-092115 0.11 0.0103 0.0515 0.059 FALSE TRUE 0.11 6500 10 50 1000 FALSE TRUE 6500
7-02-SS-01-092415 0.04 0.0103 0.0515 0.059 TRUE FALSE <0.059 1200 10 50 1200 FALSE FALSE 1200
7-03-SS-01-092415 0.033 0.0103 0.0515 0.053 TRUE FALSE <0.053 1600 10 50 200 FALSE TRUE 1600
7-05-SS-01-092415 0.037 0.0103 0.0515 0.049 TRUE FALSE <0.049 350 10 50 210 FALSE TRUE 350
7-06-SS-01-092815 0.076 0.0103 0.0515 0.057 FALSE TRUE 0.076 210 10 50 240 FALSE FALSE 210
7-09-SS-01-092815 0.032 0.0103 0.0515 0.048 TRUE FALSE <0.048 230 10 50 240 FALSE FALSE 230
7-10-SS-01-092815 0.03 0.0103 0.0515 0.052 TRUE FALSE <0.052 110 10 50 250 FALSE FALSE 110
7-04-SS-01-092915 0.017 0.0103 0.0515 0.071 TRUE FALSE <0.071 < 81 10 50 610 FALSE TRUE < 81
7-16-SS-01-092915 0.021 0.00013 0.00065 0.085 FALSE FALSE 0.021 < 95 10 50 720 FALSE TRUE < 95
7-17-SS-01-092915 0.035 0.00013 0.00065 0.074 FALSE FALSE 0.035 87000 10 50 25000 FALSE TRUE 87000
7-23-SS-01-092519 NS 0.00013 0.00065 0.046 FALSE TRUE NS 280 ND ND NA NA NA 280
7-22-SS-01-100219 NS 0.00013 0.00065 0.046 FALSE TRUE NS < 170 ND ND NA NA NA < 170
7-24-SS-01-100219 NS 0.00013 0.00065 0.046 FALSE TRUE NS 210 ND ND NA NA NA 210
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 22 22 22 22
Total number of detects 18 718 17
Frequency of detect (%) 81.8 31.8 81.8 77.3
Result of blank
comparison
dataset
changed
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 4
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-27A
PRI 8 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2A
Units
Phase 2A
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 2A
BCV
Phase 2A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
1AB SAP
Mod 4
Units
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 4
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 4
BCV
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 4 Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 4 Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 6/7
Units
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 6/7
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 6/7
BCV
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 6/7
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 6/7
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X mg 0.0208 0.104 0.0095 0.015 TRUE NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA µg 0.11 0.55 13 22 FALSE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X µg 5.79 28.95 2.5 29 TRUE NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-27B
PRI 8 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A PRI8-001-SS01-121713 0.01 0.0208 0.104 0.047 TRUE FALSE <0.047 < 2.5 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE < 2.5
PRI8-002-SS01-121713 < 0.0097 0.0208 0.104 0.045 FALSE TRUE < 0.0097 < 2.6 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.6
PRI8-007-SS01-121813 0.015 0.0208 0.104 0.049 TRUE FALSE <0.049 3.1 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
PRI8-008-SS01-121813 < 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.049 FALSE TRUE < 0.011 < 2.6 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE < 2.6
PRI8-011-SS01-121713 0.015 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043 2.5 5.79 28.95 18 TRUE FALSE <18
PRI8-012-SS01-121713 < 0.0097 0.0208 0.104 0.045 FALSE TRUE < 0.0097 29 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE 29
PRI8-013-SS01-121813 0.0095 0.0208 0.104 0.044 TRUE FALSE <0.044 < 2.6 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.6
Phase SAP Mod 4 PRI8-003-SS-01-052119 0.016 ND ND NA NA NA 0.016 34 ND ND NA NA NA 34
PRI8-005B-SS-01-052119 < 0.010 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.010 39 ND ND NA NA NA 39
PRI8-009-SS-01-052119 < 0.0098 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.0098 51 ND ND NA NA NA 51
Phase SAP Mod 5 8-22-SS-01-101019 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS < 2.9 ND ND NA NA NA < 2.9
8-23-SS-01-101019 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS < 3.0 ND ND NA NA NA < 3.0
8-24-SS-01-100919 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS 160 ND ND NA NA NA 160
Phase SAP Mod 6 8-25-SS-01-011320 0.022 ND ND NA NA NA 0.022 2000 ND ND NA NA NA 2000
8-26-SS-01-011320 < 0.011 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.011 1100 ND ND NA NA NA 1100
8-27-SS-01-011320 < 0.012 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.012 450 ND ND NA NA NA 450
8-28-SS-01-011420 < 0.014 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.014 < 1600 ND ND NA NA NA < 1600
8-29-SS-01-011420 0.015 ND ND NA NA NA 0.015 < 2.8 ND ND NA NA NA < 2.8
PRI8-004-SS-01-110619 < 0.0093 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.0093 < 24 ND ND NA NA NA < 24
PRI8-005A-SS-01-110619 0.014 ND ND NA NA NA 0.014 < 30 ND ND NA NA NA < 30
PRI8-006-SS-01-110619 0.021 ND ND NA NA NA 0.021 < 26 ND ND NA NA NA < 26
SL-09-A-SS-01-110619 < 0.012 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.012 < 27 ND ND NA NA NA < 27
Phase SAP Mod 7 TTGP-A-SS-01-112519 0.013 ND ND NA NA NA 0.013 1500 ND ND NA NA NA 1500
TTGP-A-OW-SS-01-112519 < 0.012 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.012 18000 ND ND NA NA NA 18000
TTGP-B-SS-01-121819 0.021 ND ND NA NA NA 0.021 2200 ND ND NA NA NA 2200
TTGP-B-OW-SS-01-112519 < 0.013 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.013 3600 ND ND NA NA NA 3600
TTGP-C-SS-01-121819 < 0.016 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.016 8100 ND ND NA NA NA 8100
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 27 27 27 27
Total number of detects 11 715 13
Frequency of detect (%)40.7 25.9 55.6 48.1
Result of blank comparison
dataset
changed
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-28A
PRI 9 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
DMA Units
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
DMA BCV
Phase 1A DMA
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA mg ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X mg 0.0011 0.0055 7.8 11.8 FALSE mg ND ND NA NA NA
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 X mg 0.0097 0.0485 249 262 FALSE mg 0.0033 0.0165 52 7300 FALSE
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X NA ND ND NA NA NA mg 0.0208 0.104 0.013 0.16 TRUE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X NA ND ND NA NA NA µg 5.79 28.95 9.4 320 TRUE
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-28B
PRI 9 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro-
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A DMA DMA-SMUT-PRI09-2 < 0.010 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.010 < 0.11 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.11
DMA-SMUT-PRI09-1 < 0.011 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.011 < 0.12 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.12
Phase 1A PRI9-014-SS01-122013 < 0.015 0.0208 0.104 0.069 FALSE TRUE < 0.015 18 5.79 28.95 27 TRUE FALSE <27
PRI9-013-SS01-122013 < 0.014 0.0208 0.104 0.064 FALSE TRUE < 0.014 320 5.79 28.95 500 FALSE FALSE 320
PRI9-012-SS01-122013 < 0.010 0.0208 0.104 0.048 FALSE TRUE < 0.010 12 5.79 28.95 21 TRUE FALSE <21
PRI9-011-SS01-010614 < 0.010 0.0208 0.104 0.047 FALSE TRUE < 0.010 9.4 5.79 28.95 23 TRUE FALSE <23
PRI9-002-SS01-010614 < 0.013 0.0208 0.104 0.062 FALSE TRUE < 0.013 39 5.79 28.95 27 FALSE TRUE 39
PRI9-001-SS01-010614 0.073 0.0208 0.104 0.052 TRUE TRUE <0.073 < 3 5.79 28.95 23 FALSE TRUE < 3
PRI9-003-SS01-010614 < 0.014 0.0208 0.104 0.065 FALSE TRUE < 0.014 < 3.5 5.79 28.95 27 FALSE TRUE < 3.5
PRI9-004-SS01-010714 < 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.049 FALSE TRUE < 0.011 < 2.7 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.7
PRI9-007-SS01-010714 0.013 0.0208 0.104 0.051 TRUE FALSE <0.051 18 5.79 28.95 20 TRUE FALSE <20
PRI9-009-SS01-010714 0.048 0.0208 0.104 0.067 TRUE FALSE <0.067 17 5.79 28.95 29 TRUE FALSE <29
PRI9-006-SS01-010714 0.073 0.0208 0.104 0.065 TRUE TRUE <0.073 < 3.4 5.79 28.95 26 FALSE TRUE < 3.4
PRI9-005-SS01-010714 0.05 0.0208 0.104 0.063 TRUE FALSE <0.063 < 3.3 5.79 28.95 25 FALSE TRUE < 3.3
PRI9-008-SS01-010714 < 0.013 0.0208 0.104 0.06 FALSE TRUE < 0.013 75 5.79 28.95 25 FALSE TRUE 75
PRI9-010-SS01-010714 0.16 0.0208 0.104 0.057 FALSE TRUE 0.16 48 5.79 28.95 23 FALSE TRUE 48
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 16 16 16 16
Total number of detects 6 19 4
Frequency of detect (%) 37.5 6.3 56.3 25.0
Result of blank
comparison
dataset
changed
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-29A
PRI 10 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X mg 0.0208 0.104 0.011 0.022 TRUE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X µg 5.79 28.95 7.7 7.7 TRUE
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-29B
PRI 10 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro-
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A PRI10-001-SS01-121213 < 0.010 0.0208 0.104 0.047 FALSE TRUE < 0.010 < 2.5 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE < 2.5
PRI10-004-SS01-121213 0.017 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043 < 2.7 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.7
PRI10-003-SS01-121213 < 0.0091 0.0208 0.104 0.042 FALSE TRUE < 0.0091 < 2.5 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE < 2.5
PRI10-002-SS01-121213 0.02 0.0208 0.104 0.05 TRUE FALSE <0.05 < 2.7 5.79 28.95 21 FALSE TRUE < 2.7
PRI10-013-SS01-121213 0.02 0.0208 0.104 0.044 TRUE FALSE <0.044 < 2.7 5.79 28.95 21 FALSE TRUE < 2.7
PRI10-005-SS01-121313 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043 < 2.6 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.6
PRI10-006-SS01-121313 0.022 0.0208 0.104 0.05 TRUE FALSE <0.05 < 2.8 5.79 28.95 21 FALSE TRUE < 2.8
PRI10-007-SS01-121313 0.02 0.0208 0.104 0.048 TRUE FALSE <0.048 < 2.7 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.7
PRI10-009-SS01-121313 < 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.051 FALSE TRUE < 0.011 < 2.6 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.6
PRI10-014-SS01-121613 < 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.05 FALSE TRUE < 0.011 < 2.6 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.6
PRI10-012-SS01-121613 < 0.0092 0.0208 0.104 0.043 FALSE TRUE < 0.0092 7.7 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
PRI10-010-SS01-121713 0.014 0.0208 0.104 0.054 TRUE FALSE <0.054 < 2.8 5.79 28.95 21 FALSE TRUE < 2.8
PRI10-008-SS01-121713 < 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.049 FALSE TRUE < 0.011 < 2.6 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.6
PRI10-011-SS01-121713 < 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.049 FALSE TRUE < 0.011 < 2.8 5.79 28.95 21 FALSE TRUE < 2.8
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 14 14 14 14
Total number of detects 7 01 0
Frequency of detect (%) 50.0 0.0 7.1 0.0
Result of blank
comparison Not a COPC
Not a
COPC
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-30A
PRI 11 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X mg 0.0208 0.104 0.012 0.092 TRUE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X µg 5.79 28.95 2.8 67 TRUE
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-30B
PRI 11 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro-
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A PRI11-014-SS01-050614 < 0.013 0.0208 0.104 0.045 FALSE TRUE < 0.013 < 2.5 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE < 2.5
PRI11-013-SS01-050614 < 0.019 0.0208 0.104 0.042 FALSE TRUE < 0.019 10 5.79 28.95 18 TRUE FALSE <18
PRI11-012-SS01-050614 < 0.0090 0.0208 0.104 0.042 FALSE TRUE < 0.0090 58 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE 58
PRI11-011-SS01-050614 0.027 0.0208 0.104 0.045 TRUE FALSE <0.045 6.2 5.79 28.95 18 TRUE FALSE <18
PRI11-003-SS01-050614 0.012 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043 67 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE 67
PRI11-009-SS01-050714 0.016 0.0208 0.104 0.042 TRUE FALSE <0.042 2.8 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
PRI11-007-SS01-050714 < 0.0093 0.0208 0.104 0.043 FALSE TRUE < 0.0093 < 2.5 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE < 2.5
PRI11-008-SS01-050714 0.021 0.0208 0.104 0.048 TRUE FALSE <0.048 4.5 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
PRI11-010-SS01-050714 < 0.0095 0.0208 0.104 0.044 FALSE TRUE < 0.0095 < 2.5 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE < 2.5
PRI11-001-SS01-050714 0.016 0.0208 0.104 0.040 TRUE FALSE <0.04 < 2.4 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
PRI11-004-SS01-050714 < 0.012 0.0208 0.104 0.045 FALSE TRUE < 0.012 < 2.4 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
PRI11-006-SS01-050714 0.092 0.0208 0.104 0.041 TRUE TRUE <0.092 < 2.6 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.6
PRI11-002-SS01-050714 < 0.02 0.0208 0.104 0.047 FALSE TRUE < 0.02 3.5 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
PRI11-005-SS01-050714 < 0.010 0.0208 0.104 0.047 FALSE TRUE < 0.010 5.9 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 14 14 14 14
Total number of detects 6 08 2
Frequency of detect (%) 42.9 0.0 57.1 14.3
Result of blank
comparison
Not a
COPC
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-31A
PRI 12 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X
NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X mg 0.0208 0.104 0.011 0.11 TRUE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X
µg 5.79 28.95 7.2 59 TRUE
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-31B
PRI 12 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro-
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A PRI12-001-SS01-121013 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.044 TRUE FALSE <0.044 16 5.79 28.95 18 TRUE FALSE <18
PRI12-002-SS01-121013 0.015 0.0208 0.104 0.038 TRUE FALSE <0.038 28 5.79 28.95 18 TRUE TRUE <28
PRI12-005-SS01-121013 0.067 0.0208 0.104 0.042 TRUE TRUE <0.067 25 5.79 28.95 18 TRUE TRUE <25
PRI12-003-SS01-121013 0.018 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043 59 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE 59
PRI12-004-SS01-121013 0.056 0.0208 0.104 0.045 TRUE TRUE <0.056 48 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE 48
PRI12-006-SS01-121013 0.11 0.0208 0.104 0.053 FALSE TRUE 0.11 13 5.79 28.95 22 TRUE FALSE <22
PRI12-007-SS01-121013 0.022 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043 9 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
PRI12-008-SS01-121013 0.024 0.0208 0.104 0.048 TRUE FALSE <0.048 7.4 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
PRI12-009-SS01-121013 0.02 0.0208 0.104 0.044 TRUE FALSE <0.044 54 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE 54
PRI12-010-SS01-121013 < 0.012 0.0208 0.104 0.055 FALSE TRUE < 0.012 < 3.2 5.79 28.95 25 FALSE TRUE < 3.2
PRI12-011-SS01-121113 < 0.010 0.0208 0.104 0.047 FALSE TRUE < 0.010 < 2.6 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE < 2.6
PRI12-012-SS01-121213 0.012 0.0208 0.104 0.046 TRUE FALSE <0.046 7.2 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
PRI12-013-SS01-121213 0.02 0.0208 0.104 0.044 TRUE FALSE <0.044 15 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
PRI12-014-SS01-121213 < 0.0091 0.0208 0.104 0.042 FALSE TRUE < 0.0091 15 5.79 28.95 18 TRUE FALSE <18
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 14 14 14 14
Total number of detects 11 112 3
Frequency of detect (%) 78.6 7.1 85.7 21.4
Result of blank
comparison
dataset
changed
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-32A
PRI 13 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum
Blank
Concentrat
ion
Phase 1A
BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2A
Units
Phase 2A
Maximum Blank
Concentration Phase 2A BCV
Phase 2A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
1AB
SAP
Mod 5
Units
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 5 Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 5 BCV
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 5 Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 5 Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND -- -- NA NA ND ND -- -- NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND ----NA NA ND ND ----NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X mg 0.0208 0.104 0.011 0.021 TRUE NA ND ND ----NA NA ND ND ----NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND ----NA NA ND ND ----NA NA ND ND ----NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X mg 5.79 28.95 3.1 32 TRUE NA ND ND ----NA NA ND ND ----NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND ----NA NA ND ND ----NA NA ND ND ----NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-32B
PRI 13 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro-
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A PRI13-014-SS01-120513 Shoreline 0.012 0.0208 0.104 0.047 TRUE FALSE <0.047 < 2.7 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE < 2.7
PRI13-013-SS01-120513 Shoreline < 0.0098 0.0208 0.104 0.046 FALSE TRUE < 0.0098 < 2.5 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE < 2.5
PRI13-011-SS01-120513 Shoreline < 0.0080 0.0208 0.104 0.037 FALSE TRUE < 0.0080 3.4 5.79 28.95 18 TRUE FALSE <18
PRI13-010-SS01-120513 Shoreline 0.017 0.0208 0.104 0.053 TRUE FALSE <0.053 < 2.9 5.79 28.95 22 FALSE TRUE < 2.9
PRI13-012-SS01-120613 Shoreline < 0.025 0.0208 0.104 0.11 FALSE TRUE < 0.025 < 6.2 5.79 28.95 47 FALSE TRUE < 6.2
PRI13-009-SS01-120613 Shoreline < 0.0095 0.0208 0.104 0.044 FALSE TRUE < 0.0095 < 2.4 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
PRI13-008-SS01-120613 Shoreline < 0.010 0.0208 0.104 0.047 FALSE TRUE < 0.010 32 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE 32
PRI13-003-SS01-120613 Shoreline 0.013 0.0208 0.104 0.051 TRUE FALSE <0.051 3.1 5.79 28.95 23 TRUE FALSE <23
PRI13-001-SS01-120613 Shoreline < 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.05 FALSE TRUE < 0.011 < 3 5.79 28.95 23 FALSE TRUE < 3
PRI13-007-SS01-120713 Shoreline 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.052 TRUE FALSE <0.052 < 2.8 5.79 28.95 21 FALSE TRUE < 2.8
PRI13-006-SS01-120713 Shoreline < 0.0085 0.0208 0.104 0.039 FALSE TRUE < 0.0085 < 2.4 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
PRI13-005-SS01-120713 Shoreline 0.021 0.0208 0.104 0.048 TRUE FALSE <0.048 < 3.1 5.79 28.95 23 FALSE TRUE < 3.1
PRI13-004-SS01-120713 Shoreline 0.013 0.0208 0.104 0.049 TRUE FALSE <0.049 < 3.1 5.79 28.95 23 FALSE TRUE < 3.1
PRI13-002-SS01-120713 Shoreline < 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.05 FALSE TRUE < 0.011 < 2.9 5.79 28.95 22 FALSE TRUE < 2.9
Phase 2A SL11A-SD-01-080816 Canal 0.026 ND ND NA NA NA 0.026 16 ND ND NA NA NA 16
SL11B-SD-01-080816 Canal < 0.01 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.01 70 ND ND NA NA NA 70
Phase 1AB SAP Mod 5 IC-1-SS-01-102919 Canal NS ND ND NA NA NA NS < 3.0 ND ND NA NA NA < 3.0
IC-1OB-SS-01-102919 Canal NS ND ND NA NA NA NS < 2.8 ND ND NA NA NA < 2.8
IC-2-SS-01-103119 Canal NS ND ND NA NA NA NS 31 ND ND NA NA NA 31
IC-2OB-SS-01-102919 Canal NS ND ND NA NA NA NS < 2.5 ND ND NA NA NA < 2.5
IC-3-SS-01-103119 Canal NS ND ND NA NA NA NS < 3.0 ND ND NA NA NA < 3.0
IC-3OB-SS-01-110519 Canal NS ND ND NA NA NA NS < 2.6 ND ND NA NA NA < 2.6
IC-4-SS-01-103119 Canal NS ND ND NA NA NA NS < 2.9 ND ND NA NA NA < 2.9
IC-4OB-SS-01-103119 Canal NS ND ND NA NA NA NS NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
SL-11-A-OB-SS-01-110519 Canal NS ND ND NA NA NA NS 32 ND ND NA NA NA 32
SL-11-B-OB-SS-01-110519 Canal NS ND ND NA NA NA NS 140 ND ND NA NA NA 140
Total number of samples 14 14 14 16
Total number of detects 7 15 3
Frequency of detect (%)50.0 7.1 35.7 18.8
Result of blank comparison
dataset
changed
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank Comparison
Group Sample Name
Shoreline
or Canal
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-33A
PRI 14 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
1A DMA
Units
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
DMA BCV
Phase 1A DMA
Minimum Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2A
Units
Phase 2A
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 2A
BCV
Phase 2A Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA mg 0.0011 0.0055 2.4 2.4 FALSE NA ND ND NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X mg/kg 0.0208 0.104 0.012 0.054 TRUE NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Analyte CAS #
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2
Total Chromium 7440-47-3
Total Mercury 7439-97-6
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations
Phase 2A Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< 5x Maximum
Blank?
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 4
Units
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 4
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 4
BCV
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 4 Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB SAP
Mod 4 Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 5
Units
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 5
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 5
BCV
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 5
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1AB
SAP Mod 5
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-33A
PRI 14 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Table D-33B
PRI 14 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg
Phase 1A PRI14-015-SS01-112513 < 0.010 0.0208 0.104 0.047 FALSE TRUE < 0.010
PRI14-014-SS01-112513 < 0.099 0.0208 0.104 0.046 FALSE TRUE < 0.099
PRI14-013-SS01-112513 < 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.052 FALSE TRUE < 0.011
PRI14-012-SS01-112513 < 0.097 0.0208 0.104 0.045 FALSE TRUE < 0.097
PRI14-008-SS01-120213 0.012 0.0208 0.104 0.057 TRUE FALSE <0.057
PRI14-011-SS01-120213 < 0.011 0.0208 0.104 0.05 FALSE TRUE < 0.011
PRI14-009-SS01-120213 < 0.087 0.0208 0.104 0.04 FALSE TRUE < 0.087
PRI14-010-SS01-120213 0.013 0.0208 0.104 0.046 TRUE FALSE <0.046
PRI14-001-SS01-120213 < 0.092 0.0208 0.104 0.043 FALSE TRUE < 0.092
PRI14-002-SS01-120213 0.012 0.0208 0.104 0.05 TRUE FALSE <0.05
PRI14-007-SS01-120213 0.022 0.0208 0.104 0.062 TRUE FALSE <0.062
PRI14-006-SS01-120213 < 0.014 0.0208 0.104 0.064 FALSE TRUE < 0.014
PRI14-003-SS01-120413 < 0.016 0.0208 0.104 0.075 FALSE TRUE < 0.016
PRI14-004-SS01-120413 0.025 0.0208 0.104 0.064 TRUE FALSE <0.064
PRI14-005-SS01-121113 0.054 0.0208 0.104 0.076 TRUE FALSE <0.076
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Sed-PRI14 0.029 ND ND 0.051 NA NA 0.029
Phase 2A SM08B-SD-01-081216 < 0.096 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.096
SM08A-SD-01-081216 < 0.011 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.011
SH04A-SD-01-092816 < 0.010 ND ND NA NA NA < 0.010
Phase 1AB SAP Mod 4 14-19-SS-01-021919 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-21-SS-01-021919 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-20-SS-01-022019 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-22-SS-01-022019 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-23-SS-01-022019 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-24-SS-01-022019 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-18-SS-01-052219 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-17-SS-01-052219 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-16-SS-01-052219 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
Sample NameBlank Comparison Group
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-33B
PRI 14 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kgSample NameBlank Comparison Group
Phase 1AB SAP Mod 5 14-37-SS-01-100819 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-35-SS-01-100819 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-36-SS-01-100819 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
PRI14-CANALS-1-SS-01-100919 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-33-SS-01-101519 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-34-SS-01-101519 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-32-SS-01-101519 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-31-SS-01-101519 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-25-SS-01-101519 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-28-SS-01-101619 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-26-SS-01-101619 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-27-SS-01-101619 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-30-SS-01-102819 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
14-29-SS-01-102819 NS ND ND NA NA NA NS
Original Refined
Total number of samples 42 42
Total number of detects 7 1
Frequency of detect (%) 16.7 2.4
Result of blank comparison
Not a
COPC
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-34A
PRI 15 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
DMA
Units
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
DMA
BCV
Phase 1A DMA
Minimum Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A DMA
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2A
Units
Phase 2A
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 2A
BCV
Phase 2A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentratio
n < 5x
Maximum
Blank?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X mg 0.0011 0.0055 9.5 9.5 FALSE NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X NA ND ND NA NA NA mg 0.0208 0.104 0.0088 0.041 TRUE NA ND ND NA NA NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X NA ND ND NA NA NA µg 5.79 28.95 3 35 TRUE NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-34B
PRI 15 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Hexachloro-
benzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg µg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Soil-PRI15 0.013 ND ND 0.04 NA NA 0.013 < 87 ND ND 320 NA NA < 87
Phase 1A PRI15-005-SS01-112213 0.016 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043 < 2.3 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.3
PRI15-007-SS01-112113 0.02 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043 < 2.3 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.3
PRI15-009-SS01-112313 0.02 0.0208 0.104 0.042 TRUE FALSE <0.042 3.2 5.79 28.95 19 TRUE FALSE <19
PRI15-001-SS01-112313 0.01 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043 < 2.4 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
PRI15-003-SS01-112313 0.03 0.0208 0.104 0.044 TRUE FALSE <0.044 < 2.4 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
PRI15-006-SS01-112313 < 0.0085 0.0208 0.104 0.04 FALSE TRUE < 0.0085 3 5.79 28.95 17 TRUE FALSE <17
PRI15-011-SS01-112313 0.012 0.0208 0.104 0.041 TRUE FALSE <0.041 < 2.4 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
PRI15-002-SS01-112413 0.0088 0.0208 0.104 0.041 TRUE FALSE <0.041 < 2.3 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.3
PRI15-004-SS01-112413 0.041 0.0208 0.104 0.049 TRUE FALSE <0.049 35 5.79 28.95 20 FALSE TRUE 35
PRI15-010-SS01-112413 < 0.0089 0.0208 0.104 0.041 FALSE TRUE < 0.0089 < 2.4 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
PRI15-012-SS01-112413 0.025 0.0208 0.104 0.045 TRUE FALSE <0.045 < 2.4 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
PRI15-014-SS01-112413 0.01 0.0208 0.104 0.041 TRUE FALSE <0.041 < 2.4 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.4
PRI15-013-SS01-112413 0.014 0.0208 0.104 0.045 TRUE FALSE <0.045 < 2.3 5.79 28.95 18 FALSE TRUE < 2.3
PRI15-008-SS01-011314 0.014 0.0208 0.104 0.046 TRUE FALSE <0.046 < 2.5 5.79 28.95 19 FALSE TRUE < 2.5
Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 15 15 15 15
Total number of detects 13 13 1
Frequency of detect (%) 86.7 6.7 20.0 6.7
Result of blank comparison
dataset
changed
dataset
changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-35A
PRI 16 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Solids
COPCs
Phase 1A
Units
Phase 1A
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
BCV
Phase 1A
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 X mg 0.0208 0.104 0.01 0.043 TRUE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 X µg 5.79 28.95 ND ND FALSE
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 X NA ND ND NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-35B
PRI 16 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
mg/kg mg mg mg/kg mg/kg
Phase 1A PRI16-010-SS01-111913 0.021 0.0208 0.104 0.042 TRUE FALSE <0.042
PRI16-012-SS01-111913 0.038 0.0208 0.104 0.049 TRUE FALSE <0.049
PRI16-009-SS01-111913 0.043 0.0208 0.104 0.046 TRUE FALSE <0.046
PRI16-007-SS01-111913 0.024 0.0208 0.104 0.041 TRUE FALSE <0.041
PRI16-006-SS01-111913 < 0.0084 0.0208 0.104 0.039 FALSE TRUE < 0.0084
PRI16-004-SS01-112013 0.029 0.0208 0.104 0.043 TRUE FALSE <0.043
PRI16-008-SS01-112013 0.024 0.0208 0.104 0.04 TRUE FALSE <0.04
PRI16-005-SS01-112013 0.01 0.0208 0.104 0.042 TRUE FALSE <0.042
PRI16-003-SS01-112013 0.038 0.0208 0.104 0.045 TRUE FALSE <0.045
PRI16-014-SS01-112113 0.024 0.0208 0.104 0.044 TRUE FALSE <0.044
PRI16-013-SS01-112113 0.021 0.0208 0.104 0.046 TRUE FALSE <0.046
PRI16-002-SS01-112213 0.027 0.0208 0.104 0.04 TRUE FALSE <0.04
PRI16-001-SS01-112213 0.015 0.0208 0.104 0.044 TRUE FALSE <0.044
PRI16-011-SS01-112313 0.027 0.0208 0.104 0.042 TRUE FALSE <0.042
Original Refined
Total number of samples 14 14
Total number of detects 13 0
Frequency of detect (%) 92.9 0.0
Result of blank comparison Not a
COPC
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-36A
PRI 3 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Phase
1A (2015)
Units
Phase 1A
(2015)
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
(2015) BCV
Phase 1A (2015)
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A (2015)
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 µg/L 34.6 173 650 740 FALSE
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 µg/L 0.369 1.845 0.68 0.75 TRUE
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Barium 7440-39-3 µg/L 1.95 9.75 46 310 FALSE
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 µg/L 0.37 1.85 0.14 0.14 TRUE
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Copper 7440-50-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Iron 7439-89-6 µg/L 50.3 251.5 2400 6600 FALSE
Total Lead 7439-92-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 µg/L ND NA NA NA NA
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 µg/L 1.6 8 10 15 FALSE
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 µg/L 1.68 16.8 1.3 1.4 TRUE
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Naphthalene 91-20-3 µg/L 0.012 0.06 0.0077 0.0079 TRUE
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 µg/L 0.167 0.835 ND ND NA
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Benzene 71-43-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromoform 75-25-2 µg/L 0.1 0.5 3 3 FALSE
Bromomethane 74-83-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Chloroform 67-66-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Chloromethane 74-87-3 µg/L 0.654 3.27 ND ND FALSE
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA
o-Xylene 95-47-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Fluoride 16984-48-8 µg/L 170 850 220 1200 TRUE
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 NA ND NA NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-36B
PRI 3 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Antimony 7440-36-0
Chromium,
Hexavalent 18540-29-9
Bis(2-
ethylhexyl)p
hthalate 117-81-7 Naphthalene 91-20-3 Fluoride 16984-48-8
Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L
Phase 1A (2015)PRI3-003-SW01-070715 0.68 0.369 1.845 4 TRUE FALSE <4 0.14 0.37 1.85 1 TRUE FALSE <1 1.4 1.68 16.8 10 TRUE FALSE <10 0.0077 0.012 0.06 0.047 TRUE FALSE <0.047 220 170 850 500 TRUE FALSE <500
PRI3-009-SW01-070715 0.75 0.369 1.845 4 TRUE FALSE <4 < 0.13 0.37 1.85 1 FALSE TRUE < 0.13 1.3 1.68 16.8 9.9 TRUE FALSE <9.9 0.0079 0.012 0.06 0.047 TRUE FALSE <0.047 1200 170 850 500 FALSE TRUE 1200
Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 2 22 22 22 22 2
Total number of detects 2 01 02 02 02 1
Frequency of detect (%)0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 50.0
Result of blank comparison
Not a
COPC
Not a
COPC
Not a
COPC
Not a
COPC
Dataset
Changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-37A
PRI 4 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Phase 1A
(2013-2014)
Units
Phase 1A
(2013-2014)
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
(2013-2014)
BCV
Phase 1A (2013-
2014) Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
(2013-2014)
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 µg/L 104 520 16 19 TRUE
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Barium 7440-39-3 µg/L 141 705 2800 2900 FALSE
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 µg/L 0.6 3 3.63 3.63 FALSE
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Copper 7440-50-8 µg/L 1.72 8.6 25 28 FALSE
Total Iron 7439-89-6 µg/L 5730 28650 220000 300000 FALSE
Total Lead 7439-92-1 µg/L 100 500 28 58 TRUE
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 µg/L 1.94 9.7 3700 5300 FALSE
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 µg/L 20.8 104 2.6 2.6 TRUE
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NA 27.8 139 5.4 36 TRUE
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 µg/L ND NA NA NA NA
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 µg/L 0.65 3.25 6.6 7.3 FALSE
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 µg/L ND NA 200 570 NA
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 µg/L 5.2 26 450 740 FALSE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 NA ND NA ND ND NA
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 NA ND NA ND ND NA
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 µg/kg 130 1300 11 11 TRUE
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 µg/kg 5.79 28.95 1.5 400 TRUE
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 µg/kg 33.3 166.5 ND ND FALSE
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 µg/kg 0.612 3.06 ND ND FALSE
Naphthalene 91-20-3 µg/kg 4.71 23.55 ND ND FALSE
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Benzene 71-43-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 µg/L 1.8 9 27 210 FALSE
Bromoform 75-25-2 µg/L 0.37 1.85 100 990 FALSE
Bromomethane 74-83-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 µg/L 0.47 2.35 45 340 FALSE
Chloroform 67-66-3 µg/L 15 75 4.3 33 TRUE
Chloromethane 74-87-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA
o-Xylene 95-47-6 µg/L 0.22 1.1 ND ND FALSE
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 µg/L 8.9 44.5 11 21 TRUE
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Fluoride 16984-48-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 NA ND NA NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-37B
PRI 4 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Antimony 7440-36-0
Total
Lead 7439-92-1
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L
PRI4-008-SW01-112613 16 104 520 4 TRUE TRUE <16 28 100 500 2 TRUE TRUE <28 < 0.10 20.8 104 0.2 FALSE TRUE < 0.10
PRI4-013-SW01-112513 19 104 520 4 TRUE TRUE <19 58 100 500 2 TRUE TRUE <58 2.6 20.8 104 1 TRUE TRUE <2.6
Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 2 22 22 2
Total number of detects 2 02 01 0
Frequency of detect (%) 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 50.0 0.0
Result of blank
comparison
Not a
COPC
Not a
COPC
Not a
COPC
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2013 &
2014)
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Constituent
PRI4-008-SW01-112613
PRI4-013-SW01-112513
Total number of samples
Total number of detects
Frequency of detect (%)
Result of blank
comparison
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2013 &
2014)
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
Total
Molybdenum 7439-98-7
Bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phth
alate 117-81-7
Hexachlor
obenzene 118-74-1
Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L
5.4 27.8 139 4 TRUE TRUE <5.4 < 10 130 1300 100 FALSE TRUE < 10 400 5.79 28.95 100 FALSE TRUE 400
36 27.8 139 4 TRUE TRUE <36 11 130 1300 100 TRUE FALSE <100 1.5 5.79 28.95 5 TRUE FALSE <5
Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined
2 22 22 2
2 01 02 1
100.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 100.0 50.0
Not a
COPC
Not a
COPC
Dataset
Changed
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-37B
PRI 4 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
PRI4-008-SW01-112613
PRI4-013-SW01-112513
Total number of samples
Total number of detects
Frequency of detect (%)
Result of blank
comparison
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2013 &
2014)
Blank
Comparison
Group Sample Name
Chloroform 67-66-3
Total
Cyanide -
Unfiltered 74-90-8
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L
4.3 15 75 4 TRUE TRUE <4.3 11 8.9 44.5 10 TRUE TRUE <11
33 15 75 25 TRUE TRUE <33 21 8.9 44.5 10 TRUE TRUE <21
Original Refined Original Refined
2 22 2
2 02 0
100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Not a
COPC
Not a
COPC
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-37B
PRI 4 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Table D-38A
PRI 5 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Phase 1A
(2015)
Units
Phase 1A (2015)
Maximum Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A (2015)
BCV
Phase 1A
(2015)
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A (2015)
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2B
Event 1
Units
Phase 2B
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2B Event
1 BCV
Phase 2B
Event 1
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2B Event 1
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2B
Event 2
Units
Phase 2B
Event 2
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase
2B Event
2 BCV
Phase 2B Event
2 Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 µg/L 34.6 173 66000 130000 FALSE NA ND NA NA ND ND NA ND NA NA
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 µg/L 0.369 1.845 2 13 FALSE µg/L 0.487 2.435 22 22 FALSE NA ND NA NA
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Barium 7440-39-3 µg/L 1.95 9.75 540 900 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 µg/L 0.37 1.85 0.18 7.74 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.004 0.02 0.96
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Copper 7440-50-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Iron 7439-89-6 µg/L 50.3 251.5 5700 1000000 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Lead 7439-92-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 1.63 8.15 1500 1500 FALSE NA ND NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 µg/L ND NA 0.66 0.92 NA µg/L 0.121 0.605 1.6 1.6 FALSE µg/L 0.116 0.58 0.32
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 µg/L 1.6 8 74 240 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 µg/L 1.68 16.8 ND ND NA µg/L 2.6 26 ND ND NA µg/L 1.12 11.2 ND
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Naphthalene 91-20-3 µg/L 0.012 0.06 ND ND NA NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.373 1.865 ND
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 µg/L 0.167 0.835 ND ND NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Benzene 71-43-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Bromoform 75-25-2 µg/L 0.1 0.5 9.8 95 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Bromomethane 74-83-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.14 0.7 22 22 FALSE NA ND NA NA
Chloroform 67-66-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 9.3 46.5 2.5 2.5 TRUE µg/L 0.44 2.2 ND
Chloromethane 74-87-3 µg/L 0.654 3.27 0.63 2.7 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
o-Xylene 95-47-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.166 0.83 ND
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.273 1.365 ND
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Fluoride 16984-48-8 µg/L 170 850 6200 12000 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Analyte CAS #
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5
Total Antimony 7440-36-0
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2
Total Barium 7440-39-3
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4
Total Copper 7440-50-8
Total Iron 7439-89-6
Total Lead 7439-92-1
Total Manganese 7439-96-5
Total Mercury 7439-97-6
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7
Total Nickel 7440-02-0
Total Thallium 7440-28-0
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2
Total Zinc 7440-66-6
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6
Naphthalene 91-20-3
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5
Benzene 71-43-2
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4
Bromoform 75-25-2
Bromomethane 74-83-9
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1
Chloroform 67-66-3
Chloromethane 74-87-3
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4
Trichloroethene 79-01-6
o-Xylene 95-47-6
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9
Fluoride 16984-48-8
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8
Perchlorate 14797-73-0
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 2B
Event 2
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
2B Event
3 Units
Phase 2B Event
3 Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2B Event
3 BCV
(5x/10x
Maximum Blank
Concentration)
Phase 2B Event
3 Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2B Event
3 Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase
2B Event
4 Units
Phase 2B
Event 4
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2B
Event 4 BCV
Phase 2B
Event 4
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2B Event 4
Maximum Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA µg/L 0.265 1.325 15 15 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
0.96 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
0.32 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA µg/L 1.74 8.7 190 190 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 9.98 49.9 580 580 FALSE
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA 0.58 0.58 NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
ND NA µg/L 2.18 21.8 ND ND NA µg/L 2.95 29.5 ND ND FALSE
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA 0.58 0.58 NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA 0.58 0.58 NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
ND NA µg/L 0.221 1.105 ND ND NA µg/L 0.409 2.045 0.29 0.29 TRUE
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
ND NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA ND ND NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
ND NA NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.126 0.63 ND ND NA
ND NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-38A
PRI 5 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Table D-38B
PRI 5 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Chromium,
Hexavalent 18540-29-9
Chloro-
methane 74-87-3
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Chloro-
form 67-66-3
Naph-
thalene 91-20-3
Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L
Phase 1A (2015)PRI5-002-SW01-070915 NS 0.37 1.85 -- FALSE TRUE NS 2.7 0.654 3.27 5 TRUE FALSE <5 0.66 ND NA -- NA NA 0.66 5.1 ND NA -- NA NA 5.1 < 0.05 0.012 0.06 -- FALSE TRUE < 0.05
PRI5-008-SW01-070915 0.18 0.37 1.85 1.4 TRUE FALSE <1.4 < 1.3 0.654 3.27 5 FALSE TRUE < 1.3 0.82 ND NA -- NA NA 0.82 2.1 ND NA -- NA NA 2.1 < 0.05 0.012 0.06 -- FALSE TRUE < 0.05
PRI5-010-SW01-071315 7.74 0.37 1.85 1.1 FALSE TRUE 8 < 1.3 0.654 3.27 5 FALSE TRUE < 1.3 0.84 ND NA -- NA NA 0.84 1.8 ND NA -- NA NA 1.8 < 0.05 0.012 0.06 -- FALSE TRUE < 0.05
PRI5-017-SW01-071315 6.36 0.37 1.85 1.1 FALSE TRUE 6 < 1.3 0.654 3.27 5 FALSE TRUE < 1.3 0.92 ND NA -- NA NA 0.92 1 ND NA -- NA NA 1 < 0.05 0.012 0.06 -- FALSE TRUE < 0.05
PRI5-018-SW01-051815 1.01 0.37 1.85 1 TRUE TRUE <1.01 0.63 0.654 3.27 1 TRUE FALSE <1 < 0.10 ND NA -- NA NA < 0.10 7.8 ND NA -- NA NA 7.8 < 0.048 0.012 0.06 -- FALSE TRUE < 0.048
Phase 2B Event 1 PRI5-002-SW-01-103118 2.03 ND NA -- NA NA 2 NS ND NA -- NA NA NS 1.6 0.121 0.605 0.2 FALSE TRUE 1.60 2.5 9.3 46.5 5 TRUE FALSE <5 < 0.75 ND NA -- NA NA < 0.75
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI5-002-SW-01-022719 0.96 0.004 0.02 1.11 FALSE FALSE 0.96 NS ND NA -- NA NA NS 0.32 0.116 0.58 0.2 TRUE TRUE <0.32 < 0.87 0.44 2.2 -- FALSE TRUE < 0.87 < 0.15 0.373 1.865 -- FALSE TRUE < 0.15
Phase 2B Event 3 PRI5-002-SW-01-053019 < 1.64 ND NA -- NA NA < 1.64 NS ND NA -- NA NA NS 0.38 ND NA -- NA NA 0.38 2 ND NA -- NA NA 2 < 0.60 ND NA -- NA NA < 0.60
Phase 2B Event 4 PRI5-002-SW-01-090919 0.91 ND NA -- NA NA 1 NS NS NS 1.1 ND NA 1 NA NA 1.1 1.6 ND NA -- NA NA 1.6 0.29 0.409 2.045 1 TRUE FALSE <1
Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 8 85 59 99 99 9
Total number of detects 7 52 08 78 71 0
Frequency of detect (%)87.5 62.5 40.0 0.0 88.9 77.8 88.9 77.8 11.1 0.0
Result of blank comparison
Dataset
Changed
Not a
COPC
Dataset
Changed
Dataset
Changed
Not a
COPC
*For Event 1, no Total Data was recorded so Event 1 Total Mercury Results are actually Dissolved Mercury Results.
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-39A
PRI 6 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Phase 1A
(2015)
Units
Phase 1A
(2015)
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
(2015)
BCV
Phase 1A
(2015)
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A
(2015)
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentrati
on
< BCV?
Phase 2B
Event 1
Units
Phase 2B
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2B
Event 1
BCV
Phase 2B Event 1
Minimum Detected
Concentration
Phase 2B Event
1 Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2B
Event 2
Units
Phase 2B
Event 2
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2B
Event 2
BCV
Phase 2B Event
2 Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2B
Event 2
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2B
Event 4
Units
Phase 2B Event
4 Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2B
Event 4
BCV
Phase 2B
Event 4
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2B Event
4 Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 µg/L 34.6 173 90000 110000 FALSE NA ND NA NA ND ND NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 µg/L 0.369 1.845 9.6 12 FALSE µg/L 0.487 2.435 20 20 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Barium 7440-39-3 µg/L 1.95 9.75 800 1200 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 µg/L 0.37 1.85 0.22 6.62 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.004 0.02 ND ND FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Copper 7440-50-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Iron 7439-89-6 µg/L 50.3 251.5 1100000 1200000 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Lead 7439-92-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 1.63 8.15 2600 2600 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 µg/L ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.121 0.605 3.5 3.5 FALSE µg/L 0.116 0.58 0.41 0.41 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 µg/L 1.6 8 240 270 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 9.98 49.9 810 810 FALSE
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 µg/L 1.68 16.8 ND ND NA µg/L 2.6 26 ND ND NA µg/L 1.12 11.2 ND ND NA µg/L 2.95 14.75 ND ND FALSE
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Naphthalene 91-20-3 µg/L 0.012 0.06 ND ND NA NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.373 1.865 ND ND NA µg/L 0.409 2.045 NA NA FALSE
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 µg/L 0.167 0.835 ND ND NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Benzene 71-43-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromoform 75-25-2 µg/L 0.1 0.5 13 28 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromomethane 74-83-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.14 0.7 13 13 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Chloroform 67-66-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 9.3 46.5 2.6 2.6 TRUE µg/L 0.44 2.2 ND NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Chloromethane 74-87-3 µg/L 0.654 3.27 1.3 1.3 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
o-Xylene 95-47-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.166 0.83 ND ND NA µg/L 0.126 0.63 ND ND FALSE
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.273 1.365 ND ND NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Fluoride 16984-48-8 µg/L 170 850 5800 7400 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-39B
PRI 6 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Chromium,
Hexavalent 18540-29-9
Chloro-
methane 74-87-3
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6 Chloroform 67-66-3
Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L
PRI6-002-SW01-071015-FF 6.62 0.37 1.85 1 FALSE TRUE 7 < 1.3 0.654 3.27 5 FALSE TRUE < 1.3 0.88 ND NA -- NA NA 0.88 1.3 ND NA -- NA NA 1.3
PRI6-004-SW01-070815-FF 0.22 0.37 1.85 1.4 TRUE FALSE <1.4 < 1.3 0.654 3.27 5 FALSE TRUE < 1.3 0.87 ND NA -- NA NA 0.87 1.5 ND NA -- NA NA 1.5
PRI6-006-SW01-071015-FF 6.26 0.37 1.85 1 FALSE TRUE 6 < 1.3 0.654 3.27 5 FALSE TRUE < 1.3 0.91 ND NA -- NA NA 0.91 1.8 ND NA -- NA NA 1.8
PRI6-008-SW01-071015-FF 6.11 0.37 1.85 1 FALSE TRUE 6 1.3 0.654 3.27 5 TRUE FALSE <5 0.88 ND NA -- NA NA 0.88 2.2 ND NA -- NA NA 2.2
PRI6-017-SW01-070815-FF 0.26 0.37 1.85 1.4 TRUE FALSE <1.4 < 1.3 0.654 3.27 5 FALSE TRUE < 1.3 0.85 ND NA -- NA NA 0.85 2.7 ND NA -- NA NA 2.7
Phase 2B Event 1 PRI6-002-SW-01-110118 1.15 ND NA 7 NA NA 1 NS ND NA -- NA NA NS 3.5 0.121 0.605 0.2 FALSE TRUE 3.50 2.6 9.3 46.5 2 TRUE TRUE <2.6
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI6-002-SW-01-030519 < 1.72 0.004 0.02 5.72 FALSE TRUE < 1.72 NS ND NA -- NA NA NS 0.41 0.116 0.58 0.2 TRUE TRUE <0.41 < 1.7 0.44 2.2 2 FALSE TRUE < 1.7
Phase 2B Event 4 PRI6-002A-SW-01-091619 < 1.04 ND NA -- NA NA < 1.04 NS ND NA -- NA NA NS 0.73 ND NA -- NA NA 0.73 0.74 ND NA -- NA NA 1
Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 8 85 58 88 8
Total number of detects 6 41 08 77 6
Frequency of detect (%)75.0 50.0 20.0 0.0 100.0 87.5 87.5 75.0
Dataset
Changed
Not a
COPC
Dataset
Changed
Dataset
Changed
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Blank Comparison
Group Sample Name
Phase 1A (2015)
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-40A
PRI 8 Blank Comparison for Detected Constituents of Potential Concern - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Analyte CAS #
Phase 1A
(2013-2014)
Units
Phase 1A (2013-
2014) Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 1A
(2013-2014)
BCV
Phase 1A
(2013-2014)
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 1A (2013-
2014)
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2B
Event 2
Units
Phase 2B Event
2 Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2B
Event 2
BCV
Phase 2B
Event 2
Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2B
Event 2
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Phase 2B
Event 3
Units
Phase 2B
Event 3
Maximum
Blank
Concentration
Phase 2B
Event 3
BCV
Phase 2B Event
3 Minimum
Detected
Concentration
Phase 2B
Event 3
Maximum
Detected
Concentration
Any Sample
Concentration
< BCV?
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 µg/L 104 520 0.75 3.8 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.265 1.325 1.2 1.2 TRUE
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Barium 7440-39-3 µg/L 141 705 260 390 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 µg/L 0.6 3 0.388 0.532 TRUE µg/L 0.004 0.02 ND ND FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Copper 7440-50-8 µg/L 1.72 8.6 15 56 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Iron 7439-89-6 µg/L 5730 28650 25000 220000 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Lead 7439-92-1 µg/L 100 500 17 32 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 µg/L 1.94 9.7 4500 9500 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 µg/L 20.8 104 0.2 0.22 TRUE µg/L 0.116 0.58 ND ND FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 NA 27.8 139 2.2 48 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 µg/L ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 1.74 8.7 350 350 FALSE
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 µg/L 0.65 3.25 ND ND FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 µg/L ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 µg/L 5.2 26 43 250 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 NA ND NA ND ND NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 NA ND NA ND ND NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 µg/kg 130 1300 ND ND FALSE µg/L 1.12 11.2 ND ND FALSE µg/L 2.18 21.8 ND ND FALSE
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 µg/kg 5.79 28.95 ND ND FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 µg/kg 33.3 166.5 ND ND FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 µg/kg 0.612 3.06 ND ND FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Naphthalene 91-20-3 µg/kg 4.71 23.55 ND ND FALSE µg/L 0.373 1.865 ND ND FALSE µg/L 0.221 1.105 ND ND FALSE
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Benzene 71-43-2 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 µg/L 1.8 9 1.6 25 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromoform 75-25-2 µg/L 0.37 1.85 2.9 56 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Bromomethane 74-83-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 µg/L 0.47 2.35 2.1 41 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Chloroform 67-66-3 µg/L 15 75 5.8 18 TRUE µg/L 0.44 2.2 6.8 6.8 FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA
Chloromethane 74-87-3 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Ethyl benzene 100-41-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
o-Xylene 95-47-6 µg/L 0.22 1.1 ND ND FALSE µg/L 0.166 0.83 ND ND FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 NA ND NA NA NA NA µg/L 0.273 1.365 ND ND FALSE NA ND NA NA NA NA
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 µg/L 8.9 44.5 5.3 8.1 TRUE NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Fluoride 16984-48-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-40B
PRI 8 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
Total
Antimony 7440-36-0
Chromium,
Hexavalent 18540-29-9
Total
Barium 7440-39-3
Total
Lead 7439-92-1
Result
Maximum
Detected
Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L
PRI8-005-SW01-112513 0.75 104 520 4 TRUE FALSE <4 < 1.23 0.6 3 2.6 FALSE TRUE < 1.23 260 141 705 2 TRUE TRUE <260 17 100 500 2 TRUE TRUE <17
PRI8-018-SW-01-021214 3.8 104 520 4 TRUE FALSE <4 0.531 0.6 3 0.55 TRUE FALSE <0.55 390 141 705 2 TRUE TRUE <390 < 1.2 100 500 2 FALSE TRUE < 1.2
PRI8-019-SW-01-021214 1.7 104 520 4 TRUE FALSE <4 0.388 0.6 3 0.52 TRUE FALSE <0.52 340 141 705 2 TRUE TRUE <340 30 100 500 2 TRUE TRUE <30
PRI8-020-SW01-021114 3.1 104 520 4 TRUE FALSE <4 0.532 0.6 3 0.55 TRUE FALSE <0.55 280 141 705 2 TRUE TRUE <280 32 100 500 2 TRUE TRUE <32
PRI8-021-SW01-021114 2.7 104 520 4 TRUE FALSE <4 0.489 0.6 3 0.55 TRUE FALSE <0.55 350 141 705 2 TRUE TRUE <350 32 100 500 2 TRUE TRUE <32
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI8-005-SW-01-030419 < 1.0 ND NA -- NA NA < 1.0 < 0.316 0.004 0.02 1.05 FALSE TRUE < 0.316 440 ND NA -- FALSE TRUE 440 < 3 ND NA -- NA NA < 3
Phase 2B Event 3 PRI8-005-SW-01-062019 1.2 0.265 1.325 10 TRUE FALSE <10 < 0.312 ND NA -- NA NA < 0.312 1100 ND NA -- NA NA 1100 < 3 ND NA -- NA NA < 3
Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined
Total number of samples 7 77 77 77 7
Total number of detects 6 04 07 24 0
Frequency of detect (%) 85.7 0.0 57.1 0.0 100.0 28.6 57.1 0.0
Result of blank
comparison
Not a
COPC
Not a
COPC
Dataset
Changed
Not a
COPC
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Blank Comparison
Group Sample Name
ERM Page 1 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Constituent
PRI8-005-SW01-112513
PRI8-018-SW-01-021214
PRI8-019-SW-01-021214
PRI8-020-SW01-021114
PRI8-021-SW01-021114
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI8-005-SW-01-030419
Phase 2B Event 3 PRI8-005-SW-01-062019
Total number of samples
Total number of detects
Frequency of detect (%)
Result of blank
comparison
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Blank Comparison
Group Sample Name
Total
Mercury 7439-97-6
Total
Molybdenum 7439-98-7
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane 18540-29-9
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane 18540-29-9
Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L
< 0.10 20.8 104 0.2 FALSE TRUE < 0.10 44 2.2 48 4 TRUE TRUE <44 25 1.8 9 5 FALSE TRUE 25 2.1 0.47 2.35 2 TRUE TRUE <2.1
0.22 20.8 104 0.2 TRUE TRUE <0.22 2.2 2.2 48 4 TRUE FALSE <4 12 1.8 9 5 FALSE TRUE 12 25 0.47 2.35 5 FALSE TRUE 25
0.22 20.8 104 0.2 TRUE TRUE <0.22 45 2.2 48 4 TRUE TRUE <45 17 1.8 9 5 FALSE TRUE 17 21 0.47 2.35 5 FALSE TRUE 21
0.2 20.8 104 0.2 TRUE FALSE <0.2 48 2.2 48 4 FALSE TRUE 48 1.6 1.8 9 2 TRUE FALSE <2 41 0.47 2.35 5 FALSE TRUE 41
< 0.10 20.8 104 0.2 FALSE TRUE < 0.10 21 2.2 48 4 TRUE TRUE <21 11 1.8 9 5 FALSE TRUE 11 20 0.47 2.35 5 FALSE TRUE 20
< 0.10 ND NA -- NA NA < 0.10 8.2 ND NA -- NA NA 8 < 0.14 ND NA -- NA NA < 0.14 < 0.13 ND NA -- NA NA < 0.13
< 0.50 ND NA -- NA NA < 0.50 < 15 ND NA -- NA NA < 15 < 0.14 ND NA -- NA NA < 0.14 < 0.13 ND NA -- NA NA < 0.13
Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined
7 77 77 77 7
3 06 25 45 4
42.9 0.0 85.7 28.6 71.4 57.1 71.4 57.1
Not a
COPC
Dataset
Changed
Dataset
Changed
Dataset
Changed
ERM Page 2 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-40B
PRI 8 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Constituent
PRI8-005-SW01-112513
PRI8-018-SW-01-021214
PRI8-019-SW-01-021214
PRI8-020-SW01-021114
PRI8-021-SW01-021114
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI8-005-SW-01-030419
Phase 2B Event 3 PRI8-005-SW-01-062019
Total number of samples
Total number of detects
Frequency of detect (%)
Result of blank
comparison
See Table D-41 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Blank Comparison
Group Sample Name
Chloroform 18540-29-9
Total
Cyanide -
Unfiltered 74-90-8 Total Iron 7439-89-6
Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result Result
Maximum
Detected Blank
Concentration BCV
Sample
Reporting
Limit
Result
less than
BCV?
Result
Exceeds
Reporting
Limit?
Refined
Result
µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L µg/L µg µg µg/L µg/L
5.8 15 75 2 TRUE TRUE <5.8 < 5 8.9 44.5 10 FALSE TRUE < 5 88000 5730 28650 100 FALSE TRUE 88000
11 15 75 5 TRUE TRUE <11 5.3 8.9 44.5 10 TRUE FALSE <10 25000 5730 28650 100 TRUE TRUE <25000
8.9 15 75 5 TRUE TRUE <8.9 5.5 8.9 44.5 10 TRUE FALSE <10 210000 5730 28650 100 FALSE TRUE 210000
18 15 75 5 TRUE TRUE <18 7.8 8.9 44.5 10 TRUE FALSE <10 210000 5730 28650 100 FALSE TRUE 210000
9.6 15 75 5 TRUE TRUE <9.6 8.1 8.9 44.5 10 TRUE FALSE <10 220000 5730 28650 100 FALSE TRUE 220000
6.8 0.44 2.2 1 FALSE TRUE 7 < 4.6 ND NA -- NA NA < 4.6 140000 ND NA -- NA NA 140000
0.61 ND NA -- NA NA 1 38 NA NA -- TRUE FALSE 38 140000 ND NA -- NA NA 140000
Original Refined Original Refined Original Refined
7 77 77 7
7 25 17 6
100.0 28.6 71.4 14.3 100.0 85.7
Original
Dataset
Dataset
Changed
Original
Dataset
dataset
changed
Original
Dataset
Dataset
Changed
ERM Page 3 of 3 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table D-40B
PRI 8 Sample to Blank Comparison for Refinement - Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Table D-41
Notes and Abbreviations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
-- = Blank is non-detect, therefore no blank comparison needed.
< = Constituent not detected above the sample reporting limit.
< BCV = Is concentration less than Blank Comparison Value?
µg = microgram
µg/kg = Micrograms per kilogram
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
BCV = Blank Comparison Value (5x or 10x the maximum blank concentration)
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
DMA = Demonstration of Methods Applicability
kg = Kilogram
mg = milligram
NA = Not applicable
ND = All blanks are non-detects, no blank comparison needed
NS = Not Sampled
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
SAP = Sampling and Analysis Plan
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
APPENDIX E FINAL DATASETS FOR BHHRA (EXCLUDING GROUNDWATER)
APPENDIX E – LIST OF TABLES
Table E -1: Refined Datasets for EPCs – Sitewide Air
Table E -2: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 2 Solids
Table E-3: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 4 Solids
Table E-4: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 5 Solids
Table E-5: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 6 Solids
Table E-6: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 7 Solids
Table E-7: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 8 Solids
Table E-8: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 9 Solids
Table E-9: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 10 Solids
Table E -10: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 11 Solids
Table E -11: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 12 Solids
Table E -12: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 13 Solids
Table E -13: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 14 Solids
Table E -14: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 15 Solids
Table E -15: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 16 Solids
Table E -16: Refined Dataset for EPCs – PRI 15 Plants
Table E -17: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 3 Surface Water
Table E -18: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 4 Surface Water
Table E -19: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 5 Surface Water
Table E -20: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 6 Surface Water
Table E -21: Refined Datasets for EPCs – PRI 8 Surface Water
Table E -22: Notes and Abbreviations
Table E-1
Refined Datasets for EPCs - Sitewide Air
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Manganese Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7439-96-5 7439-97-6 118-74-1 87-68-3 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/m 3 µg/m 3 µg/m 3 µg/m 3 pg/m 3 pg/m 3 pg/m 3
Phase 1A PRI18-003-TSP-01-082114 0.0197 Yes 0.0000159 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-01-082114 0.0119 Yes 0.00108 Yes PRI18-003-TO4TO9-01-082114 112 Yes 0.601 Yes 0.651 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-01-082214 0.0163 Yes 0.0000124 Yes PRI18-002-TO13-01-082214 0.0103 Yes 0.0012 Yes PRI18-002-TO4TO9-01-082214 178 Yes 0.0124 Yes 0.0679 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-01-082314 0.0164 Yes 0.00000966 Yes PRI18-001-TO13-01-082314 0.0175 Yes 0.00113 Yes PRI18-001-TO4TO9-01-082314 267 Yes 0.019 Yes 0.167 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-02-082514 0.0183 Yes 0.0000211 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-02-082414 0.0243 Yes 0.00189 Yes PRI18-002-TO4TO9-02-082514 495 Yes 1.55 Yes 1.64 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-02-082614 0.00767 Yes 0.00000955 Yes PRI18-002-TO13-02-082514 0.0168 Yes 0.00196 Yes PRI18-001-TO4TO9-02-082614 214 Yes 0.0155 Yes 0.0617 Yes
PRI18-003-TSP-03-082714 0.0121 Yes 0.0000269 Yes PRI18-001-TO13-02-082614 0.00662 Yes < 0.000552 U No PRI18-002-TO4TO9-03-082814 283 Yes 0.109 Yes 0.155 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-03-082814 0.0281 Yes 0.0000299 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-03-082714 0.0187 Yes 0.000549 Yes PRI18-002-TO4TO9-04-083114 150 Yes 0.11 Yes 0.162 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-04-083114 0.0148 Yes 0.00000824 Yes PRI18-002-TO13-03-082814 0.0141 Yes 0.00124 Yes PRI18-001-TO4TO9-04-090114 167 Yes 0.0128 Yes 0.0343 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-04-090114 0.0142 Yes 0.00000662 Yes PRI18-002-TO13-04-083114 0.00562 Yes < 0.0011 U No PRI18-003-TO4TO9-05-090214 192 Yes 0.136 Yes 0.169 Yes
PRI18-003-TSP-05-090214 0.0194 Yes 0.0000239 Yes PRI18-001-TO13-04-090114 0.00628 Yes < 0.00109 U No PRI18-002-TO4TO9-05-090314 146 Yes 0.00728 Yes 0.0339 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-05-090314 0.0117 Yes 0.0000107 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-05-090214 0.0172 Yes 0.00384 Yes PRI18-001-TO4TO9-05-090514 110 Yes 0.0132 Yes 0.0291 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-05-090514 0.0116 Yes 0.0000117 Yes PRI18-002-TO13-05-090314 0.00649 Yes 0.00331 Yes PRI18-003-TO4TO9-06-090614 171 Yes 0.037 Yes 0.0546 Yes
PRI18-003-TSP-06-090614 0.0215 Yes 0.0000203 Yes PRI18-001-TO13-05-090514 0.0103 Yes 0.00254 Yes PRI18-003-TO4TO9-01-091514 237 Yes 0.0398 Yes 0.0513 Yes
PRI18-003-TSP-01-091514 0.0173 Yes 0.0000194 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-06-090614 0.0149 Yes 0.000851 Yes PRI18-002-TO4TO9-01-091614 218 Yes 0.0929 Yes 0.106 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-01-091614 0.0165 Yes 0.0000117 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-01-091514 0.0105 Yes 0.00251 Yes PRI18-001-TO4TO9-01-091714 229 Yes 0.0564 Yes 0.0708 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-01-091714 0.02 Yes 0.0000119 Yes PRI18-002-TO13-01-091614 0.00956 Yes 0.00207 Yes PRI18-003-TO4TO9-01-091814 279 Yes 0.061 Yes 0.0712 Yes
PRI18-003-TSP-01-091814 0.0265 Yes 0.0000139 Yes PRI18-001-TO13-01-091714 0.0185 Yes 0.00164 Yes PRI18-002-TO4TO9-01-092214 190 Yes 0.0414 Yes 0.0564 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-01-092214 0.0194 Yes 0.0000181 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-01-091814 0.0182 Yes < 0.00112 U No PRI18-001-TO4TO9-01-092314 114 Yes 0.00433 Yes 0.0282 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-01-092314 0.0101 Yes 0.0000318 Yes PRI18-002-TO13-01-092214 0.0098 Yes 0.00132 Yes PRI18-003-TO4TO9-01-092414 218 Yes 0.00245 Yes 0.0423 Yes
PRI18-003-TSP-01-092414 0.00907 Yes 0.000035 Yes PRI18-001-TO13-01-092314 0.0116 Yes < 0.00139 U No PRI18-002-TO4TO9-02-092514 165 Yes 0.00453 Yes 0.0378 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-01-092514 0.0133 Yes 0.0000166 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-01-092414 < 0.00166 U No < 0.00111 U No PRI18-001-TO4TO9-02-092614 195 Yes 0.0201 Yes 0.029 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-01-092614 0.00739 Yes 0.00000741 Yes PRI18-002-TO13-02-092514 0.0188 Yes < 0.00107 U No PRI18-003-TO4TO9-02-092714 68.1 Yes 0.00258 Yes 0.0129 Yes
PRI18-003-TSP-01-092714 < 0.00621 U No < 0.00000542 U No PRI18-001-TO13-02-092614 0.0144 Yes 0.00111 Yes PRI18-002-TO4TO9-01-092814 86.9 Yes 0.0061 Yes 0.0137 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-01-092814 < 0.0046 U No 0.00000599 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-02-092714 0.00177 Yes < 0.000544 U No PRI18-001-TO4TO9-01-092914 246 Yes 0.0151 Yes 0.0432 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-01-092914 < 0.00425 U No 0.0000184 Yes PRI18-002-TO13-01-092814 0.00263 Yes < 0.000501 U No PRI18-003-TO4TO9-01-093014 230 Yes 1.29 Yes 1.32 Yes
PRI18-003-TSP-01-093014 < 0.0036 U No 0.0000264 Yes PRI18-001-TO13-01-092914 0.0108 Yes < 0.000677 U No PRI18-002-TO4TO9-01-100114 88.4 Yes 0.0942 Yes 0.106 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-01-100114 < 0.00298 U No 0.00000649 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-01-093014 0.00966 Yes 0.000805 Yes PRI18-001-TO4TO9-01-100214 69.6 Yes 0.00737 Yes 0.0219 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-01-100214 < 0.00144 U No < 0.0000054 U No PRI18-002-TO13-01-100114 0.00393 Yes 0.000828 Yes PRI18-003-TO4TO9-01-100414 163 Yes 0.0717 Yes 0.0841 Yes
PRI18-003-TSP-01-100414 < 0.00405 U No 0.0000432 Yes PRI18-001-TO13-01-100214 0.00548 Yes < 0.000707 U No PRI18-001-TO4TO9-01-100514 181 Yes 0.0188 Yes 0.034 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-01-100514 < 0.002 U No 0.0000414 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-01-100414 0.00749 Yes 0.00201 Yes PRI18-002-TO4TO9-01-100614 172 Yes 0.0403 Yes 0.0585 Yes
PRI18-002-TSP-01-100614 < 0.00486 U No 0.0000462 Yes PRI18-001-TO13-01-100514 0.0119 Yes 0.00149 Yes PRI18-003-TO4TO9-01-100714 125 Yes 0.0211 Yes 0.0343 Yes
PRI18-003-TSP-01-100714 < 0.00376 U No 0.0000401 Yes PRI18-002-TO13-01-100614 0.0107 Yes 0.00203 Yes PRI18-001-TO4TO9-01-100814 244 Yes 0.101 Yes 0.132 Yes
PRI18-001-TSP-01-100814 < 0.00368 U No 0.0000131 Yes PRI18-003-TO13-01-100714 0.0124 Yes 0.0012 Yes
PRI18-001-TO13-01-100814 0.016 Yes 0.00123 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
DetectDetectQualifier Detect QualifierSample NamePhaseQualifierSample Name Sample Name DetectQualifier Detect QualifierQualifierDetectQualifierDetect
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-2
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 2 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Arsenic Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-47-3 7440-38-2 7439-97-6 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g pg/g
Phase 1A PRI2-003-SS01-010814 14 Yes 5.5 Yes < 0.01 U No 6200 Yes < 250 U No < 35 U No 1900000 Yes 1800 Yes 1800 Yes
PRI2-010-SS01-010814 5.5 Yes 6 Yes < 0.026 U No 4600 Yes < 250 U No < 35 U No 760000 Yes 1200 Yes 1200 Yes
PRI2-011-SS01-010814 7.7 Yes 6.6 Yes < 0.0090 U No 2400 Yes < 230 U No < 33 U No 340000 Yes 350 Yes 350 Yes
PRI2-012-SS01-010814 6.5 Yes 7.7 Yes < 0.01 U No 10000 Yes < 300 U No < 43 U No 1800000 Yes 2400 Yes 2400 Yes
PRI2-001-SS01-010914 0.86 Yes 3 Yes < 0.027 U No 4.2 U No < 27 U No < 3.9 U No 1200 Yes 1.1 Yes 1.6 Yes
PRI2-004-SS01-010914 31 Yes 7.3 Yes < 0.02 U No 9300 Yes < 270 U No < 38 U No 960000 Yes 1700 Yes 1700 Yes
PRI2-008-SS01-010914 14 Yes 7.2 Yes < 0.0099 U No 7500 Yes < 300 U No < 42 U No 1400000 Yes 2100 Yes 2200 Yes
PRI2-005-SS01-010914 34 Yes 12 Yes < 0.021 U No 50000 Yes < 250 U No < 36 U No 11000000 Yes 9800 Yes 9900 Yes
PRI2-013-SS01-010914 6.3 Yes 5.2 Yes < 0.010 U No 95 Yes < 31 U No < 4.4 U No 23000 Yes 12 Yes 19 Yes
PRI2-007-SS01-010914 6.8 Yes 7.6 Yes < 0.02 U No 220 Yes < 29 U No < 4.2 U No 150000 Yes 130 Yes 130 Yes
PRI2-002-SS01-010914 51 Yes 3.7 Yes < 0.012 U No 260 Yes < 35 U No < 5 U No 590000 Yes 110 Yes 120 Yes
PRI2-009-SS01-050814 6.9 Yes 6.1 Yes 0.025 U No 10000 Yes < 290 U No < 41 U No 450000 Yes 660 Yes 670 Yes
PRI2-006-SS01-050814 3.5 Yes 9.9 Yes < 0.010 U No 5700 Yes < 300 U No < 42 U No 850000 Yes 1600 Yes 1600 Yes
PRI2-014-SS01-050814 7.5 Yes 6.8 Yes 0.024 U No 2500 Yes < 280 U No < 40 U No 410000 Yes 680 Yes 690 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
QualifierDetectQualifier DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectPhaseSample Name DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifier
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-3
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 4 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Arsenic Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-47-3 7440-38-2 7439-97-6 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 608-93-5 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/g pg/g pg/g
DMA-Gyp-PRI04-1 9.1 Yes 13.9 Yes < 0.010 U No 13000 U No < 310 U No < 1000 U No NS 0.59 Yes 2000 Yes 0.002 Yes
DMA-Gyp-PRI04-2 7.8 Yes 24.3 Yes < 0.014 U No 18000 Yes < 410 U No < 1300 U No NS 0.50 Yes 1600 Yes 0.0016 Yes
4-01-SS-01-101915 13 Yes 23 Yes 0.084 Yes 21000 Yes < 3400 U No < 490 U No < 1700 U No 1320 Yes 7300 Yes 7400 Yes
4-02-SS-01-101915 3.6 Yes 9.2 Yes 0.029 U No 5700 Yes < 2900 U No < 410 U No < 1400 U No 847 Yes 2500 Yes 2500 Yes
4-03-SS-01-102015 5.9 Yes 17 Yes 0.07 Yes 4200 Yes < 3500 U No < 500 U No < 1800 U No 349 Yes 630 Yes 650 Yes
4-05-SS-01-102015 7 Yes 20 Yes 0.022 U No 5300 Yes < 3300 U No < 460 U No < 1600 U No 862 Yes 1000 Yes 1100 Yes
4-06-SS-01-102015 11 Yes 17 Yes 0.05 U No 14000 Yes < 3300 U No < 470 U No < 1700 U No 418 Yes 2000 Yes 2000 Yes
4-07-SS-01-102015 9.1 Yes 19 Yes 0.053 Yes 15000 Yes < 4100 U No < 580 U No < 2000 U No 336 Yes 1000 Yes 1000 Yes
4-11-SS-01-102115 4.1 Yes 16 Yes 0.068 Yes 23000 Yes < 4300 U No < 610 U No < 2200 U No 1880 Yes 3100 Yes 3200 Yes
4-10-SS-01-102115 5.4 Yes 18 Yes 0.056 Yes 26000 Yes < 3700 U No < 520 U No < 1800 U No 1840 Yes 5300 Yes 5300 Yes
4-08-SS-01-102315 7.7 Yes 18 Yes 0.067 Yes 14000 Yes < 4000 U No < 560 U No < 2000 U No 815 Yes 6000 Yes 6000 Yes
4-04-SS-01-102315 6.6 Yes 18 Yes 0.032 U No 14000 Yes < 3500 U No < 490 U No < 1700 U No 757 Yes 7500 Yes 7500 Yes
4-09-SS-01-102315 6.5 Yes 13 Yes 0.031 U No 14000 Yes < 3800 U No < 540 U No < 1900 U No 1760 Yes 4700 Yes 4700 Yes
4-12-SS-01-102915 11 Yes 23 Yes 0.24 Yes 28000 Yes < 3900 U No < 560 U No < 2000 U No 1960 Yes 9300 Yes 9300 Yes
4-13-SS-01-102915 8.2 Yes 20 Yes 0.064 Yes 38000 Yes < 3900 U No < 560 U No < 2000 U No 1890 Yes 5200 Yes 5200 Yes
4-14-SS-01-102915 8.5 Yes 30 Yes 0.089 Yes 76000 Yes < 4300 U No < 610 U No < 2200 U No 3140 Yes 7700 Yes 7700 Yes
Phase 2A UH01A-SS-01-092916 10 Yes 4.8 Yes 0.012 Yes < 250 U No NS NS NS 0.047 Yes 53 Yes 54 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
QualifierDetectQualifier DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierQualifierQualifierDetectDetectDetectDetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
Phase 1A DMA
Phase 1A-B
Phase Sample Name Qualifier
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-4
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 5 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Mercury Total Iron Total Arsenic Total Thallium Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene
7440-47-3 7439-97-6 7439-89-6 7440-38-2 7440-28-0 118-74-1 95-94-3
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg mg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Sed-PRI05-2 15 Yes 0.011 Yes 11800 Yes 8600 Yes < 600 U No 0.1 U No < 320 U No
DMA-SED-PRI5-1 15.2 Yes 0.029 Yes 11000 Yes 9200 Yes < 790 U No 270 U No < 80000 U No
DMA-Soil-PRI05 12.9 Yes 0.022 Yes 9250 Yes 5300 Yes 140 Yes 1.1 UNo< 29UNo
Phase 1A-B 5-15-SS-01-091715 3.7 Yes < 0.009 U No 2600 Yes 4900 Yes < 51 U No 0.026 U No < 28 U No
5-09-SS-01-091715 2 Yes < 0.0082 U No 1800 Yes 4000 Yes < 52 U No 0.018 U No < 28 U No
5-17-SS-01-091815 28 Yes 0.027 U No 35000 Yes 19000 Yes 210 Yes 8 Yes < 290 U No
5-18-SS-01-091815 15 Yes 0.017 U No 19000 Yes 15000 Yes 100 Yes 0.024 U No < 280 U No
5-19-SS-01-091815 4.4 Yes < 0.0083 U No 3700 Yes 7500 Yes 64 Yes 0.018 U No < 27 U No
5-20-SS-01-091815 9.1 Yes 0.015 U No 8900 Yes 6900 Yes 100 Yes 0.026 U No < 28 U No
5-05-SS-01-092515 4 Yes < 0.0083 U No 3400 Yes 4900 Yes 77 Yes 0.086 U No < 130 U No
5-03-SS-01-092515 2.9 Yes < 0.0094 U No 2400 Yes 4300 Yes < 52 U No 0.012 U No < 140 U No
5-04-SS-01-092515 5.3 Yes < 0.0080 U No 4200 Yes 5100 Yes 43 Yes 0.013 U No < 150 U No
5-01-SS-01-101515 9.1 Yes 0.025 U No 8000 Yes 4600 Yes 120 Yes 0.067 Yes < 150 U No
5-16-SS-01-101515 11 Yes 0.04 U No 12000 Yes 13000 Yes 45 Yes 3.1 Yes < 3100 U No
5-06-SS-01-101515 7.9 Yes 0.019 U No 7000 Yes 8600 Yes 110 Yes 0.013 U No < 150 U No
5-10-SS-01-101515 3.3 Yes 0.032 U No 2700 Yes 5600 Yes < 52 U No 0.077 Yes < 130 U No
5-02-SS-01-102715 8 Yes 0.036 U No 5700 Yes 5700 Yes < 69 U No 310 Yes < 5200 U No
5-07-SS-01-102715 7.9 Yes 0.022 U No 7300 Yes 4500 Yes 110 Yes 3.6 Yes < 2800 U No
5-08-SS-01-102715 6.4 Yes 0.026 U No 2500 Yes 2600 Yes < 64 U No 11 Yes < 4000 U No
5-11-SS-01-102715 6.6 Yes 0.078 Yes 4300 Yes 5500 Yes 49 Yes 17 Yes < 3100 U No
5-14-SS-01-102715 9.2 Yes 0.019 U No 8000 Yes 17000 Yes 98 Yes 610 Yes < 4900 U No
5-13-SS-01-102715 5.5 Yes 0.018 U No 3600 Yes 3700 Yes < 74 U No 63 Yes < 5800 U No
5-12-SS-01-102715 14 Yes 0.018 U No 11000 Yes 4900 Yes 130 Yes 0.32 Yes < 2200 U No
Phase 2A SMXA-SD-01-081216 2.8 Yes < 9.5 U No 2000 Yes 5900 Yes 39 Yes 0.0031 Yes NS
UMXA-SS-01-092716 3.1 Yes 23 Yes 2600 Yes 5000 Yes 63 Yes 0.016 Yes NS
UM09A-SS-01-092716 22 Yes 16 Yes 25000 Yes 18000 Yes 110 Yes 21 Yes NS
UM07A-SS-01-092716 3.5 Yes < 9.0 U No 2600 Yes 4300 Yes < 51 U No 0.033 Yes NS
SMXB-SD-01-092816 13 Yes < 7.8 U No 19000 Yes 10000 Yes 110 Yes 0.27 U No NS
SH03A-SD-01-092816 21 Yes 14 Yes 28000 Yes 18000 Yes 100 Yes 0.34 Yes NS
UH03A-SS-01-092916 15 Yes < 8.6 U No 10000 Yes 9900 Yes 250 Yes 0.38 Yes NS
UH02A-SS-01-092916 4.7 Yes 12 Yes 3800 Yes 6000 Yes < 55 U No 0.048 Yes NS
UH02BALT-SS-01-092916 5 Yes < 8.6 U No 3600 Yes 4900 Yes 59 Yes 0.036 Yes NS
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 4 5-21-SS-01-092419 25 Yes NS NS 30000 Yes NS 10 Yes < 870 U No
5-22-SS-01-092419 3.7 Yes NS NS 3600 Yes NS 0.0023 U No < 27 U No
5-23-SS-01-092419 5.5 Yes NS NS 6800 Yes NS 0.058 Yes < 28 U No
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Qualifier DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetect QualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifier DetectQualifierDetectPhaseSample Name
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-4
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 5 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Sed-PRI05-2
DMA-SED-PRI5-1
DMA-Soil-PRI05
Phase 1A-B 5-15-SS-01-091715
5-09-SS-01-091715
5-17-SS-01-091815
5-18-SS-01-091815
5-19-SS-01-091815
5-20-SS-01-091815
5-05-SS-01-092515
5-03-SS-01-092515
5-04-SS-01-092515
5-01-SS-01-101515
5-16-SS-01-101515
5-06-SS-01-101515
5-10-SS-01-101515
5-02-SS-01-102715
5-07-SS-01-102715
5-08-SS-01-102715
5-11-SS-01-102715
5-14-SS-01-102715
5-13-SS-01-102715
5-12-SS-01-102715
Phase 2A SMXA-SD-01-081216
UMXA-SS-01-092716
UM09A-SS-01-092716
UM07A-SS-01-092716
SMXB-SD-01-092816
SH03A-SD-01-092816
UH03A-SS-01-092916
UH02A-SS-01-092916
UH02BALT-SS-01-092916
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 4 5-21-SS-01-092419
5-22-SS-01-092419
5-23-SS-01-092419
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase Sample Name
Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol Benzo(a)pyrene Bromodichloromethane Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
87-68-3 608-93-5 534-52-1 50-32-8 75-27-4 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/kg µg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g
< 1000 U No NS < 1 U No < 0.47 U No NS 471 Yes 4 Yes 4.6 Yes
< 250000 U No NS < 250 U No < 32 U No NS 487 Yes 640 Yes 640 Yes
< 93 U No NS < 0.091 U No < 0.45 U No NS 5.5 Yes 4.6 Yes 5.2 Yes
< 4.0 U No < 14 U No < .086 U No < 0.40 U No < 0.55 U No 2.2 Yes 2 Yes 2.1 Yes
< 3.9 U No < 14 U No < .087 U No < 0.38 U No < 0.57 U No 1.6 Yes 1.2 Yes 1.4 Yes
< 41 U No < 150 U No < .910 U No < 5.4 U No < 2.4 U No 171 Yes 3100 Yes 3100 Yes
< 40 U No < 140 U No < .880 U No < 5.1 U No < 0.85 U No 19 Yes 6.6 Yes 6.8 Yes
< 3.9 U No < 14 U No < .086 U No < 0.45 U No < 0.36 U No 1.6 Yes 1.2 Yes 1.3 Yes
< 4.0 U No < 14 U No < .087 U No < 0.44 U No < 0.51 U No 53 Yes 38 Yes 39 Yes
< 19 U No < 67 U No < .430 U No < 0.39 U No < 0.66 U No 0.86 Yes 1.1 Yes 1.2 Yes
< 20 U No < 70 U No < .470 U No < 0.41 U No < 0.74 U No 1.6 Yes 1.5 Yes 1.6 Yes
< 21 U No < 75 U No < .420 U No < 0.44 U No < 0.56 U No 0.19 Yes 0.11 Yes 0.19 Yes
< 22 U No < 77 U No < 16 U No < 0.48 U No < 0.74 U No 23 Yes 17 Yes 17 Yes
< 440 U No < 1600 U No < 8.7 U No < 4.8 U No 72 Yes 221 Yes 630 Yes 650 Yes
< 22 U No < 77 U No < 13 U No < 0.45 U No < 0.55 U No 2.5 Yes 2.2 Yes 2.2 Yes
< 19 U No < 67 U No < 9.8 U No < 2.1 U No < 1.1 U No 35 Yes 87 Yes 87 Yes
< 740 U No 3800 Yes < 7 U No 130 Yes 39 Yes 27400 Yes 17000 Yes 17000 Yes
< 400 U No < 1400 U No < 18 U No < 5.1 U No 8.7 Yes 176 Yes 380 Yes 390 Yes
< 570 U No < 2000 U No < 15 U No < 7.5 U No 23 Yes 997 Yes 830 Yes 850 Yes
< 450 U No < 1600 U No < 9.7 U No < 6.4 U No 19 Yes 1950 Yes 1400 Yes 1500 Yes
< 700 U No 11000 Yes < .480 U No 200 Yes 12 Yes 36300 Yes 28000 Yes 29000 Yes
< 820 U No < 2900 U No < .480 U No 42 Yes 75 Yes 6530 Yes 5500 Yes 5800 Yes
< 320 U No < 1100 U No < .420 U No < 4.5 U No 23 Yes 35 Yes 27 Yes 28 Yes
NS NS NS NS NS 1.9 Yes 1.8 Yes 1.8 Yes
NS NS NS NS NS 0.92 Yes 1.3 Yes 1.4 Yes
NS NS NS NS NS 5700 Yes 7900 Yes 7900 Yes
NS NS NS NS NS 5.2 Yes 4 Yes 4 Yes
NS NS NS NS NS 47 Yes 26 Yes 27 Yes
NS NS NS NS NS 160 Yes 290 Yes 290 Yes
NS NS NS NS NS 280 Yes 240 Yes 240 Yes
NS NS NS NS NS 37 Yes 27 Yes 27 Yes
NS NS NS NS NS 2.2 Yes 2.2 Yes 2.3 Yes
< 120 U No < 430 U No < 2.7 U No NS < 1.0 U No 2000 Yes 2400 Yes 2400 Yes
< 3.8 U No < 13 U No < .084 U No NS < 0.65 U No 0.21 Yes 0.24 Yes 0.31 Yes
< 4.0 U No < 14 U No < .087 U No NS < 0.70 U No 38 Yes 80 Yes 81 Yes
DetectQualifier DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifier
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-5
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 6 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Arsenic Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2
DL), Mammalian
7440-47-3 7440-47-3 7439-97-6 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 608-93-5 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g pg/g
DMA-Soil-PRI06 9.7 Yes 4.8 Yes 0.015 Yes < 1800 U No < 520 U No < 1600 U No 33780 Yes 20 Yes 21 Yes
DMA-Sed-PRI6 18.6 Yes 30.4 Yes 0.017 Yes 13000 Yes < 380 U No < 1200 U No 546200 Yes 930 Yes 930 Yes
6-15-SS-01-091615 37 Yes 16 Yes 0.028 U No 390 Yes < 33 U No < 4.6 U No < 16 U No 340000 Yes 300 Yes 300 Yes
6-14-SS-01-091615 5.5 Yes 4.9 Yes < 0.0089 U No 28 U No < 27 U No < 3.9 U No < 14 U No 14000 Yes 11 Yes 12 Yes
6-06-SS-01-091715 16 Yes 5.5 Yes < 0.0088 U No 30 U No < 28 U No < 4.0 U No < 14 U No 16000 Yes 11 Yes 11 Yes
6-03-SS-01-091715 2.3 Yes 4.8 Yes < 0.0082 U No < 2.4 U No < 28 U No < 4.0 U No < 14 U No 410 Yes 0.3 Yes 0.48 Yes
6-04-SS-01-101615 14 Yes 6.5 Yes 0.22 Yes < 250 U No < 3000 U No < 420 U No < 1500 U No 48000 Yes 50 Yes 50 Yes
6-01-SS-01-101615 14 Yes 4.5 Yes 0.031 U No 24 U No < 29 U No < 4.1 U No < 15 U No 1800 Yes 2.3 Yes 2.4 Yes
6-07-SS-01-101615 13 Yes 5.5 Yes 0.22 Yes < 260 U No < 3100 U No < 440 U No < 1500 U No 16000 Yes 8.5 Yes 9.1 Yes
6-02-SS-01-102815 9 Yes 5.3 Yes 0.018 U No 14000 Yes < 3500 U No < 500 U No < 1800 U No 1.56 Yes 2500 Yes 2500 Yes
6-05-SS-01-102815 11 Yes 14 Yes 0.052 Yes 31000 Yes < 3300 U No < 460 U No < 1600 U No 2.08 Yes 2900 Yes 3000 Yes
6-08-SS-01-102815 11 Yes 9.1 Yes 0.032 U No 220000 Yes < 4900 U No < 700 U No 3500 Yes 7.47 Yes 10000 Yes 10000 Yes
6-09-SS-01-102815 9.4 Yes 5.8 Yes 0.019 U No 37000 Yes < 4200 U No < 590 U No < 2100 U No 2.35 Yes 3000 Yes 3000 Yes
6-10-SS-01-102815 12 Yes 7.7 Yes 0.03 U No 35000 Yes < 4100 U No < 580 U No < 2000 U No 3.6 Yes 4500 Yes 4600 Yes
6-11-SS-01-102815 7.6 Yes 5.2 Yes 0.021 U No 7300 Yes < 3000 U No < 430 U No < 1500 U No 0.673 Yes 1200 Yes 1200 Yes
6-12-SS-01-102815 8.1 Yes 4.2 Yes 0.016 U No 58000 Yes < 4400 U No < 620 U No < 2200 U No 2.3 Yes 2600 Yes 2600 Yes
6-13-SS-01-102815 10 Yes 5.9 Yes 0.023 U No 57000 Yes < 4700 U No < 660 U No < 2300 U No 2.97 Yes 3500 Yes 3500 Yes
UM06A-SS-01-092716 16 Yes 8.1 Yes 0.017 Yes 17 Yes NS NS NS 350000 Yes 200 Yes 200 Yes
SH02B-SD-01-092816 17 Yes 18 Yes 0.017 Yes < 310 U No NS NS NS 19000 Yes 19 Yes 24 Yes
SH01A-SD-01-092816 12 Yes 11 Yes < 0.011 U No 370 Yes NS NS NS 89000 Yes 79 Yes 80 Yes
UH01B-SS-01-092916 13 Yes 4.7 Yes < 0.0096 U No 390 Yes NS NS NS 58000 Yes 110 Yes 110 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectDetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect DetectQualifier DetectQualifierPhaseSample Name
Phase 1A DMA
Phase 1AB
Phase 2A
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-6
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 7 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Mercury Total Arsenic Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-47-3 7439-97-6 7440-38-2 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 608-93-5 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Sed-PRI7-1 29.4 Yes 0.034 Yes 24100 Yes 8600 Yes < 910 U No < 2900 U No NS 2382.5 Yes 0.88 Yes 0.89 Yes
DMA-Sed-PRI07-2 36.6 Yes 0.026 Yes 32700 Yes 49000 Yes < 410 U No < 1300 U No NS 678.72 Yes 9.4 Yes 9.4 Yes
Phase 1A-B 7-11-SS-01-092115 15 Yes 0.014 U No 24000 Yes < 3.3 U No < 39 U No < 5.6 U No < 20 U No 32 Yes 0.031 Yes 0.032 Yes
7-12-SS-01-092115 17 Yes 0.025 U No 14000 Yes 170 Yes < 340 U No < 49 U No < 170 U No 340 Yes 0.35 Yes 0.35 Yes
7-13-SS-01-092215 43 Yes 0.077 Yes 8300 Yes 190 Yes < 340 U No < 49 U No < 170 U No 400 Yes 0.33 Yes 0.33 Yes
7-14-SS-01-092215 21 Yes 0.038 U No 18000 Yes 500 Yes < 380 U No < 55 U No < 190 U No 106 Yes 0.51 Yes 0.52 Yes
7-15-SS-01-092215 10 Yes 0.019 U No 29000 Yes 93 Yes < 310 U No < 44 U No < 150 U No 58 Yes 0.041 Yes 0.042 Yes
7-08-SS-01-092315 7.6 Yes < 0.01 U No 16000 Yes <21 U No < 32 U No < 4.6 U No < 16 U No 24 Yes 0.041 Yes 0.042 Yes
7-07-SS-01-092315 11 Yes 0.014 U No 9200 Yes 3700 Yes < 380 U No < 54 U No < 190 U No 96.2 Yes 0.79 Yes 0.8 Yes
7-01-SS-01-092315 64 Yes 0.11 Yes 14000 Yes 6500 Yes < 1600 U No < 230 U No < 790 U No 403 Yes 2.5 Yes 2.5 Yes
7-02-SS-01-092415 20 Yes 0.04 U No 17000 Yes 1200 Yes < 1800 U No < 260 U No < 920 U No 91.7 Yes 0.72 Yes 0.73 Yes
7-05-SS-01-092415 15 Yes 0.033 U No 13000 Yes 1600 Yes < 310 U No < 44 U No < 150 U No 300 Yes 0.72 Yes 0.72 Yes
7-03-SS-01-092415 11 Yes 0.037 U No 14000 Yes 350 Yes < 320 U No < 46 U No < 160 U No 36.5 Yes 0.36 Yes 0.38 Yes
7-09-SS-01-092815 64 Yes 0.076 Yes 12000 Yes 210 Yes < 370 U No < 53 U No < 190 U No 360 Yes 0.3 Yes 0.3 Yes
7-10-SS-01-092815 25 Yes 0.032 U No 22000 Yes 230 Yes < 370 U No < 53 U No < 190 U No 63.1 Yes 0.15 Yes 0.16 Yes
7-06-SS-01-092815 13 Yes 0.03 U No 17000 Yes 110 Yes < 390 U No < 55 U No < 190 U No 26.3 Yes 0.15 Yes 0.17 Yes
7-17-SS-01-092915 3.3 Yes 0.017 U No 29000 Yes < 81 U No < 950 U No < 140 U No < 480 U No 1.8 Yes 0.0012 Yes 0.0013 Yes
7-16-SS-01-092915 5.8 Yes 0.021 Yes 9500 Yes < 95 U No < 1100 U No < 160 U No < 560 U No 40 Yes 0.094 Yes 0.094 Yes
7-04-SS-01-092915 40 Yes 0.035 Yes 5700 Yes 87000 Yes < 1900 U No < 280 U No 5600 Yes 1860 Yes 19 Yes 19 Yes
Phase 2A SM06B-SD-01-081216 1.6 Yes < 0.0099 U No 5000 Yes < 2.7 U No NS NS NS 1.1 Yes 0.00074 Yes 0.00079 Yes
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 4 7-23-SS-01-092519 16 Yes NS 13000 Yes 280 Yes < 180 U No < 26 U No < 92 U No 420 Yes 0.36 Yes 0.36 Yes
7-22-SS-01-100219 30 Yes NS 21000 Yes < 170 U No < 2000 U No < 280 U No < 990 U No 930 Yes 0.96 Yes 0.96 Yes
7-24-SS-01-100219 25 Yes NS 12000 Yes 210 Yes < 160 U No < 22 U No < 78 U No 250 Yes 0.16 Yes 0.16 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Qualifier DetectDetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectPhaseSample Name Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-7
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 8 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Mercury Total Arsenic Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-47-3 7439-97-6 7440-38-2 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 608-93-5 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg
Phase 1A PRI8-001-SS01-121713 12 Yes 0.01 U No 4000 Yes < 2.5 U No < 30 U No < 4.2 U No NS 0.97 Yes 0.00031 Yes 0.00066 Yes
PRI8-002-SS01-121713 14 Yes < .0097 U No 4900 Yes < 2.6 U No < 31 U No < 4.4 U No NS 0.76 Yes 0.000078 Yes 0.00033 Yes
PRI8-007-SS01-121813 7.8 Yes 0.015 U No 5600 Yes 3.1 U No < 29 U No < 4.2 U No NS 8.3 Yes 0.0051 Yes 0.0052 Yes
PRI8-008-SS01-121813 15 Yes < .011 U No 4600 Yes < 2.6 U No < 30 U No < 4.3 U No NS 0.96 Yes 0.00031 Yes 0.00059 Yes
PRI8-011-SS01-121713 6.2 Yes 0.015 U No 4800 Yes 2.5 U No < 28 U No < 4 U No NS 3.5 Yes 0.0018 Yes 0.0021 Yes
PRI8-012-SS01-121713 5.7 Yes < .0097 U No 5800 Yes 29 Yes < 27 U No < 3.9 U No NS 20 Yes 0.014 Yes 0.014 Yes
PRI8-013-SS01-121813 15 Yes 0.0095 U No 5200 Yes < 2.6 U No < 31 U No < 4.4 U No NS 1 Yes 0.00031 Yes 0.00058 Yes
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 4 PRI8-003-SS-01-052119 18 Yes 0.016 Yes 9800 Yes 34 Yes < 31 U No < 4.4 U No NS 10 Yes 0.0071 Yes 0.0073 Yes
PRI8-005B-SS-01-052119 19 Yes < .010 U No 8600 Yes 39 Yes < 30 U No < 4.3 U No NS 16 Yes 0.0081 Yes 0.0092 Yes
PRI8-009-SS-01-052119 15 Yes < .0098 U No 6800 Yes 51 Yes < 30 U No < 4.3 U No NS 19 Yes 0.013 Yes 0.013 Yes
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 5 8-22-SS-01-101019 NS Yes NS NS < 2.9 U No NS NS NS 2.56 Yes 0.0042 Yes 0.012 Yes
8-23-SS-01-101019 NS Yes NS NS < 3.0 U No NS NS NS 3.6 Yes 0.0041 Yes 0.013 Yes
8-24-SS-01-100919 NS Yes NS NS 160 Yes NS NS NS 43.8 Yes 0.031 Yes 0.04 Yes
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 6 8-25-SS-01-011320 23 Yes 0.022 Yes 9100 Yes 2000 Yes NS NS NS 362 Yes 0.55 Yes 0.57 Yes
8-26-SS-01-011320 17 Yes < .011 U No 6700 Yes 1100 Yes NS NS NS 267 Yes 0.17 Yes 0.18 Yes
8-27-SS-01-011320 20 Yes < .012 U No 7200 Yes 450 Yes NS NS NS 105 Yes 0.07 Yes 0.078 Yes
8-28-SS-01-011420 8.8 Yes < .014 U No 8500 Yes < 1600 U No NS NS NS 783 Yes 0.78 Yes 0.83 Yes
8-29-SS-01-011420 12 Yes 0.015 Yes 8000 Yes < 2.8 U No NS NS NS 0.821 Yes 0.00071 Yes 0.0092 Yes
PRI8-004-SS-01-110619 16 Yes < .0093 U No 5900 Yes < 24 U No NS NS NS 1.31 Yes 0.00066 Yes 0.0086 Yes
PRI8-005A-SS-01-110619 9.3 Yes 0.014 Yes 28000 Yes < 30 U No NS NS NS 35.8 Yes 0.031 Yes 0.041 Yes
PRI8-006-SS-01-110619 19 Yes 0.021 Yes 7300 Yes < 26 U No NS NS NS 8.39 Yes 0.004 Yes 0.012 Yes
SL-09-A-SS-01-110619 22 Yes < .012 U No 29000 Yes < 27 U No NS NS NS 0.746 Yes 0.0029 Yes 0.012 Yes
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 7 TTGP-A-SS-01-112519 66 Yes 0.013 Yes 6900 Yes 1500 Yes NS NS NS 306 Yes 0.16 Yes 0.18 Yes
TTGP-A-OW-SS-01-112519 51 Yes < .012 U No 4400 Yes 18000 Yes NS NS NS 836 Yes 1.9 Yes 2 Yes
TTGP-B-SS-01-121819 16 Yes 0.021 Yes 9600 Yes 2200 Yes NS NS NS 58.7 Yes 0.16 Yes 0.17 Yes
TTGP-B-OW-SS-01-112519 79 Yes < .013 U No 8000 Yes 3600 Yes NS NS NS 271 Yes 0.49 Yes 0.51 Yes
TTGP-C-SS-01-121819 17 Yes < .016 U No 20000 Yes 8100 Yes NS NS NS 821 Yes 0.71 Yes 0.75 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Qualifier DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectPhaseSample Name DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifier
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - March 2022
Table E-8
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 9 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Arsenic Total Mercury Total Manganese Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-47-3 7440-38-2 7439-97-6 7439-96-5 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g pg/g
Phase 1A DMA DMA-SMUT-PRI09-1 7.8 Yes 2 Yes < 0.011 U No 262 Yes < 120 U No < 34 U No < 11 U No 3640 Yes 0.6 Yes 0.77 Yes
DMA-SMUT-PRI09-2 11.8 Yes < 1.8 U No < 0.010 U No 249 Yes < 110 U No < 32 U No < 10 U No 113.7 Yes 0.053 Yes 0.21 Yes
Phase 1A PRI9-014-SS01-122013 22 Yes 10 Yes < 0.015 U No 570 Yes 18 U No < 42 U No < 5.9 U No 71000 Yes 7.7 Yes 9.4 Yes
PRI9-013-SS01-122013 59 Yes 1.1 Yes < 0.014 U No 670 Yes 320 Yes < 39 U No < 5.6 U No 37000 Yes 34 Yes 34 Yes
PRI9-012-SS01-122013 15 Yes 5.6 Yes < 0.010 U No 390 Yes 12 U No < 32 U No < 4.6 U No 4900 Yes 1.8 Yes 1.9 Yes
PRI9-011-SS01-010614 4.1 Yes 0.69 Yes < 0.010 U No 710 Yes 9.4 U No < 36 U No < 5.2 U No 10000 Yes 4.2 Yes 4.3 Yes
PRI9-002-SS01-010614 8 Yes 1.1 Yes < 0.013 U No 1800 Yes 39 Yes < 42 U No < 5.9 U No 7000 Yes 5.7 Yes 5.8 Yes
PRI9-001-SS01-010614 7.5 Yes 0.34 Yes 0.073 U No 1200 Yes < 3 U No < 35 U No < 5 U No 400 Yes 0.026 Yes 0.14 Yes
PRI9-003-SS01-010614 34 Yes 0.51 Yes < 0.014 U No 7300 Yes < 3.5 U No < 41 U No < 5.9 U No 590 Yes 0.49 Yes 0.63 Yes
PRI9-004-SS01-010714 4.1 Yes 1.8 Yes < 0.011 U No 52 Yes < 2.7 U No < 32 U No < 4.5 U No 470 Yes 0.095 Yes 0.21 Yes
PRI9-007-SS01-010714 11 Yes 4.1 Yes 0.013 U No 290 Yes 18 U No < 32 U No < 4.5 U No 4900 Yes 2.3 Yes 2.8 Yes
PRI9-009-SS01-010714 13 Yes 1.4 Yes 0.048 U No 200 Yes 17 U No < 44 U No < 6.3 U No 14000 Yes 60 Yes 60 Yes
PRI9-006-SS01-010714 11 Yes 0.47 Yes 0.073 U No 170 Yes < 3.4 U No < 40 U No < 5.7 U No 360 Yes 0.14 Yes 0.26 Yes
PRI9-005-SS01-010714 15 Yes 1.2 Yes 0.05 U No 260 Yes < 3.3 U No < 39 U No < 5.6 U No 19000 Yes 4.7 Yes 5.1 Yes
PRI9-008-SS01-010714 22 Yes 1.3 Yes < 0.013 U No 290 Yes 75 Yes < 39 U No < 5.5 U No 79000 Yes 92 Yes 92 Yes
PRI9-010-SS01-010714 14 Yes 2.7 Yes 0.16 Yes 110 Yes 48 Yes < 35 U No < 5 U No 66000 Yes 60 Yes 60 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Qualifier DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectPhaseSample Name DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifier
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-9
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 10 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Arsenic Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-47-3 7440-38-2 7439-97-6 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g pg/g
Phase 1A PRI10-001-SS01-121213 7.3 Yes 8.1 Yes < 0.010 U No < 2.5 U No < 30 U No < 4.2 U No 95 Yes 0.03 Yes 0.18 Yes
PRI10-004-SS01-121213 15 Yes 9.7 Yes 0.017 U No < 2.7 U No < 32 U No < 4.5 U No 3100 Yes 2.4 Yes 2.5 Yes
PRI10-003-SS01-121213 16 Yes 9.2 Yes < 0.0091 U No < 2.5 U No < 30 U No < 4.2 U No 38 Yes 0.027 Yes 0.19 Yes
PRI10-002-SS01-121213 17 Yes 13 Yes 0.02 U No < 2.7 U No < 32 U No < 4.6 U No 120 Yes 0.02 Yes 1.4 Yes
PRI10-013-SS01-121213 14 Yes 6.2 Yes 0.02 U No < 2.7 U No < 32 U No < 4.6 U No 1800 Yes 0.18 Yes 0.73 Yes
PRI10-005-SS01-121313 6.6 Yes 6.9 Yes 0.011 U No < 2.6 U No < 31 U No < 4.4 U No 310 Yes 0.33 Yes 0.44 Yes
PRI10-006-SS01-121313 12 Yes 9.5 Yes 0.022 U No < 2.8 U No < 33 U No < 4.7 U No 310 Yes 0.17 Yes 0.37 Yes
PRI10-007-SS01-121313 18 Yes 9.9 Yes 0.02 U No < 2.7 U No < 32 U No < 4.5 U No 3000 Yes 0.74 Yes 1.5 Yes
PRI10-009-SS01-121313 11 Yes 7.3 Yes < 0.011 U No < 2.6 U No < 31 U No < 4.4 U No 330 Yes 0.32 Yes 0.39 Yes
PRI10-014-SS01-121613 11 Yes 6.2 Yes < 0.011 U No < 2.6 U No < 31 U No < 4.4 U No 430 Yes 0.58 Yes 0.82 Yes
PRI10-012-SS01-121613 10 Yes 6.3 Yes < 0.0092 U No 7.7 U No < 30 U No < 4.3 U No 1300 Yes 0.75 Yes 1.1 Yes
PRI10-010-SS01-121713 17 Yes 9.5 Yes 0.014 U No < 2.8 U No < 33 U No < 4.7 U No 160 Yes 0.061 Yes 0.19 Yes
PRI10-008-SS01-121713 14 Yes 7.2 Yes < 0.011 U No < 2.6 U No < 31 U No < 4.4 U No 750 Yes 0.38 Yes 0.66 Yes
PRI10-011-SS01-121713 17 Yes 8.6 Yes < 0.011 U No < 2.8 U No < 33 U No < 4.6 U No 390 Yes 0.032 Yes 0.19 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
DetectQualifier DetectQualifierDetectDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierQualifierPhaseSample Name DetectQualifier DetectQualifier
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-10
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 11 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Arsenic Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-47-3 7440-38-2 7439-97-6 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Qualifier Detect Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g pg/g
Phase 1A PRI11-014-SS01-050614 21 Yes 23 Yes < 0.013 U No < 2.5 U No < 30 U No < 4.2 U No 1100 Yes 1.6 Yes 1.9 Yes
PRI11-013-SS01-050614 12 Yes 6.2 Yes < 0.019 U No 10 U No < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 1300 Yes 1.5 Yes 1.8 Yes
PRI11-012-SS01-050614 15 Yes 7.5 Yes < 0.0090 U No 58 Yes < 27 U No < 3.9 U No 6900 Yes 5.4 Yes 6 Yes
PRI11-011-SS01-050614 17 Yes 7 Yes 0.027 U No 6.2 U No < 27 U No < 3.9 U No 2600 Yes 2.3 Yes 2.6 Yes
PRI11-003-SS01-050614 9.3 Yes 4.5 Yes 0.012 U No 67 Yes < 28 U No < 3.9 U No 73000 Yes 17 Yes 18 Yes
PRI11-009-SS01-050714 7 Yes 4.9 Yes 0.016 U No 2.8 U No < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 820 Yes 0.74 Yes 0.85 Yes
PRI11-007-SS01-050714 13 Yes 6.1 Yes < 0.0093 U No < 2.5 U No < 29 U No < 4.2 U No 870 Yes 1.1 Yes 1.2 Yes
PRI11-008-SS01-050714 7.8 Yes 4.8 Yes 0.021 U No 4.5 U No < 30 U No < 4.3 U No 210 Yes 0.11 Yes 0.24 Yes
PRI11-010-SS01-050714 5.9 Yes 4.3 Yes < 0.0095 U No < 2.5 U No < 30 U No < 4.2 U No 910 Yes 0.7 Yes 0.87 Yes
PRI11-001-SS01-050714 20 Yes 4.5 Yes 0.016 U No < 2.4 U No < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 390 Yes 0.68 Yes 1.1 Yes
PRI11-004-SS01-050714 6.2 Yes 4 Yes < 0.012 U No < 2.4 U No < 28 U No < 4 U No 4600 Yes 5.1 Yes 5.5 Yes
PRI11-006-SS01-050714 14 Yes 11 Yes 0.092 U No < 2.6 U No < 31 U No < 4.3 U No 3600 Yes 0.52 Yes 1.2 Yes
PRI11-002-SS01-050714 8.5 Yes 4.6 Yes < 0.02 U No 3.5 U No < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 2500 Yes 1.5 Yes 2 Yes
PRI11-005-SS01-050714 7.8 Yes 4.4 Yes < 0.010 U No 5.9 U No < 30 U No < 4.2 U No 29000 Yes 5.2 Yes 6 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
DetectQualifier QualifierQualifier DetectDetectQualifier DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectDetectQualifierDetectQualifierPhaseSample Name
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-11
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 12 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Arsenic Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-47-3 7440-38-2 7439-97-6 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
Phase Sample Name mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g pg/g
Phase 1A PRI12-001-SS01-121013 4.8 Yes 3.7 Yes 0.011 U No 16 U No < 27 U No < 3.9 U No 9800 Yes 7.4 Yes 7.5 Yes
PRI12-002-SS01-121013 6.8 Yes 3.8 Yes 0.015 U No 28 U No < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 24000 Yes 19 Yes 19 Yes
PRI12-005-SS01-121013 8.9 Yes 5.4 Yes 0.067 U No 25 U No < 28 U No < 4 U No 36000 Yes 38 Yes 38 Yes
PRI12-003-SS01-121013 10 Yes 5.3 Yes 0.018 U No 59 Yes < 29 U No < 4.2 U No 43000 Yes 28 Yes 29 Yes
PRI12-004-SS01-121013 9 Yes 4 Yes 0.056 U No 48 Yes < 28 U No < 4 U No 140000 Yes 150 Yes 150 Yes
PRI12-006-SS01-121013 5.1 Yes 2.7 Yes 0.11 Yes 13 U No < 34 U No < 4.8 U No 9900 Yes 12 Yes 13 Yes
PRI12-007-SS01-121013 12 Yes 5.3 Yes 0.022 U No 9 U No < 29 U No < 4.2 U No 8700 Yes 8.3 Yes 8.5 Yes
PRI12-008-SS01-121013 13 Yes 5.2 Yes 0.024 U No 7.4 U No < 29 U No < 4.2 U No 4600 Yes 4.8 Yes 5 Yes
PRI12-009-SS01-121013 6.2 Yes 5.4 Yes 0.02 U No 54 Yes < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 52000 Yes 90 Yes 91 Yes
PRI12-010-SS01-121013 1.1 Yes 4.9 Yes < 0.012 U No < 3.2 U No < 38 U No < 5.5 U No 4400 Yes 5.8 Yes 6 Yes
PRI12-011-SS01-121113 3.9 Yes 5.8 Yes < 0.010 U No < 2.6 U No < 30 U No < 4.3 U No 2100 Yes 7.2 Yes 7.4 Yes
PRI12-012-SS01-121213 9.1 Yes 4.3 Yes 0.012 U No 7.2 U No < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 2200 Yes 2.4 Yes 2.5 Yes
PRI12-013-SS01-121213 9.8 Yes 5.9 Yes 0.02 U No 15 U No < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 3900 Yes 3.7 Yes 4 Yes
PRI12-014-SS01-121213 5.5 Yes 4.7 Yes < 0.0091 U No 15 U No < 28 U No < 4 U No 750 Yes 0.81 Yes 0.88 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Qualifier DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetect Qualifier DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetect
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-12
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 13 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Arsenic Total Chromium Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-38-2 7440-47-3 7439-97-6 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
Phase mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g pg/g
Phase 1A PRI13-014-SS01-120513 8.5 Yes 3.8 Yes 0.047 U No 2.7 U No 32 U No 4.5 U No 4200 Yes 6.7 Yes 7 Yes
PRI13-013-SS01-120513 6.6 Yes 3.5 Yes 0.0098 U No 2.5 U No 30 U No 4.2 U No 1400 Yes 1.8 Yes 2.2 Yes
PRI13-011-SS01-120513 6.7 Yes 1.8 Yes 0.008 U No 18 U No 28 U No 3.9 U No 400 Yes 0.11 Yes 0.42 Yes
PRI13-010-SS01-120513 8.4 Yes 16 Yes 0.053 U No 2.9 U No 35 U No 5 U No 620 Yes 0.93 Yes 1 Yes
PRI13-012-SS01-120613 12 Yes 4 Yes 0.025 U No 6.2 U No 74 U No 10 U No 520 Yes 1.3 Yes 1.8 Yes
PRI13-009-SS01-120613 7.3 Yes 2.6 Yes 0.0095 U No 2.4 U No 28 U No 4 U No 540 Yes 0.66 Yes 0.8 Yes
PRI13-008-SS01-120613 7.9 Yes 4.5 Yes 0.01 U No 32 Yes 29 U No 4.1 U No 4300 Yes 7.3 Yes 7.4 Yes
PRI13-003-SS01-120613 20 Yes 18 Yes 0.051 U No 23 U No 36 U No 5.1 U No 2300 Yes 2.5 Yes 2.6 Yes
PRI13-001-SS01-120613 20 Yes 12 Yes 0.011 U No 3 U No 35 U No 5 U No 1600 Yes 2.3 Yes 2.3 Yes
PRI13-007-SS01-120713 7.1 Yes 8.8 Yes 0.052 U No 2.8 U No 33 U No 4.7 U No 260 Yes 0.41 Yes 0.55 Yes
PRI13-006-SS01-120713 6.6 Yes 2.3 Yes 0.0085 U No 2.4 U No 29 U No 4.1 U No 280 Yes 0.35 Yes 0.41 Yes
PRI13-005-SS01-120713 6.5 Yes 14 Yes 0.048 U No 3.1 U No 36 U No 5.1 U No 480 Yes 0.83 Yes 0.90 Yes
PRI13-004-SS01-120713 11 Yes 13 Yes 0.049 U No 3.1 U No 37 U No 5.2 U No 13000 Yes 17 Yes 17 Yes
PRI13-002-SS01-120713 8.9 Yes 4.9 Yes 0.011 U No 2.9 U No 34 U No 4.9 U No 3000 Yes 3.4 Yes 3.7 Yes
Phase 2A SL11A-SD-01-080816 9.9 Yes 15 Yes 0.026 Yes 16 Yes 330 Yes 880 Yes 880 Yes
SL11B-SD-01-080816 5.5 Yes 4.4 Yes 0.01 U No 70 Yes 52 Yes 120 Yes 120 Yes
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 5 IC-1-SS-01-102919 7.5 Yes 5.9 Yes 3 U No 3.02 Yes 7.6 Yes 16 Yes
IC-1OB-SS-01-102919 7.8 Yes 14 Yes 2.8 U No 1.83 Yes 2.4 Yes 10 Yes
IC-2-SS-01-103119 7.7 Yes 12 Yes 31 Yes 391 Yes 370 Yes 390 Yes
IC-2OB-SS-01-102919 11 Yes 6.2 Yes 2.5 U No 22.4 Yes 39 Yes 47 Yes
IC-3-SS-01-103119 10 Yes 8 Yes 3 U No 2.26 Yes 4 Yes 13 Yes
IC-3OB-SS-01-110519 10 Yes 9.6 Yes 2.6 U No 0.605 Yes 1.1 Yes 8.9 Yes
IC-4-SS-01-103119 3.3 Yes 2.3 Yes 2.9 U No 0.234 Yes 0.47 Yes 8.8 Yes
IC-4OB-SS-01-103119 0.213 Yes 220 U No 7.2 U No
SL-11-A-OB-SS-01-110519 9 Yes 10 Yes 32 Yes 28.3 Yes 38 Yes 46 Yes
SL-11-B-OB-SS-01-110519 8.2 Yes 6.3 Yes 140 Yes 48.8 Yes 72 Yes 79 Yes
Note:
IC-4OB-SS-01-103119 was analyzed for a limited constituent list
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
DetectQualifierQualifier Detect DetectQualifier DetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifierSample Name DetectQualifier Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-13
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 14 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Arsenic Total Chromium Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-38-2 7440-47-3 7439-97-6 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g
Phase 1A PRI14-015-SS01-112513 8.3 Yes 3.2 Yes < .010 U No < 2.5 U No < 30 U No < 4.2 U No 0.56 Yes 0.64 Yes 0.9 Yes
PRI14-014-SS01-112513 11 Yes 3.9 Yes < .099 U No < 2.5 U No < 30 U No < 4.2 U No 5.6 Yes 8.3 Yes 8.5 Yes
PRI14-013-SS01-112513 1.6 Yes 0.99 Yes < .011 U No 12 Yes < 34 U No < 4.8 U No 7.1 Yes 1.3 Yes 1.7 Yes
PRI14-012-SS01-112513 9.6 Yes 5.8 Yes < .097 U No 22 Yes < 29 U No < 4.2 U No 6.7 Yes 3.2 Yes 3.5 Yes
PRI14-008-SS01-120213 13 Yes 12 Yes <0.057 U No 26 Yes < 36 U No < 5.1 U No 18 Yes 6 Yes 6 Yes
PRI14-011-SS01-120213 9.6 Yes 9.3 Yes < .011 U No 21 Yes < 30 U No < 4.3 U No 11 Yes 10 Yes 10 Yes
PRI14-009-SS01-120213 4.2 Yes 2.3 Yes < .087 U No 12 Yes < 26 U No < 3.7 U No 1.6 Yes 1.5 Yes 1.6 Yes
PRI14-010-SS01-120213 8.3 Yes 5.1 Yes <0.046 U No 140 Yes < 30 U No < 4.3 U No 38 Yes 32 Yes 32 Yes
PRI14-001-SS01-120213 5.6 Yes 7.7 Yes < .092 U No 71 Yes < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 11 Yes 18 Yes 18 Yes
PRI14-002-SS01-120213 14 Yes 18 Yes <0.05 U No < 2.8 U No < 33 U No < 4.7 U No 1.7 Yes 0.56 Yes 0.71 Yes
PRI14-007-SS01-120213 12 Yes 15 Yes <0.062 U No 120 Yes < 39 U No < 5.6 U No 110 Yes 110 Yes 110 Yes
PRI14-006-SS01-120213 11 Yes 11 Yes < .014 U No 9700 Yes < 220 U No < 6.3 U No 760 Yes 910 Yes 910 Yes
PRI14-003-SS01-120413 15 Yes 12 Yes < .016 U No < 4.4 U No < 52 U No < 7.4 U No 22 Yes 17 Yes 17 Yes
PRI14-004-SS01-120413 17 Yes 11 Yes <0.064 U No < 3.4 U No < 41 U No < 5.8 U No 7.2 Yes 2.4 Yes 2.5 Yes
PRI14-005-SS01-121113 11 Yes 9 Yes <0.076 U No 580 Yes < 48 U No < 6.8 U No 370 Yes 270 Yes 270 Yes
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Sed-PRI14 12 Yes 2.4 Yes 0.029 Yes < 1100 U No < 330 U No < 1000 U No 5.304 Yes 7.7 Yes 8 Yes
Phase 2A SM08B-SD-01-081216 5.8 Yes 1.9 Yes < .096 U No 42 Yes 11 Yes 6 Yes 6.1 Yes
SM08A-SD-01-081216 7.4 Yes 2.1 Yes < .011 U No < 2.9 U No 16 Yes 15 Yes 15 Yes
SH04A-SD-01-092816 10 Yes 4 Yes < .010 U No 730 Yes 610 Yes 350 Yes 350 Yes
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 4 14-19-SS-01-021919 Yes 360 Yes < 44 U No < 6.3 U No 290 Yes 190 Yes 190 Yes
14-21-SS-01-021919 < 3.0 U No < 36 U No < 5.1 U No 11 Yes 5.5 Yes 5.6 Yes
14-20-SS-01-022019 1200 Yes < 47 U No < 6.7 U No 490 Yes 270 Yes 270 Yes
14-22-SS-01-022019 460 Yes < 45 U No < 6.4 U No 280 Yes 180 Yes 180 Yes
14-23-SS-01-022019 < 3.2 U No < 38 U No < 5.4 U No 55 Yes 40 Yes 40 Yes
14-24-SS-01-022019 < 3.1 U No < 36 U No < 5.1 U No 1.1 Yes 0.36 Yes 1.3 Yes
14-18-SS-01-052219 31 Yes < 41 U No < 5.9 U No 41 Yes 17 Yes 17 Yes
14-17-SS-01-052219 < 3.3 U No < 38 U No < 5.5 U No 8.6 Yes 2.4 Yes 2.6 Yes
14-16-SS-01-052219 < 4.8 U No < 56 U No < 8.0 U No 16 Yes 2.4 Yes 5 Yes
Phase 1A-B SAP Mod 5 14-25-SS-01-101519 < 12 U No 1.18 Yes 0.98 Yes 8.1 Yes
14-26-SS-01-101619 < 3.1 U No 3.11 Yes 0.25 Yes 9.7 Yes
14-27-SS-01-101619 < 2.9 U No 1.82 Yes 0.54 Yes 9 Yes
14-28-SS-01-101619 < 3.5 U No 0.882 Yes 0.055 Yes 10 Yes
14-29-SS-01-102819 < 2.8 U No 0.444 Yes 0.089 Yes 7.4 Yes
14-30-SS-01-102819 < 2.6 U No 0.395 Yes 0.13 Yes 7.7 Yes
14-31-SS-01-101519 < 25 U No 0.19 Yes 0.21 Yes 7.9 Yes
14-32-SS-01-101519 < 53 U No 0.904 Yes 0.6 Yes 8.2 Yes
14-33-SS-01-101519 < 23 U No 0.447 Yes 0.24 Yes 7.9 Yes
14-34-SS-01-101519 < 23 U No 0.841 Yes 0.87 Yes 7.4 Yes
14-35-SS-01-100819 < 24 U No 1.41 Yes 1.4 Yes 8.6 Yes
14-36-SS-01-100819 < 26 U No 13.1 Yes 5 Yes 13 Yes
14-37-SS-01-100819 < 14 U No 1.06 Yes 0.85 Yes 8.6 Yes
PRI14-CANALS-1-SS-01-100919 9.9 Yes 6.8 Yes < 14 U No 1.87 Yes 0.94 Yes 9.3 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectSample NamePhase Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-14
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 15 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Arsenic Total Chromium Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-38-2 7440-47-3 7439-97-6 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3
1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
Phase Sample Name mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g pg/g
Phase 1A DMA DMA-Soil-PRI15 3.00 Yes 9.50 Yes 0.013 Yes 87 U No 25 U No 80 U No 320 Yes 0.075 Yes 0.16 Yes
Phase 1A PRI15-005-SS01-112213 3.40 Yes 7.60 Yes 0.016 U No 2.30 U No 27 U No 3.90 U No 420 Yes 0.28 Yes 0.45 Yes
PRI15-007-SS01-112113 4.30 Yes 11.00 Yes 0.02 U No 2.30 U No 27 U No 3.90 U No 840 Yes 0.46 Yes 0.53 Yes
PRI15-009-SS01-112313 4.80 Yes 17.00 Yes 0.02 U No 3.20 U No 29 U No 4.10 U No 2500 Yes 1.8 Yes 2.1 Yes
PRI15-001-SS01-112313 5.30 Yes 15.00 Yes 0.01 U No 2.40 U No 29 U No 4.10 U No 380 Yes 0.30 Yes 0.38 Yes
PRI15-003-SS01-112313 4.90 Yes 13.00 Yes 0.03 U No 2.40 U No 29 U No 4.10 U No 510 Yes 0.35 Yes 0.42 Yes
PRI15-006-SS01-112313 4.20 Yes 12.00 Yes 0.0085 U No 3.00 U No 27 U No 3.80 U No 2400 Yes 2.4 Yes 2.5 Yes
PRI15-011-SS01-112313 4.70 Yes 14.00 Yes 0.012 U No 2.40 U No 28 U No 4.00 U No 720 Yes 0.39 Yes 0.73 Yes
PRI15-002-SS01-112413 4.20 Yes 5.50 Yes 0.0088 U No 2.30 U No 27 U No 3.90 U No 680 Yes 0.25 Yes 0.59 Yes
PRI15-004-SS01-112413 6.80 Yes 11.00 Yes 0.041 U No 35.00 Yes 31 U No 4.30 U No 24000 Yes 5.2 Yes 5.5 Yes
PRI15-010-SS01-112413 6.00 Yes 12.00 Yes 0.0089 U No 2.40 U No 28 U No 4.00 U No 860 Yes 0.38 Yes 0.73 Yes
PRI15-012-SS01-112413 5.10 Yes 13.00 Yes 0.025 U No 2.40 U No 28 U No 4.00 U No 600 Yes 1 Yes 1.2 Yes
PRI15-014-SS01-112413 5.10 Yes 14.00 Yes 0.01 U No 2.40 U No 28 U No 4.00 U No 460 Yes 0.2 Yes 0.52 Yes
PRI15-013-SS01-112413 5.00 Yes 12.00 Yes 0.014 U No 2.30 U No 28 U No 3.90 U No 450 Yes 0.094 Yes 0.48 Yes
PRI15-008-SS01-011314 3.00 Yes 7.70 Yes 0.014 U No 2.50 U No 29 U No 4.10 U No 540 Yes 0.31 Yes 0.59 Yes
Phase 2A UL10E-SS-01-092616 4.10 Yes 12.00 Yes 0.015 Yes 2.50 U No 400 Yes 0.43 Yes 0.54 Yes
UL10D-SS-01-092616 4.10 Yes 9.30 Yes 0.016 Yes 2.40 U No 430 Yes 0.21 Yes 0.30 Yes
UL10C-SS-01-092616 3.80 Yes 9.90 Yes 0.02 Yes 2.40 U No 400 Yes 0.24 Yes 0.30 Yes
UL10G-SS-01-092616 3.60 Yes 8.80 Yes 0.015 Yes 2.40 U No 460 Yes 0.38 Yes 0.42 Yes
UL10B-SS-01-092716 3.80 Yes 7.60 Yes 0.013 Yes 2.40 U No 710 Yes 0.55 Yes 0.58 Yes
UM05A-SS-01-092716 6.70 Yes 17.00 Yes 0.019 Yes 10 Yes 1500 Yes 1.5 Yes 1.6 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Detect Qualifier DetectDetectQualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectDetectQualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifier Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-15
Refined Datasets for EPCs - PRI 16 Solids
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Chromium Total Arsenic Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-47-3 7440-38-2 7439-97-6 118-74-1 95-94-3 87-68-3 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg µg/kg µg/kg µg/kg pg/g pg/g pg/g
Phase 1A PRI16-010-SS01-111913 12 Yes 6.9 Yes 0.021 U No < 2.3 U No < 28 U No < 3.9 U No 960 Yes 0.63 Yes 0.7 Yes
PRI16-012-SS01-111913 13 Yes 7.2 Yes 0.038 U No < 2.7 U No < 32 U No < 4.6 U No 480 Yes 0.21 Yes 0.27 Yes
PRI16-009-SS01-111913 11 Yes 5.3 Yes 0.043 U No < 2.4 U No < 28 U No < 4 U No 1200 Yes 0.44 Yes 0.55 Yes
PRI16-007-SS01-111913 18 Yes 7.1 Yes 0.024 U No < 2.4 U No < 28 U No < 4 U No 1000 Yes 0.61 Yes 0.69 Yes
PRI16-006-SS01-111913 5 Yes 2.9 Yes < 0.0084 U No < 2.2 U No < 26 U No < 3.7 U No 290 Yes 0.18 Yes 0.21 Yes
PRI16-004-SS01-112013 12 Yes 6.1 Yes 0.029 U No < 2.3 U No < 28 U No < 3.9 U No 560 Yes 0.31 Yes 0.38 Yes
PRI16-008-SS01-112013 11 Yes 5.1 Yes 0.024 U No < 2.3 U No < 27 U No < 3.9 U No 1000 Yes 0.75 Yes 0.8 Yes
PRI16-005-SS01-112013 6.2 Yes 2.5 Yes 0.01 U No < 2.3 U No < 28 U No < 3.9 U No 130 Yes 0.054 Yes 0.1 Yes
PRI16-003-SS01-112013 13 Yes 5.8 Yes 0.038 U No < 2.4 U No < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 650 Yes 0.3 Yes 0.35 Yes
PRI16-014-SS01-112113 8.9 Yes 4 Yes 0.024 U No < 2.5 U No < 30 U No < 4.2 U No 520 Yes 0.18 Yes 0.31 Yes
PRI16-013-SS01-112113 12 Yes 5.4 Yes 0.021 U No < 2.5 U No < 30 U No < 4.2 U No 430 Yes 0.24 Yes 0.31 Yes
PRI16-002-SS01-112213 12 Yes 5.3 Yes 0.027 U No < 2.2 U No < 27 U No < 3.8 U No 240 Yes 0.19 Yes 0.27 Yes
PRI16-001-SS01-112213 8.7 Yes 3.6 Yes 0.015 U No < 2.3 U No < 27 U No < 3.9 U No 340 Yes 0.16 Yes 0.24 Yes
PRI16-011-SS01-112313 13 Yes 5.2 Yes 0.027 U No < 2.4 U No < 29 U No < 4.1 U No 290 Yes 0.24 Yes 0.53 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase Sample Name DetectQualifier DetectQualifierQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect DetectQualifierQualifier DetectQualifier Detect
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-16
Refined Dataset for EPCs - PRI 15 Plants
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Arsenic Total Chromium Total Mercury Hexachlorobenzene Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian
7440-38-2 7440-47-3 7439-97-6 118-74-1 1336-36-3 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Detect
Sample Name mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg pg/g pg/g
Phase 2A UL10-B-PL-01-072816 0.08 Yes 2.52 Yes 0.00194 Yes 0.00058 Yes 0.0000808 Yes < 9.20 U No < 5.35 U No
UL10-C-PL-01-072816 0.26 Yes 7.23 Yes 0.00621 Yes 0.001 Yes 0.000313 Yes < 6.68 U No < 3.93 U No
UL10-D-PL-01-072816 0.15 Yes 4.32 Yes 0.00332 Yes 0.00037 Yes 0.0000469 Yes < 38.7 U No < 6.52 U No
UL10-E-PL-01-072816 0.1 Yes 1.04 Yes 0.00101 Yes 0.00048 Yes 0.0000279 Yes < 42.2 U No < 6.81 U No
UL10-G-PL-01-072816 0.28 Yes 13.1 Yes 0.00706 Yes 0.00067 Yes 0.000241 Yes < 10.5 U No < 6.07 U No
UM05-A-PL-01-072816 0.22
Yes 0.55 Yes 0.00655 Yes
See Table E-XX for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect DetectQualifierDetectQualifier QualifierDetectQualifierDetectQualifier
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-17
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 3 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Antimony Chromium, Hexavalent Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Naphthalene Chloromethane Fluoride Total Aluminum Total Arsenic Total Barium
7440-36-0 18540-29-9 117-81-7 91-20-3 74-87-3 16984-48-8 7429-90-5 7440-38-2 7440-39-3
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
Phase Sample Name µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
Phase 1A (2015) PRI3-003-SW01-070715 4 U No 1.00 U No 10 U No 0.047 U No 1.3 U No 500 U No 740 Yes 3.8 Yes 46 Yes
PRI3-009-SW01-070715 4 U No 0.13 U No 9.9 U No 0.047 U No 1.3 U No 1200 Yes 650 Yes 9.5 Yes 310 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect
ERM Page 1 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-17
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 3 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
Phase 1A (2015) PRI3-003-SW01-070715
PRI3-009-SW01-070715
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Total Beryllium Total Cadmium Total Cobalt Total Copper Total Iron Total Lead Total Manganese Total Mercury Total Molybdenum
7440-41-7 7440-43-9 7440-48-4 7440-50-8 7439-89-6 7439-92-1 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
0.2 U No 1 U No 1.2 U No 26 Yes 6600 Yes 1.2 U No 38 Yes 0.13 Yes 3.5 Yes
0.2 U No 1 U No 2.4 Yes 3.5 Yes 2400 Yes 1.2 U No 610 Yes 0.1 U No 18 Yes
Qualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect
ERM Page 2 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-17
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 3 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
Phase 1A (2015) PRI3-003-SW01-070715
PRI3-009-SW01-070715
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Total Nickel Total Thallium Total Vanadium Total Zinc 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene
7440-02-0 7440-28-0 7440-62-2 7440-66-6 95-94-3 111-44-4 118-74-1 87-68-3 608-93-5
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
10 Yes 1 U No 6.1 Yes 56 Yes 0.55 U No 1.5 U No 0.071 U No 0.081 U No 0.46 U No
15 Yes 1 U No 6 U No 16 Yes 0.53 U No 1.5 U No 0.069 U No 0.079 U No 0.45 U No
Qualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect
ERM Page 3 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-17
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 3 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
Phase 1A (2015) PRI3-003-SW01-070715
PRI3-009-SW01-070715
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Pentachlorophenol 2-Methylnaphthalene 1,1-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloropropane trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
87-86-5 91-57-6 75-34-3 107-06-2 78-87-5 10061-02-6 106-46-7 120-82-1 79-34-5
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
2 U No 0.0079 Yes 0.5 U No 1.1 U No 0.75 U No 0.4 U No 6.3 Yes 0.5 U No 0.45 U No
2 U No 0.0079 Yes 0.5 U No 1.1 U No 0.75 U No 0.4 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.45 U No
Qualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect
ERM Page 4 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-17
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 3 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
Phase 1A (2015) PRI3-003-SW01-070715
PRI3-009-SW01-070715
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Benzene Bromochloromethane Bromodichloromethane Bromoform Bromomethane Carbon Tetrachloride Dibromochloromethane Chloroform Ethylbenzene
71-43-2 74-97-5 75-27-4 75-25-2 74-83-9 56-23-5 124-48-1 67-66-3 100-41-4
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
0.65 U No 0.7 U No 0.7 U No 3 Yes 1.5 U No 0.75 U No 1 Yes 0.74 Yes 0.5 U No
0.65 U No 0.7 U No 0.7 U No 0.5 U No 1.5 U No 0.75 U No 0.65 U No 0.6 U No 0.5 U No
Qualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect
ERM Page 5 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-17
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 3 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
Phase 1A (2015) PRI3-003-SW01-070715
PRI3-009-SW01-070715
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Tetrachloroethene Trichloroethene o-Xylene m,p-Xylenes Total Cyanide - Filtered Nitrate as N Perchlorate Dichloroacetic Acid Trichloroacetic acid
127-18-4 79-01-6 95-47-6 179601-23-1 74-90-8 14797-55-8 14797-73-0 79-43-6 76-03-9
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
0.5 U No 0.65 U No 1 Yes 1.1 Yes 13 Yes 870 Yes 0.57 Yes 6.7 Yes 3.3 Yes
0.5 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.9 U No < 5.0 U No 22 U No 0.082 U No 0.98 U No 0.38 U No
DetectQualifierQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 6 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-17
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 3 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
Phase 1A (2015) PRI3-003-SW01-070715
PRI3-009-SW01-070715
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian Total PCBs
CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2 1336-36-3
Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L
110 Yes 110 Yes 90000 Yes
30 Yes 33 Yes 43000 Yes
Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect
ERM Page 7 of 7 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-18
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 4 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Antimony Chromium, Hexavalent Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Naphthalene Chloromethane Fluoride Total Aluminum Total Arsenic Total Barium Total Beryllium
7440-36-0 18540-29-9 117-81-7 91-20-3 74-87-3 16984-48-8 7429-90-5 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 7440-41-7
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
Phase Sample Name µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
PRI4-008-SW01-112613 16 U No 3.63 Yes 10 U No 0.12 U No 2.4 Yes 15000 Yes 3500 Yes 330 Yes 2900 Yes 1.8 Yes
PRI4-013-SW01-112513 19 U No 1.51 U No 100 U No 0.15 U No 6.3 U No 3700 Yes 9400 Yes 390 Yes 2800 Yes 1.2 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A
(2013 & 2014)
Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 1 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-18
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 4 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI4-008-SW01-112613
PRI4-013-SW01-112513
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A
(2013 & 2014)
Total Cadmium Total Cobalt Total Copper Total Iron Total Lead Total Manganese Total Mercury Total Molybdenum Total Nickel Total Thallium
7440-43-9 7440-48-4 7440-50-8 7439-89-6 7439-92-1 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 7440-02-0 7440-28-0
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
4.7 Yes 14 Yes 25 Yes 220000 Yes 28 U No 5300 Yes 0.1 U No 5.4 U No 230 Yes 7.3 Yes
4.7 Yes 8.1 Yes 28 Yes 300000 Yes 58 U No 3700 Yes 2.6 U No 36 U No 370 Yes 6.6 Yes
Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 2 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-18
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 4 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI4-008-SW01-112613
PRI4-013-SW01-112513
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A
(2013 & 2014)
Total Vanadium Total Zinc 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol 2-Methylnaphthalene 1,1-Dichloroethane
7440-62-2 7440-66-6 95-94-3 111-44-4 118-74-1 87-68-3 608-93-5 87-86-5 91-57-6 75-34-3
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
200 Yes 450 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No 400 Yes 0.8 U No NS 20 U No 0.055 U No 0.4 U No
570 Yes 740 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No 5 U No 0.8 U No NS 20 U No 0.055 U No 2.5 U No
Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 3 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-18
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 4 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI4-008-SW01-112613
PRI4-013-SW01-112513
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A
(2013 & 2014)
1,2-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloropropane trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Benzene Bromochloromethane Bromodichloromethane Bromoform
107-06-2 78-87-5 10061-02-6 106-46-7 120-82-1 79-34-5 71-43-2 74-97-5 75-27-4 75-25-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
0.88 U No 0.6 U No 0.32 U No 0.52 Yes 0.4 U No 0.36 U No 0.52 U No 0.56 U No 27 Yes 100 Yes
5.5 U No 3.8 U No 2 U No 3.3 U No 2.5 U No 2.3 U No 3.3 U No 3.5 U No 210 Yes 990 Yes
Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 4 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-18
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 4 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI4-008-SW01-112613
PRI4-013-SW01-112513
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A
(2013 & 2014)
Bromomethane Carbon Tetrachloride Dibromochloromethane Chloroform Ethylbenzene Tetrachloroethene Trichloroethene o-Xylene m,p-Xylenes Total Cyanide - Filtered
74-83-9 56-23-5 124-48-1 67-66-3 100-41-4 127-18-4 79-01-6 95-47-6 179601-23-1 74-90-8
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
1.2 U No 0.6 U No 45 Yes 4.3 U No 0.4 U No 0.4 U No 0.52 U No 0.4 U No 0.72 U No 11 U No
7.3 U No 3.8 U No 340 Yes 33 U No 2.5 U No 2.5 U No 3.3 U No 2.5 U No 4.5 U No 21 U No
Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 5 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-18
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 4 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI4-008-SW01-112613
PRI4-013-SW01-112513
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A
(2013 & 2014)
Nitrate as N Perchlorate Dichloroacetic Acid Trichloroacetic acid
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian Total PCBs
14797-55-8 14797-73-0 79-43-6 76-03-9 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2 1336-36-3
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
3800 Yes 0.82 Yes 1400 Yes 720 Yes 890 Yes 910 Yes 660000 Yes
4000 Yes 0.78 Yes 1200 Yes 710 Yes 350 Yes 360 Yes 160000 Yes
Qualifier DetectDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 6 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-19
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 5 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Antimony Chromium, Hexavalent Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Naphthalene Chloromethane Fluoride Total Aluminum Total Arsenic Total Barium Total Beryllium
7440-36-0 18540-29-9 117-81-7 91-20-3 74-87-3 16984-48-8 7429-90-5 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 7440-41-7
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
Phase Sample Name µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
PRI5-002-SW01-070915 13 Yes NS 17 U No < 0.05 U No 5 U No 6800 Yes 66000 Yes 330 Yes 720 Yes 3.4 Yes
PRI5-008-SW01-070915 11 Yes <1.4 U No 17 U No < 0.05 U No 1.3 U No 6200 Yes 78000 Yes 340 Yes 790 Yes 4 Yes
PRI5-010-SW01-071315 12 Yes 7.74 Yes 15 U No < 0.05 U No 1.3 U No 12000 Yes 82000 Yes 360 Yes 760 Yes 3.6 Yes
PRI5-017-SW01-071315 8.9 Yes 6.36 Yes 15 U No < 0.05 U No 1.3 U No 6600 Yes 130000 Yes 420 Yes 900 Yes 5.2 Yes
PRI5-018-SW01-051815 2 Yes <1.01 U No 0.9 U No < 0.048 U No 1 U No 6300 Yes < 250 Yes 28 Yes 540 Yes 1 U No
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI5-002-SW-01-103118-FF 22 Yes 2.03 Yes 25 U No < 0.75 U No 3800 Yes 51000 Yes 260 Yes 300 Yes 2.2 Yes
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI5-002-SW-01-022719 14 Yes 0.96 Yes 9.6 U No < 0.15 U No 5000 Yes 26000 Yes 210 Yes 490 Yes 1.6 Yes
Phase 2B (Event 3)PRI5-002-SW-01-053019-FF 14 Yes <1.64 U No <47 U No < 0.60 U No 5400 Yes 34000 Yes 300 Yes 680 Yes 2.7 Yes
Phase 2B (Event 4) PRI5-002-SW-01-090919 37 Yes 0.91 Yes 19 U No <1 U No 4200 Yes 120000 Yes 460 Yes 1000 Yes 4.3 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
Phase 1A (2015)
Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 1 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-19
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 5 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI5-002-SW01-070915
PRI5-008-SW01-070915
PRI5-010-SW01-071315
PRI5-017-SW01-071315
PRI5-018-SW01-051815
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI5-002-SW-01-103118-FF
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI5-002-SW-01-022719
Phase 2B (Event 3)PRI5-002-SW-01-053019-FF
Phase 2B (Event 4) PRI5-002-SW-01-090919
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Total Cadmium Total Cobalt Total Copper Total Iron Total Lead Total Manganese Total Mercury Total Molybdenum Total Nickel Total Thallium
7440-43-9 7440-48-4 7440-50-8 7439-89-6 7439-92-1 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 7440-02-0 7440-28-0
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
1.3 Yes 29 Yes 140 Yes 860000 Yes 53 Yes 2900 Yes 0.66 Yes 180 Yes 210 Yes 1.8 Yes
1.7 Yes 33 Yes 160 Yes 910000 Yes 63 Yes 3400 Yes 0.82 Yes 200 Yes 220 Yes 2.1 Yes
1.8 Yes 30 Yes 140 Yes 960000 Yes 59 Yes 3500 Yes 0.84 Yes 210 Yes 210 Yes 2 Yes
2 Yes 40 Yes 180 Yes 1000000 Yes 83 Yes 4100 Yes 0.92 Yes 270 Yes 240 Yes 2.7 Yes
5 U No 19 Yes 11 Yes 5700 Yes 6 U No 15000 Yes < 0.10 U No 19 Yes 74 Yes 5 U No
5 U No 17 Yes 99 Yes 510000 Yes 32 Yes 1500 Yes 1.6 Yes 170 Yes 140 Yes 5 U No
2.5 U No 19 Yes 70 Yes 400000 Yes 33 Yes 2000 Yes <0.32 U No 99 Yes 130 Yes 2.5 U No
2.5 U No 24 Yes 110 Yes 720000 Yes 45 Yes 2100 Yes 0.38 Yes 130 Yes 200 Yes 2.5 U No
2.5 U No 31 Yes 160 Yes 970000 Yes 63 Yes 2300 Yes 1.1 Yes 300 Yes 260 Yes 2.5 U No
Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetectQualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Detect QualifierQualifier Detect
ERM Page 2 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-19
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 5 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI5-002-SW01-070915
PRI5-008-SW01-070915
PRI5-010-SW01-071315
PRI5-017-SW01-071315
PRI5-018-SW01-051815
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI5-002-SW-01-103118-FF
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI5-002-SW-01-022719
Phase 2B (Event 3)PRI5-002-SW-01-053019-FF
Phase 2B (Event 4) PRI5-002-SW-01-090919
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Total Vanadium Total Zinc 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol 2-Methylnaphthalene 1,1-Dichloroethane
7440-62-2 7440-66-6 95-94-3 111-44-4 118-74-1 87-68-3 608-93-5 87-86-5 91-57-6 75-34-3
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
1100 Yes 390 Yes < 5.4 U No < 15 U No 20 Yes < 0.81 U No < 4.6 U No < 20 U No < 0.055 U No < 0.50 U No
1200 Yes 420 Yes < 5.4 U No < 15 U No 12 Yes < 0.8 U No < 4.6 U No < 20 U No < 0.056 U No < 0.50 U No
1100 Yes 420 Yes < 5.4 U No < 15 U No 7.2 Yes < 0.79 U No < 4.6 U No < 20 U No < 0.055 U No < 0.50 U No
1300 Yes 560 Yes < 5.4 U No < 15 U No < 0.7 U No < 0.8 U No < 4.6 U No < 20 U No < 0.055 U No < 0.50 U No
30 U No 77 Yes < 0.49 U No < 1.3 U No 0.32 Yes < 0.072 U No < 0.41 U No < 1.8 U No < 0.053 U No < 0.10 U No
660 Yes 380 Yes < 5.4 U No < 0.7 U No < 0.80 U No < 4.6 U No < 20 U No
510 Yes 360 Yes < 5.2 U No 31 Yes < 0.76 U No < 4.4 U No < 19 U No
1100 Yes 370 Yes < 25 U No < 3.3 U No < 3.7 U No < 21 U No 140 Yes
1400 Yes 580 Yes < 10 U No 9.7 Yes < 0.77 U No < 8.8 U No < 19 U No
DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 3 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-19
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 5 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI5-002-SW01-070915
PRI5-008-SW01-070915
PRI5-010-SW01-071315
PRI5-017-SW01-071315
PRI5-018-SW01-051815
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI5-002-SW-01-103118-FF
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI5-002-SW-01-022719
Phase 2B (Event 3)PRI5-002-SW-01-053019-FF
Phase 2B (Event 4) PRI5-002-SW-01-090919
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
1,2-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloropropane trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Benzene Bromochloromethane Bromodichloromethane Bromoform
107-06-2 78-87-5 10061-02-6 106-46-7 120-82-1 79-34-5 71-43-2 74-97-5 75-27-4 75-25-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
< 1.1 U No < 0.75 U No < 0.40 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.50 U No < 0.45 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.70 U No 18 Yes 95 Yes
< 1.1 U No < 0.75 U No < 0.40 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.50 U No < 0.45 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.70 U No 4.5 Yes 19 Yes
< 1.1 U No < 0.75 U No < 0.40 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.50 U No < 0.45 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.70 U No 3.3 Yes 16 Yes
< 1.1 U No < 0.75 U No < 0.40 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.50 U No < 0.45 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.70 U No 2.6 Yes 9.8 Yes
< 0.22 U No < 0.15 U No < 0.080 U No < 0.13 U No < 0.10 U No < 0.090 U No < 0.13 U No 0.78 Yes 8.5 Yes 46 Yes
9.1 Yes 88 Yes
6.8 Yes 72 Yes
11 Yes 110 Yes
3.6 Yes 16 Yes
DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 4 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-19
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 5 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI5-002-SW01-070915
PRI5-008-SW01-070915
PRI5-010-SW01-071315
PRI5-017-SW01-071315
PRI5-018-SW01-051815
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI5-002-SW-01-103118-FF
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI5-002-SW-01-022719
Phase 2B (Event 3)PRI5-002-SW-01-053019-FF
Phase 2B (Event 4) PRI5-002-SW-01-090919
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Bromomethane Carbon Tetrachloride Dibromochloromethane Chloroform Ethylbenzene Tetrachloroethene Trichloroethene o-Xylene m,p-Xylenes Total Cyanide - Filtered
74-83-9 56-23-5 124-48-1 67-66-3 100-41-4 127-18-4 79-01-6 95-47-6 179601-23-1 74-90-8
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
< 1.5 U No 5.5 Yes 28 Yes 5.1 Yes < 0.50 U No 1.7 Yes < 0.65 U No < 0.50 U No < 0.90 U No 13 Yes
< 1.5 U No < 0.75 U No 10 Yes 2.1 Yes < 0.50 U No 0.5 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.50 U No < 0.90 U No 12 Yes
< 1.5 U No < 0.75 U No 8 Yes 1.8 Yes < 0.50 U No 0.5 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.50 U No < 0.90 U No 17 Yes
< 1.5 U No < 0.75 U No 6.1 Yes 1 Yes < 0.50 U No 0.5 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.50 U No < 0.90 U No < 5.0 U No
< 0.29 U No < 0.15 U No 19 Yes 7.8 Yes < 0.10 U No 0.1 U No < 0.13 U No < 0.10 U No < 0.18 U No 6.8 Yes
2.2 Yes 9.6 Yes 22 Yes 5 U No < 0.50 U No < 0.65 U No < 0.50 U No < 0.90 U No 14 Yes
< 0.29 U No 3.1 Yes 11 Yes < 0.87 U No < 0.10 U No < 0.13 U No < 0.10 U No < 0.18 U No 14 Yes
< 1.2 U No 4.6 Yes 24 Yes 2 Yes < 0.40 U No < 0.52 U No < 0.40 U No < 0.72 U No 5.9 Yes
< 0.29 U No 7.3 Yes 6.2 Yes 1.6 Yes < 0.10 U No < 0.13 U No < 0.10 U No < 0.18 U No 91 Yes
DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetectQualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 5 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-19
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 5 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI5-002-SW01-070915
PRI5-008-SW01-070915
PRI5-010-SW01-071315
PRI5-017-SW01-071315
PRI5-018-SW01-051815
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI5-002-SW-01-103118-FF
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI5-002-SW-01-022719
Phase 2B (Event 3)PRI5-002-SW-01-053019-FF
Phase 2B (Event 4) PRI5-002-SW-01-090919
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Nitrate as N Perchlorate Dichloroacetic Acid Trichloroacetic acid
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian Total PCBs
14797-55-8 14797-73-0 79-43-6 76-03-9 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2 1336-36-3
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
3200 Yes 1.9 Yes 860 Yes 830 Yes 0.0000021 Yes 0.0000022 Yes 0.0027 Yes
3500 Yes 1.9 Yes 1000 Yes 980 Yes 0.0000018 Yes 0.0000018 Yes 0.0041 Yes
6700 Yes 1.9 Yes 870 Yes 660 Yes 0.0000017 Yes 0.0000017 Yes 0.0019 Yes
4400 Yes 2.4 Yes 1000 Yes 820 Yes 0.00000011 Yes 0.00000016 Yes 0.00029 Yes
< 440 U No 0.72 Yes 400 Yes 360 Yes 8.200E-09 Yes 0.00000001 Yes 0.000061 Yes
2800 Yes < 9.8 U No < 3.8 U No 0.0000013 Yes 0.0000014 Yes 0.00172 Yes
2100 Yes 740 Yes 470 Yes 0.0000039 Yes 0.0000047 Yes 0.0134 Yes
1700 Yes 480 Yes 350 Yes 0.0000012 Yes 0.0000014 Yes 0.0000025 Yes
3200 Yes 870 Yes 710 Yes 1.80E-06 Yes 0.000002 Yes 0.0288 Yes
Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 6 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-20
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 6 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Antimony Chromium, Hexavalent Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Naphthalene Chloromethane Fluoride Total Aluminum Total Arsenic Total Barium Total Beryllium
7440-36-0 18540-29-9 117-81-7 91-20-3 74-87-3 16984-48-8 7429-90-5 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 7440-41-7
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
Phase Sample Name µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
PRI6-002-SW01-071015 10 Yes 6.62 Yes 16 U No 0.05 U No 1.3 U No 6500 Yes 110000 Yes 460 Yes 1000 Yes 5.4 U No
PRI6-004-SW01-070815 9.9 Yes 1.4 U No 14 U No 0.049 U No 1.3 U No 5800 Yes 120000 Yes 430 Yes 820 Yes 6.3 U No
PRI6-006-SW01-071015 11 Yes 6.26 Yes 17 U No 0.049 U No 1.3 U No 6500 Yes 110000 Yes 460 Yes 1200 Yes 5.5 Yes
PRI6-008-SW01-071015 9.7 Yes 6.11 Yes 17 U No 0.05 U No 5 U No 7400 Yes 97000 Yes 440 Yes 830 Yes 6.8 U No
PRI6-017-SW01-070815 9 Yes 1.4 U No 14 U No 0.05 U No 1.3 U No 6000 Yes 90000 Yes 400 Yes 800 Yes 4.6 Yes
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI6-002-SW-01-110118 20 Yes 1.15 Yes 21 U No 0.3 U No 3700 Yes 82000 Yes 370 Yes 480 Yes 3.8 Yes
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI6-002-SW-01-030519 11 Yes 1.72 U No 9.1 U No 0.3 U No 5200 Yes 31000 Yes 230 Yes 630 Yes 2.2 Yes
Phase 2B (Event 4)PRI6-002A-SW-01-091619 28 Yes 1.04 U No 9.2 U No 0.15 U No 4100 Yes 210000 Yes 650 Yes 2800 Yes 8.2 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Detect Qualifier DetectDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier
Phase 1A (2015)
Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 1 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-20
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 6 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI6-002-SW01-071015
PRI6-004-SW01-070815
PRI6-006-SW01-071015
PRI6-008-SW01-071015
PRI6-017-SW01-070815
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI6-002-SW-01-110118
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI6-002-SW-01-030519
Phase 2B (Event 4)PRI6-002A-SW-01-091619
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Total Cadmium Total Cobalt Total Copper Total Iron Total Lead Total Manganese Total Mercury Total Molybdenum Total Nickel Total Thallium
7440-43-9 7440-48-4 7440-50-8 7439-89-6 7439-92-1 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 7440-02-0 7440-28-0
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
2.1 Yes 45 Yes 180 Yes 1200000 Yes 91 Yes 5300 Yes 0.88 Yes 240 Yes 260 Yes 2.6 Yes
1.7 Yes 47 Yes 190 Yes 1100000 Yes 79 Yes 5000 Yes 0.87 Yes 230 Yes 270 Yes 2.5 Yes
1.9 Yes 45 Yes 190 Yes 1200000 Yes 93 Yes 5100 Yes 0.91 Yes 250 Yes 270 Yes 2.8 Yes
1.8 Yes 43 Yes 180 Yes 1100000 Yes 85 Yes 4700 Yes 0.88 Yes 240 Yes 260 Yes 2.7 Yes
1.8 Yes 40 Yes 170 Yes 1100000 Yes 69 Yes 4400 Yes 0.85 Yes 220 Yes 240 Yes 2.2 Yes
5 U No 29 Yes 89 Yes 450000 Yes 49 Yes 2600 Yes 3.5 Yes 210 Yes 210 Yes 5 U No
2.5 U No 28 Yes 130 Yes 740000 Yes 48 Yes 2800 Yes 0.41 U No 87 Yes 160 Yes 2.5 U No
2.5 U No 58 Yes 230 1400000 Yes 120 Yes 4500 Yes 0.73 Yes 360 Yes 360 Yes 2.8 Yes
Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 2 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-20
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 6 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI6-002-SW01-071015
PRI6-004-SW01-070815
PRI6-006-SW01-071015
PRI6-008-SW01-071015
PRI6-017-SW01-070815
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI6-002-SW-01-110118
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI6-002-SW-01-030519
Phase 2B (Event 4)PRI6-002A-SW-01-091619
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Total Vanadium Total Zinc 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol 2-Methylnaphthalene 1,1-Dichloroethane
7440-62-2 7440-66-6 95-94-3 111-44-4 118-74-1 87-68-3 608-93-5 87-86-5 91-57-6 75-34-3
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
1500 Yes 510 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No 19 Yes 0.8 U No 4.6 U No 20 U No 0.055 U No 0.5 U No
1500 Yes 510 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No 28 Yes 0.81 U No 4.6 U No 20 U No 0.053 U No 0.5 U No
1500 Yes 520 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No 92 Yes 0.8 U No 4.6 U No 20 U No 0.054 U No 0.5 U No
1400 Yes 510 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No 25 Yes 0.79 U No 4.6 U No 20 U No 0.055 U No 0.5 U No
1400 Yes 480 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No 20 Yes 0.8 U No 4.6 U No 20 U No 0.055 U No 0.5 U No
970 Yes 520 Yes 5.4 U No 0.7 U No 0.8 U No 4.6 U No 20 U No
580 Yes 380 Yes 4.9 U No 0.63 U No 0.73 U No 4.2 U No 18 U No
2000 Yes 810 Yes 5.0 U No 13 U No 12 U No 29 Yes
DetectDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier
ERM Page 3 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-20
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 6 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI6-002-SW01-071015
PRI6-004-SW01-070815
PRI6-006-SW01-071015
PRI6-008-SW01-071015
PRI6-017-SW01-070815
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI6-002-SW-01-110118
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI6-002-SW-01-030519
Phase 2B (Event 4)PRI6-002A-SW-01-091619
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
1,2-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloropropane trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Benzene Bromochloromethane Bromodichloromethane Bromoform
107-06-2 78-87-5 10061-02-6 106-46-7 120-82-1 79-34-5 71-43-2 74-97-5 75-27-4 75-25-2
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
1.1 U No 0.75 U No 0.4 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.45 U No 0.65 U No 0.7 U No 3.2 Yes 13 Yes
1.1 U No 0.75 U No 0.4 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.45 U No 0.65 U No 0.7 U No 3.6 Yes 15 Yes
1.1 U No 0.75 U No 0.4 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.45 U No 0.65 U No 0.7 U No 4.3 Yes 17 Yes
1.1 U No 0.75 U No 0.4 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.45 U No 0.65 U No 0.7 U No 4.6 Yes 18 Yes
1.1 U No 0.75 U No 0.4 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.45 U No 0.65 U No 0.7 U No 7.2 Yes 28 Yes
5.6 Yes 42 Yes
5.4 Yes 48 Yes
1.5 Yes 9.9 Yes
Detect Qualifier DetectDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 4 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-20
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 6 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI6-002-SW01-071015
PRI6-004-SW01-070815
PRI6-006-SW01-071015
PRI6-008-SW01-071015
PRI6-017-SW01-070815
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI6-002-SW-01-110118
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI6-002-SW-01-030519
Phase 2B (Event 4)PRI6-002A-SW-01-091619
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Bromomethane Carbon Tetrachloride Dibromochloromethane Chloroform Ethylbenzene Tetrachloroethene Trichloroethene o-Xylene m,p Xylenes Total Cyanide - Unfiltered
74-83-9 56-23-5 124-48-1 67-66-3 100-41-4 127-18-4 79-01-6 95-47-6 179601-23-1 74-90-8
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
1.5 U No 0.75 U No 7.4 Yes 1.3 Yes 0.5 U No 0.5 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.9 U No 5 U No
1.5 U No 0.75 U No 8.8 Yes 1.5 Yes 0.5 U No 0.5 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.9 U No 8.4 Yes
1.5 U No 0.75 U No 10 Yes 1.8 Yes 0.5 U No 0.5 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.9 U No 11 Yes
1.5 U No 0.75 U No 9.5 Yes 2.2 Yes 0.5 U No 0.5 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.9 U No 5 U No
1.5 U No 0.75 U No 15 Yes 2.7 Yes 0.5 U No 0.5 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.9 U No 5 U No
0.58 U No 0.69 Yes 13 Yes 2.6 U No 0.2 U No 0.26 U No 0.2 U No 0.36 U No 21 Yes
0.58 U No 1.2 Yes 9.2 Yes 1.7 U No 0.2 U No 0.26 U No 0.2 U No 0.36 U No
0.29 U No 0.22 Yes 2.9 Yes 0.74 Yes 0.1 U No 0.13 U No 0.1 U No 0.18 U No
DetectDetect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 5 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-20
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 6 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI6-002-SW01-071015
PRI6-004-SW01-070815
PRI6-006-SW01-071015
PRI6-008-SW01-071015
PRI6-017-SW01-070815
Phase 2B (Event 1) PRI6-002-SW-01-110118
Phase 2B (Event 2) PRI6-002-SW-01-030519
Phase 2B (Event 4)PRI6-002A-SW-01-091619
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Nitrate as N Perchlorate Dichloroacetic Acid Trichloroacetic acid
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian Total PCBs
14797-55-8 14797-73-0 79-43-6 76-03-9 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2 1336-36-3
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
3400 Yes 2 Yes 1100 Yes 950 Yes 0.0000035 Yes 0.0000036 Yes 0.0021 Yes
3400 Yes 2 Yes 1100 Yes 900 Yes 0.0000078 Yes 0.0000079 Yes 0.0035 Yes
3400 Yes 2.2 Yes 1100 Yes 850 Yes 4.2E-07 Yes 0.0000029 Yes 0.0033 Yes
3400 Yes 2.1 Yes 990 Yes 890 Yes 0.0000029 Yes 4.5E-07 Yes 0.0023 Yes
3400 Yes 2 Yes 4.5 Yes 4.5 Yes 0.0000013 Yes 0.0000013 Yes 0.002 Yes
2900 Yes 900 Yes 730 Yes 0.0000002 Yes 2.5E-07 Yes 0.0007 Yes
110 Yes 280 Yes 1.5E-07 Yes 0.0000002 Yes 0.00078 Yes
940 Yes 620 Yes 0.0000089 Yes 0.0000099 Yes 0.0148 Yes
Detect Qualifier DetectDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 6 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-21
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 8 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total Aluminum Total Antimony Total Arsenic Total Barium Total Beryllium Total Cadmium Chromium, Hexavalent Total Cobalt Total Copper Total Iron
7429-90-5 7440-36-0 7440-38-2 7440-39-3 7440-41-7 7440-43-9 18540-29-9 7440-48-4 7440-50-8 7439-89-6
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
Phase Sample Name µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
PRI8-005-SW01-112513-FF 4400 Yes 4 U No 47 Yes 260 U No 0.38 Yes 1 U No 1.23 U No 41 Yes 15 Yes 88000 Yes
PRI8-018-SW-01-021214-FF 22000 Yes 4 U No 97 Yes 390 U No 2 Yes 2.4 Yes 0.55 U No 35 Yes 52 Yes 25000 U No
PRI8-019-SW-01-021214-FF 17000 Yes 4 U No 65 Yes 340 U No 1.3 Yes 2.6 Yes 0.52 U No 31 Yes 26 Yes 210000 Yes
PRI8-020-SW01-021114-FF 24000 Yes 4 U No 94 Yes 280 U No 2.1 Yes 2.1 Yes 0.55 U No 33 Yes 54 Yes 210000 Yes
PRI8-021-SW01-021114-FF 25000 Yes 4 U No 97 Yes 350 U No 2 Yes 2.1 Yes 0.55 U No 34 Yes 56 Yes 220000 Yes
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI8-005-SW-01-030419 < 130 U No 1 U No 48 Yes 440 Yes 0.5 U No 2.5 U No 0.316 U No 87 Yes 5 U No 140000 Yes
Phase 2B Event 3 PRI8-005-SW-01-062019 < 630 U No 10 U No 73 Yes 1100 Yes 2.5 U No 2.5 U No 0.312 U No 140 Yes 25 U No 140000 Yes
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
Phase 1A (2015)
Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier
ERM Page 1 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-21
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 8 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI8-005-SW01-112513-FF
PRI8-018-SW-01-021214-FF
PRI8-019-SW-01-021214-FF
PRI8-020-SW01-021114-FF
PRI8-021-SW01-021114-FF
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI8-005-SW-01-030419
Phase 2B Event 3 PRI8-005-SW-01-062019
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Total Lead Total Manganese Total Mercury Total Molybdenum Total Nickel Total Thallium Total Vanadium Total Zinc 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether
7439-92-1 7439-96-5 7439-97-6 7439-98-7 7440-02-0 7440-28-0 7440-62-2 7440-66-6 95-94-3 111-44-4
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
17 U No 9500 Yes 0.1 U No 44 U No 140 Yes 1 U No 6 U No 43 Yes 0.52 U No 1.4 U No
1.2 U No 5000 Yes 0.22 U No 4 U No 140 Yes 1 U No 310 Yes 250 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No
30 U No 5800 Yes 0.22 U No 45 U No 110 Yes 1 U No 140 Yes 120 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No
32 U No 4700 Yes 0.2 U No 48 Yes 140 Yes 1 U No 310 Yes 240 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No
32 U No 4500 Yes 0.1 U No 21 U No 140 Yes 1 U No 320 Yes 240 Yes 5.4 U No 15 U No
3 U No 11000 Yes 0.1 U No 8.2 Yes 220 Yes 2.5 U No 15 U No 62 Yes 0.53 U No Yes
3 U No 19000 Yes 0.5 U No 15 U No 350 Yes 2.5 U No 75 U No 130 Yes 5 U No Yes
Qualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Detect QualifierQualifier Detect
ERM Page 2 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-21
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 8 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI8-005-SW01-112513-FF
PRI8-018-SW-01-021214-FF
PRI8-019-SW-01-021214-FF
PRI8-020-SW01-021114-FF
PRI8-021-SW01-021114-FF
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI8-005-SW-01-030419
Phase 2B Event 3 PRI8-005-SW-01-062019
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol 2-Methylnaphthalene Naphthalene 1,1-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloropropane
117-81-7 118-74-1 87-68-3 608-93-5 87-86-5 91-57-6 91-20-3 75-34-3 107-06-2 78-87-5
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
0.96 U No 0.067 U No 0.077 U No Yes 1.9 U No 0.005 U No 0.013 U No 0.2 U No 0.44 U No 0.3 U No
10 U No 0.7 U No 0.81 U No Yes 20 U No 0.005 U No 0.037 U No 0.5 U No 1.1 U No 0.75 U No
9.9 U No 0.69 U No 0.79 U No Yes 20 U No 0.005 U No 0.037 U No 0.5 U No 1.1 U No 0.75 U No
10 U No 0.7 U No 0.8 U No Yes 20 U No 0.005 U No 0.15 U No 0.5 U No 1.1 U No 0.75 U No
10 U No 0.7 U No 0.8 U No Yes 20 U No 0.005 U No 0.18 U No 0.5 U No 1.1 U No 0.75 U No
0.98 U No 0.069 U No 0.078 U No 0.45 U No 2 U No 0.15 U No
9.2 U No 0.65 U No 0.74 U No 4.2 U No 27 Yes 0.15 U No
DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 3 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-21
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 8 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI8-005-SW01-112513-FF
PRI8-018-SW-01-021214-FF
PRI8-019-SW-01-021214-FF
PRI8-020-SW01-021114-FF
PRI8-021-SW01-021114-FF
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI8-005-SW-01-030419
Phase 2B Event 3 PRI8-005-SW-01-062019
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Benzene Bromochloromethane Bromodichloromethane Bromoform Bromo methane Carbon tetrachloride
10061-02-6 106-46-7 120-82-1 79-34-5 71-43-2 74-97-5 75-27-4 75-25-2 74-83-9 56-23-5
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
0.16 U No 0.26 U No 0.2 U No 0.18 U No 0.26 U No 0.28 U No 25 Yes 2.9 Yes 0.58 U No 0.3 U No
0.4 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.45 U No 0.65 U No 0.7 U No 12 Yes 56 Yes 1.5 U No 0.75 U No
0.4 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.45 U No 0.65 U No 0.7 U No 17 Yes 22 Yes 1.5 U No 0.75 U No
0.4 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.45 U No 0.65 U No 0.7 U No 2 U No 37 Yes 1.5 U No 0.75 U No
0.4 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.45 U No 0.65 U No 0.7 U No 11 Yes 30 Yes 1.5 U No 0.75 U No
0.14 U No 0.1 U No 0.29 U No 0.15 U No
0.14 U No 0.1 U No 0.29 U No 0.15 U No
DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 4 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-21
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 8 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI8-005-SW01-112513-FF
PRI8-018-SW-01-021214-FF
PRI8-019-SW-01-021214-FF
PRI8-020-SW01-021114-FF
PRI8-021-SW01-021114-FF
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI8-005-SW-01-030419
Phase 2B Event 3 PRI8-005-SW-01-062019
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Dibromochloromethane Chloroform Chloromethane Ethylbenzene Tetrachloroethene Trichloroethene o-Xylene m,p Xylenes Total Cyanide - Unfiltered Dichloroacetic Acid
124-48-1 67-66-3 74-87-3 100-41-4 127-18-4 79-01-6 95-47-6 179601-23-1 74-90-8 79-43-6
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
2.1 U No 5.8 U No 0.5 U No 0.2 U No 0.2 U No 0.26 U No 0.2 U No 0.36 U No 5 U No 120 Yes
25 Yes 11 U No 1.3 U No 0.5 U No 0.5 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.9 U No 10 U No 1000 Yes
21 Yes 8.9 U No 1.3 U No 0.5 U No 0.5 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.9 U No 10 U No 750 Yes
41 Yes 18 U No 1.3 U No 0.5 U No 0.5 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.9 U No 10 U No 1200 Yes
20 Yes 9.6 U No 1.3 U No 0.5 U No 0.5 U No 0.65 U No 0.5 U No 0.9 U No 10 U No 1200 Yes
0.13 U No 6.8 Yes 0.1 U No 0.13 U No 0.1 U No 0.18 U No 4.6 U No 9.8 U No
0.13 U No 0.61 Yes 0.1 U No 0.13 U No 0.1 U No 0.18 U No 9.8 U No
DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierDetect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 5 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-21
Refined Datasets for EPCs -
PRI 8 Surface Water
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Phase Sample Name
PRI8-005-SW01-112513-FF
PRI8-018-SW-01-021214-FF
PRI8-019-SW-01-021214-FF
PRI8-020-SW01-021114-FF
PRI8-021-SW01-021114-FF
Phase 2B Event 2 PRI8-005-SW-01-030419
Phase 2B Event 3 PRI8-005-SW-01-062019
See Table E-22 for Notes and Abbreviations.
Phase 1A (2015)
Trichloroacetic acid Fluoride Nitrate as N Perchlorate
Calculated TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian Total PCBs
76-03-9 16984-48-8 14797-55-8 14797-73-0 CALC-DX-0 CALC-DX-2 1336-36-3
Result Result Result Result Result Result Result
µg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/Lµg/L
110 Yes 16000 Yes 220 U No 0.11 Yes 3.4E-10 Yes 2.8E-09 Yes 0.0000032 Yes
1100 Yes 1900 Yes 1400 Yes 0.71 Yes 0.00000011 Yes 0.00000011 Yes 0.00028 Yes
1000 Yes 1600 Yes 910 Yes 0.55 Yes 1.5E-08 Yes 1.8E-08 Yes 0.000057 Yes
1300 Yes 1600 Yes 1100 Yes 0.71 Yes 3.8E-08 Yes 4.1E-08 Yes 0.00012 Yes
1400 Yes 1700 Yes 1000 Yes 0.71 Yes 1.5E-08 Yes 1.7E-08 Yes 0.00004 Yes
11 Yes 24000 Yes 2E-10 Yes 1.9E-08 Yes 3.73E-06 Yes
12 Yes 90000 Yes 1.6E-08 Yes 3.5E-08 Yes 8.95E-06 Yes
Detect Qualifier Detect Qualifier DetectQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect QualifierQualifier Detect Qualifier Detect
ERM Page 6 of 6 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table E-22
Notes and Abbreviations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
µg = Microgram(s)
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
DL = Detection limit
DMA = Demonstration of Methods Applicability
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
g = Gram
kg = Kilogram
L = Liter(s)
m 3 = Cubic meter
mg = Milligram(s)
ND = Not detected
NS = Not sampled
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg = Picogram(s)
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
SAP = Sampling and Analysis Plan
SVOC = Semivolatile organic compound
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
U = Not detected
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
APPENDIX F PROUCL OUTPUTS AND EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONS
(EXCLUDING GROUNDWATER)
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONS TABLES
APPENDIX F – LIST OF TABLES
Table F-1: PRI 2 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Landfill
Table F-2: PRI 4 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Gypsum Pile
Table F-3: PRI 5 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
Table F-4: PRI 6 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
Table F-5: PRI 7 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
Table F-6: PRI 8 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
Table F-7: PRI 9 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Smut Area
Table F-8: PRI 10 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Barium Sulfate Area
Table F-9: PRI 11 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, ATI Titanium Plant and US Magnesium Parking Lots
Table F-10: PRI 12 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas
Table F-11: PRI 13 - GSLIC Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Buffer Area North and East
Table F-12: PRI 13 - Shoreline Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Buffer Area North and East
Table F-13: PRI 14 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Buffer Area South
Table F-14: PRI 15 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Buffer Area West
Table F-15: PRI 16 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
Table F-16: PRI 15 Exposure Point Concentrations for Plants, Buffer Area
Table F-17: Background Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Upland
Table F-18: Background Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids, Lakebed
Table F-19: PRI 3 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water, Sanitary Lagoon
Table F-20: PRI 4 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water, Gypsum Pile
Table F-21: PRI 5 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water, Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
Table F-22: PRI 6 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water, Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
Table F-23: PRI 8 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water, Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
Table F-24: OU-2 Exposure Point Concentrations for Air
Table F-1
PRI 2 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Landfill
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 2
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 14 14 0 0% pg/g 1610 1.1 9800 2498 4148 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.004148 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 14 14 0 0% pg/g 1627 1.6 9900 2523 4103 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.004103 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 1.474 0.0012 11 2.808 3.731 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 3.731 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 6.757 3 12 2.286 7.839 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 7.839 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 13.97 0.86 51 14.45 24.54 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 24.54 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 14 13 1 7% mg/kg 7.77 0.095 50 12.71 23.14 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL mg/kg 23.14 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL
COPC Count 6
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-2
PRI 4 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Gypsum Pile
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 4
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 17 17 0 0% pg/g 3934 53 9300 2896 5161 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 0.005161 95% Student's-t UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 17 17 0 0% pg/g 3953 54 9300 2894 5179 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 0.005179 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 17 17 0 0% mg/kg 1.13 0.000047 3.14 0.826 1.483 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 1.483 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 17 17 0 0% mg/kg 17.89 4.8 30 5.82 20.36 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 20.36 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 17 17 0 0% mg/kg 7.912 3.6 13 2.508 8.974 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 8.974 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 17 10 7 41% mg/kg 0.0553 0.012 0.24 0.0548 0.0929 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.0929 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 17 15 2 12% mg/kg 18.99 4.2 76 17.63 26.4 95% KM (t) UCL mg/kg 26.4 95% KM (t) UCL
COPC Count 7
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-3
PRI 5 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 5
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

(#
1
)
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 35 35 0 0% pg/g 1961 0.11 28000 5558 11308 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.011308 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 35 35 0 0% pg/g 2003 0.19 29000 5701 11591 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.011591 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 35 35 0 0% mg/kg 2.376 0.00019 36.3 7.584 15.13 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 15.13 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 35 35 0 0% mg/kg 8.366 2.6 30 5.919 12.73 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 12.73 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 35 35 0 0% mg/kg 9.449 2 28 6.736 11.69 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 11.69 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 32 32 0 0% mg/kg 8805 1800 35000 8185 12215 95% H-UCL mg/kg 12215 95% H-UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 32 21 11 34% mg/kg 2.728 0.011 23 5.628 3.828 95% KM (t) UCL mg/kg 3.828 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 32 21 11 34% mg/kg 0.0963 0.039 0.25 0.0857 0.103 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.103 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 35 26 9 26% mg/kg 34.11 0.0031 610 115.1 223.9 99% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/kg 223.9 99% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 23 2 21 91% mg/kg 0.901 3.8 11 2.355 3.659 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/kg 3.659 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 23 3 20 87% mg/kg 0.0179 0.042 0.2 0.0484 0.0374 95% KM (t) UCL mg/kg 0.0374 95% KM (t) UCL
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 23 8 15 65% mg/kg 0.0121 0.0087 0.075 0.022 0.0203 95% KM (t) UCL mg/kg 0.0203 95% KM (t) UCL
COPC Count 12
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-4
PRI 6 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 6
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 21 21 0 0% pg/g 1521 0.3 10000 2417 3639 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.003639 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 21 21 0 0% pg/g 1531 0.48 10000 2425 3633 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.003633 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 21 21 0 0% mg/kg 1.168 0.00041 7.47 1.837 2.68 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 2.68 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 21 21 0 0% mg/kg 8.662 4.2 30.4 6.363 14.71 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 14.71 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 21 21 0 0% mg/kg 12.68 2.3 37 6.797 15.23 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 15.23 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 21 7 14 67% mg/kg 0.0414 0.015 0.22 0.0609 0.0982 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/kg 0.0982 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 21 13 8 38% mg/kg 22.61 0.017 220 49.12 64.76
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1
and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)mg/kg 64.76
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1
and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 15 1 14 93% mg/kg 3.50 3.50 3.50 NA NA NA mg/kg 3.50
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
COPC Count 8
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-5
PRI 7 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 7
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 23 23 0 0% pg/g 1646 0.74 19000 4251 7181 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.007181 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 23 23 0 0% pg/g 1650 0.79 19000 4250 7184 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.007184 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 23 23 0 0% mg/kg 0.387 0.0011 2.383 0.601 0.716 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.716 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 23 23 0 0% mg/kg 16.5 5 32.7 7.522 19.19 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 19.19 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 23 23 0 0% mg/kg 22.8 1.6 64 17.18 28.95 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 28.95 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 20 7 13 65% mg/kg 0.0348 0.021 0.11 0.0249 0.0444 95% KM (t) UCL mg/kg 0.0444 95% KM (t) UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 23 17 6 26% mg/kg 3.165 0.0024 49 10.24 16.6 97.5% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/kg 16.6 97.5% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 20 1 19 95% mg/kg 5.6 5.6 5.6 NA NA NA mg/kg 5.6
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
COPC Count 8
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-6
PRI 8 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 8
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 27 27 0 0% pg/g 189.6 0.078 1900 410.5 975.7 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.0009757 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 27 27 0 0% pg/g 202.5 0.33 2000 431.1 720.7 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.0007207 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 27 27 0 0% mg/kg 0.148 0.000746 0.836 0.262 0.463 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.463 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 24 24 0 0% mg/kg 9.113 4 29 6.762 15.13 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 15.13 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 24 24 0 0% mg/kg 20.99 5.7 79 18.21 37.19 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 37.19 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 24 6 18 75% mg/kg 0.012 0.013 0.022 0.00749 0.014 95% KM (t) UCL mg/kg 0.014 95% KM (t) UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 27 12 15 56% mg/kg 1.413 0.029 18 3.731 4.288
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1
and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)mg/kg 4.288
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1
and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)
COPC Count 7
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-7
PRI 9 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Smut Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 9
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s

Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 16 16 0 0% pg/g 17.11 0.026 92 28.61 49.1 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.0000491 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 16 16 0 0% pg/g 17.35 0.14 92 28.5 45.7 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.0000457 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 16 16 0 0% mg/kg 0.0199 0.0001137 0.0791 0.0276 0.048 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.048 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 16 15 1 6% mg/kg 2.201 0.34 10 2.511 4.2 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 4.161 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 16 16 0 0% mg/kg 16.21 4.1 59 13.7 23.5 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 23.530 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 16 16 0 0% mg/kg 907.7 52 7300 1764 2830.0 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 2830.000 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 16 1 15 94% mg/kg 0.16 0.16 0.16 NA NA
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
mg/kg 0.160
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 16 4 12 75% mg/kg 0.0416 0.039 0.32 0.0781 0.14
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1
and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)mg/kg 0.139
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1
and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)
COPC Count 8
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-8
PRI 10 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Barium Sulfate Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 10
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 14 14 0 0% pg/g 0.43 0.02 2.4 0.623 0.9 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.0000009 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 14 14 0 0% pg/g 0.761 0.18 2.5 0.669 1.1 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 0.0000011 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 0.0008666 0.000038 0.0031 0.00105 0.002 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.0018 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 8.4 6.2 13 1.907 9.3 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 9.30 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 13.28 6.6 18 3.704 15.0 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 15.03 95% Student's-t UCL
COPC Count 5
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-9
PRI 11 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
ATI Titanium Plant and US Magnesium Parking Lots
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 11
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 14 14 0 0% pg/g 3.104 0.11 17 4.4 6.2 95% H-UCL mg/kg 0.0000062 95% H-UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 14 14 0 0% pg/g 3.519 0.24 18 4.609 6.6 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.0000066 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 0.00913 0.00021 0.073 0.0198 0.062 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.062 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 6.914 4 23 4.994 9.3 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 9.3 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 11.75 5.9 21 5.067 14.2 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 14.2 95% Student's-t UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 14 2 12 86% mg/kg 0.0135 0.058 0.067 0.0212 0.025 95% KM (t) UCL mg/kg 0.067
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
COPC Count 6
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-10
PRI 12 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 12
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 14 14 0 0% pg/g 26.96 0.81 150 42.44 59.8 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.000060 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 14 14 0 0% pg/g 27.27 0.88 150 42.47 59.9 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.000060 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 0.0244 0.00075 0.14 0.0372 0.054 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.054 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 4.743 2.7 5.9 0.923 5.2 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 5.180 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 7.514 1.1 13 3.305 9.1 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 9.078 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 14 1 13 93% mg/kg 0.11 0.11 0.11 NA NA NA mg/kg 0.110
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 14 3 11 79% mg/kg 0.0184 0.048 0.059 0.0196 0.0257 95% KM (t) UCL mg/kg 0.059
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
COPC Count 7
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-11
PRI 13 - GSLIC Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Buffer Area North and East
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 12 11 1 15% pg/g 137 0.47 880 256 747.0 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL mg/kg 0.00074700 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 12 11 1 8% pg/g 135.2 8.8 880 258.1 896.5 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL mg/kg 0.0008965 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 12 12 0 0% mg/kg 0.0734 0.000213 0.391 0.136 0.291 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.2910 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 11 11 0 0% mg/kg 8.173 3.3 11 2.237 9.4 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 9.3950 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 11 11 0 0% mg/kg 8.518 2.3 15 4.007 10.7 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 10.7100 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 2 1 0 0% mg/kg 0.026 0.026 0.026 NA NA NA mg/kg 0.0260
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 11 5 6 58% mg/kg 0.0258 0.003 0.14 0.0433 0.0506 95% KM (t) UCL mg/kg 0.0506 95% KM (t) UCL
COPC Count 7
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
GSLIC = Great Salt Lake Intake Canal
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-12
PRI 13 - Shoreline Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Buffer Area North and East
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 14 14 2 14% pg/g 3.256 0.11 17 4.549 6.781 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.00000678 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 14 14 1 7% pg/g 3.434 0.41 17 4.511 6.644 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.00000664 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 0.00235 0.00026 0.013 0.00338 0.00473 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 0.0047 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 9.821 6.5 20 4.616 12.0 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 12.0100 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 7.8 1.8 18 5.663 12.1 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 12.0700 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 14 0 0 0% mg/kg NA NA NA NA NA NA mg/kg NA
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 14 1 13 93% mg/kg 0.032 0.032 0.032 NA NA NA mg/kg 0.0320
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
COPC Count 6
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
GSLIC = Great Salt Lake Intake Canal
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-13
PRI 14 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 14
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 42 42 0 0% pg/g 59.27 0.055 910 158.8 212.3 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.0002123 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 42 42 0 0% pg/g 62.04 0.71 910 157.8 168.2 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.0001682 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 42 42 0 0% mg/kg 0.077 0.00019 0.76 0.175 0.246 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.246 97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 20 20 0 0% mg/kg 9.815 1.6 17 3.723 11.25 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 11.25 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 20 20 0 0% mg/kg 7.175 0.99 18 4.832 9.043 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 9.043 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 19 1 18 95% mg/kg 0.029 0.029 0.029 - NA
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted.
mg/kg 0.029
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted.
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 42 16 26 62% mg/kg 0.338 0.012 9.7 1.5 1.466
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1
and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)mg/kg 1.466
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1
and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1)
COPC Count 7
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-14
PRI 15 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 15
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s

Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 21 21 0 0% pg/g 0.8 0.075 5.2 1.175 1.917 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.0000019 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 21 21 0 0% pg/g 0.982 0.16 5.5 1.199 1.407 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.0000014 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 21 21 0 0% mg/kg 0.00188 0.00032 0.024 0.0051 0.00674 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/kg 0.0067400 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 21 21 0 0% mg/kg 4.567 3 6.8 1.054 4.963 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 4.9630000 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 21 21 0 0% mg/kg 11.38 5.5 17 3.086 12.54 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 12.5400000 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 21 7 14 67% mg/kg 0.0182 0.013 0.02 0.006 0.0166 95% KM (t) UCL mg/kg 0.0166000 95% KM (t) UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 21 2 19 90% mg/kg 0.00598 0.01 0.035 0.0115 0.0144 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/kg 0.0350000
Insufficient detections to compute
meaningful or reliable statistics and
estimates, maximum adopted
COPC Count 7
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-15
PRI 16 Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 16
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 14 14 0 0% pg/g 0.321 0.054 0.75 0.207 0.466 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/kg 4.66E-07 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 14 14 0 0% pg/g 0.408 0.1 0.8 0.211 0.508 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 5.08E-07 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 0.0005779 0.00013 0.0012 0.0003359 0.0007368 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 0.00073684 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 5.171 2.5 7.2 1.476 5.87 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 5.87 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 14 14 0 0% mg/kg 11.13 5 18 3.205 12.65 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 12.65 95% Student's-t UCL
COPC Count 5
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-16
PRI 15 Exposure Point Concentrations for Plants
Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 5 5 0 0% µg/kg 0.142 0.0279 0.313 0.127 0.263 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 0.000263 95% Student's-t UCL
Arsenic 7440-38-2 6 6 0 0% µg/kg 181.7 80 280 84 250.8 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 0.2508 95% Student's-t UCL
Chromium 7440-47-3 6 6 0 0% µg/kg 4793 550 13100 4742 8694 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 8.694 95% Student's-t UCL
Mercury 7439-97-6 6 6 0 0% µg/kg 4.348 1.01 7.06 2.595 6.483 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 0.006483 95% Student's-t UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 5 5 0 0% µg/kg 0.62 0.37 1 0.24 0.849 95% Student's-t UCL mg/kg 0.000849 95% Student's-t UCL
Notes:
µg/kg = Micrograms per kilogram
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-17
Background Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Upland
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
BG_Up
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

(#
1
)
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

(
m
g
/
k
g
)
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 18 18 0 0% 0.18 0.049 0.54 0.121 0.23 95% Student's-t UCL 2.32E-07 95% Student's-t UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 18 18 0 0% 0.28 0.14 0.71 0.128 0.34 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 3.35E-07 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 18 0 18 100%------1.15E-03Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, median adopted
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 18 18 0 0% 0.00028 0.00016 0.00066 0.000123 0.00034 95% Student's-t UCL 3.35E-04 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 30 30 0 0% 10800 7600 15000 2120 11411 95% Student's-t UCL 1.14E+04 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 30 30 0 0% 0.24 0.1 0.37 0.0819 0.26 95% Student's-t UCL 2.61E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 30 30 0 0% 5.95 4.1 10 1.55 6.43 or 95% Modified-t UCL 6.43E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 30 30 0 0% 213 120 280 44.3 227 95% Student's-t UCL 2.27E+02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 30 30 0 0% 0.50 0.35 0.75 0.104 0.53 95% Student's-t UCL 5.30E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 30 30 0 0% 0.43 0.29 0.65 0.0798 0.45 95% Student's-t UCL 4.54E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 30 30 0 0% 11.1 7.7 15 1.84 11.7 95% Student's-t UCL 1.17E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 30 30 0 0% 3.82 2.6 5.8 0.785 4.07 95% Student's-t UCL 4.07E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Copper 7440-50-8 30 30 0 0% 14.6 9.4 23 3.68 15.8 95% Student's-t UCL 1.58E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 30 30 0 0% 12100 8400 19000 3020 13046 95% Student's-t UCL 1.30E+04 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Lead 7439-92-1 30 30 0 0% 21.9 11 89 14 26.62 95% Modified-t UCL 26.62 95% Modified-t UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 30 30 0 0% 428 270 630 84.1 453.8 95% Student's-t UCL 4.54E+02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 30 30 0 0% 0.034 0.019 0.071 0.0103 0.037 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 3.69E-02 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 29 29 0 0% 0.765 0.42 1.3 0.183 0.82 95% Student's-t UCL 8.23E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 30 30 0 0% 8.86 5.9 12 1.62 9.36 95% Student's-t UCL 9.36E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 30 30 0 0% 0.256 0.18 0.32 0.0375 0.27 95% Student's-t UCL 2.68E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Silver 7440-22-4 30 30 0 0% 0.070 0.039 0.12 0.0192 0.08 95% Student's-t UCL 7.64E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 30 30 0 0% 0.165 0.11 0.27 0.035 0.18 95% Student's-t UCL 1.76E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 30 30 0 0% 17.7 12 24 2.95 18.7 95% Student's-t UCL 1.87E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 30 30 0 0% 40.8 26 73 11.2 44.3 95% Student's-t UCL 4.43E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/24/2022
Table F-18
Background Exposure Point Concentrations for Solids
Lakebed
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
BG_Lake
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

(#
1
)
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

(
m
g
/
k
g
)
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 17 17 0 0% 0.645 0.012 2.8 0.781 1.198 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 1.198E-06 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 17 17 0 0% 0.751 0.12 2.9 0.768 1.076 95% Student's-t UCL 1.076E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 17 17 0 0% 0.000626 0.00011 0.0024 0.000653 0.00101 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.00101 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 17 2 15 88% 0.00189 0.00115 0.0087 0.00181 0.00498 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 0.00498 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 29 29 0 0% 7750 860 17000 6330 12873 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 12873 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 29 29 0 0% 0.382 0.085 0.85 0.22 0.451 95% Student's-t UCL 0.451 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 29 29 0 0% 10.3 4.9 23 4.07 11.57 95% Student's-t UCL 11.57 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 29 29 0 0% 239 130 480 89.7 266.9 95% Student's-t UCL 266.9 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 29 29 0 0% 0.375 0.04 0.87 0.303 0.62 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 0.62 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 29 21 8 28% 0.157 0.0165 0.35 0.117 0.196 95% KM (t) UCL 0.196 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Chromium 7440-47-3 29 29 0 0% 9.52 1.2 20 7.44 15.54 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 15.54 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 29 29 0 0% 3.13 0.54 6.4 2.24 4.945 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 4.945 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Copper 7440-50-8 29 29 0 0% 10.2 2.4 22 6.37 12.2 95% Student's-t UCL 12.2 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 29 29 0 0% 7520 740 17000 6290 12611 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 12611 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Lead 7439-92-1 29 29 0 0% 11 5.9 18 3.3 12.02 95% Student's-t UCL 12.02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 29 29 0 0% 179 22 360 128 283.1 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 283.1 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 29 28 1 3% 0.0368 0.0046 0.16 0.0329 0.0481 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.0481 95% GROS Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 27 27 0 0% 1.9 0.051 13 2.7 3.155 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 3.155 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 29 29 0 0% 8.1 1.1 17 6.09 13.03 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 13.03 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Selenium 7782-49-2 29 25 4 14% 0.384 0.049 1.1 0.289 0.48 95% KM (t) UCL 0.48 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Silver 7440-22-4 29 19 10 34% 0.0425 0.0095 0.094 0.0275 0.0531 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0531 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 29 21 8 28% 0.129 0.034 0.24 0.073 0.15 95% KM (t) UCL 0.15 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 29 29 0 0% 18.9 4.5 41 13.7 27.89 95% H-UCL 27.89 95% H-UCL
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 29 29 0 0% 28.5 6.5 81 19 36.4 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 36.4 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Notes:
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - 3/24/2022
Table F-19
PRI 3 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water
Sanitary Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 3
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 2 2 0 0% mg/L 7E-08 0.00000003 1.1E-07 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 1.1E-07
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 2 2 0 0% mg/L 7.15E-08 3.3E-08 1.1E-07 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 1.1E-07
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 2 1 1 50% µg/L 6.3 6.3 6.3 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.0063
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 2 2 0 0% µg/L 0.0079 0.0079 0.0079 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.0000079
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Bromoform 75-25-2 2 1 1 50% µg/L 3 3 3 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.003
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Chloroform 67-66-3 2 1 1 50% µg/L 0.74 0.74 0.74 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.00074
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 2 1 1 50% µg/L 1 1 1 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.001
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 2 1 1 50% µg/L 6.7 6.7 6.7 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.0067
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Fluoride 16984-48-8 2 1 1 50% µg/L 1200 1200 1200 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 1.2
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
m,p Xylenes 179601-23-1 2 1 1 50% µg/L 1.1 1.1 1.1 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.0011
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 2 1 1 50% µg/L 870 870 870 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.87
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
o-Xylene 95-47-6 2 1 1 50% µg/L 1 1 1 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.001
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 2 1 1 50% µg/L 0.57 0.57 0.57 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.00057
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 2 2 0 0%µg/L 695 650 740 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.74
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 2 2 0 0% µg/L 6.65 3.8 9.5 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.0095
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Barium 7440-39-3 2 2 0 0% µg/L 178 46 310 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.31
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-19
PRI 3 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water
Sanitary Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 3
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 2 1 1 50% µg/L 2.4 2.4 2.4 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.0024
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Copper 7440-50-8 2 2 0 0% µg/L 14.75 3.5 26 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.026
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Iron 7439-89-6 2 2 0 0% µg/L 4500 2400 6600 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 6.6
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Lead 7439-92-1 2 1 1 50% µg/L 7.6 7.6 7.6 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.0076
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 2 2 0 0% µg/L 324 38 610 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.61
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 2 1 1 50% µg/L 0.13 0.13 0.13 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.00013
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2 2 0 0% µg/L 10.75 3.5 18 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.018
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 2 2 0 0% µg/L 12.5 10 15 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.015
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 2 2 0 0% mg/L 0.0000665 0.000043 0.00009 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.00009
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 2 1 0 0% µg/L 6.1 6.1 6.1 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.0061
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 2 2 0 0% µg/L 36 16 56 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.056
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 2 1 1 50% µg/L 3.3 3.3 3.3 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.0033
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
mg/L = Milligrams per liter
NA = Not available
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-20
PRI 4 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water
Gypsum Pile
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 4
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L

(#
1
)
UC
L

B
a
s
i
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 2 2 0 0% mg/L 0.00000062 0.00000035 0.00000089 ---mg/L 0.00000089
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 2 2 0 0% mg/L 0.000000635 0.00000036 0.00000091 ---mg/L 0.00000091
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 2 2 0 0% µg/L 118.5 27 210 ---mg/L 0.21
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Bromoform 75-25-2 2 2 0 0% µg/L 545 100 990 ---mg/L 0.99
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Chloromethane 74-87-3 2 1 1 50% µg/L 2.4 2.4 2.4 ---mg/L 0.0024
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 2 1 1 50% µg/L 3.63 3.63 3.63 ---mg/L 0.00363
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 2 2 0 0% µg/L 192.5 45 340 ---mg/L 0.34
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 2 2 0 0% µg/L 1300 1200 1400 ---mg/L 1.4
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Fluoride 16984-48-8 2 2 0 0% µg/L 9350 3700 15000 ---mg/L 15
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 2 1 1 50% µg/L 400 400 400 ---mg/L 0.4
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 2 2 0 0% µg/L 3900 3800 4000 ---mg/L 4
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 2 2 0 0% µg/L 0.8 0.78 0.82 ---mg/L 0.00082
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 2 2 0 0% µg/L 6450 3500 9400 ---mg/L 9.4
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 2 2 0 0% µg/L 360 330 390 ---mg/L 0.39
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Barium 7440-39-3 2 2 0 0% µg/L 2850 2800 2900 ---mg/L 2.9
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 2 2 0 0% µg/L 1.5 1.2 1.8 ---mg/L 0.0018
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 2 2 0 0% µg/L 4.7 4.7 4.7 ---mg/L 0.0047
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 2 2 0 0% µg/L 11.05 8.1 14 ---mg/L 0.014
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Copper 7440-50-8 2 2 0 0% µg/L 26.5 25 28 ---mg/L 0.028
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Iron 7439-89-6 2 2 0 0% µg/L 260000 220000 300000 ---mg/L 300
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 2 2 0 0% µg/L 4500 3700 5300 ---mg/L 5.3
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 2 2 0 0% µg/L 300 230 370 ---mg/L 0.37
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 2 2 0 0% mg/L 0.00041 0.00016 0.00066 ---mg/L 0.00066
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 2 2 0 0% µg/L 6.95 6.6 7.3 ---mg/L 0.0073
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 2 2 0 0% µg/L 385 200 570 ---mg/L 0.57
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 2 2 0 0% µg/L 595 450 740 ---mg/L 0.74
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 2 2 0 0% µg/L 715 710 720 ---mg/L 0.72
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or
reliable statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
COPC Count 27
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
COPC = Constituent of potential concern PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
KM = Kaplan-Meier TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
mg/L = Milligrams per liter UCL = Upper confidence level
ND = Non-detect congener
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-21
PRI 5 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water
Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 5
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 9 9 0 0% mg/L 1.5465E-06 8.2E-09 0.0000039 1.1515E-06 2.26E-06 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 2.3E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 9 9 0 0% mg/L 1.7078E-06 1E-08 0.0000047 1.3582E-06 2.55E-06 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 2.5E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 9 1 8 89% µg/L 140 140 140 - - - mg/L 1.4E-01
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 5 1 4 80% µg/L 0.78 0.78 0.78 - - - mg/L 7.8E-04
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 9 9 0 0% µg/L 7.489 2.6 18 4.904 10.53 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 1.1E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Bromoform 75-25-2 9 9 0 0% µg/L 52.42 9.8 110 39.38 76.83 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 7.7E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Bromomethane 74-83-9 9 1 8 89% µg/L 2.2 2.2 2.2 - - - mg/L 2.2E-03
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 9 5 4 44% µg/L 3.478 3.1 9.6 3.501 5.742 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 5.7E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Chloroform 67-66-3 9 7 2 22% µg/L 2.704 1 7.8 2.31 5.7 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/L 5.7E-03 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 8 5 3 38% µg/L 2.503 0.91 7.74 2.867 4.56 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 4.6E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 9 9 0 0% µg/L 14.92 6.1 28 8.379 20.12 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 2.0E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 9 8 1 11% µg/L 691.7 400 1000 332.8 899.3 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 9.0E-01 95% KM (t) UCL
Fluoride 16984-48-8 9 9 0 0% µg/L 6256 3800 12000 2397 8284 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/L 8.3E+00 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 9 6 3 33% µg/L 9.174 0.32 31 10.59 15.88 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 1.6E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 9 8 1 11% µg/L 3091 1700 6700 1809 4219 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 4.2E+00 95% KM (t) UCL
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 5 5 0 0% µg/L 1.764 0.72 2.4 0.622 2.357 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 2.4E-03 95% Student's-t UCL
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 5 1 4 80% µg/L 1.7 1.7 1.7 - - - mg/L 1.7E-03
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 9 8 1 11% µg/L 65236 26000 130000 42713 91920 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 9.2E+01 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 9 9 0 0% µg/L 14.88 2 37 9.811 20.96 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 2.1E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 9 9 0 0% µg/L 300.9 28 460 127.4 379.8 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 3.8E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 9 9 0 0% µg/L 686.7 300 1000 215.2 820.1 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 8.2E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 9 8 1 11% µg/L 3.056 1.6 5.2 1.456 3.956 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 4.0E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 9 4 5 56% µg/L 1.728 1.3 2 0.517 1.974 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 2.0E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 9 9 0 0% µg/L 26.89 17 40 7.672 31.64 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 3.2E-02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Copper 7440-50-8 9 9 0 0% µg/L 118.9 11 180 53.05 151.8 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 1.5E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 9 8 1 11% µg/L 19.58 5.9 91 27.19 59.4 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/L 5.9E-02 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 9 9 0 0% µg/L 703967 5700 1000000 337011 912863 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 9.1E+02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Lead 7439-92-1 9 8 1 11% µg/L 48.22 32 83 23.28 62.65 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 6.3E-02 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 9 9 0 0% µg/L 4089 1500 15000 4176 7193 95% H-UCL mg/L 7.2E+00 95% H-UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 9 7 2 22% µg/L 0.726 0.38 1.6 0.483 1.03 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 1.0E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 9 9 0 0% µg/L 175.3 19 300 85.65 228.4 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 2.3E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 9 9 0 0% µg/L 187.1 74 260 59.88 224.2 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 2.2E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 9 9 0 0% mg/L 0.00589 0.0000025 0.0288 0.00954 0.0308 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/L 3.1E-02 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 9 4 5 56% µg/L 1.928 1.8 2.7 0.579 2.318 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 2.3E-03 95% KM (t) UCL
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-21
PRI 5 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water
Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 5
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 9 8 1 11% µg/L 931.7 510 1400 447.8 1211 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 1.2E+00 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 9 9 0 0% µg/L 395.2 77 5.8E+02 144 4.8E+02 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 4.8E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 9 8 1 11% µg/L 575.8 350 980 306.4 767.1 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 7.7E-01 95% KM (t) UCL
COPC Count 37
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/L = Milligrams per liter
ND = Non-detect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-22
PRI 6 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water
Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 8 8 0 0% mg/L 3.146E-06 1.5E-07 0.0000089 3.453E-06 5.459E-06 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 5.5E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 8 8 0 0% mg/L 3.313E-06 0.0000002 0.0000099 3.703E-06 5.7931E-06 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 5.8E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 8 8 0 0% µg/L 4.425 1.5 7.2 1.724 5.58 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.00558 95% Student's-t UCL
Bromoform 75-25-2 8 8 0 0% µg/L 23.86 9.9 48 14.15 33.34 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.03334 95% Student's-t UCL
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 8 3 5 63% µg/L 0.498 0.2 1.2 0.312 0.941 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.000941 95% KM (t) UCL
Chloroform 67-66-3 8 6 2 25% µg/L 1.549 0.7 2.7 0.663 2.09 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.00209 95% KM (t) UCL
Chromium, Hexavalent 18540-29-9 8 4 4 50% µg/L 2.865 1.2 6.62 2.878 7.576 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/L 0.00662
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 8 8 0 0% µg/L 9.475 2.9 15 3.611 11.89 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.01189 95% Student's-t UCL
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 8 8 0 0% µg/L 780.6 4.5 1100 453.8 964.8 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL mg/L 0.9648 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL
Fluoride 16984-48-8 8 8 0 0% µg/L 5650 3700.0 7400 1257 6492 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 6.492 95% Student's-t UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 8 6 2 25% µg/L 39.33 19.0 130 46.53 5469 KM H-UCL mg/L 0.13
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 6 6 0 0% µg/L 3317 2900.0 3400 204.1 3485 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 3.4
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 8 1 7 88% µg/L 29 29.0 29 - mg/L 0.029
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 5 5 0 0% µg/L 2.06 2.0 2.2 0.0894 2.145 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.002145 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 8 8 0 0% µg/L 102875 32000.0 210000 49415 162290 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/L 162.29 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Antimony 7440-36-0 8 8 0 0% µg/L 13.95 9.6 28 6.605 18.37 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.01837 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 8 8 0 0% µg/L 430 230.0 650 116.4 508 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.508 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 8 8 0 0% µg/L 1070 480.0 2800 731.9 1825 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/L 1.825 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 8 5 3 38% µg/L 4.194 2.2 8.2 1.927 5.969 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.005969 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 8 5 3 38% µg/L 1.788 1.7 2.1 0.415 1.988 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.001988 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 8 8 0 0% µg/L 41.88 28.0 58 9.775 48.42 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.04842 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Copper 7440-50-8 8 8 0 0% µg/L 169.9 89.0 230 42.7 198.5 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.1985 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Cyanide - Unfiltered 74-90-8 6 3 3 50% µg/L 7.983 8.4 21 7.334 14.99 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.01499 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 8 8 0 0% µg/L 1036250 450000.0 1400000 299902 1237135 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 1237.135 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Lead 7439-92-1 8 8 0 0% µg/L 79.25 48.0 120 23.96 95.3 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.0953 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 8 8 0 0% µg/L 4300 2600.0 5300 1034 4992 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 4.992 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 7439-97-6 8 7 1 13% µg/L 1.103 0.7 3.5 0.996 2.642 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/L 0.00264 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 8 8 0 0% µg/L 229.6 87.0 360 74.11 279.3 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.2793 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 8 8 0 0% µg/L 253.8 160.0 360 57.06 292 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.292 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 8 8 0 0% mg/L 0.00369 0.0 0.0148 0.0046 0.00976 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/L 0.00976 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL
Total Thallium 7440-28-0 8 6 2 25% µg/L 2.419 2.2 2.8 0.511 2.73 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.00273 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 8 8 0 0% µg/L 1356 580.0 2000 419.5 1637 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 1.637 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 8 8 0 0% µg/L 530 380.0 810 122.4 612 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.612 95% Student's-t UCL
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 8 8 0 0% µg/L 653.1 4.5 950 340.4 881 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.881 95% Student's-t UCL
COPC Count 34
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
COPC = Constituent of potential concern PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
KM = Kaplan-Meier TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
mg/L = Milligrams per liter UCL = Upper confidence level
ND = Nondetect congener
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-23
PRI 8 Exposure Point Concentrations for Surface Water
Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Chemical Name CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

N
o
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Me
a
n

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

D
e
t
e
c
t
SD

D
e
t
e
c
t
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

U
C
L
UCL Basis Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

U
n
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Adopted EPC Basis
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 7 7 0 0% mg/L 2.779E-08 2E-10 0.00000011 3.839E-08 1.941E-07 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/L 0.00000011
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
Mammalian CALC_DX_2 7 7 0 0% mg/L 3.469E-08 2.8E-09 0.00000011 3.551E-08 6.077E-08 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 6.0767E-08 95% Student's-t UCL
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 7 4 3 43% µg/L 9.449 11 25 9.618 16.98 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.01698 95% KM (t) UCL
Bromoform 75-25-2 7 5 2 29% µg/L 21.14 2.9 56 21.48 37.47 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.03747 95% KM (t) UCL
Chloroform 67-66-3 7 2 5 71% µg/L 4.866 0.61 6.8 2.689 17.55 975% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/L 0.0068 975% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 7 4 3 43% µg/L 15.45 20 41 15.69 27.75 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.02775 95% KM (t) UCL
Dichloroacetic Acid 79-43-6 7 5 2 29% µg/L 611.4 120 1200 553.8 1032 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 1.032 95% KM (t) UCL
Fluoride 16984-48-8 7 7 0 0% µg/L 19543 1600 90000 32327 43285 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 43.285 95% Student's-t UCL
Nitrate as N 14797-55-8 5 4 1 20% µg/L 904 910 1400 480.7 1355 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 1.355 95% KM (t) UCL
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 7 1 6 86% µg/L 27 27 27 --Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.mg/L 0.027
Insufficient detections to compute meaningful or reliable
statistics and estimates, maximum adopted.
Perchlorate 14797-73-0 5 5 0 0% µg/L 0.558 0.11 0.71 0.26 0.806 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.00071 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Aluminum 7429-90-5 7 5 2 29% µg/L 13254 4400 25000 11282 21832 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 21.832 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Arsenic 7440-38-2 7 7 0 0% µg/L 74.43 47 97 22.15 90.7 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.0907 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Barium 7440-39-3 7 2 5 71% µg/L 335.7 440 1100 353.3 1082 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/L 1.082 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Total Beryllium 7440-41-7 7 5 2 29% µg/L 1.326 0.38 2.1 0.771 2.017 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.002017 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cadmium 7440-43-9 7 4 3 43% µg/L 1.743 2.1 2.6 0.759 2.554 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.002554 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Cobalt 7440-48-4 7 7 0 0% µg/L 57.29 31 140 41.45 125.6 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/L 0.1256 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Total Copper 7440-50-8 7 5 2 29% µg/L 31.14 15 56 22.47 48.3 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.0483 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Iron 7439-89-6 7 6 1 14% µg/L 145786 88000 220000 76295 201737 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 201.737 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Manganese 7439-96-5 7 7 0 0% µg/L 8500 4500 19000 5283 12380 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 12.38 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Molybdenum 7439-98-7 7 2 5 71% µg/L 17.24 8.2 48 15.55 47.14 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL mg/L 0.04714 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL
Total Nickel 7440-02-0 7 7 0 0% µg/L 177.1 110 350 83.41 238.4 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.2384 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 1336-36-3 7 7 0 0% mg/L 7.327E-05 0.0000032 0.00028 0.0001002 0.0001468 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.00014682 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Vanadium 7440-62-2 7 4 3 43% µg/L 161.1 140 320 149.4 277.7 95% KM (t) UCL mg/L 0.2777 95% KM (t) UCL
Total Zinc 7440-66-6 7 7 0 0% µg/L 155 43 250 88.05 219.7 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 0.2197 95% Student's-t UCL
Trichloroacetic acid 76-03-9 7 7 0 0% µg/L 704.7 11 1400 631.9 1169 95% Student's-t UCL mg/L 1.169 95% Student's-t UCL
COPC Count 26
Notes:
µg/L = Micrograms per liter
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
mg/L = Milligrams per liter
ND = Nondetect congener
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table F-24
OU-2 Exposure Point Concentrations for Air
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
COPC CAS To
t
a
l

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

Ob
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

De
t
e
c
t
s
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

No
n
d
e
t
e
c
t
s
Fr
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

o
f

De
t
e
c
t
s
Un
i
t
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m
Ma
x
i
m
u
m
SD Me
a
n
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d

UC
L

Suggested UCL to Use Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C

Un
i
t
s
Ad
o
p
t
e
d

E
P
C
Calculated TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian CALC_DX_0 32 32 0 100%pg/m3 2.45E-03 1.55E+00 3.53E-01 1.44E-01 4.16E-01 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/m3 4.16E-10
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian CALC_DX_2 32 32 0 100%pg/m3 1.29E-02 1.64E+00 3.63E-01 1.74E-01 4.54E-01 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL mg/m3 4.54E-10
Total PCB 1336-36-3 32 32 0 100%pg/m3 6.81E+01 4.95E+02 8.19E+01 1.88E+02 2.12E+02 95% Student's-t UCL mg/m3 2.12E-07
Arsenic 7440-38-2 33 31 2 94%µg/m3 2.98E-04 1.28E-02 2.84E-03 3.26E-03 4.36E-03 95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL mg/m3 4.36E-06
Mercury 7439-97-6 33 31 2 94%µg/m3 0.00000599 0.0000462 0.000012171 0.000018769 2.25E-05 95% KM (t) UCL mg/m3 2.25E-08
Manganese 7439-96-5 33 22 0 67%µg/m3 7.39E-03 2.81E-02 8.10E-03 1.13E-02 1.36E-02 95% KM (t) UCL mg/m3 1.36E-05
Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 34 23 11 68%µg/m3 5.49E-04 3.84E-03 8.81E-04 1.26E-03 1.56E-03 95% KM (t) UCL mg/m3 1.56E-06
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 34 33 1 97%µg/m3 1.77E-03 2.43E-02 5.59E-03 1.14E-02 1.30E-02 95% KM (t) UCL mg/m3 1.30E-05
COPC Count 8
Notes:
µg/m 3 = Micrograms per cubic meter
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
EPC = Exposure Point Concentration
KM = Kaplan-Meier
ND = Nondetect congener
OU = Operable unit
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
pg/m 3 = Picograms per cubic meter
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
UCL = Upper confidence level
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
PROUCL OUTPUTS – SOLIDS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 2 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/2/2020 11:40:14 AM
Number of Detects 13 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 12 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 13
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
Median Detects 5.7 CV Detects 1.557
Skewness Detects 3.119 Kurtosis Detects 10.53
Variance Detects 169.7 Percent Non-Detects 7.143%
Mean Detects 8.367 SD Detects 13.03
Minimum Detect 0.095 Minimum Non-Detect 0.018
Maximum Detect 50 Maximum Non-Detect 0.018
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.373 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.573 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 1.11 SD of Logged Detects 1.8
95% KM (z) UCL 13.38 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 23.14
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 18 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 22.63
KM SD 12.25 95% KM (BCA) UCL 14.59
95% KM (t) UCL 13.81 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 13.89
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 7.771 KM Standard Error of Mean 3.408
K-S Test Statistic 0.207 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.248 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.507 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.781 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 29.05 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 41.68
Mean (detects) 8.367
Theta hat (MLE) 13.76 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 16.12
nu hat (MLE) 15.81 nu star (bias corrected) 13.49
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.608 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.519
Maximum 50 Median 5.15
SD 12.71 CV 1.636
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 7.77
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
nu hat (MLE) 13.29 nu star (bias corrected) 11.78
k hat (MLE) 0.475 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.421
Theta hat (MLE) 16.36 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 18.47
Page 1 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 2 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/2/2020 11:40:14 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.78, α) 5.082 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.78, β) 4.512
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 18.01 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 20.29
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
nu hat (KM) 11.26 nu star (KM) 10.18
theta hat (KM) 19.32 theta star (KM) 21.37
Variance (KM) 150.1 SE of Mean (KM) 3.408
k hat (KM) 0.402 k star (KM) 0.364
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 7.771 SD (KM) 12.25
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 19.51 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 22.24
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (10.18, α) 4.057 Adjusted Chi Square Value (10.18, β) 3.558
80% gamma percentile (KM) 12.38 90% gamma percentile (KM) 22.31
95% gamma percentile (KM) 33.36 99% gamma percentile (KM) 61.44
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 7.773 Mean in Log Scale 0.813
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.217 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.888 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.744 KM Geo Mean 2.104
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 16.97 95% Bootstrap t UCL 23.75
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 284.3
SD in Original Scale 12.71 SD in Log Scale 2.054
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 13.79 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 14.2
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 7.77 Mean in Log Scale 0.694
KM SD (logged) 2.126 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.93
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.591
KM SD (logged) 2.126 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.93
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.591 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 368.8
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 23.14 a Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1) 22.24
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 12.71 SD in Log Scale 2.326
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 13.79 95% H-Stat UCL 936.6
Page 2 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 2 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/2/2020 11:40:14 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Minimum 0.0012 Mean 1.474
Maximum 11 Median 0.675
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.368 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.491 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 2.808 Std. Error of Mean 0.75
Coefficient of Variation 1.905 Skewness 3.45
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.525 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.793 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2.918
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 2.803 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 3.447
Theta hat (MLE) 2.926 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.324
nu hat (MLE) 14.1 nu star (bias corrected) 12.41
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.504 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.443
K-S Test Statistic 0.185 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.242 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.854 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 3.326 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 3.731
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 4.903
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.474 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.214
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 5.501
Maximum of Logged Data 2.398 SD of logged Data 2.184
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -6.725 Mean of logged Data -0.872
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.248 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Page 3 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 2 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/2/2020 11:40:14 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.51 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.2
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 22.45
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 96.69 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8.857
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.725 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4.745
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.16 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8.94
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 7.238 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.87
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 3.657
95% CLT UCL 2.708 95% Jackknife UCL 2.803
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 2.64 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 6.468
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 10
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 3.731
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
The data set for variable concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 10
Coefficient of Variation 0.338 Skewness 0.666
Maximum 12 Median 6.7
SD 2.286 Std. Error of Mean 0.611
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3 Mean 6.757
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.197 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.947 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 4 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 2 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/2/2020 11:40:14 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
5% A-D Critical Value 0.735 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.161 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.323 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 7.839 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 7.879
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 7.857
Theta hat (MLE) 0.735 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.929
nu hat (MLE) 257.4 nu star (bias corrected) 203.6
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 9.193 k star (bias corrected MLE) 7.271
5% K-S Critical Value 0.229 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 8.018 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 8.204
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 167.7
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 6.757 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.506
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 171.6
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.099 Mean of logged Data 1.855
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.157 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.952 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.613 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.84
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.25
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 8.238 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8.728
Maximum of Logged Data 2.485 SD of logged Data 0.354
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 8.337 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 7.721
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 7.814
95% CLT UCL 7.762 95% Jackknife UCL 7.839
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 7.728 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 7.995
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 7.839
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8.59 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9.421
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.57 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.84
Page 5 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 2 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/2/2020 11:40:14 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Minimum 0.86 Mean 13.97
Maximum 51 Median 7.2
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 13
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.311 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.75 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 14.45 Std. Error of Mean 3.861
Coefficient of Variation 1.034 Skewness 1.716
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.732 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.755 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 21.1
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 20.81 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 22.21
Theta hat (MLE) 11.2 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 13.59
nu hat (MLE) 34.93 nu star (bias corrected) 28.78
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.248 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.028
K-S Test Statistic 0.258 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.234 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.927 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 22.92 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 24.54
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 16.38
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 13.97 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 13.78
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 17.54
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.198 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Page 6 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 2 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/2/2020 11:40:14 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
Maximum of Logged Data 3.932 SD of logged Data 1.03
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.151 Mean of logged Data 2.185
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 33.05 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 41.15
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 57.06
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 34.01 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 27.22
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 25.55 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 30.8
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 38.08 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 52.38
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 21.91 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 20.39
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 21.76
95% CLT UCL 20.32 95% Jackknife UCL 20.81
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 20.24 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 24.91
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 24.54
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 10
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 12
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 10
Page 7 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 2 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/2/2020 11:40:14 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Coefficient of Variation 1.551 Skewness 3.061
Maximum 9800 Median 940
SD 2498 Std. Error of Mean 667.5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 1.1 Mean 1610
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.304 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.6 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.796 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.15 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.338 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 2792 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 3292
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2883
Theta hat (MLE) 3306 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3742
nu hat (MLE) 13.64 nu star (bias corrected) 12.05
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.487 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.43
5% K-S Critical Value 0.242 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 3689 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 4148
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 4.677
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1610 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2455
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 5.259
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.0953 Mean of logged Data 6.075
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.212 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.865 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Page 8 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 2 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/2/2020 11:40:14 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17801 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 23611
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 35025
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 280684 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13614
Maximum of Logged Data 9.19 SD of logged Data 2.388
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 6966 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2800
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 3295
95% CLT UCL 2708 95% Jackknife UCL 2792
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 2662 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 4585
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 4148
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3613 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4520
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5779 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8252
Minimum 1.6 Mean 1627
Maximum 9900 Median 945
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.308 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.6 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 2523 Std. Error of Mean 674.3
Coefficient of Variation 1.551 Skewness 3.061
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.316 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.793 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2913
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 2821 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 3326
K-S Test Statistic 0.154 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.242 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 9 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 2 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/2/2020 11:40:14 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
Theta hat (MLE) 3205 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3644
nu hat (MLE) 14.22 nu star (bias corrected) 12.5
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.508 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.447
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 3659 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 4103
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 4.959
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1627 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2435
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 5.561
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.47 Mean of logged Data 6.147
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.206 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.879 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15003 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19847
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 29362
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 159666 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11513
Maximum of Logged Data 9.2 SD of logged Data 2.264
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 7002 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2838
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 3368
95% CLT UCL 2736 95% Jackknife UCL 2821
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 2723 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 4490
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 4103
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3650 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4566
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5838 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8336
Page 10 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
nu hat (MLE) 26.5 nu star (bias corrected) 23.16
k hat (MLE) 0.779 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.681
Theta hat (MLE) 23.92 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 27.37
Maximum 76 Median 14
SD 17.95 CV 0.963
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 18.64
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 21.08
Theta hat (MLE) 10.38 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 12.63
nu hat (MLE) 60.94 nu star (bias corrected) 50.09
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 2.031 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.67
K-S Test Statistic 0.181 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.224 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.452 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.747 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 45.87 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 61.9
95% KM (z) UCL 25.96 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 31.78
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 31.82 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 37.71
KM SD 17.23 95% KM (BCA) UCL 26.08
95% KM (t) UCL 26.4 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 26.42
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 18.84 KM Standard Error of Mean 4.328
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.215 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.22 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.755 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 2.782 SD of Logged Detects 0.76
Median Detects 15 CV Detects 0.841
Skewness Detects 2.324 Kurtosis Detects 6.701
Variance Detects 314 Percent Non-Detects 11.76%
Mean Detects 21.08 SD Detects 17.72
Minimum Detect 4.2 Minimum Non-Detect 0.25
Maximum Detect 76 Maximum Non-Detect 13
Number of Detects 15 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 12 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 17 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
Page 1 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 26.4
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 17.63 SD in Log Scale 1.383
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 26.45 95% H-Stat UCL 93.15
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 18.99 Mean in Log Scale 2.443
KM SD (logged) 1.299 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.142
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.338
KM SD (logged) 1.299 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.142
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.338 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 72.81
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 2.424 KM Geo Mean 11.3
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 29.4 95% Bootstrap t UCL 31.23
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 34.25
SD in Original Scale 17.54 SD in Log Scale 0.877
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 26.48 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 26.6
Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 19.05 Mean in Log Scale 2.606
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.225 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.22 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.948 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 29.39 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 30.84
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (34.83, α) 22.33 Adjusted Chi Square Value (34.83, β) 21.28
80% gamma percentile (KM) 30.26 90% gamma percentile (KM) 43.13
95% gamma percentile (KM) 55.97 99% gamma percentile (KM) 85.73
nu hat (KM) 40.67 nu star (KM) 34.83
theta hat (KM) 15.75 theta star (KM) 18.4
Variance (KM) 296.8 SE of Mean (KM) 4.328
k hat (KM) 1.196 k star (KM) 1.024
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 18.84 SD (KM) 17.23
Approximate Chi Square Value (23.16, α) 13.21 Adjusted Chi Square Value (23.16, β) 12.43
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 32.68 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 34.74
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0346
Page 2 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.135 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.889 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 2.151 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 2.239
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0346 Adjusted Chi Square Value 31.47
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.48 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1.251
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 32.76
Theta hat (MLE) 0.896 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.058
nu hat (MLE) 56.17 nu star (bias corrected) 47.59
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.652 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.4
5% K-S Critical Value 0.213 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.754 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.158 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.368 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 1.933 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 1.965
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1.942
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.219 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.905 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.722 Skewness 0.873
Maximum 4.086 Median 1.105
SD 1.068 Std. Error of Mean 0.259
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.0646 Mean 1.48
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 17 Number of Distinct Observations 17
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Page 3 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224 Variance Detects 0.00359 Percent Non-Detects 41.18%
Minimum Detect 0.012 Minimum Non-Detect 0.01
Maximum Detect 0.24 Maximum Non-Detect 0.056
Number of Detects 10 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 10 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 7
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 17 Number of Distinct Observations 15
The data set for variable concDL (608-93-5__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 7
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (608-93-5__mg/kg)
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 1.933
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.258 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.61
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.098 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4.058
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 2.015 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.892
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.992
95% CLT UCL 1.907 95% Jackknife UCL 1.933
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1.883 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 2.041
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3.571 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4.398
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.022
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 3.323 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.976
Maximum of Logged Data 1.407 SD of logged Data 0.987
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -2.74 Mean of logged Data 0.0601
Page 4 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278 nu hat (KM) 30.1 nu star (KM) 26.12
Variance (KM) 0.00306 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0142
k hat (KM) 0.885 k star (KM) 0.768
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.052 SD (KM) 0.0553
Approximate Chi Square Value (31.21, α) 19.45 Adjusted Chi Square Value (31.21, β) 18.48
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0824 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0867
nu hat (MLE) 36.28 nu star (bias corrected) 31.21
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0346
k hat (MLE) 1.067 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.918
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0481 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0559
Maximum 0.24 Median 0.053
SD 0.0574 CV 1.117
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0514
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.0803
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0323 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0445
nu hat (MLE) 49.69 nu star (bias corrected) 36.12
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 2.484 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.806
K-S Test Statistic 0.253 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.269 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.897 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.734 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.14 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.193
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0753 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0893
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0945 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.114
KM SD 0.0553 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0796
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0767 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0772
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.052 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0142
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.342 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.262 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.692 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -2.737 SD of Logged Detects 0.73
Median Detects 0.0675 CV Detects 0.746
Skewness Detects 2.398 Kurtosis Detects 7.073
Mean Detects 0.0803 SD Detects 0.0599
Page 5 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.0929 95% GROS Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.0867
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0548 SD in Log Scale 0.986
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0785 95% H-Stat UCL 0.115
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0553 Mean in Log Scale -3.299
KM SD (logged) 1.028 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.71
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.266
KM SD (logged) 1.028 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.71
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.266 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.107
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -3.462 KM Geo Mean 0.0314
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0857 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0946
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.1
SD in Original Scale 0.0559 SD in Log Scale 0.939
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.077 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0758
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0534 Mean in Log Scale -3.348
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.292 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.262 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.824 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0878 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0929
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (26.12, α) 15.47 Adjusted Chi Square Value (26.12, β) 14.62
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0852 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.128
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.171 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.274
theta hat (KM) 0.0587 theta star (KM) 0.0677
Page 6 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 26.37 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 29.93
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 22.4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 23.81
Maximum of Logged Data 3.401 SD of logged Data 0.418
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.569 Mean of logged Data 2.817
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.222 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.841 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 21.14 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 21.51
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0346 Adjusted Chi Square Value 178.1
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 17.89 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 7.13
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 181.3
Theta hat (MLE) 2.354 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.841
nu hat (MLE) 258.5 nu star (bias corrected) 214.2
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 7.602 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.299
5% K-S Critical Value 0.209 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.74 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.199 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.685 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 20.36 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 20.12
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 20.34
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.145 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.967 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.325 Skewness -0.276
Maximum 30 Median 18
SD 5.82 Std. Error of Mean 1.412
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 4.8 Mean 17.89
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 17 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Page 7 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
5% K-S Critical Value 0.209 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.739 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.0973 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.165 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 8.974 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 8.939
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 8.978
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.0825 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.987 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.317 Skewness 0.17
Maximum 13 Median 7.8
SD 2.508 Std. Error of Mean 0.608
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.6 Mean 7.912
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 17 Number of Distinct Observations 15
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 20.36
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 22.13 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 24.05
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 26.71 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 31.94
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 20.44 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 20.07
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 20.08
95% CLT UCL 20.22 95% Jackknife UCL 20.36
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 20.15 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 20.28
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 36.91
Page 8 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491 Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 16
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 12
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 8.974
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9.737 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.56
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.71 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.96
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 8.99 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 8.871
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 8.918
95% CLT UCL 8.912 95% Jackknife UCL 8.974
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 8.861 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 9.047
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.87 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.14
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.63
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 9.376 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.956
Maximum of Logged Data 2.565 SD of logged Data 0.344
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.281 Mean of logged Data 2.016
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.117 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.964 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 9.157 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 9.3
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0346 Adjusted Chi Square Value 234
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 7.912 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.782
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 237.6
Theta hat (MLE) 0.809 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.978
nu hat (MLE) 332.3 nu star (bias corrected) 275
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 9.774 k star (bias corrected MLE) 8.088
Page 9 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3934 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3847
Theta hat (MLE) 3219 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3762
nu hat (MLE) 41.56 nu star (bias corrected) 35.56
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.222 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.046
5% K-S Critical Value 0.214 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.761 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.163 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.399 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 5161 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 5158
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 5171
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.16 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.928 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.736 Skewness 0.377
Maximum 9300 Median 3100
SD 2896 Std. Error of Mean 702.5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 53 Mean 3934
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 17 Number of Distinct Observations 15
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 16
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 12
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 12
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Page 10 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.928 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 2894 Std. Error of Mean 702
Coefficient of Variation 0.732 Skewness 0.376
Minimum 54 Mean 3953
Maximum 9300 Median 3200
Total Number of Observations 17 Number of Distinct Observations 16
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 5161
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6042 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6996
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8321 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10924
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5107 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5012
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5138
95% CLT UCL 5090 95% Jackknife UCL 5161
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5062 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 5286
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13335 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16844
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 23736
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 15387 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10807
Maximum of Logged Data 9.138 SD of logged Data 1.284
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.97 Mean of logged Data 7.816
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.161 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.835 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 6105 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 6402
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0346 Adjusted Chi Square Value 21.85
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 22.91
Page 11 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6059 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7013
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8337 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10938
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5141 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5097
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5171
95% CLT UCL 5108 95% Jackknife UCL 5179
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5093 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 5279
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13296 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16785
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 23637
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 15221 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10783
Maximum of Logged Data 9.138 SD of logged Data 1.276
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.989 Mean of logged Data 7.827
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.159 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.834 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 6116 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 6411
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0346 Adjusted Chi Square Value 22.2
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3953 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3842
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 23.27
Theta hat (MLE) 3193 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3734
nu hat (MLE) 42.09 nu star (bias corrected) 36
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.238 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.059
K-S Test Statistic 0.161 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.214 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.395 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.761 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 5189
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 5179 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 5176
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.163 Lilliefors GOF Test
Page 12 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:13:56 AM
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 5179
Page 13 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Detects 21 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 21 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 11
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 35 Number of Distinct Observations 32
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
Median Detects 0.38 CV Detects 2.876
Skewness Detects 3.468 Kurtosis Detects 12.23
Variance Detects 20995 Percent Non-Detects 40%
Mean Detects 50.38 SD Detects 144.9
Minimum Detect 0.0031 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0023
Maximum Detect 610 Maximum Non-Detect 270
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.437 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.399 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 0.0181 SD of Logged Detects 3.425
95% KM (z) UCL 62.35 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 294.2
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 88.7 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 115.1
KM SD 112.3 95% KM (BCA) UCL 65.73
95% KM (t) UCL 63.24 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 65.86
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 30.36 KM Standard Error of Mean 19.45
K-S Test Statistic 0.211 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.211 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 1.342 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.905 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 151.8 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 223.9
Mean (detects) 50.38
Theta hat (MLE) 265 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 258.8
nu hat (MLE) 7.985 nu star (bias corrected) 8.177
Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.19 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.195
Maximum 610 Median 0.036
SD 113.9 CV 3.768
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.0031 Mean 30.23
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
nu hat (MLE) 10.3 nu star (bias corrected) 10.75
k hat (MLE) 0.147 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.154
Theta hat (MLE) 205.6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 196.9
Page 1 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
Approximate Chi Square Value (10.75, α) 4.414 Adjusted Chi Square Value (10.75, β) 4.222
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 73.62 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 76.96
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0425
nu hat (KM) 5.119 nu star (KM) 6.014
theta hat (KM) 415.1 theta star (KM) 353.4
Variance (KM) 12603 SE of Mean (KM) 19.45
k hat (KM) 0.0731 k star (KM) 0.0859
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 30.36 SD (KM) 112.3
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 110.9 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 118.4
95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50)
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (6.01, α) 1.647 Adjusted Chi Square Value (6.01, β) 1.542
80% gamma percentile (KM) 16.5 90% gamma percentile (KM) 75.08
95% gamma percentile (KM) 176.9 99% gamma percentile (KM) 519.7
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 30.23 Mean in Log Scale -2.537
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.156 Lilliefors GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.954 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -2.071 KM Geo Mean 0.126
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 85.13 95% Bootstrap t UCL 313.5
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 187414
SD in Original Scale 113.9 SD in Log Scale 4.264
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 62.79 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 65.64
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 34.11 Mean in Log Scale -1.37
KM SD (logged) 3.771 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 6.802
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.673
KM SD (logged) 3.771 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 6.802
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.673 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 12562
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
Suggested UCL to Use
99% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 223.9
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Lognormal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 115.1 SD in Log Scale 3.6
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 67.02 95% H-Stat UCL 9226
Page 2 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Minimum 1.9000E-4 Mean 2.376
Maximum 36.3 Median 0.037
Total Number of Observations 35 Number of Distinct Observations 31
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.148 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.934 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.405 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.358 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 7.584 Std. Error of Mean 1.282
Coefficient of Variation 3.192 Skewness 3.896
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 2.534 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.921 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 4.684
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 4.543 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 5.386
Theta hat (MLE) 12.8 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 12.59
nu hat (MLE) 12.99 nu star (bias corrected) 13.21
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.186 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.189
K-S Test Statistic 0.212 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.166 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.957 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 5.201 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 5.407
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0425 Adjusted Chi Square Value 5.807
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 2.376 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5.468
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 6.037
Maximum of Logged Data 3.592 SD of logged Data 3.275
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -8.568 Mean of logged Data -3.145
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.148 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.934 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.122 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Page 3 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19.68 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 26.26
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 39.19
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 261.8 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.94
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.222 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.964
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.38 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.13
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 13.96 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 4.637
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.852
95% CLT UCL 4.484 95% Jackknife UCL 4.543
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 4.49 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 11.78
concDL (50-32-8__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 19
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 15.13
Variance Detects 0.00627 Percent Non-Detects 86.96%
Mean Detects 0.124 SD Detects 0.0792
Minimum Detect 0.042 Minimum Non-Detect 3.8000E-4
Maximum Detect 0.2 Maximum Non-Detect 0.032
Number of Detects 3 Number of Non-Detects 20
Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 16
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.996 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Mean of Logged Detects -2.273 SD of Logged Detects 0.806
Median Detects 0.13 CV Detects 0.638
Skewness Detects -0.339 Kurtosis Detects N/A
KM SD 0.0477 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0374 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0165 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0122
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.197 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.425 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0366 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
Page 4 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 2.847 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0926 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.138
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0531 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0696
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0249
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.124
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0436 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 17.08 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 43.98 nu star (bias corrected) 39.58
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0389
k hat (MLE) 0.956 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.86
Theta hat (MLE) 0.026 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0289
Maximum 0.2 Median 0.01
SD 0.0459 CV 1.847
Variance (KM) 0.00228 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0122
k hat (KM) 0.12 k star (KM) 0.133
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0165 SD (KM) 0.0477
Approximate Chi Square Value (39.58, α) 26.17 Adjusted Chi Square Value (39.58, β) 25.38
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0376 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (6.12, α) 1.699 Adjusted Chi Square Value (6.12, β) 1.537
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0161 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0479
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0928 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.226
nu hat (KM) 5.5 nu star (KM) 6.116
theta hat (KM) 0.138 theta star (KM) 0.124
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.28 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.425 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.937 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0594 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0657
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.042 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.099
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.032
SD in Original Scale 0.0486 SD in Log Scale 1.75
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0346 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0352
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0172 Mean in Log Scale -6.331
Page 5 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
KM SD (logged) 1.902 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.889
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.486
KM SD (logged) 1.902 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.889
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.486 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.0233
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -7.145 KM Geo Mean 7.8909E-4
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0484 SD in Log Scale 2.18
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0352 95% H-Stat UCL 0.11
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0179 Mean in Log Scale -6.608
concDL (534-52-1__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 26 Number of Distinct Observations 21
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0374
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 16
The data set for variable concDL (534-52-1__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (608-93-5__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 26
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 21
Variance Detects 25.92 Percent Non-Detects 91.3%
Mean Detects 7.4 SD Detects 5.091
Minimum Detect 3.8 Minimum Non-Detect 0.013
Maximum Detect 11 Maximum Non-Detect 2.9
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 21
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 14
Mean of Logged Detects 1.866 SD of Logged Detects 0.752
Median Detects 7.4 CV Detects 0.688
Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A
Page 6 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
95% KM (z) UCL 1.789 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.722 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.659
KM SD 2.337 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 1.838 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.655 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.689
Theta hat (MLE) 1.916 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 15.45 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 3.862 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 4.958 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.511
Variance (KM) 5.459 SE of Mean (KM) 0.689
k hat (KM) 0.0787 k star (KM) 0.0974
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.655 SD (KM) 2.337
Mean (detects) 7.4
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0389
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.437 90% gamma percentile (KM) 1.725
95% gamma percentile (KM) 3.809 99% gamma percentile (KM) 10.55
nu hat (KM) 3.619 nu star (KM) 4.48
theta hat (KM) 8.33 theta star (KM) 6.729
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.671 Mean in Log Scale -3.681
95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50)
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Approximate Chi Square Value (4.48, α) 0.92 Adjusted Chi Square Value (4.48, β) 0.812
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 3.191 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 3.616
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -3.803 KM Geo Mean 0.0223
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.411 95% Bootstrap t UCL 34.42
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 1.548
SD in Original Scale 2.385 SD in Log Scale 2.106
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1.525 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.615
KM SD (logged) 1.757 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.654
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.518
KM SD (logged) 1.757 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.654
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.518 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.41
Page 7 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.901 Mean in Log Scale -2.342
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 3.659
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 2.355 SD in Log Scale 2.266
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1.744 95% H-Stat UCL 11.01
Minimum 1800 Mean 8805
Maximum 35000 Median 6350
Total Number of Observations 32 Number of Distinct Observations 26
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7439-89-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.154 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.93 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.196 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.776 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 8185 Std. Error of Mean 1447
Coefficient of Variation 0.93 Skewness 1.786
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.937 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.763 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 11334
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 11258 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 11673
Theta hat (MLE) 5529 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 6014
nu hat (MLE) 101.9 nu star (bias corrected) 93.69
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.592 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.464
K-S Test Statistic 0.17 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.158 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8805 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 7277
Page 8 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 11399 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 11559
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0416 Adjusted Chi Square Value 71.37
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 72.37
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 7.496 Mean of logged Data 8.737
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.154 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.93 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.142 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.942 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14762 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17410
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 22609
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 12215 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12855
Maximum of Logged Data 10.46 SD of logged Data 0.826
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 11967 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 11258
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 11956
95% CLT UCL 11185 95% Jackknife UCL 11258
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 11194 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 12086
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% H-UCL 12215
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13145 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15111
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17840 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 23201
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 24
Number of Distinct Detects 8 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 21
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 32 Number of Distinct Observations 29
ProUCL computes and outputs H-statistic based UCLs for historical reasons only.
H-statistic often results in unstable (both high and low) values of UCL95 as shown in examples in the Technical Guide.
It is therefore recommended to avoid the use of H-statistic based 95% UCLs.
Use of nonparametric methods are preferred to compute UCL95 for skewed data sets which do not follow a gamma distribution.
Minimum Detect 0.011 Minimum Non-Detect 0.008
Maximum Detect 23 Maximum Non-Detect 9.5
Page 9 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
Median Detects 6.039 CV Detects 1.132
Skewness Detects 0.46 Kurtosis Detects -1.516
Variance Detects 84.94 Percent Non-Detects 75%
Mean Detects 8.143 SD Detects 9.216
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.309 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.819 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -0.423 SD of Logged Detects 3.447
95% KM (z) UCL 3.775 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 4.529
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 5.2 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 6.629
KM SD 5.566 95% KM (BCA) UCL 3.866
95% KM (t) UCL 3.828 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 3.792
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 2.045 KM Standard Error of Mean 1.052
K-S Test Statistic 0.297 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.318 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.943 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.806 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 8.613 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 12.51
Mean (detects) 8.143
Theta hat (MLE) 29.38 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 31.74
nu hat (MLE) 4.434 nu star (bias corrected) 4.105
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.277 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.257
Maximum 23 Median 0.01
SD 5.655 CV 2.768
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 2.043
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.52, α) 4.913 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.52, β) 4.683
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 4.791 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 5.026
nu hat (MLE) 11.24 nu star (bias corrected) 11.52
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0416
k hat (MLE) 0.176 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.18
Theta hat (MLE) 11.63 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 11.35
Variance (KM) 30.98 SE of Mean (KM) 1.052
k hat (KM) 0.135 k star (KM) 0.143
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 2.045 SD (KM) 5.566
Page 10 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
nu hat (KM) 8.639 nu star (KM) 9.163
theta hat (KM) 15.15 theta star (KM) 14.28
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 5.47 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 5.784
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (9.16, α) 3.425 Adjusted Chi Square Value (9.16, β) 3.239
80% gamma percentile (KM) 2.14 90% gamma percentile (KM) 6.021
95% gamma percentile (KM) 11.35 99% gamma percentile (KM) 26.98
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 2.036 Mean in Log Scale -6.326
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.301 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.783 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -3.539 KM Geo Mean 0.0291
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4.47 95% Bootstrap t UCL 5.105
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 975.7
SD in Original Scale 5.658 SD in Log Scale 4.021
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 3.732 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3.751
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 2.728 Mean in Log Scale -2.346
KM SD (logged) 2.454 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.54
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.48
KM SD (logged) 2.454 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.54
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.48 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 4.363
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 3.828
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 5.628 SD in Log Scale 2.918
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 4.415 95% H-Stat UCL 108.1
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 11 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
Number of Detects 21 Number of Non-Detects 11
Number of Distinct Detects 16 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 8
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 32 Number of Distinct Observations 23
concDL (7440-28-0__mg/kg)
Median Detects 0.1 CV Detects 0.519
Skewness Detects 1.407 Kurtosis Detects 2.522
Variance Detects 0.00277 Percent Non-Detects 34.38%
Mean Detects 0.101 SD Detects 0.0526
Minimum Detect 0.039 Minimum Non-Detect 0.051
Maximum Detect 0.25 Maximum Non-Detect 0.79
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.196 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.861 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -2.407 SD of Logged Detects 0.496
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0999 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.106
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.113 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.126
KM SD 0.0501 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.1
95% KM (t) UCL 0.1 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0999
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0845 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.00941
K-S Test Statistic 0.155 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.19 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.513 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.746 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.143 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.178
Mean (detects) 0.101
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0229 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0265
nu hat (MLE) 185.8 nu star (bias corrected) 160.6
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 4.424 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.823
Maximum 0.25 Median 0.0689
SD 0.0516 CV 0.633
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.0181 Mean 0.0814
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
nu hat (MLE) 193 nu star (bias corrected) 176.2
k hat (MLE) 3.015 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.753
Theta hat (MLE) 0.027 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0296
Page 12 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
Approximate Chi Square Value (176.20, α) 146.5 Adjusted Chi Square Value (176.20, β) 145.1
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0979 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0989
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0416
nu hat (KM) 181.6 nu star (KM) 165.9
theta hat (KM) 0.0298 theta star (KM) 0.0326
Variance (KM) 0.00251 SE of Mean (KM) 0.00941
k hat (KM) 2.837 k star (KM) 2.592
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0845 SD (KM) 0.0501
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.102 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.103
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (165.89, α) 137.1 Adjusted Chi Square Value (165.89, β) 135.7
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.123 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.155
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.185 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.251
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.084 Mean in Log Scale -2.611
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.187 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.951 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -2.616 KM Geo Mean 0.0731
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.101 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.102
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0997
SD in Original Scale 0.0492 SD in Log Scale 0.507
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0987 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0987
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0963 Mean in Log Scale -2.646
KM SD (logged) 0.52 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 1.947
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0987
KM SD (logged) 0.52 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 1.947
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0987 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.1
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.103 95% GROS Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.0989
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0857 SD in Log Scale 0.777
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.122 95% H-Stat UCL 0.13
Page 13 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Minimum 2.6 Mean 8.366
Maximum 30 Median 5.7
Total Number of Observations 35 Number of Distinct Observations 29
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
General Statistics
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.148 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.934 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.227 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.761 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 5.919 Std. Error of Mean 1
Coefficient of Variation 0.707 Skewness 1.965
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.75 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.754 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 10.11
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 10.06 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 10.37
Theta hat (MLE) 2.832 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.076
nu hat (MLE) 206.8 nu star (bias corrected) 190.4
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.954 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.72
K-S Test Statistic 0.205 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.15 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 9.988 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 10.07
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0425 Adjusted Chi Square Value 158.1
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8.366 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5.073
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 159.5
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.956 Mean of logged Data 1.945
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.148 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.934 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.178 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.922 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Maximum of Logged Data 3.401 SD of logged Data 0.57
Page 14 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.83 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.41
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16.5
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 10.01 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.7
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10.64 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 10.09
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 10.32
95% CLT UCL 10.01 95% Jackknife UCL 10.06
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 9.99 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 10.62
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 12.73
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.37 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.73
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.61 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 18.32
Minimum 2 Mean 9.449
Maximum 28 Median 7.9
Total Number of Observations 35 Number of Distinct Observations 29
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.148 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.934 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.172 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.864 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 6.736 Std. Error of Mean 1.139
Coefficient of Variation 0.713 Skewness 1.198
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.571 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.758 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 11.41
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 11.37 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 11.57
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.126 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.15 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 15 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
Theta hat (MLE) 4.149 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.497
nu hat (MLE) 159.4 nu star (bias corrected) 147.1
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.277 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.101
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 11.58 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 11.69
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0425 Adjusted Chi Square Value 118.9
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 9.449 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 6.519
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 120
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.693 Mean of logged Data 2.011
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.148 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.934 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.0974 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.964 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.76 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.06
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 21.56
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 12.31 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.11
Maximum of Logged Data 3.332 SD of logged Data 0.7
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 11.55 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 11.36
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 11.69
95% CLT UCL 11.32 95% Jackknife UCL 11.37
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 11.3 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 11.74
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 11.69
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.86 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.41
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 16.56 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 20.78
Minimum Detect 0.0087 Minimum Non-Detect 3.6000E-4
Maximum Detect 0.075 Maximum Non-Detect 0.0024
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 15
Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 13
concDL (75-27-4__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 20
Page 16 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
Mean of Logged Detects -3.643 SD of Logged Detects 0.779
Median Detects 0.023 CV Detects 0.766
Skewness Detects 0.99 Kurtosis Detects -0.678
Variance Detects 6.7730E-4 Percent Non-Detects 65.22%
Mean Detects 0.034 SD Detects 0.026
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.012 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.00479
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.288 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.826 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.042 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0597
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0199 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0257
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0264 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0329
KM SD 0.0215 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0203
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0203 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0195
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 2.074 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.379
K-S Test Statistic 0.238 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.297 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.388 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.724 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.0087 Mean 0.0183
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.034
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0164 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0246
nu hat (MLE) 33.18 nu star (bias corrected) 22.07
nu hat (MLE) 91.67 nu star (bias corrected) 81.05
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0389
k hat (MLE) 1.993 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.762
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0092 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0104
Maximum 0.075 Median 0.01
SD 0.0188 CV 1.023
Variance (KM) 4.6227E-4 SE of Mean (KM) 0.00479
k hat (KM) 0.314 k star (KM) 0.302
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.012 SD (KM) 0.0215
Approximate Chi Square Value (81.05, α) 61.3 Adjusted Chi Square Value (81.05, β) 60.06
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0242 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0247
Page 17 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (13.89, α) 6.498 Adjusted Chi Square Value (13.89, β) 6.134
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0185 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0355
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.055 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.106
nu hat (KM) 14.44 nu star (KM) 13.89
theta hat (KM) 0.0384 theta star (KM) 0.0399
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.191 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.938 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0258 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0273
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0239 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0275
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0289
SD in Original Scale 0.0214 SD in Log Scale 1.349
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0208 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0208
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0132 Mean in Log Scale -5.322
KM SD (logged) 2.086 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.196
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.465
KM SD (logged) 2.086 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.196
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.465 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.0911
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -6.438 KM Geo Mean 0.0016
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.022 SD in Log Scale 2.165
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0199 95% H-Stat UCL 0.122
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0121 Mean in Log Scale -6.443
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0203
Page 18 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 26 Number of Distinct Observations 21
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 26 Number of Distinct Observations 18
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 26
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 21
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 35 Number of Distinct Observations 31
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 26
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 18
Coefficient of Variation 2.834 Skewness 3.84
Maximum 28000 Median 27
SD 5558 Std. Error of Mean 939.4
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.11 Mean 1961
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.381 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.148 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.415 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.934 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.916 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.198 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 2.068 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 3550 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 4158
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 3651
Page 19 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
Theta hat (MLE) 10299 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 10154
nu hat (MLE) 13.33 nu star (bias corrected) 13.52
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.19 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.193
5% K-S Critical Value 0.166 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 4247 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 4412
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0425 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.01
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1961 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4463
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 6.245
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -2.207 Mean of logged Data 3.687
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.148 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.934 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.137 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.944 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 26171 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 34983
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 52291
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 484804 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19823
Maximum of Logged Data 10.24 SD of logged Data 3.404
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 9108 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3728
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4591
95% CLT UCL 3506 95% Jackknife UCL 3550
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 3457 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 6716
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 11308
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4780 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6056
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7828 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11308
Page 20 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
Minimum 0.19 Mean 2003
Maximum 29000 Median 27
Total Number of Observations 35 Number of Distinct Observations 33
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.148 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.934 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.38 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.414 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 5701 Std. Error of Mean 963.7
Coefficient of Variation 2.846 Skewness 3.891
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 2.142 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.915 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 3738
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 3632 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 4265
Theta hat (MLE) 10433 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 10294
nu hat (MLE) 13.44 nu star (bias corrected) 13.62
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.192 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.195
K-S Test Statistic 0.2 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.166 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 4322 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 4490
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0425 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.076
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 2003 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4541
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 6.312
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -1.661 Mean of logged Data 3.745
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.148 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.934 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.136 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.937 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 23979 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 32032
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 388215 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18177
Maximum of Logged Data 10.28 SD of logged Data 3.352
Page 21 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/5/2021 8:33:30 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 47850
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 9274 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3743
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4474
95% CLT UCL 3588 95% Jackknife UCL 3632
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 3589 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 7383
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 11591
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4894 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6204
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8021 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11591
Page 22 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHIJKL
nu hat (MLE) 8.338 nu star (bias corrected) 8.48
k hat (MLE) 0.199 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.202
Theta hat (MLE) 113.6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 111.7
Maximum 220 Median 0.39
SD 49.15 CV 2.179
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 22.55
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 36.42
Theta hat (MLE) 94.75 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 105
nu hat (MLE) 9.994 nu star (bias corrected) 9.021
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.384 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.347
K-S Test Statistic 0.172 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.254 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.375 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.813 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 90.58 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 130.9
95% KM (z) UCL 40.47 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 70.02
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 55.23 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 70.04
KM SD 47.96 95% KM (BCA) UCL 44.91
95% KM (t) UCL 41.34 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 43.21
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 22.55 KM Standard Error of Mean 10.89
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.28 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.621 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 1.872 SD of Logged Detects 2.749
Median Detects 14 CV Detects 1.619
Skewness Detects 2.865 Kurtosis Detects 9.111
Variance Detects 3479 Percent Non-Detects 38.1%
Mean Detects 36.42 SD Detects 58.98
Minimum Detect 0.017 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0024
Maximum Detect 220 Maximum Non-Detect 1.8
Number of Detects 13 Number of Non-Detects 8
Number of Distinct Detects 12 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 8
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 20
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
Page 1 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
Suggested UCL to Use
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1) 64.76
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 49.12 SD in Log Scale 3.527
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 41.1 95% H-Stat UCL 105675
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 22.61 Mean in Log Scale -0.0652
KM SD (logged) 4.018 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 7.764
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.954
KM SD (logged) 4.018 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 7.764
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.954 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 1603290
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -0.76 KM Geo Mean 0.468
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 50.92 95% Bootstrap t UCL 69.86
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 109849
SD in Original Scale 49.14 SD in Log Scale 3.567
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 41.05 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 40.5
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 22.56 Mean in Log Scale -0.291
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.215 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.884 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 59.79 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 64.76
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (9.29, α) 3.506 Adjusted Chi Square Value (9.29, β) 3.237
80% gamma percentile (KM) 31.21 90% gamma percentile (KM) 68.13
95% gamma percentile (KM) 113.1 99% gamma percentile (KM) 234.9
nu hat (KM) 9.288 nu star (KM) 9.295
theta hat (KM) 102 theta star (KM) 101.9
Variance (KM) 2300 SE of Mean (KM) 10.89
k hat (KM) 0.221 k star (KM) 0.221
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 22.55 SD (KM) 47.96
Approximate Chi Square Value (8.48, α) 3.016 Adjusted Chi Square Value (8.48, β) 2.771
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 63.4 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 69.02
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0383
Page 2 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
Maximum of Logged Data 2.274 SD of logged Data 2.393
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -5.513 Mean of logged Data -1.376
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.141 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.936 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 3.174 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 3.368
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0383 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.639
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.522 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.575
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 7.043
Theta hat (MLE) 4.105 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.354
nu hat (MLE) 15.58 nu star (bias corrected) 14.69
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.371 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.35
K-S Test Statistic 0.176 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.204 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.637 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.831 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2.465
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 2.421 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2.659
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.273 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.686 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 2.388 Std. Error of Mean 0.521
Coefficient of Variation 1.569 Skewness 2.301
Minimum 0.00403 Mean 1.522
Maximum 9.715 Median 0.446
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 20
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 3 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.672 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Skewness Detects 1.158 Kurtosis Detects -0.923
Mean of Logged Detects -3.201 SD of Logged Detects 1.227
Mean Detects 0.0797 SD Detects 0.0967
Median Detects 0.017 CV Detects 1.213
Maximum Detect 0.22 Maximum Non-Detect 0.079
Variance Detects 0.00935 Percent Non-Detects 66.67%
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 12
Minimum Detect 0.015 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0082
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 16
Number of Detects 7 Number of Non-Detects 14
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (608-93-5__mg/kg) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 10
concDL (608-93-5__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 15 Number of Distinct Observations 11
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 3.368
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.086 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.794
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4.777 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.708
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 3.303 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.425
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.659
95% CLT UCL 2.38 95% Jackknife UCL 2.421
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 2.365 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 2.952
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.4 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.04
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 22.21
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 58.45 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8.768
Page 4 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0768 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0819
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (12.95, α) 5.859 Adjusted Chi Square Value (12.95, β) 5.495
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0536 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.102
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.157 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.301
nu hat (KM) 13.55 nu star (KM) 12.95
theta hat (KM) 0.108 theta star (KM) 0.113
Variance (KM) 0.00374 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0146
k hat (KM) 0.323 k star (KM) 0.308
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0347 SD (KM) 0.0611
Approximate Chi Square Value (30.44, α) 18.84 Adjusted Chi Square Value (30.44, β) 18.14
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0537 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0558
nu hat (MLE) 33.95 nu star (bias corrected) 30.44
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0383
k hat (MLE) 0.808 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.725
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0411 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0459
Maximum 0.22 Median 0.01
SD 0.0628 CV 1.888
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0332
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.0797
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0913 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.134
nu hat (MLE) 12.23 nu star (bias corrected) 8.321
Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.873 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.594
K-S Test Statistic 0.349 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.321 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.991 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.732 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.126 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.18
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0587 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0784 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0982
KM SD 0.0611 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0598 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0347 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0146
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.327 Lilliefors GOF Test
Page 5 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.252 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.686 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 6.363 Std. Error of Mean 1.388
Coefficient of Variation 0.735 Skewness 2.372
Minimum 4.2 Mean 8.662
Maximum 30.4 Median 5.8
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 19
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 0.0982
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0609 SD in Log Scale 1.127
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0643 95% H-Stat UCL 0.0817
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0414 Mean in Log Scale -3.83
KM SD (logged) 0.982 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.54
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.253
KM SD (logged) 0.982 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.54
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.253 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.0472
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -4.094 KM Geo Mean 0.0167
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0628 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.152
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0602
SD in Original Scale 0.064 SD in Log Scale 1.345
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0545 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0555
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0304 Mean in Log Scale -4.637
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.333 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.752 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 6 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.83 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.71
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.33 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 22.48
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 13.07 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 11.08
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 11.59
95% CLT UCL 10.95 95% Jackknife UCL 11.06
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 10.89 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 12.83
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.92 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.87
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18.71
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 10.83 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.51
Maximum of Logged Data 3.414 SD of logged Data 0.541
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.435 Mean of logged Data 1.99
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.226 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.844 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 10.93 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 11.13
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0383 Adjusted Chi Square Value 88.57
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8.662 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5.262
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 90.18
Theta hat (MLE) 2.772 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.197
nu hat (MLE) 131.2 nu star (bias corrected) 113.8
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.124 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.71
K-S Test Statistic 0.242 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.191 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.634 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.749 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 11.18
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 11.06 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 11.71
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 7 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.149 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.903 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 15.46 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 15.7
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0383 Adjusted Chi Square Value 124.1
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 12.68 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 6.626
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 126.1
Theta hat (MLE) 2.995 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.464
nu hat (MLE) 177.8 nu star (bias corrected) 153.7
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 4.233 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.66
K-S Test Statistic 0.118 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.19 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.593 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.747 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 15.36
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 15.23 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 15.9
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.185 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.794 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 6.797 Std. Error of Mean 1.483
Coefficient of Variation 0.536 Skewness 2.271
Minimum 2.3 Mean 12.68
Maximum 37 Median 12
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 16
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 14.71
Page 8 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 17
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 15
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 17 Number of Distinct Observations 15
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 17
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 16
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 17 Number of Distinct Observations 16
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 15.23
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.13 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 19.14
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 21.94 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 27.43
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 27.79 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 15.36
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 15.85
95% CLT UCL 15.12 95% Jackknife UCL 15.23
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 15.08 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 16.47
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19.57 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 22.49
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 28.22
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 16.41 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.46
Maximum of Logged Data 3.611 SD of logged Data 0.531
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.833 Mean of logged Data 2.417
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 9 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.156 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.938 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 3409 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 3639
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0383 Adjusted Chi Square Value 5.262
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1521 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2778
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 5.617
Theta hat (MLE) 4865 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 5075
nu hat (MLE) 13.13 nu star (bias corrected) 12.59
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.313 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.3
5% K-S Critical Value 0.205 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.843 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.143 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.557 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 2431 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2684
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2477
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.265 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.676 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 1.589 Skewness 2.406
Maximum 10000 Median 200
SD 2417 Std. Error of Mean 527.3
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.3 Mean 1521
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 20
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Page 10 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.57 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.842 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2490
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 2444 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2695
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.266 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.678 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 2425 Std. Error of Mean 529.3
Coefficient of Variation 1.584 Skewness 2.379
Minimum 0.48 Mean 1531
Maximum 10000 Median 200
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 20
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 3639
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3103 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3820
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4814 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6768
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5686 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2434
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2783
95% CLT UCL 2388 95% Jackknife UCL 2431
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 2389 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 3053
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 24416 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 32553
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 48538
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 480897 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18553
Maximum of Logged Data 9.21 SD of logged Data 2.905
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -1.204 Mean of logged Data 5.136
Page 11 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/10/2020 10:59:23 AM
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 3633
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3119 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3838
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4836 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6797
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5609 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2417
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2740
95% CLT UCL 2402 95% Jackknife UCL 2444
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 2380 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 2989
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 21841 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 29090
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 43328
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 350975 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16618
Maximum of Logged Data 9.21 SD of logged Data 2.837
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.734 Mean of logged Data 5.185
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.157 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.94 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 3406 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 3633
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0383 Adjusted Chi Square Value 5.384
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1531 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2776
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 5.743
Theta hat (MLE) 4816 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 5032
nu hat (MLE) 13.35 nu star (bias corrected) 12.78
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.318 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.304
K-S Test Statistic 0.142 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.205 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 12 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
nu hat (MLE) 10.97 nu star (bias corrected) 10.87
k hat (MLE) 0.239 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.236
Theta hat (MLE) 13.25 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 13.37
Maximum 49 Median 0.21
SD 10.24 CV 3.24
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.0024 Mean 3.16
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 4.271
Theta hat (MLE) 14.4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 15.07
nu hat (MLE) 10.08 nu star (bias corrected) 9.638
Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.297 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.283
K-S Test Statistic 0.279 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.227 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 1.183 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.843 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 16.6 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 24.57
95% KM (z) UCL 6.699 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 20.55
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 9.615 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 12.54
KM SD 10.01 95% KM (BCA) UCL 7.587
95% KM (t) UCL 6.855 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 7.237
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 3.159 KM Standard Error of Mean 2.152
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.359 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.4 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -0.877 SD of Logged Detects 2.392
Median Detects 0.28 CV Detects 2.761
Skewness Detects 3.834 Kurtosis Detects 15.21
Variance Detects 139.1 Percent Non-Detects 26.09%
Mean Detects 4.271 SD Detects 11.79
Minimum Detect 0.0024 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0027
Maximum Detect 49 Maximum Non-Detect 0.17
Number of Detects 17 Number of Non-Detects 6
Number of Distinct Detects 16 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 22
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
Page 1 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
Suggested UCL to Use
97.5% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 16.6
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Lognormal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 10.24 SD in Log Scale 2.713
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 6.83 95% H-Stat UCL 138.9
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 3.165 Mean in Log Scale -1.792
KM SD (logged) 2.913 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.613
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.637
KM SD (logged) 2.913 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.613
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.637 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 278.1
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -2.099 KM Geo Mean 0.123
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 9.502 95% Bootstrap t UCL 22
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 198.2
SD in Original Scale 10.24 SD in Log Scale 2.828
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 6.824 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 7.186
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 3.159 Mean in Log Scale -2.007
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.207 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.176 Lilliefors GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.967 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 12.91 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 14.43
95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50)
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (5.32, α) 1.301 Adjusted Chi Square Value (5.32, β) 1.164
80% gamma percentile (KM) 2.652 90% gamma percentile (KM) 8.854
95% gamma percentile (KM) 18.11 99% gamma percentile (KM) 46.63
nu hat (KM) 4.579 nu star (KM) 5.315
theta hat (KM) 31.73 theta star (KM) 27.34
Variance (KM) 100.3 SE of Mean (KM) 2.152
k hat (KM) 0.0996 k star (KM) 0.116
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 3.159 SD (KM) 10.01
Approximate Chi Square Value (10.87, α) 4.495 Adjusted Chi Square Value (10.87, β) 4.201
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 7.643 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 8.179
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0389
Page 2 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
Maximum of Logged Data 1.132 SD of logged Data 1.699
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -5.312 Mean of logged Data -1.764
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.127 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.962 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 0.875 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.911
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0389 Adjusted Chi Square Value 13.5
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.507 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.697
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 14.07
Theta hat (MLE) 0.883 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.96
nu hat (MLE) 26.4 nu star (bias corrected) 24.29
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.574 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.528
K-S Test Statistic 0.151 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.191 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.486 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.798 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.801
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.786 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.865
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.304 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.643 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 0.782 Std. Error of Mean 0.163
Coefficient of Variation 1.543 Skewness 2.483
Minimum 0.00493 Mean 0.507
Maximum 3.101 Median 0.141
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 3 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.287 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.87 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Skewness Detects 0.754 Kurtosis Detects -0.884
Mean of Logged Detects -3.085 SD of Logged Detects 0.63
Mean Detects 0.0541 SD Detects 0.0336
Median Detects 0.035 CV Detects 0.621
Maximum Detect 0.11 Maximum Non-Detect 0.071
Variance Detects 0.00113 Percent Non-Detects 65%
Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 11
Minimum Detect 0.021 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0099
Total Number of Observations 20 Number of Distinct Observations 18
Number of Detects 7 Number of Non-Detects 13
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (608-93-5__mg/kg) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 19
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 13
concDL (608-93-5__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 20 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.911
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.996 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.217
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.525 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.128
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 2.084 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.794
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.905
95% CLT UCL 0.775 95% Jackknife UCL 0.786
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.765 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 1.119
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.86 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.39
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3.431
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 2.639 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.479
Page 4 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0457 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.047
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (55.00, α) 38.96 Adjusted Chi Square Value (55.00, β) 37.89
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0506 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0689
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0869 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.128
nu hat (KM) 63.14 nu star (KM) 55
theta hat (KM) 0.0205 theta star (KM) 0.0236
Variance (KM) 6.6457E-4 SE of Mean (KM) 0.00694
k hat (KM) 1.578 k star (KM) 1.375
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0324 SD (KM) 0.0258
Approximate Chi Square Value (70.61, α) 52.26 Adjusted Chi Square Value (70.61, β) 51.02
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0404 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0414
nu hat (MLE) 81.5 nu star (bias corrected) 70.61
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.038
k hat (MLE) 2.038 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.765
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0147 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0169
Maximum 0.11 Median 0.0173
SD 0.0267 CV 0.895
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0299
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.0541
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0174 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0288
nu hat (MLE) 43.65 nu star (bias corrected) 26.28
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 3.118 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.877
K-S Test Statistic 0.271 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.314 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.453 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.712 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0757 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.101
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0438 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0445
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0532 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0626
KM SD 0.0258 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0439
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0444 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0433
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0324 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.00694
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 5 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.152 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.953 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 7.522 Std. Error of Mean 1.568
Coefficient of Variation 0.456 Skewness 0.573
Minimum 5 Mean 16.5
Maximum 32.7 Median 14
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 17
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0444
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0249 SD in Log Scale 0.732
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0444 95% H-Stat UCL 0.0532
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0348 Mean in Log Scale -3.583
KM SD (logged) 0.715 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.254
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.234
KM SD (logged) 0.715 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.254
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.234 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.0465
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -3.693 KM Geo Mean 0.0249
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0448 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0478
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0422
SD in Original Scale 0.0256 SD in Log Scale 0.609
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0419 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0421
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.032 Mean in Log Scale -3.649
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.236 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.911 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 6 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 19.19
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 21.21 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 23.34
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 26.29 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 32.1
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 19.48 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 19.08
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 19.27
95% CLT UCL 19.08 95% Jackknife UCL 19.19
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 18.97 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 19.39
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 24.37 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 27.71
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 34.29
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 20.57 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 21.96
Maximum of Logged Data 3.487 SD of logged Data 0.493
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.609 Mean of logged Data 2.696
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.117 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.966 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 19.67 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 19.92
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0389 Adjusted Chi Square Value 160.2
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 16.5 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 8.045
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 162.3
Theta hat (MLE) 3.435 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.923
nu hat (MLE) 221 nu star (bias corrected) 193.5
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 4.804 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.206
K-S Test Statistic 0.0994 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.2 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.747 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 19.22
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 19.19 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 19.28
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 7 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.109 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.953 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 30.73 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 31.41
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0389 Adjusted Chi Square Value 51.98
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 22.8 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 18.27
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 53.13
Theta hat (MLE) 12.97 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 14.64
nu hat (MLE) 80.83 nu star (bias corrected) 71.62
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.757 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.557
K-S Test Statistic 0.07 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.184 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.138 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.757 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 29.1
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 28.95 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 29.66
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.154 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.883 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 17.18 Std. Error of Mean 3.583
Coefficient of Variation 0.754 Skewness 1.211
Minimum 1.6 Mean 22.8
Maximum 64 Median 17
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 19
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 8 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 22
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 18
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 22 Number of Distinct Observations 18
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 22
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 17
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 22 Number of Distinct Observations 17
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 28.95
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 33.54 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 38.41
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 45.17 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 58.44
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 30.72 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 28.86
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 28.81
95% CLT UCL 28.69 95% Jackknife UCL 28.95
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 28.63 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 30.41
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 46.18 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 55.65
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 74.24
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 39.2 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 39.36
Maximum of Logged Data 4.159 SD of logged Data 0.893
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.47 Mean of logged Data 2.816
Page 9 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
Maximum of Logged Data 9.852 SD of logged Data 2.337
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.301 Mean of logged Data 5.481
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.159 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.919 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 3369 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 3557
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0389 Adjusted Chi Square Value 7.081
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1646 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2853
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 7.476
Theta hat (MLE) 4710 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4945
nu hat (MLE) 16.07 nu star (bias corrected) 15.31
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.349 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.333
5% K-S Critical Value 0.196 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.838 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.258 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.305 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 3168 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 3826
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 3280
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.434 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.412 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 2.583 Skewness 3.656
Maximum 19000 Median 350
SD 4251 Std. Error of Mean 886.4
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.74 Mean 1646
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 19
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Page 10 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.26 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.196 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.308 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.837 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 3284
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 3171 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 3829
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.434 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.412 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 4250 Std. Error of Mean 886.2
Coefficient of Variation 2.576 Skewness 3.657
Minimum 0.79 Mean 1650
Maximum 19000 Median 350
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 21
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 7181
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4305 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5510
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7181 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10466
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10387 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3151
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4167
95% CLT UCL 3104 95% Jackknife UCL 3168
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 3062 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 11718
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9687 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12753
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18774
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 36694 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7478
Page 11 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 7 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/31/2020 10:31:22 AM
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 7184
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4308 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5512
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7184 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10467
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10377 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3191
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4072
95% CLT UCL 3107 95% Jackknife UCL 3171
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 3046 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 11661
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9518 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12523
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18427
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 34765 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7352
Maximum of Logged Data 9.852 SD of logged Data 2.318
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.236 Mean of logged Data 5.503
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.166 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.919 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 3366 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 3552
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0389 Adjusted Chi Square Value 7.168
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1650 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2848
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 7.566
Theta hat (MLE) 4679 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4916
nu hat (MLE) 16.22 nu star (bias corrected) 15.44
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.353 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.336
Page 12 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHIJKL
nu hat (MLE) 11.9 nu star (bias corrected) 11.91
k hat (MLE) 0.22 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.221
Theta hat (MLE) 7.973 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 7.965
Maximum 24.12 Median 0.01
SD 5.019 CV 2.858
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 1.756
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 3.94
Theta hat (MLE) 10.38 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 11.58
nu hat (MLE) 9.105 nu star (bias corrected) 8.162
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.379 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.34
K-S Test Statistic 0.165 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.263 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.443 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.808 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.953 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 11.62
95% KM (z) UCL 3.398 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 8.047
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 4.74 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 6.085
KM SD 4.923 95% KM (BCA) UCL 3.599
95% KM (t) UCL 3.458 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 3.426
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 1.77 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.99
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.306 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.243 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.623 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.859 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -0.378 SD of Logged Detects 2.258
Median Detects 1.04 CV Detects 1.798
Skewness Detects 2.517 Kurtosis Detects 6.568
Variance Detects 50.19 Percent Non-Detects 55.56%
Mean Detects 3.94 SD Detects 7.085
Minimum Detect 0.0408 Minimum Non-Detect 0.00527
Maximum Detect 24.12 Maximum Non-Detect 2.682
Number of Detects 12 Number of Non-Detects 15
Number of Distinct Detects 12 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 13
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 27 Number of Distinct Observations 25
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
Page 1 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
Suggested UCL to Use
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1) 5.83
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 4.998 SD in Log Scale 2.908
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 3.485 95% H-Stat UCL 124.5
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 1.845 Mean in Log Scale -2.589
KM SD (logged) 2.81 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.414
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.577
KM SD (logged) 2.81 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.414
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.577 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 52.28
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -2.973 KM Geo Mean 0.0511
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4.346 95% Bootstrap t UCL 8.535
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 335.9
SD in Original Scale 5.021 SD in Log Scale 3.266
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 3.401 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3.436
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 1.753 Mean in Log Scale -3.495
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.177 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.243 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.919 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.859 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 5.401 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 5.83
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (7.54, α) 2.469 Adjusted Chi Square Value (7.54, β) 2.288
80% gamma percentile (KM) 1.81 90% gamma percentile (KM) 5.188
95% gamma percentile (KM) 9.871 99% gamma percentile (KM) 23.67
nu hat (KM) 6.978 nu star (KM) 7.536
theta hat (KM) 13.7 theta star (KM) 12.68
Variance (KM) 24.24 SE of Mean (KM) 0.99
k hat (KM) 0.129 k star (KM) 0.14
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 1.77 SD (KM) 4.923
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.91, α) 5.167 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.91, β) 4.884
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 4.048 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 4.282
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0401
Page 2 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
Maximum of Logged Data 0.06 SD of logged Data 2.409
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -6.889 Mean of logged Data -3.792
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.167 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.923 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.129 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.91 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.37 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.387
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0401 Adjusted Chi Square Value 8.138
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.188 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.337
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.514
Theta hat (MLE) 0.583 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.604
nu hat (MLE) 17.37 nu star (bias corrected) 16.78
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.322 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.311
K-S Test Statistic 0.189 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.3 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.848 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.301
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.297 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.319
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.167 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.923 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.337 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.61 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 0.333 Std. Error of Mean 0.0641
Coefficient of Variation 1.774 Skewness 1.976
Minimum 0.00102 Mean 0.188
Maximum 1.062 Median 0.0204
Total Number of Observations 27 Number of Distinct Observations 27
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 3 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0143 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0201
95% KM (z) UCL 0.00709 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.00663
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00922 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0114
KM SD 0.00633 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.00779
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0072 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00705
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.00451 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.00157
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.293 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.822 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -4.452 SD of Logged Detects 0.507
Median Detects 0.0134 CV Detects 0.462
Skewness Detects -0.0637 Kurtosis Detects -2.961
Variance Detects 3.5527E-5 Percent Non-Detects 75%
Mean Detects 0.0129 SD Detects 0.00596
Minimum Detect 0.00608 Minimum Non-Detect 6.7800E-4
Maximum Detect 0.0192 Maximum Non-Detect 0.0586
Number of Detects 6 Number of Non-Detects 18
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 13
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 24 Number of Distinct Observations 16
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 0.588
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.38 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.467
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.588 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.825
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.291 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.296
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.322
95% CLT UCL 0.293 95% Jackknife UCL 0.297
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.292 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.349
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.089 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.433
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.109
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 3.831 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.841
Page 4 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00762 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00803
SD in Original Scale 0.00529 SD in Log Scale 0.741
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00722 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00708
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.00537 Mean in Log Scale -5.542
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.297 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.842 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.00796 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0083
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (22.59, α) 12.78 Adjusted Chi Square Value (22.59, β) 12.26
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.00738 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0123
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0177 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0309
nu hat (KM) 24.29 nu star (KM) 22.59
theta hat (KM) 0.0089 theta star (KM) 0.00957
Variance (KM) 4.0105E-5 SE of Mean (KM) 0.00157
k hat (KM) 0.506 k star (KM) 0.471
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.00451 SD (KM) 0.00633
Approximate Chi Square Value (672.03, α) 612.9 Adjusted Chi Square Value (672.03, β) 608.9
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0118 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0118
nu hat (MLE) 766.5 nu star (bias corrected) 672
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0392
k hat (MLE) 15.97 k star (bias corrected MLE) 14
Theta hat (MLE) 6.7151E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 7.6592E-4
Maximum 0.0192 Median 0.01
SD 0.00306 CV 0.285
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.00608 Mean 0.0107
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.0129
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00253 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00485
nu hat (MLE) 61.14 nu star (bias corrected) 31.91
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 5.095 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.659
K-S Test Statistic 0.318 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.333 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.605 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.698 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 5 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
K-S Test Statistic 0.25 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.179 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.97 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.751 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 11.84
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 11.73 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 12.35
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.177 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.916 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.335 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.637 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 6.897 Std. Error of Mean 1.408
Coefficient of Variation 0.74 Skewness 2.329
Minimum 4.1 Mean 9.314
Maximum 29.6 Median 7.211
Total Number of Observations 24 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0072
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0099 SD in Log Scale 1.38
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0125 95% H-Stat UCL 0.0266
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.00899 Mean in Log Scale -5.468
KM SD (logged) 1.341 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.03
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.34
KM SD (logged) 1.341 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.03
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.34 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.00967
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -6.385 KM Geo Mean 0.00169
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.00727
Page 6 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385 Minimum 7.388 Mean 22.19
Total Number of Observations 24 Number of Distinct Observations 18
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 15.45
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.54 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.45
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 18.11 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 23.32
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 12.62 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 11.67
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 12.46
95% CLT UCL 11.63 95% Jackknife UCL 11.73
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 11.59 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 13.86
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.42 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.33
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19.08
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 11.3 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.05
Maximum of Logged Data 3.388 SD of logged Data 0.526
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.411 Mean of logged Data 2.067
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.177 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.916 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.201 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.845 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 11.51 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 11.69
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0392 Adjusted Chi Square Value 108
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 9.314 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5.543
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 109.7
Theta hat (MLE) 2.915 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.298
nu hat (MLE) 153.4 nu star (bias corrected) 135.6
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.196 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.824
Page 7 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 33.21 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 38.29
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 48.27
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 27.8 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 29.56
Maximum of Logged Data 4.361 SD of logged Data 0.583
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2 Mean of logged Data 2.905
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.177 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.916 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.192 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.89 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 27.94 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 28.4
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0392 Adjusted Chi Square Value 90.6
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 22.19 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 14.28
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 92.1
Theta hat (MLE) 8.131 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 9.185
nu hat (MLE) 131 nu star (bias corrected) 116
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.729 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.416
K-S Test Statistic 0.241 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.179 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.708 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.752 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 28.64
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 28.36 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 29.95
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.177 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.916 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.331 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.658 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 17.63 Std. Error of Mean 3.598
Coefficient of Variation 0.794 Skewness 2.341
Maximum 78.34 Median 17.36
Page 8 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.533 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Coefficient of Variation 2.161 Skewness 3.189
Maximum 2128 Median 9.535
SD 459.8 Std. Error of Mean 88.49
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.55 Mean 212.8
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 27 Number of Distinct Observations 23
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 10
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 10
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 37.87
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 32.98 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 37.87
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 44.66 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 57.99
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 30.93 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 28.36
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 30.57
95% CLT UCL 28.11 95% Jackknife UCL 28.36
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 28.08 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 32.88
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Page 9 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 478.3 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 598.5
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 765.4 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1093
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 771.5 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 366.9
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 433.7
95% CLT UCL 358.3 95% Jackknife UCL 363.7
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 355.6 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 521.1
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1147 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1513
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2233
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 4944 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 882.9
Maximum of Logged Data 7.663 SD of logged Data 2.515
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.597 Mean of logged Data 2.923
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.167 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.923 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.123 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.93 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 439.2 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 461
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0401 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.937
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 212.8 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 403.4
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 7.281
Theta hat (MLE) 745.9 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 764.7
nu hat (MLE) 15.41 nu star (bias corrected) 15.03
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.285 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.278
5% K-S Critical Value 0.183 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.86 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.222 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.517 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 363.7 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 416.4
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 372.8
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.334 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.167 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.923 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 10 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.167 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.923 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.19 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.941 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 445.7 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 466.2
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0401 Adjusted Chi Square Value 8.274
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 227.2 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 405.3
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.654
Theta hat (MLE) 697.4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 722.9
nu hat (MLE) 17.6 nu star (bias corrected) 16.97
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.326 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.314
K-S Test Statistic 0.267 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.547 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.847 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 395.3
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 385.8 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 441.2
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.167 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.923 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.336 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.535 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 482.9 Std. Error of Mean 92.93
Coefficient of Variation 2.125 Skewness 3.197
Minimum 0.764 Mean 227.2
Maximum 2240 Median 14.95
Total Number of Observations 27 Number of Distinct Observations 22
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 1093
Page 11 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/2/2020 7:30:30 AM
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 807.6
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 506 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 632.3
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 807.6 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1152
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 856.4 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 407
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 470.6
95% CLT UCL 380.1 95% Jackknife UCL 385.8
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 374.4 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 538
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1005 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1317
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1931
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 2787 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 780.1
Maximum of Logged Data 7.714 SD of logged Data 2.275
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.27 Mean of logged Data 3.338
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 12 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHIJKL
nu hat (MLE) 20.2 nu star (bias corrected) 17.75
k hat (MLE) 0.631 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.555
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0766 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0872
Maximum 0.431 Median 0.01
SD 0.106 CV 2.183
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0483
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.163
Theta hat (MLE) 0.111 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.305
nu hat (MLE) 11.79 nu star (bias corrected) 4.281
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.474 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.535
K-S Test Statistic 0.345 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.4 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.548 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.663 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.235 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.346
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0964 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.137 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.178
KM SD 0.103 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0996 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.047 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.03
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.383 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.726 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -2.188 SD of Logged Detects 0.936
Median Detects 0.0843 CV Detects 1.098
Skewness Detects 1.924 Kurtosis Detects 3.726
Variance Detects 0.0322 Percent Non-Detects 75%
Mean Detects 0.163 SD Detects 0.179
Minimum Detect 0.0542 Minimum Non-Detect 0.00554
Maximum Detect 0.431 Maximum Non-Detect 0.163
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 12
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 12
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 16
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
Page 1 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
Suggested UCL to Use
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1) 0.182
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.105 SD in Log Scale 1.548
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.103 95% H-Stat UCL 0.273
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0569 Mean in Log Scale -3.948
KM SD (logged) 1.391 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.351
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.419
KM SD (logged) 1.391 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.351
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.419 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.111
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -4.37 KM Geo Mean 0.0126
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.124 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.231
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.106
SD in Original Scale 0.107 SD in Log Scale 1.373
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0923 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0952
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0456 Mean in Log Scale -4.36
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.289 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.854 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.157 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.182
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (6.70, α) 2.008 Adjusted Chi Square Value (6.70, β) 1.729
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0634 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.142
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.239 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.504
nu hat (KM) 6.605 nu star (KM) 6.7
theta hat (KM) 0.228 theta star (KM) 0.224
Variance (KM) 0.0107 SE of Mean (KM) 0.03
k hat (KM) 0.206 k star (KM) 0.209
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.047 SD (KM) 0.103
Approximate Chi Square Value (17.75, α) 9.209 Adjusted Chi Square Value (17.75, β) 8.515
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0932 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0335
Page 2 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
Maximum of Logged Data -2.299 SD of logged Data 2.024
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -8.438 Mean of logged Data -5.025
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.16 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.927 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0546 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.0599
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 5.783
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0253 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0388
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 6.343
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0534 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0593
nu hat (MLE) 15.18 nu star (bias corrected) 13.67
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.474 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.427
K-S Test Statistic 0.157 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.228 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.46 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.802 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.0412
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.0407 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.0431
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.272 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.721 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 0.0351 Std. Error of Mean 0.00877
Coefficient of Variation 1.384 Skewness 1.416
Minimum 2.1640E-4 Mean 0.0253
Maximum 0.1 Median 0.00763
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 15
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 3 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.23 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.224 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.17 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.779 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2130
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 2049 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2511
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.357 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.469 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 2170 Std. Error of Mean 542.4
Coefficient of Variation 1.975 Skewness 3.59
Minimum 45.86 Mean 1098
Maximum 8961 Median 338.6
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 15
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7439-96-5__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.0599
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0516 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0636
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0801 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.113
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.0377 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0397
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0419
95% CLT UCL 0.0398 95% Jackknife UCL 0.0407
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.0394 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.0479
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.135 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.177
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.259
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.539 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.105
Page 4 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 15
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 9
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 10
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 3463
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2726 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3463
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4486 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6495
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5188 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2060
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2754
95% CLT UCL 1991 95% Jackknife UCL 2049
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1947 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 5519
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2295 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2893
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4067
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 2611 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1865
Maximum of Logged Data 9.101 SD of logged Data 1.229
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.826 Mean of logged Data 6.137
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.163 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.957 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 2042 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 2199
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 9.747
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1098 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1407
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 10.49
Theta hat (MLE) 1571 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1801
nu hat (MLE) 22.38 nu star (bias corrected) 19.51
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.699 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.61
Page 5 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331 Maximum 10.22 Median 1.295
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.366 Mean 2.246
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 2.353
Theta hat (MLE) 1.806 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.165
nu hat (MLE) 39.09 nu star (bias corrected) 32.61
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.303 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.087
K-S Test Statistic 0.182 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.226 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.538 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.757 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 6.279 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 8.661
95% KM (z) UCL 3.322 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 4.66
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 4.193 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 5.066
KM SD 2.482 95% KM (BCA) UCL 3.43
95% KM (t) UCL 3.391 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 3.422
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 2.264 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.643
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.22 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.278 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.713 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Skewness Detects 2.278 Kurtosis Detects 5.53
Mean of Logged Detects 0.425 SD of Logged Detects 0.927
Mean Detects 2.353 SD Detects 2.626
Median Detects 1.346 CV Detects 1.116
Maximum Detect 10.22 Maximum Non-Detect 1.856
Variance Detects 6.897 Percent Non-Detects 6.25%
Number of Distinct Detects 14 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
Minimum Detect 0.366 Minimum Non-Detect 1.856
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Detects 15 Number of Non-Detects 1
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
General Statistics
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg) was not processed!
Page 6 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL 4.255 95% GROS Adjusted Gamma UCL 3.696
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 2.562 SD in Log Scale 0.904
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 3.386 95% H-Stat UCL 4.057
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 2.264 Mean in Log Scale 0.394
KM SD (logged) 0.887 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.535
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.232
KM SD (logged) 0.887 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.535
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.232 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 3.903
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.388 KM Geo Mean 1.474
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 3.774 95% Bootstrap t UCL 4.851
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 4.057
SD in Original Scale 2.563 SD in Log Scale 0.905
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 3.385 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3.337
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 2.262 Mean in Log Scale 0.392
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.124 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.22 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.969 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 3.98 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 4.255
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (22.97, α) 13.07 Adjusted Chi Square Value (22.97, β) 12.22
80% gamma percentile (KM) 3.719 90% gamma percentile (KM) 5.65
95% gamma percentile (KM) 7.638 99% gamma percentile (KM) 12.37
nu hat (KM) 26.63 nu star (KM) 22.97
theta hat (KM) 2.721 theta star (KM) 3.154
Variance (KM) 6.161 SE of Mean (KM) 0.643
k hat (KM) 0.832 k star (KM) 0.718
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 2.264 SD (KM) 2.482
Approximate Chi Square Value (34.67, α) 22.2 Adjusted Chi Square Value (34.67, β) 21.07
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 3.507 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 3.696
nu hat (MLE) 41.03 nu star (bias corrected) 34.67
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0335
k hat (MLE) 1.282 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.084
Theta hat (MLE) 1.751 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.073
SD 2.573 CV 1.146
Page 7 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.17 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.952 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 23.56 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 24.38
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 53.02
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 17.56 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 11.58
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 54.86
Theta hat (MLE) 6.315 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 7.632
nu hat (MLE) 88.97 nu star (bias corrected) 73.62
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.78 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.301
K-S Test Statistic 0.215 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.217 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.575 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.746 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 23.69
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 23.37 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 25.07
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.285 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.74 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 13.26 Std. Error of Mean 3.314
Coefficient of Variation 0.755 Skewness 2.332
Minimum 5.839 Mean 17.56
Maximum 58.98 Median 13.87
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 8 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 16
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 9
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 9
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 16
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 11
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 11
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 24.38
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 27.5 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 32
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 38.26 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 50.54
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 49.54 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 22.99
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 25.68
95% CLT UCL 23.01 95% Jackknife UCL 23.37
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 22.83 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 28.96
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 29.02 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 34.14
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 44.2
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 24.43 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 25.34
Maximum of Logged Data 4.077 SD of logged Data 0.605
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.765 Mean of logged Data 2.675
Page 9 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 68.12 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 88.87
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 195.2 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 53.17
Maximum of Logged Data 4.64 SD of logged Data 1.866
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.709 Mean of logged Data 1.5
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.144 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.903 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 43.73 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 48.16
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 5.194
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 19.63 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 31.1
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 5.721
Theta hat (MLE) 44.73 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 49.29
nu hat (MLE) 14.04 nu star (bias corrected) 12.74
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.439 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.398
5% K-S Critical Value 0.229 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.809 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.222 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.034 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 33.67 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 36.57
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 34.26
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.379 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.655 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 1.632 Skewness 1.759
Maximum 103.5 Median 4.103
SD 32.04 Std. Error of Mean 8.01
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.492 Mean 19.63
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 15
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Page 10 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600 Gamma Statistics
5% K-S Critical Value 0.228 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.806 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.223 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.009 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 33.81 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 36.69
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 34.39
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.36 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.661 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 1.611 Skewness 1.756
Maximum 103.4 Median 4.37
SD 31.92 Std. Error of Mean 7.981
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.551 Mean 19.82
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 48.16
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 43.66 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 54.54
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 69.65 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 99.33
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 32.37 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 33.4
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 36.86
95% CLT UCL 32.8 95% Jackknife UCL 33.67
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 32.18 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 44.16
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 129.6
Page 11 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 9 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/22/2020 8:48:25 AM
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 47.79
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 43.76 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 54.61
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 69.66 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 99.23
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 32.55 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 32.79
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 37.04
95% CLT UCL 32.95 95% Jackknife UCL 33.81
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 32.3 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 43.53
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 67.26 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 87.59
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 127.5
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 177 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 52.6
Maximum of Logged Data 4.639 SD of logged Data 1.823
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.596 Mean of logged Data 1.569
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.144 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.903 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 43.47 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 47.79
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 5.457
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 19.82 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 30.91
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 5.999
Theta hat (MLE) 43.58 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 48.21
nu hat (MLE) 14.55 nu star (bias corrected) 13.16
k hat (MLE) 0.455 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.411
Page 12 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 0.00204 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.0022
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 12.69
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00117 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00127
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 13.69
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00115 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00138
nu hat (MLE) 28.59 nu star (bias corrected) 23.8
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.021 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.85
5% K-S Critical Value 0.235 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.76 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.237 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.648 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.0018 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.00191
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.00183
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.304 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.742 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 1.135 Skewness 1.501
Maximum 0.00401 Median 5.2920E-4
SD 0.00133 Std. Error of Mean 3.5569E-4
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 1.2026E-4 Mean 0.00117
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 13
The data set for variable concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 10 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:18:20 PM
Page 1 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 10 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:18:20 PM
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
The data set for variable concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 9
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 9
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.0022
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00224 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00272
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00339 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00471
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.00195 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00179
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0019
95% CLT UCL 0.00176 95% Jackknife UCL 0.0018
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.00173 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.00226
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00278 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00348
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00486
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.00304 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00227
Maximum of Logged Data -5.519 SD of logged Data 1.103
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -9.026 Mean of logged Data -7.312
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.17 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.946 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Page 2 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 10 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:18:20 PM
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.78 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.73
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 9.605 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.09
Maximum of Logged Data 2.586 SD of logged Data 0.218
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.847 Mean of logged Data 2.128
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.134 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.931 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 9.568 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 9.707
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 436
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8.588 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.047
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 442.4
Theta hat (MLE) 0.384 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.488
nu hat (MLE) 625.6 nu star (bias corrected) 492.9
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 22.34 k star (bias corrected MLE) 17.6
5% K-S Critical Value 0.228 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.734 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.146 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.406 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 9.508 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 9.575
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 9.529
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.147 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.904 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.227 Skewness 0.894
Maximum 13.28 Median 8.537
SD 1.945 Std. Error of Mean 0.52
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 6.344 Mean 8.588
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 12
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
Page 3 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 10 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:18:20 PM
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
Theta hat (MLE) 0.919 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.165
nu hat (MLE) 448.8 nu star (bias corrected) 354
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 16.03 k star (bias corrected MLE) 12.64
K-S Test Statistic 0.178 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.228 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.513 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.734 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 16.4
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 16.42 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 16.16
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.149 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.925 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 3.586 Std. Error of Mean 0.958
Coefficient of Variation 0.244 Skewness -0.506
Minimum 8.259 Mean 14.72
Maximum 19.29 Median 15.42
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 10
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 9.508
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.15 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.85
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.83 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.76
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 9.808 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 9.447
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 9.506
95% CLT UCL 9.443 95% Jackknife UCL 9.508
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 9.405 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 9.656
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.59
Page 4 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 10 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:18:20 PM
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 16.42
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.6 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 18.9
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 20.71 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 24.26
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 16.11 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 16.25
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 16.15
95% CLT UCL 16.3 95% Jackknife UCL 16.42
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 16.21 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 16.28
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19.44 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 21.47
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 25.45
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 17.02 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.98
Maximum of Logged Data 2.96 SD of logged Data 0.27
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.111 Mean of logged Data 2.658
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.185 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.894 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 16.74 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 17.03
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 306.1
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 14.72 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.141
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 311.4
Page 5 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 10 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:18:20 PM
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 53.27
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.945 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.58
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 55.43
Theta hat (MLE) 0.285 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.356
nu hat (MLE) 92.83 nu star (bias corrected) 74.27
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.315 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.653
5% K-S Critical Value 0.23 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.742 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.184 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.89 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 1.275 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 1.397
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1.297
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.255 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.655 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.738 Skewness 2.736
Maximum 3.151 Median 0.743
SD 0.697 Std. Error of Mean 0.186
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.485 Mean 0.945
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 4
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 4
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Page 6 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 10 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:18:20 PM
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.832 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.601 Skewness 1.516
Maximum 3.194 Median 1.01
SD 0.749 Std. Error of Mean 0.2
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.596 Mean 1.247
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 1.317
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.504 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.757
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.109 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.799
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 2.409 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.279
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.405
95% CLT UCL 1.251 95% Jackknife UCL 1.275
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1.235 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 1.679
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.501 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.753
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.249
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1.253 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.319
Maximum of Logged Data 1.148 SD of logged Data 0.53
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.723 Mean of logged Data -0.215
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.169 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.86 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 1.266 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.317
Page 7 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 10 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:18:20 PM
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.848 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.12
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.497 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.239
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1.776 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.571
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.675
95% CLT UCL 1.576 95% Jackknife UCL 1.601
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1.559 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 1.745
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.028 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.372
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3.047
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1.694 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.781
Maximum of Logged Data 1.161 SD of logged Data 0.535
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.518 Mean of logged Data 0.0789
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.146 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.919 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 1.644 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.707
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 60.23
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.247 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.727
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 62.53
Theta hat (MLE) 0.338 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.423
nu hat (MLE) 103.3 nu star (bias corrected) 82.46
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.688 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.945
5% K-S Critical Value 0.23 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.741 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.17 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.506 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 1.601 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 1.663
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1.615
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.192 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 8 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_c.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 10 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:18:20 PM
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 1.601
Page 9 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Approximate Chi Square Value (8.95, α) 3.3 Adjusted Chi Square Value (8.95, β) 2.86
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0452 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0521
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0259 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0487
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0746 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.141
nu hat (KM) 9.7 nu star (KM) 8.955
theta hat (KM) 0.048 theta star (KM) 0.052
Variance (KM) 7.9936E-4 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0107
k hat (KM) 0.346 k star (KM) 0.32
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0166 SD (KM) 0.0283
Mean (detects) 0.0857
Theta hat (MLE) 4.2513E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 806.1 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 201.5 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0834 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.123
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0342 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0487 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0632
KM SD 0.0283 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0356 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0166 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0107
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Mean of Logged Detects -2.46 SD of Logged Detects 0.0997
Median Detects 0.0857 CV Detects 0.0995
Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A
Variance Detects 7.2722E-5 Percent Non-Detects 85.71%
Mean Detects 0.0857 SD Detects 0.00853
Minimum Detect 0.0796 Minimum Non-Detect 0.00514
Maximum Detect 0.0917 Maximum Non-Detect 0.0274
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 12
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 11 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/29/2020 2:14:57 PM
Page 1 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 11 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/29/2020 2:14:57 PM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.402 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.497 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 0.0252 Std. Error of Mean 0.00673
Coefficient of Variation 2.157 Skewness 3.04
Minimum 3.3870E-4 Mean 0.0117
Maximum 0.0928 Median 0.00249
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available!
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0356 KM H-UCL 0.0265
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0288 SD in Log Scale 1.247
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0327 95% H-Stat UCL 0.0577
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0191 Mean in Log Scale -4.745
KM SD (logged) 0.984 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.766
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.372
KM SD (logged) 0.984 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.766
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.372 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.0265
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -4.87 KM Geo Mean 0.00767
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.059
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0585 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.058
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0598 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0649
Mean in Original Scale 0.0506 Mean in Log Scale -3.028
SD in Original Scale 0.0168 SD in Log Scale 0.294
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Page 2 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 11 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/29/2020 2:14:57 PM
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0786
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0318 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.041
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0537 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0786
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.0748 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.024
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0303
95% CLT UCL 0.0227 95% Jackknife UCL 0.0236
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.0223 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.106
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0263 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0339
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0489
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.0508 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0208
Maximum of Logged Data -2.378 SD of logged Data 1.542
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -7.99 Mean of logged Data -5.781
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.147 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.934 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.0269 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.0303
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 4.591
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0117 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0179
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 5.167
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0243 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0274
nu hat (MLE) 13.46 nu star (bias corrected) 11.91
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.481 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.425
K-S Test Statistic 0.255 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.242 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.288 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.797 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.0245
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.0236 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.0286
Page 3 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 11 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/29/2020 2:14:57 PM
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 62.61
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 7.072 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.053
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 64.95
Theta hat (MLE) 1.854 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.323
nu hat (MLE) 106.8 nu star (bias corrected) 85.23
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.814 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.044
5% K-S Critical Value 0.23 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.741 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.248 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.564 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 9.483 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 10.46
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 9.663
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.31 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.582 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.72 Skewness 2.964
Maximum 23.48 Median 4.967
SD 5.093 Std. Error of Mean 1.361
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 4.1 Mean 7.072
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 13
The data set for variable concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 14
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 4 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 11 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/29/2020 2:14:57 PM
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.186 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.91 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 4.905 Std. Error of Mean 1.311
Coefficient of Variation 0.37 Skewness 0.617
Minimum 7.581 Mean 13.24
Maximum 22.2 Median 12.18
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 13
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 9.483 or 95% Modified-t UCL 9.663
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.16 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.01
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.57 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 20.62
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 18.46 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 9.498
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 10.79
95% CLT UCL 9.311 95% Jackknife UCL 9.483
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 9.204 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 15.05
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.73 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.41
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.71
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 8.995 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.517
Maximum of Logged Data 3.156 SD of logged Data 0.475
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.411 Mean of logged Data 1.819
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.24 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.765 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 9.28 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 9.628
Page 5 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 11 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/29/2020 2:14:57 PM
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 15.57
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.18 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 18.96
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 21.43 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 26.29
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 15.44 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 15.42
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 15.73
95% CLT UCL 15.4 95% Jackknife UCL 15.57
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 15.33 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 15.99
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18.94 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 21.41
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 26.26
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 16.2 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.16
Maximum of Logged Data 3.1 SD of logged Data 0.364
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.026 Mean of logged Data 2.521
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.145 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.935 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 15.88 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 16.27
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 148
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 13.24 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5.197
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 151.7
Theta hat (MLE) 1.614 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.039
nu hat (MLE) 229.7 nu star (bias corrected) 181.8
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 8.205 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.494
K-S Test Statistic 0.166 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.229 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.403 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.736 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 15.6
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 15.57 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 15.63
Page 6 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 11 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/29/2020 2:14:57 PM
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
95% Student's-t UCL 6.272 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 7.138
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 6.433
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.287 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.633 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 1.251 Skewness 2.746
Maximum 19.5 Median 2.143
SD 4.928 Std. Error of Mean 1.317
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.586 Mean 3.939
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 13
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 7 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 11 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/29/2020 2:14:57 PM
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438 ProUCL computes and outputs H-statistic based UCLs for historical reasons only.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% H-UCL 7.666
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.89 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9.68
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.16 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.04
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 13.37 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 6.251
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 7.118
95% CLT UCL 6.105 95% Jackknife UCL 6.272
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 6.147 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 9.925
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7.972 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.835
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.49
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 7.666 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.631
Maximum of Logged Data 2.971 SD of logged Data 0.934
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.534 Mean of logged Data 0.905
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.182 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.94 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 6.515 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 6.982
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 15.8
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3.939 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.938
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 16.94
Theta hat (MLE) 3.248 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.938
nu hat (MLE) 33.95 nu star (bias corrected) 28.01
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.213 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1
5% K-S Critical Value 0.234 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.756 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.24 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.805 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
Page 8 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 11 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/29/2020 2:14:57 PM
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492 Maximum of Logged Data 3.023 SD of logged Data 0.893
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.411 Mean of logged Data 1.042
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.176 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.94 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 7.01 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 7.489
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 17.57
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4.335 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.164
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 18.77
Theta hat (MLE) 3.286 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.999
nu hat (MLE) 36.93 nu star (bias corrected) 30.35
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.319 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.084
K-S Test Statistic 0.232 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.234 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.806 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.754 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 6.944
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 6.778 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 7.669
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.293 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.643 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 5.162 Std. Error of Mean 1.38
Coefficient of Variation 1.191 Skewness 2.704
Minimum 0.663 Mean 4.335
Maximum 20.55 Median 2.466
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
H-statistic often results in unstable (both high and low) values of UCL95 as shown in examples in the Technical Guide.
It is therefore recommended to avoid the use of H-statistic based 95% UCLs.
Use of nonparametric methods are preferred to compute UCL95 for skewed data sets which do not follow a gamma distribution.
Page 9 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 11 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/29/2020 2:14:57 PM
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 7.489
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8.474 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.35
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.95 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 18.06
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 14.28 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 6.854
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 7.724
95% CLT UCL 6.604 95% Jackknife UCL 6.778
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 6.651 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 9.655
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8.618 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.59
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.45
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 8.087 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7.2
Page 10 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
nu hat (MLE) 261.7 nu star (bias corrected) 207
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 9.347 k star (bias corrected MLE) 7.392
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00495 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00626
Maximum 0.081 Median 0.039
SD 0.0166 CV 0.358
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.0236 Mean 0.0463
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.0738
Theta hat (MLE) 4.9671E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 891.9 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 148.6 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0777 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.112
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0353 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0478 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0603
KM SD 0.0282 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0364 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0201 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.00924
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.191 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.425 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.997 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Mean of Logged Detects -2.609 SD of Logged Detects 0.101
Median Detects 0.0743 CV Detects 0.1
Skewness Detects -0.271 Kurtosis Detects N/A
Variance Detects 5.4467E-5 Percent Non-Detects 78.57%
Mean Detects 0.0738 SD Detects 0.00738
Minimum Detect 0.0662 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0054
Maximum Detect 0.081 Maximum Non-Detect 0.0394
Number of Detects 3 Number of Non-Detects 11
Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 7
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 10
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet_e.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 12 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:22:34 PM
Page 1 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_e.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 12 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:22:34 PM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0364
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0266 SD in Log Scale 1.003
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0384 95% H-Stat UCL 0.0594
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0258 Mean in Log Scale -4.106
KM SD (logged) 1.072 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.913
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.351
KM SD (logged) 1.072 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.913
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.351 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.0399
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -4.661 KM Geo Mean 0.00946
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0583 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0603
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0577
SD in Original Scale 0.0134 SD in Log Scale 0.237
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0575 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.057
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0511 Mean in Log Scale -3.001
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.204 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.425 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.993 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0452 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0507
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (12.46, α) 5.532 Adjusted Chi Square Value (12.46, β) 4.932
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0327 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0556
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0803 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.142
nu hat (KM) 14.16 nu star (KM) 12.46
theta hat (KM) 0.0397 theta star (KM) 0.0451
Variance (KM) 7.9617E-4 SE of Mean (KM) 0.00924
k hat (KM) 0.506 k star (KM) 0.445
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0201 SD (KM) 0.0282
Approximate Chi Square Value (206.98, α) 174.7 Adjusted Chi Square Value (206.98, β) 170.8
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0548 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
Page 2 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_e.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 12 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:22:34 PM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.15 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0719
Maximum of Logged Data -1.727 SD of logged Data 1.448
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -6.884 Mean of logged Data -4.386
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.139 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.975 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0624 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.0688
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 7.212
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.031 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0411
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 7.953
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0466 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0544
nu hat (MLE) 18.65 nu star (bias corrected) 15.99
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.666 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.571
K-S Test Statistic 0.225 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.239 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.502 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.778 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.0549
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.0534 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.0613
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.294 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.651 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 0.0473 Std. Error of Mean 0.0126
Coefficient of Variation 1.524 Skewness 2.614
Minimum 0.00102 Mean 0.031
Maximum 0.178 Median 0.0118
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Page 3 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_e.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 12 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:22:34 PM
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225 95% Student's-t UCL 5.303 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 5.212
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.19 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.923 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.194 Skewness -0.828
Maximum 6.038 Median 5.171
SD 0.941 Std. Error of Mean 0.252
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.774 Mean 4.857
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 12
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 13
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 10
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 11
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.0688
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.069 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0861
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.11 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.157
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.125 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0532
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0656
95% CLT UCL 0.0518 95% Jackknife UCL 0.0534
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.0514 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.0776
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0903 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.116
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.166
Page 4 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_e.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 12 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:22:34 PM
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 5.303
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5.612 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5.954
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.429 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.361
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5.209 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.251
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.229
95% CLT UCL 5.271 95% Jackknife UCL 5.303
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.258 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 5.252
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.101 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.636
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7.687
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 5.441 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5.716
Maximum of Logged Data 1.798 SD of logged Data 0.217
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.02 Mean of logged Data 1.56
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.197 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.879 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 5.379 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 5.453
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 490.1
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4.857 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1.096
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 496.8
Theta hat (MLE) 0.195 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.247
nu hat (MLE) 698.6 nu star (bias corrected) 550.2
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 24.95 k star (bias corrected MLE) 19.65
5% K-S Critical Value 0.228 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.734 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.202 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.584 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 5.294
Page 5 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_e.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 12 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:22:34 PM
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333 Maximum of Logged Data 2.671 SD of logged Data 0.418
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.077 Mean of logged Data 2.143
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.19 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.907 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 11.1 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 11.39
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 129.3
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 9.144 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.812
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 132.8
Theta hat (MLE) 1.259 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.589
nu hat (MLE) 203.3 nu star (bias corrected) 161.1
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 7.262 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.754
5% K-S Critical Value 0.229 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.736 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.192 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.331 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 10.66 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 10.51
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 10.65
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.163 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.975 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.35 Skewness -0.158
Maximum 14.45 Median 9.469
SD 3.199 Std. Error of Mean 0.855
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.935 Mean 9.144
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Page 6 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_e.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 12 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:22:34 PM
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 6
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 7
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 10.66
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.71 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.87
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.48 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.65
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10.56 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 10.48
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 10.45
95% CLT UCL 10.55 95% Jackknife UCL 10.66
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 10.52 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 10.54
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.82 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.81
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19.71
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 11.71 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.39
Page 7 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_e.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 12 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:22:34 PM
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 77.39 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 98.59
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 108.5 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 62.12
Maximum of Logged Data 5.127 SD of logged Data 1.326
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.315 Mean of logged Data 2.569
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.158 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.971 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 60.26 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 66.23
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 7.813
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 30.66 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 39.48
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.587
Theta hat (MLE) 43.38 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 50.85
nu hat (MLE) 19.79 nu star (bias corrected) 16.88
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.707 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.603
5% K-S Critical Value 0.238 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.775 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.222 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.732 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 53.15 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 60.17
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 54.5
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.289 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.636 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 1.55 Skewness 2.376
Maximum 168.5 Median 9.255
SD 47.53 Std. Error of Mean 12.7
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 1.37 Mean 30.66
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Page 8 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_e.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 12 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:22:34 PM
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
Theta hat (MLE) 43.3 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 50.8
nu hat (MLE) 20 nu star (bias corrected) 17.05
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.714 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.609
K-S Test Statistic 0.223 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.238 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.72 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.774 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 54.79
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 53.45 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 60.42
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.291 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.639 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 47.57 Std. Error of Mean 12.71
Coefficient of Variation 1.538 Skewness 2.361
Minimum 1.38 Mean 30.94
Maximum 168.4 Median 9.354
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 66.23
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 68.76 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 86.03
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 110 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 157
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 146.4 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 52.44
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 60.74
95% CLT UCL 51.55 95% Jackknife UCL 53.15
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 50.95 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 108
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 140.2
Page 9 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_e.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 12 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:22:34 PM
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 66.53
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 69.08 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 86.35
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 110.3 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 157.4
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 144.8 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 52.54
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 60.62
95% CLT UCL 51.85 95% Jackknife UCL 53.45
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 51.05 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 107.3
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 78.25 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 99.66
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 141.7
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 109 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 62.83
Maximum of Logged Data 5.126 SD of logged Data 1.321
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.322 Mean of logged Data 2.588
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.16 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.972 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 60.57 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 66.53
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 7.928
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 30.94 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 39.64
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.708
Page 10 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
nu hat (MLE) 20.78 nu star (bias corrected) 16.45
k hat (MLE) 0.945 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.748
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0309 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.039
Maximum 0.14 Median 0.01
SD 0.0413 CV 1.414
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.003 Mean 0.0292
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.0522
Theta hat (MLE) 0.058 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.106
nu hat (MLE) 8.999 nu star (bias corrected) 4.933
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.9 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.493
K-S Test Statistic 0.139 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.365 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.162 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.694 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.112 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.164
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0482 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0738
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0671 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0861
KM SD 0.0414 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0488
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0506 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0489
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0253 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.014
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.243 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.89 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -3.602 SD of Logged Detects 1.479
Median Detects 0.032 CV Detects 1.056
Skewness Detects 1.261 Kurtosis Detects 1.092
Variance Detects 0.00304 Percent Non-Detects 54.55%
Mean Detects 0.0522 SD Detects 0.0551
Minimum Detect 0.003 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0025
Maximum Detect 0.14 Maximum Non-Detect 0.031
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 6
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 11 Number of Distinct Observations 10
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
Page 1 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0506
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0433 SD in Log Scale 1.784
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0494 95% H-Stat UCL 0.455
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0258 Mean in Log Scale -5.011
KM SD (logged) 1.482 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.994
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.505
KM SD (logged) 1.482 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.994
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.505 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.148
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -4.879 KM Geo Mean 0.0076
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0543 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.107
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 2.287
SD in Original Scale 0.0441 SD in Log Scale 2.238
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0481 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0479
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0241 Mean in Log Scale -5.712
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.159 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.968 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0789 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0968
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (7.30, α) 2.337 Adjusted Chi Square Value (7.30, β) 1.906
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0396 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0736
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.112 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.21
nu hat (KM) 8.206 nu star (KM) 7.301
theta hat (KM) 0.0678 theta star (KM) 0.0762
Variance (KM) 0.00171 SE of Mean (KM) 0.014
k hat (KM) 0.373 k star (KM) 0.332
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0253 SD (KM) 0.0414
Approximate Chi Square Value (16.45, α) 8.28 Adjusted Chi Square Value (16.45, β) 7.354
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.058 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0653
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0278
Page 2 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
Maximum of Logged Data -0.939 SD of logged Data 2.618
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -8.454 Mean of logged Data -4.818
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.243 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.859 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.151 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.933 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 0.239 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.291
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.029 Adjusted Chi Square Value 1.749
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0734 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.137
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 2.131
Theta hat (MLE) 0.236 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.254
nu hat (MLE) 7.46 nu star (bias corrected) 6.928
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.311 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.289
K-S Test Statistic 0.213 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.265 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.558 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.822 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.148
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.144 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.162
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.243 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.859 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.396 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.588 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 0.136 Std. Error of Mean 0.0393
Coefficient of Variation 1.854 Skewness 2.013
Minimum 2.1300E-4 Mean 0.0734
Maximum 0.391 Median 0.0127
Total Number of Observations 12 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 3 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.246 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.255 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.659 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.729 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 9.36
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 9.395 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 9.057
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.251 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.2 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.915 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 2.237 Std. Error of Mean 0.674
Coefficient of Variation 0.274 Skewness -1.034
Minimum 3.3 Mean 8.173
Maximum 11 Median 8.2
Total Number of Observations 11 Number of Distinct Observations 10
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.291
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.191 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.245
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.319 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.464
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.534 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.137
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.158
95% CLT UCL 0.138 95% Jackknife UCL 0.144
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.133 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.472
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.493 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.657
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.98
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 36.87 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.374
Page 4 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 9.395
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.2 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.11
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.38 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.88
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 9.123 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 9.164
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 9.118
95% CLT UCL 9.282 95% Jackknife UCL 9.395
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 9.24 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 9.202
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.63
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16.84
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 10.29 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.83
Maximum of Logged Data 2.398 SD of logged Data 0.344
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.194 Mean of logged Data 2.055
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.251 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.272 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.816 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 9.815 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 10.12
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0278 Adjusted Chi Square Value 144.5
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8.173 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.866
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 149
Theta hat (MLE) 0.736 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.005
nu hat (MLE) 244.2 nu star (bias corrected) 178.9
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 11.1 k star (bias corrected MLE) 8.133
Page 5 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.08 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.86
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 13 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.08
Maximum of Logged Data 2.708 SD of logged Data 0.552
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.833 Mean of logged Data 2.021
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.251 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.146 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.94 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 11.53 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 12.13
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0278 Adjusted Chi Square Value 49.07
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8.518 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.78
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 51.62
Theta hat (MLE) 1.989 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.682
nu hat (MLE) 94.23 nu star (bias corrected) 69.86
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 4.283 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.175
5% K-S Critical Value 0.256 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.732 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.121 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.203 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 10.71 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 10.6
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 10.72
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.165 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.251 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.965 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.47 Skewness 0.251
Maximum 15 Median 8
SD 4.007 Std. Error of Mean 1.208
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.3 Mean 8.518
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 11 Number of Distinct Observations 11
Page 6 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380 K-S Test Statistic 0.17 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.384 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.812 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 598 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 875.4
95% KM (z) UCL 253.7 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 747
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 355.1 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 456.8
KM SD 247 95% KM (BCA) UCL 270.2
95% KM (t) UCL 265 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 259.4
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 130.5 KM Standard Error of Mean 74.86
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.347 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.251 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.593 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 2.972 SD of Logged Detects 2.43
Median Detects 38 CV Detects 1.923
Skewness Detects 2.552 Kurtosis Detects 6.64
Variance Detects 71985 Percent Non-Detects 8.333%
Mean Detects 139.5 SD Detects 268.3
Minimum Detect 0.47 Minimum Non-Detect 220
Maximum Detect 880 Maximum Non-Detect 220
Number of Detects 11 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 11 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 12 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 10.71
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.14 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.78
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 16.06 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 20.54
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10.59 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 10.32
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 10.38
95% CLT UCL 10.51 95% Jackknife UCL 10.71
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 10.43 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 10.73
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 23.33
Page 7 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 2.909 KM Geo Mean 18.34
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 341.8 95% Bootstrap t UCL 838.6
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 14716
SD in Original Scale 258.5 SD in Log Scale 2.325
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 262.7 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 251.7
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 128.7 Mean in Log Scale 2.916
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.153 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.251 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.968 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 454.5 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 560.5
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (6.36, α) 1.826 Adjusted Chi Square Value (6.36, β) 1.481
80% gamma percentile (KM) 193.3 90% gamma percentile (KM) 389.9
95% gamma percentile (KM) 620.7 99% gamma percentile (KM) 1230
nu hat (KM) 6.702 nu star (KM) 6.36
theta hat (KM) 467.4 theta star (KM) 492.5
Variance (KM) 61003 SE of Mean (KM) 74.86
k hat (KM) 0.279 k star (KM) 0.265
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 130.5 SD (KM) 247
Approximate Chi Square Value (6.34, α) 1.815 Adjusted Chi Square Value (6.34, β) 1.471
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 446.5 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 551
nu hat (MLE) 6.673 nu star (bias corrected) 6.338
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.029
k hat (MLE) 0.278 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.264
Theta hat (MLE) 459.9 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 484.2
Maximum 880 Median 22.8
SD 259 CV 2.025
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 127.9
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 139.5
Theta hat (MLE) 406.6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 449.8
nu hat (MLE) 7.548 nu star (bias corrected) 6.823
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.343 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.31
5% K-S Critical Value 0.274 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 8 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.837 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 602.4 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 879.5
95% KM (z) UCL 258.5 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 896.5
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 359.8 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 461.4
KM SD 247 95% KM (BCA) UCL 271.3
95% KM (t) UCL 269.8 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 268.4
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 135.5 KM Standard Error of Mean 74.77
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.359 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.251 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.593 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 3.78 SD of Logged Detects 1.579
Median Detects 46 CV Detects 1.816
Skewness Detects 2.518 Kurtosis Detects 6.402
Variance Detects 71395 Percent Non-Detects 8.333%
Mean Detects 147.2 SD Detects 267.2
Minimum Detect 8.8 Minimum Non-Detect 7.2
Maximum Detect 880 Maximum Non-Detect 7.2
Number of Detects 11 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 11 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 12 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 747 a Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1) 560.5
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 256 SD in Log Scale 2.37
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 269.7 95% H-Stat UCL 23184
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 137 Mean in Log Scale 3.116
KM SD (logged) 2.291 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.601
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.714
KM SD (logged) 2.291 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.601
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.714 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 12113
Page 9 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 324.5 95% Bootstrap t UCL 899.5
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 2533
SD in Original Scale 258.2 SD in Log Scale 1.868
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 268.8 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 261.8
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 135 Mean in Log Scale 3.461
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.193 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.251 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.896 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 449.5 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 549.6
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (6.75, α) 2.035 Adjusted Chi Square Value (6.75, β) 1.664
80% gamma percentile (KM) 204.3 90% gamma percentile (KM) 402.5
95% gamma percentile (KM) 632.6 99% gamma percentile (KM) 1235
nu hat (KM) 7.224 nu star (KM) 6.751
theta hat (KM) 450.2 theta star (KM) 481.7
Variance (KM) 60992 SE of Mean (KM) 74.77
k hat (KM) 0.301 k star (KM) 0.281
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 135.5 SD (KM) 247
Approximate Chi Square Value (7.92, α) 2.691 Adjusted Chi Square Value (7.92, β) 2.248
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 397.2 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 475.4
nu hat (MLE) 8.788 nu star (bias corrected) 7.924
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.029
k hat (MLE) 0.366 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.33
Theta hat (MLE) 368.4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 408.5
Maximum 880 Median 31
SD 258.3 CV 1.915
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 134.9
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 147.2
Theta hat (MLE) 282.4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 334.8
nu hat (MLE) 11.46 nu star (bias corrected) 9.671
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.521 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.44
K-S Test Statistic 0.218 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.269 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.78 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 10 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - GSLIC EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.112/3/2020 3:18:45 PM
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 896.5 a Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1) 549.6
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 258.1 SD in Log Scale 1.67
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 269 95% H-Stat UCL 1219
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 135.2 Mean in Log Scale 3.572
KM SD (logged) 1.526 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.949
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.462
KM SD (logged) 1.526 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.949
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.462 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 742.5
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 3.63 KM Geo Mean 37.7
Page 11 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.931 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 0.00434 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.00473
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 9.889
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00235 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00279
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 10.77
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00279 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00331
nu hat (MLE) 23.62 nu star (bias corrected) 19.89
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.843 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.71
5% K-S Critical Value 0.237 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.767 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.23 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.665 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.00395 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.00454
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.00406
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.268 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.639 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 1.436 Skewness 2.734
Maximum 0.013 Median 0.00101
SD 0.00338 Std. Error of Mean 9.0210E-4
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.6000E-4 Mean 0.00235
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 13
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 10
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 11
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet_d.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - Shoreline EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.111/18/2020 11:51:49 AM
Page 1 of 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_d.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - Shoreline EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.111/18/2020 11:51:49 AM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117 95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 12.1
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 12.01 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 12.47
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.293 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.704 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 4.616 Std. Error of Mean 1.234
Coefficient of Variation 0.47 Skewness 1.769
Minimum 6.5 Mean 9.821
Maximum 20 Median 8.15
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.00473
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00506 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00628
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00798 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0113
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.00918 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00395
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00455
95% CLT UCL 0.00383 95% Jackknife UCL 0.00395
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.00376 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.006
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00559 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00706
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00994
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.00669 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00454
Maximum of Logged Data -4.343 SD of logged Data 1.193
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -8.255 Mean of logged Data -6.752
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.202 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Page 2 of 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_d.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - Shoreline EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.111/18/2020 11:51:49 AM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 12.01 or 95% Modified-t UCL 12.1
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.52 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.2
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.53 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 22.1
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 20.21 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 11.85
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 12.49
95% CLT UCL 11.85 95% Jackknife UCL 12.01
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 11.78 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 14.85
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.13 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16.04
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19.79
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 12.05 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.76
Maximum of Logged Data 2.996 SD of logged Data 0.383
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.872 Mean of logged Data 2.207
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.236 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.8 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 12.04 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 12.38
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 115.7
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 9.821 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.303
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 119
Theta hat (MLE) 1.495 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.885
nu hat (MLE) 184 nu star (bias corrected) 145.9
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 6.57 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.21
K-S Test Statistic 0.261 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.229 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.302 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.737 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 3 of 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_d.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - Shoreline EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.111/18/2020 11:51:49 AM
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.48 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18.77
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 13.77 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.11
Maximum of Logged Data 2.89 SD of logged Data 0.783
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.588 Mean of logged Data 1.784
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.172 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.919 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 11.45 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 12.07
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 29.29
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 7.8 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 6.132
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 30.87
Theta hat (MLE) 3.902 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.82
nu hat (MLE) 55.97 nu star (bias corrected) 45.31
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.999 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.618
K-S Test Statistic 0.214 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.232 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.623 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.746 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 10.52
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 10.48 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 10.56
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.267 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.861 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 5.663 Std. Error of Mean 1.514
Coefficient of Variation 0.726 Skewness 0.635
Minimum 1.8 Mean 7.8
Maximum 18 Median 4.7
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Page 4 of 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_d.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - Shoreline EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.111/18/2020 11:51:49 AM
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279 Maximum 17 Median 1.55
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.11 Mean 3.256
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 10
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 10
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 11
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 11
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 12.07
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.34 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.4
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.25 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 22.86
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10.07 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 10.26
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 10.55
95% CLT UCL 10.29 95% Jackknife UCL 10.48
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 10.19 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 10.77
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 25.24
Page 5 of 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_d.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - Shoreline EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.111/18/2020 11:51:49 AM
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333 95% CLT UCL 5.256 95% Jackknife UCL 5.41
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.273 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.83
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16.86
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 13.4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7.43
Maximum of Logged Data 2.833 SD of logged Data 1.35
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -2.207 Mean of logged Data 0.409
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.08 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.992 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 6.199 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 6.781
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 8.802
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3.256 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.025
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 9.629
Theta hat (MLE) 4.215 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.975
nu hat (MLE) 21.63 nu star (bias corrected) 18.33
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.773 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.655
5% K-S Critical Value 0.237 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.77 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.148 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.336 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 5.41 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 6.106
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 5.542
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.28 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.681 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 1.397 Skewness 2.448
SD 4.549 Std. Error of Mean 1.216
Page 6 of 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_d.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - Shoreline EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.111/18/2020 11:51:49 AM
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 6.131 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 6.644
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 11.33
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3.434 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.882
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 12.28
Theta hat (MLE) 3.67 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.387
nu hat (MLE) 26.2 nu star (bias corrected) 21.92
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.936 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.783
K-S Test Statistic 0.175 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.236 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.522 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.763 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 5.699
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 5.569 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 6.248
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.288 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.684 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 4.511 Std. Error of Mean 1.206
Coefficient of Variation 1.314 Skewness 2.412
Minimum 0.41 Mean 3.434
Maximum 17 Median 2
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 6.781
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.904 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8.556
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.85 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.35
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 11.82 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.392
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.88
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.191 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 8.069
Page 7 of 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_d.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 13 - Shoreline EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.111/18/2020 11:51:49 AM
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 6.644
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.051 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8.69
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.96 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.43
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 11.78 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.689
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 6.491
95% CLT UCL 5.417 95% Jackknife UCL 5.569
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.355 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 8.046
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8.088 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.16
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.24
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 9.151 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.592
Maximum of Logged Data 2.833 SD of logged Data 1.138
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.892 Mean of logged Data 0.612
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.133 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.954 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Page 8 of 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHIJKL
nu hat (MLE) 21.9 nu star (bias corrected) 21.67
k hat (MLE) 0.261 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.258
Theta hat (MLE) 1.682 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.7
Maximum 13 Median 0.01
SD 2.011 CV 4.586
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.438
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 1.135
Theta hat (MLE) 3.225 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.465
nu hat (MLE) 11.26 nu star (bias corrected) 10.48
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.352 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.328
K-S Test Statistic 0.217 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.231 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 1.355 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.827 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.416 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.59
95% KM (z) UCL 0.959 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 3.912
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.389 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.819
KM SD 1.987 95% KM (BCA) UCL 1.071
95% KM (t) UCL 0.971 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 1.031
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.438 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.317
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.394 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.378 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -1.783 SD of Logged Detects 1.891
Median Detects 0.13 CV Detects 2.817
Skewness Detects 3.868 Kurtosis Detects 15.22
Variance Detects 10.22 Percent Non-Detects 61.9%
Mean Detects 1.135 SD Detects 3.196
Minimum Detect 0.018 Minimum Non-Detect 0.00527
Maximum Detect 13 Maximum Non-Detect 1.476
Number of Detects 16 Number of Non-Detects 26
Number of Distinct Detects 15 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 20
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 42 Number of Distinct Observations 33
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 14 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/30/2020 1:10:49 PM
Page 1 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 14 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/30/2020 1:10:49 PM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Suggested UCL to Use
Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1) 1.96
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 2.01 SD in Log Scale 2.192
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.977 95% H-Stat UCL 0.964
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.455 Mean in Log Scale -3.784
KM SD (logged) 2.017 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.676
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.327
KM SD (logged) 2.017 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.676
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.327 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.518
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -3.851 KM Geo Mean 0.0213
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.459 95% Bootstrap t UCL 3.887
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 2.937
SD in Original Scale 2.012 SD in Log Scale 2.779
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.956 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.034
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.433 Mean in Log Scale -4.869
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.213 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.15 Lilliefors GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.924 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 1.855 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 1.96
95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50)
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (5.13, α) 1.212 Adjusted Chi Square Value (5.13, β) 1.147
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.111 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.839
95% gamma percentile (KM) 2.466 99% gamma percentile (KM) 8.777
nu hat (KM) 4.088 nu star (KM) 5.129
theta hat (KM) 9.008 theta star (KM) 7.179
Variance (KM) 3.949 SE of Mean (KM) 0.317
k hat (KM) 0.0487 k star (KM) 0.0611
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.438 SD (KM) 1.987
Approximate Chi Square Value (21.67, α) 12.09 Adjusted Chi Square Value (21.67, β) 11.84
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.786 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.803
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0443
Page 2 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 14 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/30/2020 1:10:49 PM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.135 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.942 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.125 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.891 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.167 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.17
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0443 Adjusted Chi Square Value 14.42
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0978 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.179
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 14.71
Theta hat (MLE) 0.321 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.327
nu hat (MLE) 25.62 nu star (bias corrected) 25.13
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.305 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.299
5% K-S Critical Value 0.148 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.858 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.248 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 3.243 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.156 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.17
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.158
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.391 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.135 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.5 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.942 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 2.276 Skewness 2.716
Maximum 0.965 Median 0.00915
SD 0.223 Std. Error of Mean 0.0344
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.1330E-4 Mean 0.0978
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 42 Number of Distinct Observations 38
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Page 3 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 14 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/30/2020 1:10:49 PM
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.127 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.986 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.905 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.379 Skewness -0.284
Maximum 17.36 Median 10.17
SD 3.798 Std. Error of Mean 0.849
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 1.652 Mean 10.03
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 20 Number of Distinct Observations 15
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 18
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 15
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 19 Number of Distinct Observations 16
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 0.312
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.201 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.248
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.312 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.44
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.164 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.157
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.169
95% CLT UCL 0.154 95% Jackknife UCL 0.156
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.153 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.187
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.297 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.385
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.557
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.427 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.234
Maximum of Logged Data -0.0353 SD of logged Data 2.186
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -8.068 Mean of logged Data -4.579
Page 4 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 14 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/30/2020 1:10:49 PM
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.58 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.73
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.33 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 18.48
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 11.53 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 11.37
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 11.28
95% CLT UCL 11.43 95% Jackknife UCL 11.5
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 11.33 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 11.47
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.88 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18.28
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 22.99
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 13.36 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.15
Maximum of Logged Data 2.854 SD of logged Data 0.528
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.502 Mean of logged Data 2.205
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.192 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.905 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.209 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.831 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 12.07 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 12.25
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.038 Adjusted Chi Square Value 143.5
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 10.03 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.792
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 145.6
Theta hat (MLE) 1.961 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.289
nu hat (MLE) 204.6 nu star (bias corrected) 175.3
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 5.116 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.382
5% K-S Critical Value 0.194 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.745 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.189 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.642 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 11.5 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 11.37
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 11.49
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.192 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 5 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 14 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/30/2020 1:10:49 PM
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.905 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.958 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 10.98 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 11.18
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.038 Adjusted Chi Square Value 99.91
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8.815 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.953
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 101.7
Theta hat (MLE) 2.391 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.783
nu hat (MLE) 147.5 nu star (bias corrected) 126.7
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.687 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.167
5% K-S Critical Value 0.195 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.746 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.122 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.346 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 10.62 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 10.69
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 10.65
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.144 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.192 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.932 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.905 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.531 Skewness 0.632
Maximum 19.29 Median 7.968
SD 4.678 Std. Error of Mean 1.046
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.828 Mean 8.815
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 20 Number of Distinct Observations 18
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 11.5
Page 6 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 14 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/30/2020 1:10:49 PM
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 25
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 17
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 25 Number of Distinct Observations 17
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 25
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 19
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 25 Number of Distinct Observations 19
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 10.62
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.95 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.37
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.35 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 19.22
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10.73 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 10.57
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 10.72
95% CLT UCL 10.54 95% Jackknife UCL 10.62
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 10.53 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 10.73
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.91 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16.1
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 20.39
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 11.68 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.34
Maximum of Logged Data 2.96 SD of logged Data 0.559
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.04 Mean of logged Data 2.035
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.192 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.119 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Page 7 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 14 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/30/2020 1:10:49 PM
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439 Maximum of Logged Data 6.927 SD of logged Data 2.096
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.645 Mean of logged Data 1.899
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.135 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.942 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.14 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.854 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 114.8 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 117.1
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0443 Adjusted Chi Square Value 14.09
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 66.85 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 123.3
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 14.38
Theta hat (MLE) 223.2 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 227.4
nu hat (MLE) 25.16 nu star (bias corrected) 24.69
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.299 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.294
5% K-S Critical Value 0.148 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.86 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.251 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 3.922 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 113 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 131
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 116
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.388 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.135 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.433 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.942 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 2.66 Skewness 4.206
Maximum 1020 Median 3.599
SD 177.8 Std. Error of Mean 27.44
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.525 Mean 66.85
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 42 Number of Distinct Observations 37
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__mg/kg)
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Page 8 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 14 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/30/2020 1:10:49 PM
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.332 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.146 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 5.011 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.832 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 118.7
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 115.8 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 133.8
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.135 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.942 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.396 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.431 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 176.7 Std. Error of Mean 27.27
Coefficient of Variation 2.529 Skewness 4.238
Minimum 1.189 Mean 69.88
Maximum 1020 Median 9.97
Total Number of Observations 42 Number of Distinct Observations 36
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
97.5% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 238.2
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 149.2 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 186.5
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 238.2 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 339.9
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 264.7 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 113.6
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 145
95% CLT UCL 112 95% Jackknife UCL 113
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 110.6 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 165.8
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 157 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 202.6
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 292
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 207.5 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 124.2
Page 9 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHIJKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 14 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/30/2020 1:10:49 PM
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 188.7
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 151.7 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 188.7
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 240.2 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 341.2
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 264.8 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 119
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 140.8
95% CLT UCL 114.7 95% Jackknife UCL 115.8
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 114.1 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 174
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 115.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 144.4
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 201.8
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 108.5 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 94.21
Maximum of Logged Data 6.927 SD of logged Data 1.58
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.173 Mean of logged Data 2.68
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.135 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.942 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.225 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.863 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 109.8 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 111.6
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0443 Adjusted Chi Square Value 21.22
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 69.88 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 110
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 21.57
Theta hat (MLE) 167.5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 173.3
nu hat (MLE) 35.05 nu star (bias corrected) 33.88
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.417 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.403
Page 10 of 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Approximate Chi Square Value (24.38, α) 14.14 Adjusted Chi Square Value (24.38, β) 13.54
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0134 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.014
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0383
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0128 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0204
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0283 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0475
nu hat (KM) 26.89 nu star (KM) 24.38
theta hat (KM) 0.0121 theta star (KM) 0.0134
Variance (KM) 9.4291E-5 SE of Mean (KM) 0.00308
k hat (KM) 0.64 k star (KM) 0.58
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.00777 SD (KM) 0.00971
Mean (detects) 0.0321
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00973 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 13.19 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 3.297 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.027 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0384
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0128 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.017 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0212
KM SD 0.00971 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0131 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.00777 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.00308
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Mean of Logged Detects -3.599 SD of Logged Detects 0.82
Median Detects 0.0321 CV Detects 0.739
Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A
Variance Detects 5.6113E-4 Percent Non-Detects 90.48%
Mean Detects 0.0321 SD Detects 0.0237
Minimum Detect 0.0153 Minimum Non-Detect 0.005
Maximum Detect 0.0488 Maximum Non-Detect 0.119
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 19
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__mg/kg)
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
Page 1 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.00514
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.00491 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.00627
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.404 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.305 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 0.00648 Std. Error of Mean 0.00141
Coefficient of Variation 2.629 Skewness 4.477
Minimum 4.7840E-4 Mean 0.00247
Maximum 0.0306 Median 7.5780E-4
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 19
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 0.0212
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0156 SD in Log Scale 1.029
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0149 95% H-Stat UCL 0.0134
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.00907 Mean in Log Scale -5.438
KM SD (logged) 0.546 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.032
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.175
KM SD (logged) 0.546 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.032
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.175 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.00888
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -5.121 KM Geo Mean 0.00597
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0129
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00804 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00843
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.011 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0335
Mean in Original Scale 0.00398 Mean in Log Scale -7.157
SD in Original Scale 0.0108 SD in Log Scale 1.695
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Page 2 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00863
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00671 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00863
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0113 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0165
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.0165 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00524
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00687
95% CLT UCL 0.00479 95% Jackknife UCL 0.00491
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.00472 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.0208
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00317 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00385
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00519
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.00275 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00267
Maximum of Logged Data -3.488 SD of logged Data 0.937
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -7.645 Mean of logged Data -6.854
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.268 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.692 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.00413 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.0043
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0383 Adjusted Chi Square Value 15.44
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00247 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00308
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 16.08
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00347 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00385
nu hat (MLE) 29.83 nu star (bias corrected) 26.91
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.71 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.641
K-S Test Statistic 0.368 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.197 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 3.907 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.786 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 3 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
Approximate Chi Square Value (74.18, α) 55.34 Adjusted Chi Square Value (74.18, β) 54.09
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0105 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0108
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0383
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0119 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0158
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0194 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0276
nu hat (KM) 84.99 nu star (KM) 74.18
theta hat (KM) 0.00389 theta star (KM) 0.00445
Variance (KM) 3.0566E-5 SE of Mean (KM) 0.00199
k hat (KM) 2.023 k star (KM) 1.766
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.00786 SD (KM) 0.00553
Mean (detects) 0.0103
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00129 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00222
nu hat (MLE) 110.8 nu star (bias corrected) 64.66
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 7.916 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.619
K-S Test Statistic 0.176 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.312 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.367 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.709 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0203 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0277
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0111 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0112
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0138 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0165
KM SD 0.00553 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0109
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0113 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0111
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.00786 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.00199
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.194 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.891 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Median Detects 0.009 CV Detects 0.389
Skewness Detects 0.619 Kurtosis Detects -1.004
Variance Detects 1.5936E-5 Percent Non-Detects 66.67%
Mean Detects 0.0103 SD Detects 0.00399
Minimum Detect 0.00608 Minimum Non-Detect -4.900E-4
Maximum Detect 0.0163 Maximum Non-Detect 0.0586
Number of Detects 7 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 9
concDL (7439-97-6__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Page 4 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
5% K-S Critical Value 0.189 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.742 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.101 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.242 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 5.082 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 5.098
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 5.088
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.124 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.947 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.23 Skewness 0.624
Maximum 6.956 Median 4.406
SD 1.075 Std. Error of Mean 0.235
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.08 Mean 4.678
concDL (7440-38-2__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 16
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0113
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Suggested UCL to Use
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0215
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
DL/2 Statistics
Mean in Original Scale 0.0179 SD in Original Scale 0.00963
KM SD (logged) N/A 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) N/A
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) N/A
KM SD (logged) N/A 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) N/A
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) N/A 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) N/A
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) N/A KM Geo Mean N/A
Page 5 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331 SD 2.987 Std. Error of Mean 0.652
Minimum 7.194 Mean 12.88
Maximum 18.33 Median 13.49
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 13
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-47-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 5.082
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5.382 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5.7
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.143 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.012
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5.116 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.071
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.124
95% CLT UCL 5.064 95% Jackknife UCL 5.082
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.045 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 5.138
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5.693 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.133
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.996
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 5.126 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5.376
Maximum of Logged Data 1.94 SD of logged Data 0.227
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.125 Mean of logged Data 1.518
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.0858 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.971 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 5.106 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 5.141
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0383 Adjusted Chi Square Value 673.8
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4.678 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1.114
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 678.4
Theta hat (MLE) 0.228 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.265
nu hat (MLE) 862.4 nu star (bias corrected) 740.5
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 20.53 k star (bias corrected MLE) 17.63
Page 6 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
95% CLT UCL 13.95 95% Jackknife UCL 14.01
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 13.92 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 14.01
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.89 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.19
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19.73
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 14.23 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.96
Maximum of Logged Data 2.908 SD of logged Data 0.242
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.973 Mean of logged Data 2.529
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.142 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.967 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 14.12 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 14.22
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0383 Adjusted Chi Square Value 611.7
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 12.88 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.213
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 616
Theta hat (MLE) 0.688 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.801
nu hat (MLE) 786.3 nu star (bias corrected) 675.3
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 18.72 k star (bias corrected MLE) 16.08
K-S Test Statistic 0.133 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.189 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.238 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.743 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 14.01
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 14.01 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 13.97
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.104 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.975 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Coefficient of Variation 0.232 Skewness 0.0991
Page 7 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.346 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.582 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.968 Skewness 3.012
Maximum 6.287 Median 0.889
SD 1.316 Std. Error of Mean 0.287
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.547 Mean 1.359
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 20
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__pg/g)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 15
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 15 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__mg/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 15
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
concDL (87-68-3__mg/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 15 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 14.01
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.84 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.72
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 16.95 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 19.37
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 13.96 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 13.87
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 13.88
Page 8 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 2.61
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.22 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.61
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.152 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4.216
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 3.481 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.842
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.092
95% CLT UCL 1.831 95% Jackknife UCL 1.854
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1.815 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 2.45
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.071 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.413
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3.085
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1.727 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.824
Maximum of Logged Data 1.838 SD of logged Data 0.616
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.603 Mean of logged Data 0.0673
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.272 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.81 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 1.793 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.833
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0383 Adjusted Chi Square Value 60.82
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.359 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.972
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 62.15
Theta hat (MLE) 0.606 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.696
nu hat (MLE) 94.13 nu star (bias corrected) 82.02
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.241 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.953
5% K-S Critical Value 0.192 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.753 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.308 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 2.207 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 1.854 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2.033
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1.886
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Page 9 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.262 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.832 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 1.936 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.976
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0383 Adjusted Chi Square Value 70.16
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.494 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1.005
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 71.59
Theta hat (MLE) 0.588 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.676
nu hat (MLE) 106.7 nu star (bias corrected) 92.8
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.541 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.21
K-S Test Statistic 0.305 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.191 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 2.011 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.751 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2.031
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 1.999 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2.183
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.908 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.345 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.592 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 1.343 Std. Error of Mean 0.293
Coefficient of Variation 0.899 Skewness 3.042
Minimum 0.573 Mean 1.494
Maximum 6.554 Median 0.999
Total Number of Observations 21 Number of Distinct Observations 17
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__pg/g)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 10 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.13/5/2020 8:55:10 AM
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 2.771
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.373 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.771
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.323 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4.409
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 3.715 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.044
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.222
95% CLT UCL 1.976 95% Jackknife UCL 1.999
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1.969 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 2.62
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.244 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.6
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3.299
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1.874 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.987
Maximum of Logged Data 1.88 SD of logged Data 0.58
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.557 Mean of logged Data 0.192
Page 11 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.37 Mean 0.62
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1_n_ug/kg)
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.387 Skewness 1.101
Maximum 1 Median 0.58
SD 0.24 Std. Error of Mean 0.107
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.218 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.936 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.679 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.165 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.205 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.849 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.853
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.858
Theta hat (MLE) 0.069 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.166
nu hat (MLE) 89.9 nu star (bias corrected) 37.29
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 8.99 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.729
5% K-S Critical Value 0.358 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.951 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.164
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0086 Adjusted Chi Square Value 19.86
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.62 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.321
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 24.31
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.994 Mean of logged Data -0.535
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.159 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.99 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Page 1 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.066 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.26
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.64
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1.015 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.927
Maximum of Logged Data 0 SD of logged Data 0.372
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1.828 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.792
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.808
95% CLT UCL 0.797 95% Jackknife UCL 0.849
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.78 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.956
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
concDL (1336-36-3_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 0.849
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.942 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.088
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.291 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.688
SD 0.127 Std. Error of Mean 0.0569
Coefficient of Variation 0.897 Skewness 0.689
Minimum 0.0279 Mean 0.142
Maximum 0.313 Median 0.0808
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Missing Observations 0
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.284 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.861 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.266
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.263 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.254
Page 2 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.347 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.687 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Theta hat (MLE) 0.101 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.204
nu hat (MLE) 14.08 nu star (bias corrected) 6.966
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.408 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.697
K-S Test Statistic 0.232 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.362 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.929 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.459 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.842
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0086 Adjusted Chi Square Value 1.175
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.142 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.17
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 2.152
Maximum of Logged Data -1.162 SD of logged Data 1.038
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -3.579 Mean of logged Data -2.348
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.213 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.42 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.54
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.775
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 2.281 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.334
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.313 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.39
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.498 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.708
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1.186 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.231
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.227
95% CLT UCL 0.236 95% Jackknife UCL 0.263
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.225 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.607
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 0.263
Page 3 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
concDL (1746-01-6_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (1746-01-6_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (19408-74-3_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (19408-74-3_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (31508-00-6_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (31508-00-6_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (32598-13-3_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
The data set for variable concDL (32598-13-3_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Page 4 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
concDL (32598-14-4_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (32598-14-4_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (3268-87-9_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (3268-87-9_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (32774-16-6_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (32774-16-6_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (35822-46-9_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
The data set for variable concDL (35822-46-9_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Page 5 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
concDL (39001-02-0_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (39001-02-0_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (39227-28-6_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (39227-28-6_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (39635-31-9_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (39635-31-9_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (40321-76-4_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
The data set for variable concDL (40321-76-4_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Page 6 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
concDL (51207-31-9_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (51207-31-9_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (52663-72-6_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (52663-72-6_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (55673-89-7_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (55673-89-7_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (57117-31-4_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
The data set for variable concDL (57117-31-4_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Page 7 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
concDL (57117-41-6_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (57117-41-6_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (57117-44-9_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (57117-44-9_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (57465-28-8_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (57465-28-8_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (57653-85-7_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
The data set for variable concDL (57653-85-7_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Page 8 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
concDL (60851-34-5_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (60851-34-5_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (65510-44-3_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (65510-44-3_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (67562-39-4_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (67562-39-4_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (70362-50-4_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
The data set for variable concDL (70362-50-4_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Page 9 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
concDL (70648-26-9_n_ug/kg)
The data set for variable concDL (70648-26-9_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (72918-21-9_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 51700 Mean 151800
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
The data set for variable concDL (72918-21-9_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (7429-90-5_t_ug/kg)
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.674 Skewness 0.568
Maximum 285000 Median 123000
SD 102275 Std. Error of Mean 41753
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.205 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.861 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
95% Student's-t UCL 235935 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 230830
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 237550
Page 10 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
5% A-D Critical Value 0.703 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.218 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.361 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
Theta hat (MLE) 59813 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 109995
nu hat (MLE) 30.45 nu star (bias corrected) 16.56
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.538 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.38
5% K-S Critical Value 0.335 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 300737 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 394666
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.37
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 151800 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 129218
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.359
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 10.85 Mean of logged Data 11.72
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.191 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.908 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 348488 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 433334
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 600000
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 461436 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 287357
Maximum of Logged Data 12.56 SD of logged Data 0.727
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 299895 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 217117
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 221350
95% CLT UCL 220478 95% Jackknife UCL 235935
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 213115 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 314444
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 235935
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 277060 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 333799
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 412550 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 567241
Page 11 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
concDL (7439-92-1_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
SD 313.4 Std. Error of Mean 128
Coefficient of Variation 0.66 Skewness 0.568
Minimum 161 Mean 475
Maximum 876 Median 387.5
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.212 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.859 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.355 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.702 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 737.8
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 732.9 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 717.2
Theta hat (MLE) 179.4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 331.1
nu hat (MLE) 31.77 nu star (bias corrected) 17.22
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.647 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.435
K-S Test Statistic 0.223 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.335 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 926.5 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1208
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.771
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 475 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 396.6
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.827
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 5.081 Mean of logged Data 5.963
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.194 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.913 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Page 12 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1078 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1338
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1849
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1388 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 890.6
Maximum of Logged Data 6.775 SD of logged Data 0.711
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1038 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 678.3
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 690
95% CLT UCL 685.5 95% Jackknife UCL 732.9
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 666.2 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 960.2
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
concDL (7439-96-5_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 732.9
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 858.9 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1033
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1274 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1748
SD 20235 Std. Error of Mean 8261
Coefficient of Variation 0.348 Skewness 0.377
Minimum 33400 Mean 58083
Maximum 87200 Median 55400
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.208 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.955 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 74941
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 74729 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 73029
Page 13 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.223 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.698 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Theta hat (MLE) 5963 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 11659
nu hat (MLE) 116.9 nu star (bias corrected) 59.78
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 9.741 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.982
K-S Test Statistic 0.169 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.332 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 80747 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 91566
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 37.92
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 58083 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 26023
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 43
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 10.42 Mean of logged Data 10.92
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.16 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.966 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 95111 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 111115
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 142552
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 85336 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 83581
Maximum of Logged Data 11.38 SD of logged Data 0.358
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 87029 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 70550
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 70750
95% CLT UCL 71671 95% Jackknife UCL 74729
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 70531 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 80387
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 74729
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 82866 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 94091
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 109672 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 140277
Page 14 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
concDL (7439-97-6_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
SD 2.595 Std. Error of Mean 1.059
Coefficient of Variation 0.597 Skewness -0.261
Minimum 1.01 Mean 4.348
Maximum 7.06 Median 4.765
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.263 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.878 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.439 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.703 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 6.464
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 6.483 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 5.97
Theta hat (MLE) 1.749 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.21
nu hat (MLE) 29.84 nu star (bias corrected) 16.25
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.487 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.354
K-S Test Statistic 0.289 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.335 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 8.681 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 11.43
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.183
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4.348 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.736
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.141
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.00995 Mean of logged Data 1.255
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.265 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.872 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Page 15 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.79 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.5
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18.84
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 16.12 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8.828
Maximum of Logged Data 1.954 SD of logged Data 0.789
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5.47 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.98
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.895
95% CLT UCL 6.091 95% Jackknife UCL 6.483
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.921 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 6.474
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 6.483
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.526 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8.966
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.96 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.89
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 436 Mean 2276
concDL (7439-98-7_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.48 Skewness -0.976
Maximum 3350 Median 2490
SD 1093 Std. Error of Mean 446.1
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.243 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.896 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
95% Student's-t UCL 3175 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2820
Page 16 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
5% A-D Critical Value 0.701 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.263 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.606 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 3145
Theta hat (MLE) 756.5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1409
nu hat (MLE) 36.1 nu star (bias corrected) 19.39
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.009 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.615
5% K-S Critical Value 0.335 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 4243 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 5425
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 8.133
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 2276 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1791
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 10.4
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 6.078 Mean of logged Data 7.555
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.308 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.762 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5690 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7106
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9887
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 8106 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4670
Maximum of Logged Data 8.117 SD of logged Data 0.765
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 2827 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2942
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2822
95% CLT UCL 3010 95% Jackknife UCL 3175
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 2963 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 3004
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 3175
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3614 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4220
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5062 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6714
Page 17 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 450 Mean 2312
concDL (7440-02-0_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.954 Skewness 1.287
Maximum 6180 Median 1610
SD 2205 Std. Error of Mean 900.1
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.214 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.866 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.71 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.186 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.248 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 4125 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 4297
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 4204
Theta hat (MLE) 1722 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2955
nu hat (MLE) 16.11 nu star (bias corrected) 9.389
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.343 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.782
5% K-S Critical Value 0.339 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.949 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 6091 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 9060
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 2.396
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 2312 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2613
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 3.563
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.175 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Page 18 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
Maximum of Logged Data 8.729 SD of logged Data 1.036
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 6.109 Mean of logged Data 7.329
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6526 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8345
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11917
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 18689 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5216
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5012 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6235
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7933 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11268
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 11537 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3822
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 3940
95% CLT UCL 3792 95% Jackknife UCL 4125
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 3678 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 5779
concDL (7440-22-4_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 4125
Variance Detects 1.3 Percent Non-Detects 16.67%
Mean Detects 6.4 SD Detects 1.14
Minimum Detect 5 Minimum Non-Detect 4
Maximum Detect 8 Maximum Non-Detect 4
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 1.844 SD of Logged Detects 0.178
Median Detects 6 CV Detects 0.178
Skewness Detects 0.405 Kurtosis Detects -0.178
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.237 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.961 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 19 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 6 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.589
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 9.68 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 11.86
95% KM (z) UCL 6.969 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.768 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 8.569
KM SD 1.291 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 7.187 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 39.73 k star (bias corrected MLE) 16.03
K-S Test Statistic 0.237 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.257 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.678 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 6.4
Theta hat (MLE) 0.161 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.399
nu hat (MLE) 397.3 nu star (bias corrected) 160.3
k hat (MLE) 17.37 k star (bias corrected MLE) 8.794
Theta hat (MLE) 0.343 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.676
Maximum 8 Median 6
SD 1.504 CV 0.253
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 3.693 Mean 5.949
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 6 SD (KM) 1.291
Approximate Chi Square Value (105.53, α) 82.83 Adjusted Chi Square Value (105.53, β) 75.58
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 7.58 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 8.306
nu hat (MLE) 208.4 nu star (bias corrected) 105.5
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0122
80% gamma percentile (KM) 7.451 90% gamma percentile (KM) 8.414
95% gamma percentile (KM) 9.266 99% gamma percentile (KM) 11.01
nu hat (KM) 259.2 nu star (KM) 130.9
theta hat (KM) 0.278 theta star (KM) 0.55
Variance (KM) 1.667 SE of Mean (KM) 0.589
k hat (KM) 21.6 k star (KM) 10.91
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.968 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 7.446 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 8.078
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (130.93, α) 105.5 Adjusted Chi Square Value (130.93, β) 97.26
Page 20 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
SD in Original Scale 1.413 SD in Log Scale 0.245
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 7.163 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 6.834
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 6.001 Mean in Log Scale 1.768
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.215 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
KM SD (logged) 0.224 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.104
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.102 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 7.412
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 1.767 KM Geo Mean 5.856
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 6.833 95% Bootstrap t UCL 7.156
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 7.626
SD in Original Scale 2.066 SD in Log Scale 0.496
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 7.366 95% H-Stat UCL 10.57
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 5.667 Mean in Log Scale 1.652
KM SD (logged) 0.224 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.104
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.102
concDL (7440-28-0_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 7.187
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD 8.803 Std. Error of Mean 3.594
Coefficient of Variation 0.429 Skewness 0.798
Minimum 12 Mean 20.5
Maximum 33 Median 17
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.852 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Page 21 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.278 Lilliefors GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.446 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.698 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 27.94
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 27.74 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 27.66
Theta hat (MLE) 2.923 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 5.667
nu hat (MLE) 84.16 nu star (bias corrected) 43.41
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 7.013 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.618
K-S Test Statistic 0.25 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.333 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 30.37 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 35.32
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 25.19
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 20.5 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 10.78
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 29.3
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.485 Mean of logged Data 2.947
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.222 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.9 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 35.43 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 41.92
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 54.66
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 32.54 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 30.76
Maximum of Logged Data 3.497 SD of logged Data 0.412
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 85.77 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 26.33
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 26.67
95% CLT UCL 26.41 95% Jackknife UCL 27.74
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 25.91 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 40.27
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 31.28 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 36.17
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 42.94 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 56.26
Page 22 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
concDL (7440-36-0_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 27.74
SD 15.91 Std. Error of Mean 6.494
Coefficient of Variation 0.519 Skewness 0.457
Minimum 13 Mean 30.67
Maximum 55 Median 30
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.171 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.949 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.255 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.7 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 43.96
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 43.75 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 42.64
Theta hat (MLE) 7.346 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 13.95
nu hat (MLE) 50.09 nu star (bias corrected) 26.38
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 4.174 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.198
K-S Test Statistic 0.205 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.333 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 51.62 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 63.25
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 12.79
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 30.67 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 20.68
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 15.67
Page 23 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.565 Mean of logged Data 3.299
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.19 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.938 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 61.72 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 75.09
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 101.3
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 64.28 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 52.1
Maximum of Logged Data 4.007 SD of logged Data 0.564
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 45.6 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 41
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 41.5
95% CLT UCL 41.35 95% Jackknife UCL 43.75
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 40.31 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 44.97
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
concDL (7440-38-2_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 43.75
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 50.15 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 58.98
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 71.22 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 95.29
SD 84 Std. Error of Mean 34.29
Coefficient of Variation 0.462 Skewness -0.0706
Minimum 80 Mean 181.7
Maximum 280 Median 185
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.176 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.915 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Page 24 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
1303
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.344 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.698 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 250.6
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 250.8 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 237
Theta hat (MLE) 36.68 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 70.22
nu hat (MLE) 59.43 nu star (bias corrected) 31.05
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 4.952 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.587
K-S Test Statistic 0.222 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.333 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 292 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 351
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 16.07
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 181.7 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 112.9
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 19.32
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 4.382 Mean of logged Data 5.098
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.215 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.906 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 351.9 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 425
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 568.6
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 350 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 299.2
Maximum of Logged Data 5.635 SD of logged Data 0.52
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 226.5 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 233.3
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 230
95% CLT UCL 238.1 95% Jackknife UCL 250.8
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 233.8 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 249.6
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 284.6 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 331.2
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 395.8 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 522.9
Page 25 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 250.8
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 6180 Mean 17185
concDL (7440-39-3_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.646 Skewness 0.366
Maximum 31500 Median 14900
SD 11096 Std. Error of Mean 4530
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.244 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.871 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.702 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.229 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.419 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 26313 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 25359
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 26426
Theta hat (MLE) 6450 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 11907
nu hat (MLE) 31.97 nu star (bias corrected) 17.32
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.664 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.443
5% K-S Critical Value 0.335 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.835
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 17185 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 14304
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.901
Page 26 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.886 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 33438 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 43546
Maximum of Logged Data 10.36 SD of logged Data 0.711
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 8.729 Mean of logged Data 9.553
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.19 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 39050 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 48469
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 66971
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 50283 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 32264
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 30775 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 36930
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 45474 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 62257
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 23380 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 24005
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 24505
95% CLT UCL 24636 95% Jackknife UCL 26313
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 24077 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 27086
concDL (7440-41-7_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 26313
Variance Detects 18 Percent Non-Detects 33.33%
Mean Detects 13 SD Detects 4.243
Minimum Detect 8 Minimum Non-Detect 4
Maximum Detect 17 Maximum Non-Detect 4
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
Mean of Logged Detects 2.521 SD of Logged Detects 0.352
Median Detects 13.5 CV Detects 0.326
Skewness Detects -0.367 Kurtosis Detects -3.438
Page 27 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1447
1448
1449
1450
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 10 KM Standard Error of Mean 2.449
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.26 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.913 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 25.3 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 34.37
95% KM (z) UCL 14.03 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 17.35 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 20.68
KM SD 5.196 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 14.94 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 11.49 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.038
K-S Test Statistic 0.296 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.395 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.348 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.657 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 13
Theta hat (MLE) 1.132 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.279
nu hat (MLE) 91.88 nu star (bias corrected) 24.3
k hat (MLE) 2.113 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.168
Theta hat (MLE) 4.578 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 8.284
Maximum 17 Median 9.5
SD 6.168 CV 0.638
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 1.715 Mean 9.673
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 10 SD (KM) 5.196
Approximate Chi Square Value (14.01, α) 6.58 Adjusted Chi Square Value (14.01, β) 4.86
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 20.6 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 25.36 nu star (bias corrected) 14.01
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0122
80% gamma percentile (KM) 15 90% gamma percentile (KM) 19.53
nu hat (KM) 44.44 nu star (KM) 23.56
theta hat (KM) 2.7 theta star (KM) 5.094
Variance (KM) 27 SE of Mean (KM) 2.449
k hat (KM) 3.704 k star (KM) 1.963
Page 28 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
1547
1548
1549
1550
1551
1552
1553
1554
95% gamma percentile (KM) 23.86 99% gamma percentile (KM) 33.47
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.91 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 17.43 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 21.68
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (23.56, α) 13.51 Adjusted Chi Square Value (23.56, β) 10.87
SD in Original Scale 5.355 SD in Log Scale 0.569
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 14.69 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 13.52
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 10.29 Mean in Log Scale 2.204
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.263 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
KM SD (logged) 0.59 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.865
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.278 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 21.59
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 2.143 KM Geo Mean 8.522
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 13.76 95% Bootstrap t UCL 15.29
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 21.78
SD in Original Scale 6.563 SD in Log Scale 0.982
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 14.73 95% H-Stat UCL 65.17
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 9.333 Mean in Log Scale 1.912
KM SD (logged) 0.59 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.865
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.278
concDL (7440-43-9_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 14.94
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD 640.1 Std. Error of Mean 261.3
Coefficient of Variation 1.347 Skewness 2.121
Minimum 57 Mean 475.2
Maximum 1740 Median 253.5
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
Page 29 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1555
1556
1557
1558
1559
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565
1566
1567
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572
1573
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
1582
1583
1584
1585
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1597
1598
1599
1600
1601
1602
1603
1604
1605
1606
1607
1608
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.338 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.713 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.35 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.718 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1039
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 1002 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 1147
Theta hat (MLE) 545.7 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 869.5
nu hat (MLE) 10.45 nu star (bias corrected) 6.558
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.871 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.546
K-S Test Statistic 0.197 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.342 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 1614 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 2692
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 1.157
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 475.2 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 642.8
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 1.931
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 4.043 Mean of logged Data 5.489
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.145 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.958 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1417 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1837
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2661
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 9313 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1114
Maximum of Logged Data 7.462 SD of logged Data 1.264
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Page 30 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627
1628
1629
1630
1631
1632
1633
1634
1635
1636
1637
1638
1639
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
1645
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 2543 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 951
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1013
95% CLT UCL 905 95% Jackknife UCL 1002
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 868.6 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 2383
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 2692
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1259 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1614
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2107 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3075
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 550 Mean 4793
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (7440-47-3_t_ug/kg)
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.989 Skewness 1.256
Maximum 13100 Median 3420
SD 4742 Std. Error of Mean 1936
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.206 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.883 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.713 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.164 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.175 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 8694 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 9038
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 8860
5% K-S Critical Value 0.34 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 31 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680
1681
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
1703
1704
1705
1706
1707
1708
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
Theta hat (MLE) 4243 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 7091
nu hat (MLE) 13.56 nu star (bias corrected) 8.112
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.13 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.676
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 13887 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 21561
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 1.803
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4793 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5830
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 2.8
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 6.31 Mean of logged Data 7.971
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.138 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.974 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15337 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19804
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 28577
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 75827 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12119
Maximum of Logged Data 9.48 SD of logged Data 1.192
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 25126 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 7938
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 8267
95% CLT UCL 7977 95% Jackknife UCL 8694
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 7703 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 11909
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
concDL (7440-48-4_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 8694
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10601 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13231
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 16883 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 24055
SD 125 Std. Error of Mean 51.03
Minimum 52 Mean 180.5
Maximum 390 Median 135.5
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
Page 32 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1716
1717
1718
1719
1720
1721
1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
1729
1730
1731
1732
1733
1734
1735
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740
1741
1742
1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1748
1749
1750
1751
1752
1753
1754
1755
1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768
Coefficient of Variation 0.693 Skewness 1.067
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.244 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.905 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.225 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.702 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 287
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 283.3 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 288.2
Theta hat (MLE) 69.52 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 128.1
nu hat (MLE) 31.16 nu star (bias corrected) 16.91
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.597 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.409
K-S Test Statistic 0.177 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.335 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 354.6 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 463.6
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.585
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 180.5 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 152
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.61
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.951 Mean of logged Data 4.991
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.152 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.979 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 409.9 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 508.9
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 703.6
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 531.1 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 338.5
Maximum of Logged Data 5.966 SD of logged Data 0.715
Page 33 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780
1781
1782
1783
1784
1785
1786
1787
1788
1789
1790
1791
1792
1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
1821
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 896.6 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 257.7
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 265.3
95% CLT UCL 264.4 95% Jackknife UCL 283.3
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 256.7 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 431.3
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
concDL (7440-50-8_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 283.3
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 333.6 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 403
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 499.2 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 688.3
SD 728.9 Std. Error of Mean 297.6
Coefficient of Variation 0.227 Skewness 1.031
Minimum 2350 Mean 3213
Maximum 4480 Median 3055
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.185 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.936 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.244 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.697 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 3834
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 3813 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 3837
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.168 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.332 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 34 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1822
1823
1824
1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837
1838
1839
1840
1841
1842
1843
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
1857
1858
1859
1860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
1869
1870
1871
1872
1873
1874
1875
Theta hat (MLE) 129.4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 256.5
nu hat (MLE) 298 nu star (bias corrected) 150.3
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 24.83 k star (bias corrected MLE) 12.53
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 3928 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 4236
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 114.1
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3213 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 907.8
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 123
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 7.762 Mean of logged Data 8.055
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.157 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.972 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4457 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4997
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6055
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 3955 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4069
Maximum of Logged Data 8.407 SD of logged Data 0.218
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 6639 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3688
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 3748
95% CLT UCL 3703 95% Jackknife UCL 3813
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 3659 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 4161
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
concDL (7440-62-2_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 3813
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4106 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4510
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5072 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6174
SD 244.1 Std. Error of Mean 99.65
Minimum 120 Mean 398.3
Maximum 700 Median 365
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
Page 35 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
1886
1887
1888
1889
1890
1891
1892
1893
1894
1895
1896
1897
1898
1899
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
Coefficient of Variation 0.613 Skewness 0.285
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.2 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.9 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.315 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.702 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 601.1
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 599.1 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 574.6
Theta hat (MLE) 143.8 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 266.2
nu hat (MLE) 33.25 nu star (bias corrected) 17.96
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.771 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.497
K-S Test Statistic 0.206 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.335 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 764.2 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 989.2
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 7.232
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 398.3 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 325.6
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 9.361
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 4.787 Mean of logged Data 5.796
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.185 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.916 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 917.4 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1139
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1575
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1190 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 757.6
Maximum of Logged Data 6.551 SD of logged Data 0.715
Page 36 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 689.9 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 555
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 541.7
95% CLT UCL 562.2 95% Jackknife UCL 599.1
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 548.5 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 665.7
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
concDL (7440-66-6_t_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 599.1
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 697.3 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 832.7
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1021 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1390
SD 828.7 Std. Error of Mean 338.3
Coefficient of Variation 0.0944 Skewness -2.227
Minimum 7120 Mean 8775
Maximum 9300 Median 9110
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.345 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.678 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.058 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.696 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 9405
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 9457 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 9003
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.358 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.332 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 37 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
Theta hat (MLE) 72.33 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 144.4
nu hat (MLE) 1456 nu star (bias corrected) 729.3
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 121.3 k star (bias corrected MLE) 60.77
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 9585 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 9905
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 646
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8775 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1126
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 667.6
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 8.871 Mean of logged Data 9.076
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.361 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.66 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10372 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11063
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12419
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 9601 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9875
Maximum of Logged Data 9.138 SD of logged Data 0.102
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 9097 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 9178
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 9132
95% CLT UCL 9331 95% Jackknife UCL 9457
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 9280 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 9227
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 9457 or 95% Modified-t UCL 9405
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9790 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10250
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10888 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12141
Page 38 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2053
2054
2055
2056
2057
2058
2059
2060
2061
2062
2063
2064
2065
2066
2067
2068
2069
2070
2071
2072
2073
2074
2075
2076
2077
2078
2079
2080
2081
2082
2083
2084
2085
2086
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
concDL (74472-37-0_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 25 Mean 81.83
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 6
The data set for variable concDL (74472-37-0_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (7782-49-2_t_ug/kg)
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.644 Skewness 0.0696
Maximum 145 Median 81.5
SD 52.72 Std. Error of Mean 21.52
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.269 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.84 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.703 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.302 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.567 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 125.2 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 117.9
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 125.3
Theta hat (MLE) 33.15 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 60.83
nu hat (MLE) 29.62 nu star (bias corrected) 16.14
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.468 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.345
5% K-S Critical Value 0.335 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.116
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 81.83 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 70.56
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.063
Page 39 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2087
2088
2089
2090
2091
2092
2093
2094
2095
2096
2097
2098
2099
2100
2101
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
2108
2109
2110
2111
2112
2113
2114
2115
2116
2117
2118
2119
2120
2121
2122
2123
2124
2125
2126
2127
2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
2133
2134
2135
2136
2137
2138
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.858 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 163.8 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 216
Maximum of Logged Data 4.977 SD of logged Data 0.755
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.219 Mean of logged Data 4.189
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.286 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 193.7 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 241.6
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 335.7
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 270.2 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 159.2
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 146.4 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 175.7
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 216.3 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 296
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 101.8 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 113.2
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 115
95% CLT UCL 117.2 95% Jackknife UCL 125.2
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 114.1 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 130.3
concDL (avteq-nd0-nohcb_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 125.2
The data set for variable concDL (avteq-nd0-nohcb_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Page 40 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2139
2140
2141
2142
2143
2144
2145
2146
2147
2148
2149
2150
2151
2152
2153
2154
2155
2156
2157
2158
2159
2160
2161
2162
2163
2164
2165
2166
2167
2168
2169
2170
2171
2172
2173
2174
2175
2176
2177
2178
2179
2180
2181
2182
2183
2184
2185
2186
2187
2188
2189
2190
2191
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
concDL (avteq-nd2-nohcb_n_ug/kg)
The data set for variable concDL (avteq-nd2-nohcb_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0_n_ug/kg)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.0037 Mean 0.0062
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (calc-dx-0_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0-av_n_ug/kg)
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.387 Skewness 1.101
Maximum 0.01 Median 0.0058
SD 0.0024 Std. Error of Mean 0.00107
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.218 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.936 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
95% Student's-t UCL 0.00849 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.00853
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.00858
Page 41 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2192
2193
2194
2195
2196
2197
2198
2199
2200
2201
2202
2203
2204
2205
2206
2207
2208
2209
2210
2211
2212
2213
2214
2215
2216
2217
2218
2219
2220
2221
2222
2223
2224
2225
2226
2227
2228
2229
2230
2231
2232
2233
2234
2235
2236
2237
2238
2239
2240
2241
2242
2243
2244
5% A-D Critical Value 0.679 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.165 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.205 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
Theta hat (MLE) 6.8968E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00166
nu hat (MLE) 89.9 nu star (bias corrected) 37.29
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 8.99 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.729
5% K-S Critical Value 0.358 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.00951 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.0116
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0086 Adjusted Chi Square Value 19.86
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0062 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00321
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 24.31
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -5.599 Mean of logged Data -5.14
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.159 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.99 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0107 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0126
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0164
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.0101 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00927
Maximum of Logged Data -4.605 SD of logged Data 0.372
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.0182 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0079
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00812
95% CLT UCL 0.00797 95% Jackknife UCL 0.00849
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.00778 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.00967
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 0.00849
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00942 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0109
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0129 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0169
Page 42 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2245
2246
2247
2248
2249
2250
2251
2252
2253
2254
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259
2260
2261
2262
2263
2264
2265
2266
2267
2268
2269
2270
2271
2272
2273
2274
2275
2276
2277
2278
2279
2280
2281
2282
2283
2284
2285
2286
2287
2288
2289
2290
2291
2292
2293
2294
2295
2296
2297
2298
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
concDL (calc-dx-2_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.0131 Mean 0.0143
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (calc-dx-2_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-2-av_n_ug/kg)
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.075 Skewness -0.426
Maximum 0.0154 Median 0.0148
SD 0.00107 Std. Error of Mean 4.7958E-4
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.279 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.838 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.678 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.303 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.554 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.0153 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.015
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.0153
Theta hat (MLE) 6.5294E-5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.6299E-4
nu hat (MLE) 2190 nu star (bias corrected) 877.4
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 219 k star (bias corrected MLE) 87.74
5% K-S Critical Value 0.357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0086 Adjusted Chi Square Value 780.7
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0143 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00153
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 809.6
Page 43 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2299
2300
2301
2302
2303
2304
2305
2306
2307
2308
2309
2310
2311
2312
2313
2314
2315
2316
2317
2318
2319
2320
2321
2322
2323
2324
2325
2326
2327
2328
2329
2330
2331
2332
2333
2334
2335
2336
2337
2338
2339
2340
2341
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.0155 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.0161
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -4.335 Mean of logged Data -4.25
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.286 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.831 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0164 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0173
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0191
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0158
Maximum of Logged Data -4.173 SD of logged Data 0.0759
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.0147 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.015
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.015
95% CLT UCL 0.0151 95% Jackknife UCL 0.0153
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.015 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.0153
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 0.0153
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0157 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0164
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0173 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0191
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (dcbph-empc_n_ug/kg)
Median Detects 0.0281 CV Detects 0.129
Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A
Variance Detects 1.3005E-5 Percent Non-Detects 60%
Mean Detects 0.0281 SD Detects 0.00361
Minimum Detect 0.0255 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0101
Maximum Detect 0.0306 Maximum Non-Detect 0.0791
Page 44 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2353
2354
2355
2356
2357
2358
2359
2360
2361
2362
2363
2364
2365
2366
2367
2368
2369
2370
2371
2372
2373
2374
2375
2376
2377
2378
2379
2380
2381
2382
2383
2384
2385
2386
2387
2388
2389
2390
2391
2392
2393
2394
2395
2396
2397
2398
2399
2400
2401
2402
2403
2404
2405
2406
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0221 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.00712
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
Mean of Logged Detects -3.578 SD of Logged Detects 0.129
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0665 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0929
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0338 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0434 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0531
KM SD 0.00871 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0372 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Mean (detects) 0.0281
Theta hat (MLE) 2.3246E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 482.7 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 120.7 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (KM) 64.13 nu star (KM) 26.98
theta hat (KM) 0.00344 theta star (KM) 0.00818
Variance (KM) 7.5936E-5 SE of Mean (KM) 0.00712
k hat (KM) 6.413 k star (KM) 2.698
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0221 SD (KM) 0.00871
Approximate Chi Square Value (26.98, α) 16.14 Adjusted Chi Square Value (26.98, β) 12.62
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0369 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0472
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0086
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0319 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0401
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0478 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0645
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0288 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap t UCL N/A
Mean in Original Scale 0.0247 Mean in Log Scale -3.714
SD in Original Scale 0.00431 SD in Log Scale 0.181
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0302
Page 45 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2407
2408
2409
2410
2411
2412
2413
2414
2415
2416
2417
2418
2419
2420
2421
2422
2423
2424
2425
2426
2427
2428
2429
2430
2431
2432
2433
2434
2435
2436
2437
2438
2439
2440
2441
2442
2443
2444
2445
2446
2447
2448
2449
2450
2451
2452
2453
2454
2455
2456
2457
2458
2459
2460
KM SD (logged) 0.485 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.901
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.396 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.0453
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -3.917 KM Geo Mean 0.0199
SD in Original Scale 0.0136 SD in Log Scale 0.85
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0404 95% H-Stat UCL 0.197
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0274 Mean in Log Scale -3.798
KM SD (logged) 0.485 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.901
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.396
Warning: Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available!
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0372 KM H-UCL 0.0453
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.0279 Mean 0.0891
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (decbph-empc_n_ug/kg)
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.769 Skewness 0.835
Maximum 0.186 Median 0.0485
SD 0.0685 Std. Error of Mean 0.0306
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.323 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.854 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
95% Student's-t UCL 0.154 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.152
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.156
Page 46 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2461
2462
2463
2464
2465
2466
2467
2468
2469
2470
2471
2472
2473
2474
2475
2476
2477
2478
2479
2480
2481
2482
2483
2484
2485
2486
2487
2488
2489
2490
2491
2492
2493
2494
2495
2496
2497
2498
2499
2500
2501
2502
2503
2504
2505
2506
2507
2508
2509
2510
2511
2512
2513
2514
5% A-D Critical Value 0.684 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.316 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.427 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0414 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0896
nu hat (MLE) 21.52 nu star (bias corrected) 9.941
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.152 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.994
5% K-S Critical Value 0.36 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.908 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.227 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.363
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0086 Adjusted Chi Square Value 2.44
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0891 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0893
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 3.905
Maximum of Logged Data -1.682 SD of logged Data 0.796
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -3.579 Mean of logged Data -2.668
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.273 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.222 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.28
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.394
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.477 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.181
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.181 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.223
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.28 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.394
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.816 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.134
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.138
95% CLT UCL 0.139 95% Jackknife UCL 0.154
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.134 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.421
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 0.154
Page 47 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2515
2516
2517
2518
2519
2520
2521
2522
2523
2524
2525
2526
2527
2528
2529
2530
2531
2532
2533
2534
2535
2536
2537
2538
2539
2540
2541
2542
2543
2544
2545
2546
2547
2548
2549
2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
concDL (hpcbph-empc_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Variance Detects 4.8672E-6 Percent Non-Detects 60%
Mean Detects 0.00924 SD Detects 0.00221
Minimum Detect 0.00768 Minimum Non-Detect 0.00109
Maximum Detect 0.0108 Maximum Non-Detect 0.0127
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
Mean of Logged Detects -4.699 SD of Logged Detects 0.241
Median Detects 0.00924 CV Detects 0.239
Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A
KM SD 0.00405 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0136 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.00652 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0033
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 34.75 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0272 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0394
95% KM (z) UCL 0.012 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0164 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0209
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.00652 SD (KM) 0.00405
Mean (detects) 0.00924
Theta hat (MLE) 2.6593E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 139 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0104 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0144
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0185 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0278
nu hat (KM) 25.97 nu star (KM) 11.72
theta hat (KM) 0.00251 theta star (KM) 0.00556
Variance (KM) 1.6383E-5 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0033
k hat (KM) 2.597 k star (KM) 1.172
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.72, α) 5.045 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.72, β) 3.315
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0086
Page 48 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
2578
2579
2580
2581
2582
2583
2584
2585
2586
2587
2588
2589
2590
2591
2592
2593
2594
2595
2596
2597
2598
2599
2600
2601
2602
2603
2604
2605
2606
2607
2608
2609
2610
2611
2612
2613
2614
2615
2616
2617
2618
2619
2620
2621
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0152 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0231
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0114
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00962 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap t UCL N/A
Mean in Original Scale 0.00738 Mean in Log Scale -4.952
SD in Original Scale 0.00235 SD in Log Scale 0.338
KM SD (logged) 1.01 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.95
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.825
KM SD (logged) 1.01 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.95
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.825 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.0911
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -5.406 KM Geo Mean 0.00449
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.00373 SD in Log Scale 1.193
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00979 95% H-Stat UCL 0.276
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.00624 Mean in Log Scale -5.424
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (hxcbph-empc_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Warning: Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available!
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0136 KM H-UCL 0.0911
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (hxcbph-empc_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Page 49 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2622
2623
2624
2625
2626
2627
2628
2629
2630
2631
2632
2633
2634
2635
2636
2637
2638
2639
2640
2641
2642
2643
2644
2645
2646
2647
2648
2649
2650
2651
2652
2653
2654
2655
2656
2657
2658
2659
2660
2661
2662
2663
2664
2665
2666
2667
2668
2669
2670
2671
2672
2673
2674
2675
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.26 Mean 0.376
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 4
concDL (lipid_n_percent)
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.189 Skewness -1.43
Maximum 0.44 Median 0.41
SD 0.0709 Std. Error of Mean 0.0317
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.284 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.862 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.679 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.307 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.53 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.444 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.406
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.44
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0123 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0304
nu hat (MLE) 306.3 nu star (bias corrected) 123.8
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 30.63 k star (bias corrected MLE) 12.38
5% K-S Critical Value 0.357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.47 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.52
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0086 Adjusted Chi Square Value 89.48
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.376 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.107
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 99.14
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -1.347 Mean of logged Data -0.995
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.288 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.823 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Page 50 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2676
2677
2678
2679
2680
2681
2682
2683
2684
2685
2686
2687
2688
2689
2690
2691
2692
2693
2694
2695
2696
2697
2698
2699
2700
2701
2702
2703
2704
2705
2706
2707
2708
2709
2710
2711
2712
2713
2714
2715
2716
2717
2718
2719
2720
2721
2722
2723
2724
2725
2726
2727
2728
2729
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.53 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.597
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.728
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.477 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.482
Maximum of Logged Data -0.821 SD of logged Data 0.21
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% CLT UCL 0.428 95% Jackknife UCL 0.444
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap-t UCL N/A
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 0.444
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.471 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.514
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.574 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.692
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
concDL (monocb-empc_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Detects 3 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (monocb-empc_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
concDL (ncbph-empc_n_ug/kg)
Variance Detects 6.5443E-4 Percent Non-Detects 40%
Mean Detects 0.0508 SD Detects 0.0256
Minimum Detect 0.0222 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0058
Maximum Detect 0.0715 Maximum Non-Detect 0.00633
Page 51 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2730
2731
2732
2733
2734
2735
2736
2737
2738
2739
2740
2741
2742
2743
2744
2745
2746
2747
2748
2749
2750
2751
2752
2753
2754
2755
2756
2757
2758
2759
2760
2761
2762
2763
2764
2765
2766
2767
2768
2769
2770
2771
2772
2773
2774
2775
2776
2777
2778
2779
2780
2781
2782
2783
Median Detects 0.0587 CV Detects 0.504
Skewness Detects -1.257 Kurtosis Detects N/A
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.928 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
Mean of Logged Detects -3.094 SD of Logged Detects 0.626
KM SD 0.0273 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0647 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0328 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.015
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.288 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.425 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 4.553 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.126 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.182
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0574 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0777 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0981
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0345
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.0508
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0112 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 27.32 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 16.58 nu star (bias corrected) 7.966
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0086
k hat (MLE) 1.658 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.797
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0208 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0433
Maximum 0.0715 Median 0.0222
SD 0.0288 CV 0.834
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0328 SD (KM) 0.0273
Approximate Chi Square Value (7.97, α) 2.715 Adjusted Chi Square Value (7.97, β) 1.567
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.101 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
Page 52 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2784
2785
2786
2787
2788
2789
2790
2791
2792
2793
2794
2795
2796
2797
2798
2799
2800
2801
2802
2803
2804
2805
2806
2807
2808
2809
2810
2811
2812
2813
2814
2815
2816
2817
2818
2819
2820
2821
2822
2823
2824
2825
2826
2827
2828
2829
2830
2831
2832
2833
Variance (KM) 7.4777E-4 SE of Mean (KM) 0.015
k hat (KM) 1.439 k star (KM) 0.709
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (7.09, α) 2.219 Adjusted Chi Square Value (7.09, β) 1.22
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0539 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0821
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.111 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.18
nu hat (KM) 14.39 nu star (KM) 7.088
theta hat (KM) 0.0228 theta star (KM) 0.0463
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.327 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.425 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.872 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.105 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.19
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap t UCL N/A
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.586
SD in Original Scale 0.0296 SD in Log Scale 1.053
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0619 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0336 Mean in Log Scale -3.791
KM SD (logged) 1.082 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.262
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.593
KM SD (logged) 1.082 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.262
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.593 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.617
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -3.916 KM Geo Mean 0.0199
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0318 SD in Log Scale 1.547
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.062 95% H-Stat UCL 14.75
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0317 Mean in Log Scale -4.176
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0647
Page 53 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2834
2835
2836
2837
2838
2839
2840
2841
2842
2843
2844
2845
2846
2847
2848
2849
2850
2851
2852
2853
2854
2855
2856
2857
2858
2859
2860
2861
2862
2863
2864
2865
2866
2867
2868
2869
2870
2871
2872
2873
2874
2875
2876
2877
2878
2879
2880
2881
2882
2883
2884
2885
2886
2887
concDL (ocbph-empc_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Variance Detects 1.2800E-6 Percent Non-Detects 60%
Mean Detects 0.0114 SD Detects 0.00113
Minimum Detect 0.0106 Minimum Non-Detect 0.00109
Maximum Detect 0.0122 Maximum Non-Detect 0.0127
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
Mean of Logged Detects -4.477 SD of Logged Detects 0.0994
Median Detects 0.0114 CV Detects 0.0992
Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A
KM SD 0.00495 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0161 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.00743 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.00406
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 202.7 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0328 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0479
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0141 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0196 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0251
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.00743 SD (KM) 0.00495
Mean (detects) 0.0114
Theta hat (MLE) 5.6233E-5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 810.9 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0119 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.017
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.022 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0337
nu hat (KM) 22.53 nu star (KM) 10.34
theta hat (KM) 0.0033 theta star (KM) 0.00719
Variance (KM) 2.4530E-5 SE of Mean (KM) 0.00406
k hat (KM) 2.253 k star (KM) 1.034
Approximate Chi Square Value (10.34, α) 4.158 Adjusted Chi Square Value (10.34, β) 2.631
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0086
Page 54 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2888
2889
2890
2891
2892
2893
2894
2895
2896
2897
2898
2899
2900
2901
2902
2903
2904
2905
2906
2907
2908
2909
2910
2911
2912
2913
2914
2915
2916
2917
2918
2919
2920
2921
2922
2923
2924
2925
2926
2927
2928
2929
2930
2931
2932
2933
2934
2935
2936
2937
2938
2939
2940
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0185 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0292
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0116
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0115 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0112
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0112 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0118
Mean in Original Scale 0.0104 Mean in Log Scale -4.566
SD in Original Scale 0.00113 SD in Log Scale 0.106
KM SD (logged) 1.13 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.469
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.938
KM SD (logged) 1.13 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.469
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.938 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.194
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -5.365 KM Geo Mean 0.00468
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.00457 SD in Log Scale 1.259
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0115 95% H-Stat UCL 0.479
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0071 Mean in Log Scale -5.335
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (pcb156_157_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Warning: Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available!
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0161 KM H-UCL 0.194
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (pcb156_157_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Page 55 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2941
2942
2943
2944
2945
2946
2947
2948
2949
2950
2951
2952
2953
2954
2955
2956
2957
2958
2959
2960
2961
2962
2963
2964
2965
2966
2967
2968
2969
2970
2971
2972
2973
2974
2975
2976
2977
2978
2979
2980
2981
2982
2983
2984
2985
2986
2987
2988
2989
2990
2991
2992
2993
2994
concDL (pecbph-empc_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
concDL (tecbph-empc_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (pecbph-empc_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Maximum Detect 0.00219 Maximum Non-Detect 0.0253
Variance Detects 2.000E-10 Percent Non-Detects 60%
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Minimum Detect 0.00217 Minimum Non-Detect 0.00217
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 4
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 3
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A
Mean of Logged Detects -6.128 SD of Logged Detects 0.00649
Mean Detects 0.00218 SD Detects 1.4142E-5
Median Detects 0.00218 CV Detects 0.00649
KM SD 9.4281E-6 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.00219 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.00218 KM Standard Error of Mean 7.6980E-6
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 47524 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00222 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00225
95% KM (z) UCL 0.00219 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0022 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00221
Mean (detects) 0.00218
Theta hat (MLE) 4.5872E-8 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 190095 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Page 56 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
2995
2996
2997
2998
2999
3000
3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3007
3008
3009
3010
3011
3012
3013
3014
3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021
3022
3023
3024
3025
3026
3027
3028
3029
3030
3031
3032
3033
3034
3035
3036
3037
3038
3039
3040
3041
3042
3043
3044
3045
3046
3047
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.00218 SD (KM) 9.4281E-6
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.00219 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0022
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0022 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.00221
nu hat (KM) 533011 nu star (KM) 213206
theta hat (KM) 4.0837E-8 theta star (KM) 1.0209E-7
Variance (KM) 8.889E-11 SE of Mean (KM) 7.6980E-6
k hat (KM) 53301 k star (KM) 21321
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Approximate Chi Square Value (N/A, α) 212133 Adjusted Chi Square Value (N/A, β) 211653
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.00219 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.00219
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0086
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) N/A
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00218 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap t UCL N/A
Mean in Original Scale 0.00217 Mean in Log Scale -6.135
SD in Original Scale 1.9680E-5 SD in Log Scale 0.00911
KM SD (logged) 0.00432 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) N/A
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.00353
KM SD (logged) 0.00432 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) N/A
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.00353 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) N/A
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -6.13 KM Geo Mean 0.00218
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.00568 SD in Log Scale 1.105
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0114 95% H-Stat UCL 0.134
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.00594 Mean in Log Scale -5.582
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Warning: Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available!
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.00219 KM H-UCL N/A
Page 57 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
3048
3049
3050
3051
3052
3053
3054
3055
3056
3057
3058
3059
3060
3061
3062
3063
3064
3065
3066
3067
3068
3069
3070
3071
3072
3073
3074
3075
3076
3077
3078
3079
3080
3081
3082
3083
3084
3085
3086
3087
3088
3089
3090
3091
3092
3093
3094
3095
3096
3097
3098
3099
3100
3101
concDL (tricbph-empc_n_ug/kg)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (tricbph-empc_n_ug/kg) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 90.4 Mean 92.3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 4
concDL (tso_t_percent)
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.0245 Skewness 1.402
Maximum 96.4 Median 91.95
SD 2.261 Std. Error of Mean 0.923
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.263 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.841 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% K-S Critical Value 0.332 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.696 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.253 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.505 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 94.16 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 94.38
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 94.25
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 92.3 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.897
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 11923
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0455 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0909
nu hat (MLE) 24355 nu star (bias corrected) 12179
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2030 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1015
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 11830
Page 58 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 15 EPCs for Plants
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/10/2019 4:18:04 PM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
3102
3103
3104
3105
3106
3107
3108
3109
3110
3111
3112
3113
3114
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3120
3121
3122
3123
3124
3125
3126
3127
3128
3129
3130
3131
3132
3133
3134
3135
3136
3137
3138
3139
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.259 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.845 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 94.28 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 95.02
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 95.04
Maximum of Logged Data 4.569 SD of logged Data 0.0242
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 4.504 Mean of logged Data 4.525
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
94.16
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap-t UCL N/A
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 96.28 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 98
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 101.4
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 94.16
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 95.07 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 96.32
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 98.06 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 101.5
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% CLT UCL 93.82 95% Jackknife UCL
Page 59 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.00106 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.0011
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 61.83
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8.0588E-4 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.6437E-4
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 64.16
Theta hat (MLE) 2.1362E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.6758E-4
nu hat (MLE) 105.6 nu star (bias corrected) 84.33
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.773 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.012
5% K-S Critical Value 0.23 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.741 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.162 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.31 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.00101 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.00101
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.00101
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.164 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.915 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.529 Skewness 0.6
Maximum 0.0016 Median 7.0700E-4
SD 4.2660E-4 Std. Error of Mean 1.1401E-4
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.3710E-4 Mean 8.0588E-4
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 12
The data set for variable concDL (118-74-1__n) was not processed!
concDL (1336-36-3__y)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__n)
From File WorkSheet_g.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 16 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:26:08 PM
Page 1 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_g.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 16 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:26:08 PM
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
The data set for variable concDL (7439-97-6__n) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 9
concDL (7439-97-6__n)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 9
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 0.00101
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00115 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0013
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00152 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00194
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.001 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 9.8459E-4
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00101
95% CLT UCL 9.9342E-4 95% Jackknife UCL 0.00101
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 9.8555E-4 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.00103
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00136 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0016
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00206
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.00114 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00119
Maximum of Logged Data -6.44 SD of logged Data 0.561
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -8.347 Mean of logged Data -7.262
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.147 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.96 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Page 2 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_g.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 16 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:26:08 PM
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7.342 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8.218
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 6.335 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.71
Maximum of Logged Data 1.997 SD of logged Data 0.323
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.944 Mean of logged Data 1.622
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.252 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.896 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 6.167 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 6.294
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 213.4
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 5.294 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1.759
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 217.8
Theta hat (MLE) 0.461 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.584
nu hat (MLE) 321.2 nu star (bias corrected) 253.7
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 11.47 k star (bias corrected MLE) 9.062
5% K-S Critical Value 0.229 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.734 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.235 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.529 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 6.007 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 5.91
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 6
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.195 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.938 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.284 Skewness -0.406
Maximum 7.364 Median 5.426
SD 1.505 Std. Error of Mean 0.402
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.57 Mean 5.294
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 13
concDL (7440-38-2__y)
Page 3 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_g.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 16 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:26:08 PM
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
5% K-S Critical Value 0.228 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.734 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.232 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.753 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 14.11 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 13.99
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 14.11
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.208 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.919 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.245 Skewness -0.0778
Maximum 19.29 Median 13.49
SD 3.102 Std. Error of Mean 0.829
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 6.71 Mean 12.64
concDL (7440-47-3__y)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 6.007
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.501 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.048
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.807 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9.297
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5.908 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.914
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.892
95% CLT UCL 5.956 95% Jackknife UCL 6.007
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.937 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 5.965
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.939
Page 4 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_g.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 16 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:26:08 PM
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 7
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (87-68-3__n)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 14.11
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.13 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 16.26
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.82 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 20.89
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 14.25 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 14
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 13.83
95% CLT UCL 14.01 95% Jackknife UCL 14.11
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 13.97 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 14.14
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16.67 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18.4
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 21.8
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 14.6 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.42
Maximum of Logged Data 2.96 SD of logged Data 0.269
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.904 Mean of logged Data 2.506
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.246 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.887 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 14.36 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 14.61
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 309.2
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 12.64 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.539
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 314.5
Theta hat (MLE) 0.781 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.991
nu hat (MLE) 453.1 nu star (bias corrected) 357.3
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 16.18 k star (bias corrected MLE) 12.76
Page 5 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_g.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 16 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:26:08 PM
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.823 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.239
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0547 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0693
nu hat (MLE) 421.1 nu star (bias corrected) 332.2
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 15.04 k star (bias corrected MLE) 11.86
5% K-S Critical Value 0.228 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.734 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.211 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.716 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.932 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.942
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.935
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.235 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.868 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.282 Skewness 1.019
Maximum 1.303 Median 0.732
SD 0.232 Std. Error of Mean 0.062
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.523 Mean 0.823
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 12
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__n) was not processed!
concDL (calc-dx-0__y)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 6
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__n) was not processed!
concDL (95-94-3__n)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Page 6 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_g.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 16 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:26:08 PM
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.922 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 0.236 Std. Error of Mean 0.0631
Coefficient of Variation 0.277 Skewness 0.608
Minimum 0.506 Mean 0.851
Maximum 1.29 Median 0.764
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 12
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__y)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.956
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.008 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.093
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.21 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.439
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.945 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.922
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.931
95% CLT UCL 0.924 95% Jackknife UCL 0.932
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.921 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.971
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.075 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.185
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.401
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.944 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.996
Maximum of Logged Data 0.265 SD of logged Data 0.263
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.647 Mean of logged Data -0.229
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.195 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.917 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 0.939 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.956
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 285.8
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 290.9
Page 7 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_g.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 16 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:26:08 PM
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.04 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.126
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.245 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.478
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.969 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.96
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.959
95% CLT UCL 0.955 95% Jackknife UCL 0.963
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.949 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.981
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.123 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.24
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.471
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.982 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.038
Maximum of Logged Data 0.255 SD of logged Data 0.272
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.681 Mean of logged Data -0.196
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.148 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.952 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.973 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.991
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 276.3
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.851 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.251
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 281.3
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0584 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.074
nu hat (MLE) 408 nu star (bias corrected) 321.9
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 14.57 k star (bias corrected MLE) 11.5
K-S Test Statistic 0.165 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.228 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.435 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.734 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.964
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.963 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.966
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.195 Lilliefors GOF Test
Page 8 of 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_g.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 16 EPCs for Solids
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/16/2020 2:26:08 PM
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 0.963
Page 9 of 9
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
PROUCL OUTPUTS – SURFACE WATER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (107-06-2__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (106-46-7__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (106-46-7__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (10061-02-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (10061-02-6__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (100-41-4__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (100-41-4__ug/l)
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
Page 1 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (118-74-1__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (118-74-1__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (117-81-7__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (117-81-7__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (111-44-4__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (111-44-4__ug/l)
The data set for variable concDL (107-06-2__ug/l) was not processed!
Page 2 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168 Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Maximum 9.0000E-5 Median 6.6500E-5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 4.3000E-5 Mean 6.6500E-5
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (127-18-4__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (127-18-4__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (124-48-1__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (124-48-1__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (120-82-1__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
concDL (120-82-1__ug/l)
Page 3 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (16984-48-8__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (16984-48-8__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (14797-73-0__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (14797-73-0__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (14797-55-8__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (14797-55-8__ug/l)
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (1336-36-3__mg/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Page 4 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (608-93-5__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (56-23-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (56-23-5__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (18540-29-9__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (18540-29-9__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (179601-23-1__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (179601-23-1__ug/l)
Page 5 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7429-90-5__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 740 Median 695
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 650 Mean 695
concDL (7429-90-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (71-43-2__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (71-43-2__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (67-66-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (67-66-3__ug/l)
The data set for variable concDL (608-93-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Page 6 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (7439-97-6__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7439-96-5__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 610 Median 324
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 38 Mean 324
concDL (7439-96-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7439-92-1__ug/l) was not processed!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7439-92-1__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7439-89-6__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 6600 Median 4500
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2400 Mean 4500
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (7439-89-6__ug/l)
Page 7 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-28-0__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-28-0__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-02-0__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 15 Median 12.5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 10 Mean 12.5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-02-0__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7439-98-7__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 18 Median 10.75
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.5 Mean 10.75
concDL (7439-98-7__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7439-97-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Page 8 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-41-7__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-39-3__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 310 Median 178
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 46 Mean 178
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-39-3__ug/l)
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-38-2__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 9.5 Median 6.65
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.8 Mean 6.65
concDL (7440-38-2__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-36-0__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
concDL (7440-36-0__ug/l)
Page 9 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-50-8__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 26 Median 14.75
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.5 Mean 14.75
concDL (7440-50-8__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-48-4__ug/l) was not processed!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-48-4__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-43-9__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-43-9__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-41-7__ug/l) was not processed!
Page 10 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (74-87-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (74-83-9__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (74-83-9__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-66-6__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 56 Median 36
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 16 Mean 36
concDL (7440-66-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-62-2__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (7440-62-2__ug/l)
Page 11 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (75-25-2__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (75-25-2__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (74-97-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (74-97-5__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (74-90-8__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (74-90-8__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (74-87-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Page 12 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (78-87-5__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (76-03-9__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (76-03-9__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (75-34-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (75-34-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (75-27-4__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
concDL (75-27-4__ug/l)
Page 13 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (79-43-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (79-43-6__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (79-34-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (79-34-5__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (79-01-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (79-01-6__ug/l)
The data set for variable concDL (78-87-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Page 14 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808 Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Maximum 0.0079 Median 0.0079
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.0079 Mean 0.0079
concDL (91-57-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (91-20-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (91-20-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (87-86-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (87-86-5__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (87-68-3__ug/l)
Page 15 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (calc-dx-0__mg/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 1.1000E-7 Median 7.0000E-8
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.0000E-8 Mean 7.0000E-8
concDL (calc-dx-0__mg/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (95-94-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (95-47-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (95-47-6__ug/l)
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (91-57-6__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Page 16 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 3 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.110/29/2020 11:40:24 AM
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (calc-dx-2__mg/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 1.1000E-7 Median 7.1500E-8
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.3000E-8 Mean 7.1500E-8
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (calc-dx-2__mg/l)
Page 17 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (107-06-2__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (106-46-7__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (106-46-7__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (10061-02-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (10061-02-6__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (100-41-4__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (100-41-4__ug/l)
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
Page 1 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (118-74-1__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (118-74-1__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (117-81-7__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (117-81-7__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (111-44-4__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (111-44-4__ug/l)
The data set for variable concDL (107-06-2__ug/l) was not processed!
Page 2 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168 Maximum 6.6000E-4 Median 4.1000E-4
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 1.6000E-4 Mean 4.1000E-4
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (127-18-4__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (127-18-4__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (124-48-1__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 340 Median 192.5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 45 Mean 192.5
concDL (124-48-1__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (120-82-1__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (120-82-1__ug/l)
Page 3 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (16984-48-8__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 15000 Median 9350
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3700 Mean 9350
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (16984-48-8__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (14797-73-0__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 0.82 Median 0.8
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.78 Mean 0.8
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (14797-73-0__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (14797-55-8__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 4000 Median 3900
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3800 Mean 3900
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (14797-55-8__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (1336-36-3__mg/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Page 4 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (67-66-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (56-23-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (56-23-5__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (18540-29-9__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (18540-29-9__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (179601-23-1__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (179601-23-1__ug/l)
Page 5 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330 If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7439-89-6__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 300000 Median 260000
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 220000 Mean 260000
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7439-89-6__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7429-90-5__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 9400 Median 6450
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3500 Mean 6450
concDL (7429-90-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (71-43-2__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (71-43-2__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (67-66-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Page 6 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7439-98-7__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7439-97-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7439-97-6__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7439-96-5__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 5300 Median 4500
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3700 Mean 4500
concDL (7439-96-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7439-92-1__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (7439-92-1__ug/l)
Page 7 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-36-0__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-36-0__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-28-0__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 7.3 Median 6.95
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 6.6 Mean 6.95
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-28-0__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-02-0__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 370 Median 300
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 230 Mean 300
concDL (7440-02-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7439-98-7__ug/l) was not processed!
Page 8 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-43-9__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-41-7__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 1.8 Median 1.5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 1.2 Mean 1.5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-41-7__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-39-3__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 2900 Median 2850
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2800 Mean 2850
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-39-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-38-2__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 390 Median 360
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 330 Mean 360
concDL (7440-38-2__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Page 9 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
Maximum 570 Median 385
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 200 Mean 385
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-62-2__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-50-8__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 28 Median 26.5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 25 Mean 26.5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-50-8__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-48-4__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 14 Median 11.05
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 8.1 Mean 11.05
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-48-4__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-43-9__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 4.7 Median 4.7
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 4.7 Mean 4.7
Page 10 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (74-87-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (74-87-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (74-83-9__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (74-83-9__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (7440-66-6__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 740 Median 595
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 450 Mean 595
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (7440-66-6__ug/l)
The data set for variable concDL (7440-62-2__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Page 11 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
Maximum 210 Median 118.5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 27 Mean 118.5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (75-27-4__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (75-25-2__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 990 Median 545
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 100 Mean 545
concDL (75-25-2__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (74-97-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (74-97-5__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (74-90-8__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (74-90-8__ug/l)
Page 12 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (78-87-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (78-87-5__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (76-03-9__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 720 Median 715
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 710 Mean 715
concDL (76-03-9__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (75-34-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (75-34-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (75-27-4__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Page 13 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760 Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (87-68-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (79-43-6__ug/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 1400 Median 1300
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 1200 Mean 1300
concDL (79-43-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (79-34-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (79-34-5__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (79-01-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (79-01-6__ug/l)
Page 14 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (95-47-6__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (91-57-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (91-57-6__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (91-20-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (91-20-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (87-86-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (87-86-5__ug/l)
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Page 15 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
Maximum 9.1000E-7 Median 6.3500E-7
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.6000E-7 Mean 6.3500E-7
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (calc-dx-2__mg/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (calc-dx-0__mg/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Maximum 8.9000E-7 Median 6.2000E-7
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.5000E-7 Mean 6.2000E-7
concDL (calc-dx-0__mg/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 1
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (95-94-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (95-47-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Page 16 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 4 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/10/2020 11:01:54 AM
869
870
871
872 If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
The data set for variable concDL (calc-dx-2__mg/l) was not processed!
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
Page 17 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
The data set for variable concDL (107-06-2__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (106-46-7__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (107-06-2__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (10061-02-6__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (106-46-7__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (100-41-4__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (10061-02-6__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 9
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (100-41-4__ug/l)
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
Page 1 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.217 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.957 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 2.004 SD of Logged Detects 1.626
Median Detects 10.85 CV Detects 0.805
Skewness Detects 0.786 Kurtosis Detects 0.505
Variance Detects 115.7 Percent Non-Detects 33.33%
Mean Detects 13.37 SD Detects 10.76
Minimum Detect 0.32 Minimum Non-Detect 0.7
Maximum Detect 31 Maximum Non-Detect 3.3
Number of Detects 6 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
The data set for variable concDL (117-81-7__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (118-74-1__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 9
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 7
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 7
The data set for variable concDL (111-44-4__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (117-81-7__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (111-44-4__ug/l)
Page 2 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.798 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 21.8 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 26.69
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (10.89, α) 4.508 Adjusted Chi Square Value (10.89, β) 3.681
80% gamma percentile (KM) 14.87 90% gamma percentile (KM) 23.41
95% gamma percentile (KM) 32.36 99% gamma percentile (KM) 53.97
nu hat (KM) 14.34 nu star (KM) 10.89
theta hat (KM) 11.32 theta star (KM) 14.9
Variance (KM) 102.1 SE of Mean (KM) 3.69
k hat (KM) 0.797 k star (KM) 0.605
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 9.02 SD (KM) 10.11
Approximate Chi Square Value (5.55, α) 1.415 Adjusted Chi Square Value (5.55, β) 1.023
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 35.32 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 48.84
nu hat (MLE) 6.326 nu star (bias corrected) 5.55
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 0.351 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.308
Theta hat (MLE) 25.62 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 29.2
Maximum 31 Median 7.2
SD 10.74 CV 1.193
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 9.003
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 13.37
Theta hat (MLE) 13.62 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 22.22
nu hat (MLE) 11.78 nu star (bias corrected) 7.222
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.981 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.602
K-S Test Statistic 0.253 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.341 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.375 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.716 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 32.06 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 45.74
95% KM (z) UCL 15.09 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 17.92
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 20.09 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 25.1
KM SD 10.11 95% KM (BCA) UCL 14.62
95% KM (t) UCL 15.88 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 14.72
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 9.02 KM Standard Error of Mean 3.69
Page 3 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
The data set for variable concDL (120-82-1__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (120-82-1__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 15.88
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 10.59 SD in Log Scale 1.86
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 15.74 95% H-Stat UCL 604.7
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 9.174 Mean in Log Scale 1.158
KM SD (logged) 1.914 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.486
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.699
KM SD (logged) 1.914 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.486
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.699 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 664.9
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.956 KM Geo Mean 2.601
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 15.96 95% Bootstrap t UCL 19.73
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 519.8
SD in Original Scale 10.63 SD in Log Scale 1.834
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 15.71 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 15.03
Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 9.124 Mean in Log Scale 1.151
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.326 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 4 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.808 Mean of logged Data 2.551
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.19 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.899 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 22.18 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 24.2
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 26.34
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 14.92 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 9.686
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 28.74
Theta hat (MLE) 4.326 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 6.287
nu hat (MLE) 62.09 nu star (bias corrected) 42.72
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.449 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.374
5% K-S Critical Value 0.281 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.726 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.194 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.459 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 20.12 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 19.94
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 20.18
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.236 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.885 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.561 Skewness 0.422
Maximum 28 Median 11
SD 8.379 Std. Error of Mean 2.793
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 6.1 Mean 14.92
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
concDL (124-48-1__ug/l)
Page 5 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 1.621 Skewness 2.167
Maximum 0.0288 Median 0.0019
SD 0.00954 Std. Error of Mean 0.00318
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.5000E-6 Mean 0.00589
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/l)
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (127-18-4__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 4
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (127-18-4__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 20.12
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 23.3 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 27.1
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 32.36 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 42.71
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 18.63 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 19.24
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 19.68
95% CLT UCL 19.52 95% Jackknife UCL 20.12
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 19.35 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 20.8
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 28.17 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 33.88
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 45.1
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 25.51 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 24.06
Maximum of Logged Data 3.332 SD of logged Data 0.595
Page 6 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.0376 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0115
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.014
95% CLT UCL 0.0111 95% Jackknife UCL 0.0118
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.0109 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.0354
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.082 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.11
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.165
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 237.1 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0619
Maximum of Logged Data -3.547 SD of logged Data 2.893
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -12.9 Mean of logged Data -6.961
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.248 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.914 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0225 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.0308
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 1.092
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00589 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0104
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 1.499
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0161 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0185
nu hat (MLE) 6.581 nu star (bias corrected) 5.721
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.366 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.318
5% K-S Critical Value 0.299 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.795 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.149 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.184 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.0118 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.0136
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.0122
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.352 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.673 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 7 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.183 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.295 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.262 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.718 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 6821 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 9019
95% KM (z) UCL 4092 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 4434
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 4896 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 5702
KM SD 1665 95% KM (BCA) UCL 4027
95% KM (t) UCL 4219 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 4067
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 3116 KM Standard Error of Mean 593.4
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.237 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.889 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 8.066 SD of Logged Detects 0.423
Median Detects 3200 CV Detects 0.45
Skewness Detects 1.374 Kurtosis Detects 2.468
Variance Detects 2414286 Percent Non-Detects 11.11%
Mean Detects 3450 SD Detects 1554
Minimum Detect 1700 Minimum Non-Detect 440
Maximum Detect 6700 Maximum Non-Detect 440
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (14797-55-8__ug/l)
Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.0308
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0154 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0197
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0257 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0375
Page 8 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491 KM SD (logged) 0.725 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.665
KM SD (logged) 0.725 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.665
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.258 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 6583
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 7.846 KM Geo Mean 2555
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4122 95% Bootstrap t UCL 4527
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 4971
SD in Original Scale 1648 SD in Log Scale 0.526
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 4213 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 4111
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 3191 Mean in Log Scale 7.95
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.161 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.973 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 4617 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 5034
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (43.34, α) 29.25 Adjusted Chi Square Value (43.34, β) 26.83
80% gamma percentile (KM) 4562 90% gamma percentile (KM) 5804
95% gamma percentile (KM) 6977 99% gamma percentile (KM) 9549
nu hat (KM) 63.02 nu star (KM) 43.34
theta hat (KM) 889.9 theta star (KM) 1294
Variance (KM) 2772602 SE of Mean (KM) 593.4
k hat (KM) 3.501 k star (KM) 2.408
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 3116 SD (KM) 1665
Approximate Chi Square Value (33.90, α) 21.59 Adjusted Chi Square Value (33.90, β) 19.54
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 4895 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 5408
nu hat (MLE) 48.86 nu star (bias corrected) 33.9
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 2.714 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.884
Theta hat (MLE) 1148 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1655
Maximum 6700 Median 3200
SD 1764 CV 0.566
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 453.2 Mean 3117
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 3450
Theta hat (MLE) 539.7 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 845.9
nu hat (MLE) 102.3 nu star (bias corrected) 65.26
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 6.392 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.078
Page 9 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.427 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.358 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.816 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.68 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2.326
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 2.357 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2.021
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.386 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.804 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 0.622 Std. Error of Mean 0.278
Coefficient of Variation 0.353 Skewness -1.508
Minimum 0.72 Mean 1.764
Maximum 2.4 Median 1.9
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (14797-73-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 4219
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 1809 SD in Log Scale 0.975
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 4212 95% H-Stat UCL 11389
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 3091 Mean in Log Scale 7.769
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.258
Page 10 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 2.357
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.599 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.977
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.502 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4.534
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% CLT UCL 2.222 95% Jackknife UCL 2.357
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap-t UCL N/A
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3.42 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4.125
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5.511
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 3.59 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.912
Maximum of Logged Data 0.875 SD of logged Data 0.471
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -0.329 Mean of logged Data 0.495
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.423 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.721 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 2.879 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 3.637
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0086 Adjusted Chi Square Value 14.24
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.764 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1.03
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 17.98
Theta hat (MLE) 0.252 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.601
nu hat (MLE) 70.04 nu star (bias corrected) 29.35
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 7.004 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.935
Page 11 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 8.243 Mean of logged Data 8.688
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.229 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.918 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 7880 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 8284
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 87.21
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 6256 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2470
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 91.68
Theta hat (MLE) 657.6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 975
nu hat (MLE) 171.2 nu star (bias corrected) 115.5
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 9.513 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.416
5% K-S Critical Value 0.279 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.722 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.245 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.471 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 7742 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 8113
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 7826
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.299 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.802 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.383 Skewness 1.909
Maximum 12000 Median 6200
SD 2397 Std. Error of Mean 799.2
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3800 Mean 6256
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
concDL (16984-48-8__ug/l)
Page 12 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
Mean of Logged Detects 0.894 SD of Logged Detects 1.016
Median Detects 2.03 CV Detects 0.894
Skewness Detects 0.628 Kurtosis Detects -2.653
Variance Detects 10.36 Percent Non-Detects 37.5%
Mean Detects 3.6 SD Detects 3.218
Minimum Detect 0.91 Minimum Non-Detect 1.01
Maximum Detect 7.74 Maximum Non-Detect 1.64
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
The data set for variable concDL (179601-23-1__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (18540-29-9__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 9
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
concDL (179601-23-1__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 8284
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8653 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9739
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11246 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14207
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 13629 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 7600
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 8022
95% CLT UCL 7570 95% Jackknife UCL 7742
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 7455 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 8635
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9263 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10576
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13156
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 7979 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8317
Maximum of Logged Data 9.393 SD of logged Data 0.333
Page 13 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760 nu hat (KM) 15.81 nu star (KM) 11.22
Variance (KM) 6.843 SE of Mean (KM) 1.034
k hat (KM) 0.988 k star (KM) 0.701
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 2.601 SD (KM) 2.616
Approximate Chi Square Value (12.42, α) 5.504 Adjusted Chi Square Value (12.42, β) 4.396
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 5.631 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 7.049
nu hat (MLE) 17.74 nu star (bias corrected) 12.42
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0195
k hat (MLE) 1.108 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.776
Theta hat (MLE) 2.251 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.215
Maximum 7.74 Median 0.935
SD 2.871 CV 1.15
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.655 Mean 2.496
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 3.6
Theta hat (MLE) 2.508 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 5.088
nu hat (MLE) 14.36 nu star (bias corrected) 7.076
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.436 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.708
K-S Test Statistic 0.246 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.362 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.482 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.687 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 9.059 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 12.89
95% KM (z) UCL 4.302 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 10.24
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 5.703 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.108
KM SD 2.616 95% KM (BCA) UCL 4.293
95% KM (t) UCL 4.56 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 4.293
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 2.601 KM Standard Error of Mean 1.034
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.287 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.824 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Page 14 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814 Minimum Detect 3.1 Minimum Non-Detect 0.15
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 4
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (56-23-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 4.56
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 2.867 SD in Log Scale 1.032
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 4.423 95% H-Stat UCL 10
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 2.503 Mean in Log Scale 0.404
KM SD (logged) 0.856 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.08
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.339
KM SD (logged) 0.856 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.08
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.339 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 6.662
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.533 KM Geo Mean 1.705
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4.611 95% Bootstrap t UCL 13.73
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 7.784
SD in Original Scale 2.789 SD in Log Scale 0.907
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 4.48 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 4.166
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 2.611 Mean in Log Scale 0.545
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.227 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.855 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 6.186 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 7.867
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.22, α) 4.716 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.22, β) 3.708
80% gamma percentile (KM) 4.275 90% gamma percentile (KM) 6.526
95% gamma percentile (KM) 8.847 99% gamma percentile (KM) 14.39
theta hat (KM) 2.631 theta star (KM) 3.71
Page 15 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868 Approximate Chi Square Value (5.75, α) 1.512 Adjusted Chi Square Value (5.75, β) 1.102
nu hat (MLE) 6.621 nu star (bias corrected) 5.747
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 0.368 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.319
Theta hat (MLE) 9.427 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 10.86
Maximum 9.6 Median 3.1
SD 3.525 CV 1.017
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 3.467
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 6.02
Theta hat (MLE) 0.855 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.042
nu hat (MLE) 70.38 nu star (bias corrected) 29.49
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 7.038 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.949
K-S Test Statistic 0.143 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.358 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.168 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.68 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 11.24 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 15.88
95% KM (z) UCL 5.473 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 4.795
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.172 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 8.876
KM SD 3.364 95% KM (BCA) UCL 5.489
95% KM (t) UCL 5.742 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 5.439
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 3.411 KM Standard Error of Mean 1.254
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.182 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.978 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 1.722 SD of Logged Detects 0.433
Median Detects 5.5 CV Detects 0.418
Skewness Detects 0.527 Kurtosis Detects -0.364
Variance Detects 6.317 Percent Non-Detects 44.44%
Mean Detects 6.02 SD Detects 2.513
Maximum Detect 9.6 Maximum Non-Detect 0.75
Page 16 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 5.742
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 3.501 SD in Log Scale 1.737
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 5.648 95% H-Stat UCL 139.6
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 3.478 Mean in Log Scale 0.342
KM SD (logged) 1.822 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.247
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.679
KM SD (logged) 1.822 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.247
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.679 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 172.8
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.114 KM Geo Mean 1.12
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.813 95% Bootstrap t UCL 6.643
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 8.802
SD in Original Scale 2.936 SD in Log Scale 0.758
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 5.882 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.612
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 4.062 Mean in Log Scale 1.157
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.13 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.993 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 7.347 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 8.746
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (13.67, α) 6.348 Adjusted Chi Square Value (13.67, β) 5.332
80% gamma percentile (KM) 5.589 90% gamma percentile (KM) 8.398
95% gamma percentile (KM) 11.27 99% gamma percentile (KM) 18.09
nu hat (KM) 18.51 nu star (KM) 13.67
theta hat (KM) 3.317 theta star (KM) 4.491
Variance (KM) 11.32 SE of Mean (KM) 1.254
k hat (KM) 1.028 k star (KM) 0.76
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 3.411 SD (KM) 3.364
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 13.18 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 18.08
Page 17 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976 Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.334 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.315 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.591 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.714 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.542 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 10.44
95% KM (z) UCL 3.937 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 7.662
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 4.999 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 6.064
KM SD 2.17 95% KM (BCA) UCL 4.083
95% KM (t) UCL 4.105 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 3.948
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 2.648 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.784
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.365 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.779 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 0.882 SD of Logged Detects 0.71
Median Detects 2 CV Detects 0.808
Skewness Detects 1.537 Kurtosis Detects 1.489
Variance Detects 6.106 Percent Non-Detects 22.22%
Mean Detects 3.057 SD Detects 2.471
Minimum Detect 1 Minimum Non-Detect 0.87
Maximum Detect 7.8 Maximum Non-Detect 5
Number of Detects 7 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
The data set for variable concDL (608-93-5__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (67-66-3__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 9
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
concDL (608-93-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Page 18 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
KM SD (logged) 0.68 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.586
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.249 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 4.797
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.714 KM Geo Mean 2.043
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4.244 95% Bootstrap t UCL 7.429
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 6.071
SD in Original Scale 2.34 SD in Log Scale 0.816
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 4.047 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3.887
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 2.597 Mean in Log Scale 0.651
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.293 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.905 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 4.953 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 5.7
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (19.20, α) 10.27 Adjusted Chi Square Value (19.20, β) 8.922
80% gamma percentile (KM) 4.239 90% gamma percentile (KM) 6
95% gamma percentile (KM) 7.754 99% gamma percentile (KM) 11.81
nu hat (KM) 26.81 nu star (KM) 19.2
theta hat (KM) 1.778 theta star (KM) 2.482
Variance (KM) 4.708 SE of Mean (KM) 0.784
k hat (KM) 1.489 k star (KM) 1.067
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 2.648 SD (KM) 2.17
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.19, α) 4.697 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.19, β) 3.85
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 6.021 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 7.346
nu hat (MLE) 14.78 nu star (bias corrected) 11.19
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 0.821 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.622
Theta hat (MLE) 3.078 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.067
Maximum 7.8 Median 1.8
SD 2.407 CV 0.952
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 2.528
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 3.057
Theta hat (MLE) 1.341 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.188
nu hat (MLE) 31.91 nu star (bias corrected) 19.56
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 2.279 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.397
Page 19 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
Mean of Logged Detects 11.07 SD of Logged Detects 0.568
Median Detects 72000 CV Detects 0.511
Skewness Detects 0.379 Kurtosis Detects -0.949
Variance Detects 1.404E+9 Percent Non-Detects 11.11%
Mean Detects 73375 SD Detects 37466
Minimum Detect 26000 Minimum Non-Detect 250
Maximum Detect 130000 Maximum Non-Detect 250
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 8 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
The data set for variable concDL (71-43-2__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (7429-90-5__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (71-43-2__ug/l)
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL 5.7 95% GROS Adjusted Gamma UCL 7.346
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 2.31 SD in Log Scale 0.84
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 4.136 95% H-Stat UCL 6.745
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 2.704 Mean in Log Scale 0.696
KM SD (logged) 0.68 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.586
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.249
Page 20 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138 80% gamma percentile (KM) 98734 90% gamma percentile (KM) 129662
nu hat (KM) 47.31 nu star (KM) 32.87
theta hat (KM) 24826 theta star (KM) 35728
Variance (KM) 1.620E+9 SE of Mean (KM) 14342
k hat (KM) 2.628 k star (KM) 1.826
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 65250 SD (KM) 40248
Approximate Chi Square Value (21.34, α) 11.84 Adjusted Chi Square Value (21.34, β) 10.38
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 118303 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 134944
nu hat (MLE) 30.01 nu star (bias corrected) 21.34
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 1.667 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.185
Theta hat (MLE) 39389 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 55391
Maximum 130000 Median 66000
SD 41996 CV 0.64
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 3957 Mean 65662
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 73375
Theta hat (MLE) 18324 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 28374
nu hat (MLE) 64.07 nu star (bias corrected) 41.38
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 4.004 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.586
K-S Test Statistic 0.141 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.295 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.216 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.719 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 154817 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 207954
95% KM (z) UCL 88841 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 93508
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 108277 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 127766
KM SD 40248 95% KM (BCA) UCL 87583
95% KM (t) UCL 91920 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 88222
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 65250 KM Standard Error of Mean 14342
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.159 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.942 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Page 21 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192 SD 337011 Std. Error of Mean 112337
Minimum 5700 Mean 703967
Maximum 1000000 Median 860000
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7439-89-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 91920
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 42713 SD in Log Scale 2.148
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 91712 95% H-Stat UCL 33208132
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 65236 Mean in Log Scale 10.38
KM SD (logged) 1.815 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.231
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.647
KM SD (logged) 1.815 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.231
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.647 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 5187939
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 10.46 KM Geo Mean 34767
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 90104 95% Bootstrap t UCL 96175
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 136659
SD in Original Scale 39935 SD in Log Scale 0.707
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 91747 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 88430
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 66993 Mean in Log Scale 10.92
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.142 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.949 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 103294 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 114325
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (32.87, α) 20.77 Adjusted Chi Square Value (32.87, β) 18.76
95% gamma percentile (KM) 159326 99% gamma percentile (KM) 225484
Page 22 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4606935 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6026048
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8813623
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 29884590 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3584490
Maximum of Logged Data 13.82 SD of logged Data 1.66
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 8.648 Mean of logged Data 12.99
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.366 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.548 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 1424690 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1670698
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6.629
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 703967 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 752998
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 7.774
Theta hat (MLE) 586685 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 805444
nu hat (MLE) 21.6 nu star (bias corrected) 15.73
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.2 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.874
K-S Test Statistic 0.297 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.286 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.508 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.74 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 904956
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 912863 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 838053
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.234 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.847 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.479 Skewness -1.267
Page 23 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
95% KM (z) UCL 61.02 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 60.98
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 71.3 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 81.6
KM SD 21.27 95% KM (BCA) UCL 59.56
95% KM (t) UCL 62.65 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 59.56
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 48.56 KM Standard Error of Mean 7.58
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.171 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.944 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 3.94 SD of Logged Detects 0.332
Median Detects 56 CV Detects 0.316
Skewness Detects 0.234 Kurtosis Detects -0.197
Variance Detects 290.7 Percent Non-Detects 11.11%
Mean Detects 53.88 SD Detects 17.05
Minimum Detect 32 Minimum Non-Detect 6
Maximum Detect 83 Maximum Non-Detect 6
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (7439-92-1__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 912863
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1040978 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1193632
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1405511 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1821705
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 846584 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 860000
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 848889
95% CLT UCL 888745 95% Jackknife UCL 912863
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 876873 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 866894
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Page 24 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1300
1301
1302
1303
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353 SD in Original Scale 18.99 SD in Log Scale 0.411
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 50.44 Mean in Log Scale 3.851
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.161 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.928 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 66.72 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 71.51
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (63.86, α) 46.48 Adjusted Chi Square Value (63.86, β) 43.36
80% gamma percentile (KM) 67.89 90% gamma percentile (KM) 83.12
95% gamma percentile (KM) 97.21 99% gamma percentile (KM) 127.5
nu hat (KM) 93.79 nu star (KM) 63.86
theta hat (KM) 9.319 theta star (KM) 13.69
Variance (KM) 452.5 SE of Mean (KM) 7.58
k hat (KM) 5.211 k star (KM) 3.548
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 48.56 SD (KM) 21.27
Approximate Chi Square Value (74.80, α) 55.88 Adjusted Chi Square Value (74.80, β) 52.44
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 66.87 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 71.25
nu hat (MLE) 110.2 nu star (bias corrected) 74.8
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 6.122 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.155
Theta hat (MLE) 8.16 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 12.02
Maximum 83 Median 53
SD 19.81 CV 0.397
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 18.61 Mean 49.96
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 53.88
Theta hat (MLE) 4.928 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 7.79
nu hat (MLE) 174.9 nu star (bias corrected) 110.6
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 10.93 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.916
K-S Test Statistic 0.168 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.316 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.715 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 95.89 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 124
Page 25 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1354
1355
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.388 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.582 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 4176 Std. Error of Mean 1392
Coefficient of Variation 1.021 Skewness 2.773
Minimum 1500 Mean 4089
Maximum 15000 Median 2900
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7439-96-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 62.65
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 23.28 SD in Log Scale 0.997
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 62.65 95% H-Stat UCL 192.5
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 48.22 Mean in Log Scale 3.624
KM SD (logged) 0.736 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.686
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.262
KM SD (logged) 0.736 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.686
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.262 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 106.8
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 3.702 KM Geo Mean 40.51
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 60.22 95% Bootstrap t UCL 62.04
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 69.86
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 62.21 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 60.11
Page 26 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
1448
1449
1450
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% H-UCL 7193
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8265 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10156
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12782 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17939
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 16136 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 6722
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 7289
95% CLT UCL 6379 95% Jackknife UCL 6677
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 6238 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 13213
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7611 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9248
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12466
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 7193 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6430
Maximum of Logged Data 9.616 SD of logged Data 0.666
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 7.313 Mean of logged Data 8.056
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.235 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.84 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 6895 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 7744
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 13.84
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4089 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3388
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 15.55
Theta hat (MLE) 1972 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2807
nu hat (MLE) 37.33 nu star (bias corrected) 26.22
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.074 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.457
K-S Test Statistic 0.295 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.282 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.985 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.73 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 6892
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 6677 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 7754
Page 27 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
Theta hat (MLE) 0.14 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.24
nu hat (MLE) 89.98 nu star (bias corrected) 52.75
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 6.427 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.768
K-S Test Statistic 0.172 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.313 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.234 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.709 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.75 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.358
95% KM (z) UCL 0.994 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 1.017
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.217 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.44
KM SD 0.456 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.978
95% KM (t) UCL 1.03 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.978
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.724 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.164
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.196 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.949 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects -0.182 SD of Logged Detects 0.444
Median Detects 0.84 CV Detects 0.421
Skewness Detects 0.798 Kurtosis Detects 1.64
Variance Detects 0.145 Percent Non-Detects 22.22%
Mean Detects 0.903 SD Detects 0.38
Minimum Detect 0.38 Minimum Non-Detect 0.1
Maximum Detect 1.6 Maximum Non-Detect 0.32
Number of Detects 7 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (7439-97-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
ProUCL computes and outputs H-statistic based UCLs for historical reasons only.
H-statistic often results in unstable (both high and low) values of UCL95 as shown in examples in the Technical Guide.
It is therefore recommended to avoid the use of H-statistic based 95% UCLs.
Use of nonparametric methods are preferred to compute UCL95 for skewed data sets which do not follow a gamma distribution.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 28 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
1547
1548
1549
1550
1551
1552
1553
1554
1555
1556
1557
1558
1559
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565
1566
1567
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
KM SD (logged) 0.953 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.136
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.343
KM SD (logged) 0.953 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.136
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.343 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 2.359
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -0.653 KM Geo Mean 0.52
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.009 95% Bootstrap t UCL 1.065
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 1.336
SD in Original Scale 0.426 SD in Log Scale 0.605
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1.031 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.997
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.766 Mean in Log Scale -0.418
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.2 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.962 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 1.159 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 1.285
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (31.63, α) 19.78 Adjusted Chi Square Value (31.63, β) 17.83
80% gamma percentile (KM) 1.101 90% gamma percentile (KM) 1.453
95% gamma percentile (KM) 1.791 99% gamma percentile (KM) 2.547
nu hat (KM) 45.44 nu star (KM) 31.63
theta hat (KM) 0.287 theta star (KM) 0.412
Variance (KM) 0.208 SE of Mean (KM) 0.164
k hat (KM) 2.524 k star (KM) 1.757
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.724 SD (KM) 0.456
Approximate Chi Square Value (25.60, α) 15.07 Adjusted Chi Square Value (25.60, β) 13.4
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 1.246 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 1.402
nu hat (MLE) 36.4 nu star (bias corrected) 25.6
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 2.022 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.422
Theta hat (MLE) 0.363 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.516
Maximum 1.6 Median 0.82
SD 0.471 CV 0.642
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.141 Mean 0.734
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.903
Page 29 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572
1573
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
1582
1583
1584
1585
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1597
1598
1599
1600
1601
1602
1603
1604
1605
1606
1607
1608
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621 Theta hat (MLE) 66.62 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 95.89
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.632 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.829
K-S Test Statistic 0.229 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.282 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.559 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.728 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 227.8
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 228.4 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 218.3
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.142 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.978 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 85.65 Std. Error of Mean 28.55
Coefficient of Variation 0.488 Skewness -0.388
Minimum 19 Mean 175.3
Maximum 300 Median 180
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7439-98-7__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 1.03
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.483 SD in Log Scale 1.096
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1.025 95% H-Stat UCL 3.532
Mean in Original Scale 0.726 Mean in Log Scale -0.678
Page 30 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627
1628
1629
1630
1631
1632
1633
1634
1635
1636
1637
1638
1639
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
1645
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675 Maximum 260 Median 210
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 74 Mean 187.1
concDL (7440-02-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 228.4
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 261 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 299.8
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 353.6 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 459.4
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 221.3 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 220
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 217.7
95% CLT UCL 222.3 95% Jackknife UCL 228.4
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 220 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 226.1
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 432.7 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 536.4
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 740.2
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 470.2 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 357.9
Maximum of Logged Data 5.704 SD of logged Data 0.83
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.944 Mean of logged Data 4.965
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.248 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.77 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 277.5 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 307.1
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 18.79
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 175.3 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 129.7
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 20.8
nu hat (MLE) 47.37 nu star (bias corrected) 32.91
Page 31 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680
1681
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
1703
1704
1705
1706
1707
1708
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
1716
1717
1718
1719
1720
1721
1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
1729
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 299.4 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 347.2
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 441.2
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 257.6 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 265
Maximum of Logged Data 5.561 SD of logged Data 0.399
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 4.304 Mean of logged Data 5.171
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.292 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.839 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 239.3 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 252.4
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 75.93
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 187.1 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 78.43
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 80.09
Theta hat (MLE) 22.21 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 32.88
nu hat (MLE) 151.7 nu star (bias corrected) 102.4
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 8.426 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.692
5% K-S Critical Value 0.279 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.722 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.288 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.605 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 224.2 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 213.9
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 223.3
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.252 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.915 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.32 Skewness -0.854
SD 59.88 Std. Error of Mean 19.96
Page 32 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1730
1731
1732
1733
1734
1735
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740
1741
1742
1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1748
1749
1750
1751
1752
1753
1754
1755
1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780
1781
1782
1783
95% KM (z) UCL 2.29 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.47 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.65
KM SD 0.281 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 2.318 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 2.071 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.133
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.301 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.897 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 0.754 SD of Logged Detects 0.172
Median Detects 2.05 CV Detects 0.18
Skewness Detects 1.377 Kurtosis Detects 2.356
Variance Detects 0.15 Percent Non-Detects 55.56%
Mean Detects 2.15 SD Detects 0.387
Minimum Detect 1.8 Minimum Non-Detect 2.5
Maximum Detect 2.7 Maximum Non-Detect 5
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (7440-28-0__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 224.2
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 247 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 274.1
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 311.8 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 385.7
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 212.4 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 216.7
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 213.3
95% CLT UCL 219.9 95% Jackknife UCL 224.2
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 217.9 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 218.6
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Page 33 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1784
1785
1786
1787
1788
1789
1790
1791
1792
1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
1821
1822
1823
1824
1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837 SD in Original Scale 0.281 SD in Log Scale 0.128
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 2.072 Mean in Log Scale 0.721
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.278 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.927 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 2.275 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 2.321
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (651.59, α) 593.4 Adjusted Chi Square Value (651.59, β) 581.6
80% gamma percentile (KM) 2.354 90% gamma percentile (KM) 2.523
95% gamma percentile (KM) 2.668 99% gamma percentile (KM) 2.955
nu hat (KM) 975.4 nu star (KM) 651.6
theta hat (KM) 0.0382 theta star (KM) 0.0572
Variance (KM) 0.0792 SE of Mean (KM) 0.133
k hat (KM) 54.19 k star (KM) 36.2
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 2.071 SD (KM) 0.281
Approximate Chi Square Value (773.32, α) 709.8 Adjusted Chi Square Value (773.32, β) 696.9
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 2.258 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 1158 nu star (bias corrected) 773.3
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 64.33 k star (bias corrected MLE) 42.96
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0322 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0483
Maximum 2.7 Median 2
SD 0.285 CV 0.137
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 1.762 Mean 2.073
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 2.15
Theta hat (MLE) 0.049 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.193
nu hat (MLE) 351.1 nu star (bias corrected) 89.1
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 43.88 k star (bias corrected MLE) 11.14
K-S Test Statistic 0.292 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.394 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.35 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.656 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.9 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.392
Page 34 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1838
1839
1840
1841
1842
1843
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
1857
1858
1859
1860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
1869
1870
1871
1872
1873
1874
1875
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
1886
1887
1888
1889
1890
1891
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.313 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.854 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 9.811 Std. Error of Mean 3.27
Coefficient of Variation 0.659 Skewness 1.489
Minimum 2 Mean 14.88
Maximum 37 Median 13
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-36-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 2.318
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.579 SD in Log Scale 0.318
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 2.287 95% H-Stat UCL 2.44
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 1.928 Mean in Log Scale 0.613
KM SD (logged) 0.127 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 1.843
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.061
KM SD (logged) 0.127 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 1.843
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.061 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 2.249
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.72 KM Geo Mean 2.054
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.261 95% Bootstrap t UCL 2.338
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 2.254
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 2.246 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.239
Page 35 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1892
1893
1894
1895
1896
1897
1898
1899
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 20.96
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 24.69 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 29.13
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 35.3 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 47.42
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 58.36 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 20.43
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 21.73
95% CLT UCL 20.26 95% Jackknife UCL 20.96
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 19.95 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 26.43
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 34.07 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 42.06
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 57.74
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 35.56 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 28.32
Maximum of Logged Data 3.611 SD of logged Data 0.79
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.693 Mean of logged Data 2.479
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.245 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.861 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 24.07 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 26.78
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 16.83
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 14.88 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 11.47
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 18.72
Theta hat (MLE) 6.166 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 8.842
nu hat (MLE) 43.43 nu star (bias corrected) 30.29
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.413 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.683
K-S Test Statistic 0.229 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.282 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.498 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.729 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 21.23
95% Student's-t UCL 20.96 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 21.99
Page 36 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.655 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 470.9 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 519.8
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 19.91
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 300.9 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 217.7
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 21.97
Theta hat (MLE) 109.2 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 157.5
nu hat (MLE) 49.58 nu star (bias corrected) 34.39
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.755 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.91
5% K-S Critical Value 0.282 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.728 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.265 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.008 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 379.8 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 352.9
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 377.1
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.164 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.923 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.423 Skewness -1.177
Maximum 460 Median 330
SD 127.4 Std. Error of Mean 42.46
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 28 Mean 300.9
concDL (7440-38-2__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Page 37 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2053
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.978 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.313 Skewness -0.428
Maximum 1000 Median 720
SD 215.2 Std. Error of Mean 71.74
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 300 Mean 686.7
concDL (7440-39-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 379.8
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 428.3 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 485.9
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 566 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 723.3
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 357.4 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 363.3
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 350
95% CLT UCL 370.7 95% Jackknife UCL 379.8
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 367.9 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 362.5
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 772.3 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 959.6
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1328
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 859.2 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 637.3
Maximum of Logged Data 6.131 SD of logged Data 0.852
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.332 Mean of logged Data 5.514
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.311 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Page 38 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2054
2055
2056
2057
2058
2059
2060
2061
2062
2063
2064
2065
2066
2067
2068
2069
2070
2071
2072
2073
2074
2075
2076
2077
2078
2079
2080
2081
2082
2083
2084
2085
2086
2087
2088
2089
2090
2091
2092
2093
2094
2095
2096
2097
2098
2099
2100
2101
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 901.9 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 999.4
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1135 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1401
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 801.6 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 792.2
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 785.6
95% CLT UCL 804.7 95% Jackknife UCL 820.1
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 797.3 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 810.6
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1063 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1223
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1539
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 913.6 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 946.7
Maximum of Logged Data 6.908 SD of logged Data 0.367
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 5.704 Mean of logged Data 6.479
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.214 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.912 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 864.7 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 909
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 87.47
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 686.7 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 270.7
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 91.94
Theta hat (MLE) 71.99 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 106.7
nu hat (MLE) 171.7 nu star (bias corrected) 115.8
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 9.538 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.433
5% K-S Critical Value 0.279 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.722 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.198 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.299 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 820.1 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 793.7
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 818.4
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.154 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 39 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2108
2109
2110
2111
2112
2113
2114
2115
2116
2117
2118
2119
2120
2121
2122
2123
2124
2125
2126
2127
2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
2133
2134
2135
2136
2137
2138
2139
2140
2141
2142
2143
2144
2145
2146
2147
2148
2149
2150
2151
2152
2153
2154
2155
2156
2157
2158
2159
2160
2161
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 8.476 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.381
K-S Test Statistic 0.179 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.295 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.202 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.716 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 5.948 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.632
95% KM (z) UCL 3.858 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 3.928
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 4.474 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 5.091
KM SD 1.275 95% KM (BCA) UCL 3.778
95% KM (t) UCL 3.956 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 3.811
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 3.111 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.454
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.134 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.987 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 1.156 SD of Logged Detects 0.385
Median Detects 3.5 CV Detects 0.347
Skewness Detects -0.0469 Kurtosis Detects -0.535
Variance Detects 1.374 Percent Non-Detects 11.11%
Mean Detects 3.375 SD Detects 1.172
Minimum Detect 1.6 Minimum Non-Detect 1
Maximum Detect 5.2 Maximum Non-Detect 1
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 8 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (7440-41-7__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 820.1
Page 40 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2162
2163
2164
2165
2166
2167
2168
2169
2170
2171
2172
2173
2174
2175
2176
2177
2178
2179
2180
2181
2182
2183
2184
2185
2186
2187
2188
2189
2190
2191
2192
2193
2194
2195
2196
2197
2198
2199
2200
2201
2202
2203
2204
2205
2206
2207
2208
2209
2210
2211
2212
2213
2214
2215
KM SD (logged) 0.498 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.225
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.177
KM SD (logged) 0.498 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.225
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.177 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 4.679
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 1.028 KM Geo Mean 2.795
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 3.811 95% Bootstrap t UCL 3.95
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 4.657
SD in Original Scale 1.306 SD in Log Scale 0.477
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 3.948 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3.822
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 3.138 Mean in Log Scale 1.052
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.195 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.956 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 4.183 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 4.461
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (72.79, α) 54.14 Adjusted Chi Square Value (72.79, β) 50.77
80% gamma percentile (KM) 4.284 90% gamma percentile (KM) 5.185
95% gamma percentile (KM) 6.013 99% gamma percentile (KM) 7.782
nu hat (KM) 107.2 nu star (KM) 72.79
theta hat (KM) 0.522 theta star (KM) 0.769
Variance (KM) 1.625 SE of Mean (KM) 0.454
k hat (KM) 5.955 k star (KM) 4.044
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 3.111 SD (KM) 1.275
Approximate Chi Square Value (58.52, α) 41.93 Adjusted Chi Square Value (58.52, β) 38.99
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 4.339 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 4.667
nu hat (MLE) 85.78 nu star (bias corrected) 58.52
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 4.766 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.251
Theta hat (MLE) 0.652 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.956
Maximum 5.2 Median 3.4
SD 1.356 CV 0.436
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.982 Mean 3.109
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 3.375
Theta hat (MLE) 0.398 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.627
nu hat (MLE) 135.6 nu star (bias corrected) 86.1
Page 41 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2216
2217
2218
2219
2220
2221
2222
2223
2224
2225
2226
2227
2228
2229
2230
2231
2232
2233
2234
2235
2236
2237
2238
2239
2240
2241
2242
2243
2244
2245
2246
2247
2248
2249
2250
2251
2252
2253
2254
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259
2260
2261
2262
2263
2264
2265
2266
2267
2268
2269
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.316 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.619 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.165
95% KM (z) UCL 1.942 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.142 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.342
KM SD 0.255 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 1.974 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 1.7 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.147
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.25 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.953 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 0.518 SD of Logged Detects 0.184
Median Detects 1.75 CV Detects 0.173
Skewness Detects -0.941 Kurtosis Detects 1.5
Variance Detects 0.0867 Percent Non-Detects 55.56%
Mean Detects 1.7 SD Detects 0.294
Minimum Detect 1.3 Minimum Non-Detect 2.5
Maximum Detect 2 Maximum Non-Detect 5
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (7440-43-9__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 3.956
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 1.456 SD in Log Scale 0.714
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 3.958 95% H-Stat UCL 6.511
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 3.056 Mean in Log Scale 0.951
Page 42 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2270
2271
2272
2273
2274
2275
2276
2277
2278
2279
2280
2281
2282
2283
2284
2285
2286
2287
2288
2289
2290
2291
2292
2293
2294
2295
2296
2297
2298
2299
2300
2301
2302
2303
2304
2305
2306
2307
2308
2309
2310
2311
2312
2313
2314
2315
2316
2317
2318
2319
2320
2321
2322
2323
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.817 95% Bootstrap t UCL 1.834
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 1.873
SD in Original Scale 0.244 SD in Log Scale 0.149
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1.847 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.821
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 1.696 Mean in Log Scale 0.518
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.276 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.924 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 1.886 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 1.928
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (534.87, α) 482.2 Adjusted Chi Square Value (534.87, β) 471.7
80% gamma percentile (KM) 1.955 90% gamma percentile (KM) 2.11
95% gamma percentile (KM) 2.243 99% gamma percentile (KM) 2.508
nu hat (KM) 800.3 nu star (KM) 534.9
theta hat (KM) 0.0382 theta star (KM) 0.0572
Variance (KM) 0.065 SE of Mean (KM) 0.147
k hat (KM) 44.46 k star (KM) 29.72
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 1.7 SD (KM) 0.255
Approximate Chi Square Value (649.45, α) 591.3 Adjusted Chi Square Value (649.45, β) 579.6
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 1.865 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 972.2 nu star (bias corrected) 649.4
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 54.01 k star (bias corrected MLE) 36.08
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0314 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0471
Maximum 2 Median 1.7
SD 0.24 CV 0.141
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 1.3 Mean 1.699
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 1.7
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0411 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.162
nu hat (MLE) 330.6 nu star (bias corrected) 83.99
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 41.33 k star (bias corrected MLE) 10.5
K-S Test Statistic 0.271 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.394 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.656 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 43 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2324
2325
2326
2327
2328
2329
2330
2331
2332
2333
2334
2335
2336
2337
2338
2339
2340
2341
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
2356
2357
2358
2359
2360
2361
2362
2363
2364
2365
2366
2367
2368
2369
2370
2371
2372
2373
2374
2375
2376
2377 Gamma GOF Test
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 31.68
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 31.64 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 31.3
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.181 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.939 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 7.672 Std. Error of Mean 2.557
Coefficient of Variation 0.285 Skewness 0.22
Minimum 17 Mean 26.89
Maximum 40 Median 29
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-48-4__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 1.974
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.517 SD in Log Scale 0.291
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 2.048 95% H-Stat UCL 2.132
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 1.728 Mean in Log Scale 0.508
KM SD (logged) 0.159 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 1.871
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0918
KM SD (logged) 0.159 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 1.871
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0918 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 1.889
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.518 KM Geo Mean 1.679
Page 44 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2378
2379
2380
2381
2382
2383
2384
2385
2386
2387
2388
2389
2390
2391
2392
2393
2394
2395
2396
2397
2398
2399
2400
2401
2402
2403
2404
2405
2406
2407
2408
2409
2410
2411
2412
2413
2414
2415
2416
2417
2418
2419
2420
2421
2422
2423
2424
2425
2426
2427
2428
2429
2430
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 31.64
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 34.56 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 38.04
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 42.86 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 52.33
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 31.37 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 30.89
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 30.78
95% CLT UCL 31.1 95% Jackknife UCL 31.64
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 30.85 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 31.93
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 38.44 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 43.44
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 53.24
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 33.29 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 34.85
Maximum of Logged Data 3.689 SD of logged Data 0.294
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.833 Mean of logged Data 3.254
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.206 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.93 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 32.58 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 33.96
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 129.3
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 26.89 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 8.926
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 134.8
Theta hat (MLE) 1.992 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.963
nu hat (MLE) 243 nu star (bias corrected) 163.4
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 13.5 k star (bias corrected MLE) 9.075
K-S Test Statistic 0.2 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.279 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
A-D Test Statistic 0.365 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.721 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 45 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2431
2432
2433
2434
2435
2436
2437
2438
2439
2440
2441
2442
2443
2444
2445
2446
2447
2448
2449
2450
2451
2452
2453
2454
2455
2456
2457
2458
2459
2460
2461
2462
2463
2464
2465
2466
2467
2468
2469
2470
2471
2472
2473
2474
2475
2476
2477
2478
2479
2480
2481
2482
2483
2484
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.398 Mean of logged Data 4.574
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.287 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.686 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 188.6 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 208.8
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 18.57
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 118.9 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 88.32
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 20.56
Theta hat (MLE) 45.61 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 65.61
nu hat (MLE) 46.92 nu star (bias corrected) 32.61
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.607 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.812
K-S Test Statistic 0.248 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.282 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.898 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.728 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 150.7
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 151.8 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 141.2
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.21 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.916 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 53.05 Std. Error of Mean 17.68
Coefficient of Variation 0.446 Skewness -1.072
Minimum 11 Mean 118.9
Maximum 180 Median 140
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-50-8__ug/l)
General Statistics
Page 46 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2485
2486
2487
2488
2489
2490
2491
2492
2493
2494
2495
2496
2497
2498
2499
2500
2501
2502
2503
2504
2505
2506
2507
2508
2509
2510
2511
2512
2513
2514
2515
2516
2517
2518
2519
2520
2521
2522
2523
2524
2525
2526
2527
2528
2529
2530
2531
2532
2533
2534
2535
2536
2537
2538 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.32 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.874 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 6.905 SD of Logged Detects 0.352
Median Detects 1100 CV Detects 0.293
Skewness Detects -0.971 Kurtosis Detects -0.0452
Variance Detects 94084 Percent Non-Detects 11.11%
Mean Detects 1046 SD Detects 306.7
Minimum Detect 510 Minimum Non-Detect 30
Maximum Detect 1400 Maximum Non-Detect 30
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (7440-62-2__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 151.8
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 171.9 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 196
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 229.3 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 294.8
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 142.5 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 144.4
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 142.1
95% CLT UCL 148 95% Jackknife UCL 151.8
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 145.6 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 145.3
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 308.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 383.5
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 531.5
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 348.9 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 253.9
Maximum of Logged Data 5.193 SD of logged Data 0.867
Page 47 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2539
2540
2541
2542
2543
2544
2545
2546
2547
2548
2549
2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
2578
2579
2580
2581
2582
2583
2584
2585
2586
2587
2588
2589
2590
2591
2592
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.814 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 1293 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 1388
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (61.01, α) 44.04 Adjusted Chi Square Value (61.01, β) 41.02
80% gamma percentile (KM) 1312 90% gamma percentile (KM) 1613
95% gamma percentile (KM) 1892 99% gamma percentile (KM) 2494
nu hat (KM) 89.51 nu star (KM) 61.01
theta hat (KM) 187.7 theta star (KM) 275.4
Variance (KM) 175178 SE of Mean (KM) 149.1
k hat (KM) 4.973 k star (KM) 3.389
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 933.3 SD (KM) 418.5
Approximate Chi Square Value (89.88, α) 69.02 Adjusted Chi Square Value (89.88, β) 65.18
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 1278 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 1353
nu hat (MLE) 132.8 nu star (bias corrected) 89.88
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 7.379 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.994
Theta hat (MLE) 133 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 196.5
Maximum 1400 Median 1100
SD 346.6 CV 0.353
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 462.7 Mean 981.4
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 1046
Theta hat (MLE) 98.75 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 156
nu hat (MLE) 169.5 nu star (bias corrected) 107.3
Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 10.6 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.705
K-S Test Statistic 0.355 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.739 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.715 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1865 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 2417
95% KM (z) UCL 1179 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 1145
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1381 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1583
KM SD 418.5 95% KM (BCA) UCL 1146
95% KM (t) UCL 1211 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 1144
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 933.3 KM Standard Error of Mean 149.1
Page 48 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2593
2594
2595
2596
2597
2598
2599
2600
2601
2602
2603
2604
2605
2606
2607
2608
2609
2610
2611
2612
2613
2614
2615
2616
2617
2618
2619
2620
2621
2622
2623
2624
2625
2626
2627
2628
2629
2630
2631
2632
2633
2634
2635
2636
2637
2638
2639
2640
2641
2642
2643
2644
2645
2646
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.364 Skewness -1.155
Maximum 580 Median 390
SD 144 Std. Error of Mean 48.01
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 77 Mean 395.2
concDL (7440-66-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 1211
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 447.8 SD in Log Scale 1.437
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1209 95% H-Stat UCL 15489
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 931.7 Mean in Log Scale 6.439
KM SD (logged) 1.144 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.568
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.408
KM SD (logged) 1.144 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.568
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.408 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 5505
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 6.516 KM Geo Mean 675.7
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1140 95% Bootstrap t UCL 1173
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 1374
SD in Original Scale 347.5 SD in Log Scale 0.419
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1196 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1151
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 980.9 Mean in Log Scale 6.819
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.36 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 49 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2647
2648
2649
2650
2651
2652
2653
2654
2655
2656
2657
2658
2659
2660
2661
2662
2663
2664
2665
2666
2667
2668
2669
2670
2671
2672
2673
2674
2675
2676
2677
2678
2679
2680
2681
2682
2683
2684
2685
2686
2687
2688
2689
2690
2691
2692
2693
2694
2695
2696
2697
2698
2699
2700 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 464.7 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 463.3
95% CLT UCL 474.2 95% Jackknife UCL 484.5
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 469 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 470.3
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 779.8 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 938.2
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1249
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 707.3 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 665.7
Maximum of Logged Data 6.363 SD of logged Data 0.598
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 4.344 Mean of logged Data 5.869
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.4 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.654 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 553.2 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 595.3
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 38.23
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 395.2 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 221
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 41.15
Theta hat (MLE) 84.3 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 123.5
nu hat (MLE) 84.39 nu star (bias corrected) 57.59
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 4.688 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.2
5% K-S Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.723 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.372 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.151 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 484.5 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 454.4
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 481.4
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.292 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.846 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 50 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2701
2702
2703
2704
2705
2706
2707
2708
2709
2710
2711
2712
2713
2714
2715
2716
2717
2718
2719
2720
2721
2722
2723
2724
2725
2726
2727
2728
2729
2730
2731
2732
2733
2734
2735
2736
2737
2738
2739
2740
2741
2742
2743
2744
2745
2746
2747
2748
2749
2750
2751
2752
2753
2754 Variance Detects 797.8 Percent Non-Detects 11.11%
Minimum Detect 5.9 Minimum Non-Detect 5
Maximum Detect 91 Maximum Non-Detect 5
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
The data set for variable concDL (74-87-3__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (74-90-8__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
concDL (74-87-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (74-83-9__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 4
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 8
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (74-83-9__ug/l)
General Statistics
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 484.5
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 539.2 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 604.5
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 695 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 872.9
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 453
Page 51 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2755
2756
2757
2758
2759
2760
2761
2762
2763
2764
2765
2766
2767
2768
2769
2770
2771
2772
2773
2774
2775
2776
2777
2778
2779
2780
2781
2782
2783
2784
2785
2786
2787
2788
2789
2790
2791
2792
2793
2794
2795
2796
2797
2798
2799
2800
2801
2802
2803
2804
2805
2806
2807
2808
Approximate Chi Square Value (8.14, α) 2.818 Adjusted Chi Square Value (8.14, β) 2.201
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 55.78 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 71.41
nu hat (MLE) 10.21 nu star (bias corrected) 8.142
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 0.567 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.452
Theta hat (MLE) 34.02 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 42.67
Maximum 91 Median 13
SD 27.39 CV 1.419
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 19.3
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 21.71
Theta hat (MLE) 15.85 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 23.11
nu hat (MLE) 21.92 nu star (bias corrected) 15.03
Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.37 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.94
K-S Test Statistic 0.368 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.3 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 1.132 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.73 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 76.51 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 110.1
95% KM (z) UCL 34.78 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 93.19
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 47.07 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 59.4
KM SD 25.46 95% KM (BCA) UCL 38.08
95% KM (t) UCL 36.73 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 37.09
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 19.86 KM Standard Error of Mean 9.072
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.441 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.544 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 2.67 SD of Logged Detects 0.831
Median Detects 13.5 CV Detects 1.301
Skewness Detects 2.728 Kurtosis Detects 7.587
Mean Detects 21.71 SD Detects 28.25
Page 52 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2809
2810
2811
2812
2813
2814
2815
2816
2817
2818
2819
2820
2821
2822
2823
2824
2825
2826
2827
2828
2829
2830
2831
2832
2833
2834
2835
2836
2837
2838
2839
2840
2841
2842
2843
2844
2845
2846
2847
2848
2849
2850
2851
2852
2853
2854
2855
2856
2857
2858
2859
2860
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 59.4
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 27.19 SD in Log Scale 0.973
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 36.43 95% H-Stat UCL 56.89
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 19.58 Mean in Log Scale 2.476
KM SD (logged) 0.805 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.823
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.287
KM SD (logged) 0.805 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.823
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.287 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 39.65
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 2.553 KM Geo Mean 12.84
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 45.51 95% Bootstrap t UCL 84.38
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 59.91
SD in Original Scale 27.21 SD in Log Scale 0.995
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 36.41 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 36.62
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 19.55 Mean in Log Scale 2.464
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.297 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.809 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 55.17 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 69.95
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (8.63, α) 3.107 Adjusted Chi Square Value (8.63, β) 2.451
80% gamma percentile (KM) 32.54 90% gamma percentile (KM) 54.18
95% gamma percentile (KM) 77.41 99% gamma percentile (KM) 134.8
nu hat (KM) 10.95 nu star (KM) 8.633
theta hat (KM) 32.64 theta star (KM) 41.4
Variance (KM) 648.1 SE of Mean (KM) 9.072
k hat (KM) 0.608 k star (KM) 0.48
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 19.86 SD (KM) 25.46
Page 53 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2861
2862
2863
2864
2865
2866
2867
2868
2869
2870
2871
2872
2873
2874
2875
2876
2877
2878
2879
2880
2881
2882
2883
2884
2885
2886
2887
2888
2889
2890
2891
2892
2893
2894
2895
2896
2897
2898
2899
2900
2901
2902
2903
2904
2905
2906
2907
2908
2909
2910
2911
2912
2913
2914 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 10.11
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 52.42 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 48.6
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 11.55
Theta hat (MLE) 32.07 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 45.05
nu hat (MLE) 29.42 nu star (bias corrected) 20.95
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.634 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.164
5% K-S Critical Value 0.284 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.733 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.242 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.571 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 76.83 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 75.35
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 77.04
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.246 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.87 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.751 Skewness 0.287
Maximum 110 Median 46
SD 39.38 Std. Error of Mean 13.13
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 9.8 Mean 52.42
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
concDL (75-25-2__ug/l)
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (74-97-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 4
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
concDL (74-97-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Page 54 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2915
2916
2917
2918
2919
2920
2921
2922
2923
2924
2925
2926
2927
2928
2929
2930
2931
2932
2933
2934
2935
2936
2937
2938
2939
2940
2941
2942
2943
2944
2945
2946
2947
2948
2949
2950
2951
2952
2953
2954
2955
2956
2957
2958
2959
2960
2961
2962
2963
2964
2965
2966
2967
2968
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 4.904 Std. Error of Mean 1.635
Coefficient of Variation 0.655 Skewness 1.272
Minimum 2.6 Mean 7.489
Maximum 18 Median 6.8
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (75-27-4__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 76.83
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 91.8 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 109.6
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 134.4 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 183
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 70.38 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 73.56
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 74.2
95% CLT UCL 74.01 95% Jackknife UCL 76.83
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 72.4 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 79.21
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 130.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 163.1
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 227.6
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 159.5 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 106.6
Maximum of Logged Data 4.7 SD of logged Data 0.931
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.282 Mean of logged Data 3.623
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.212 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.876 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 95.06 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 108.6
Page 55 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
2969
2970
2971
2972
2973
2974
2975
2976
2977
2978
2979
2980
2981
2982
2983
2984
2985
2986
2987
2988
2989
2990
2991
2992
2993
2994
2995
2996
2997
2998
2999
3000
3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3007
3008
3009
3010
3011
3012
3013
3014
3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021
3022 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 12.78 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 10.13
95% CLT UCL 10.18 95% Jackknife UCL 10.53
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 10.04 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 11.76
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.55 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.62
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 23.64
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 13.53 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.34
Maximum of Logged Data 2.89 SD of logged Data 0.639
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.956 Mean of logged Data 1.832
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.14 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.961 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 11.56 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 12.73
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 21.35
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 7.489 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5.275
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 23.49
Theta hat (MLE) 2.572 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.716
nu hat (MLE) 52.42 nu star (bias corrected) 36.28
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.912 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.015
K-S Test Statistic 0.169 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.281 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.259 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.727 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 10.64
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 10.53 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 10.92
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.173 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.883 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Page 56 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
3023
3024
3025
3026
3027
3028
3029
3030
3031
3032
3033
3034
3035
3036
3037
3038
3039
3040
3041
3042
3043
3044
3045
3046
3047
3048
3049
3050
3051
3052
3053
3054
3055
3056
3057
3058
3059
3060
3061
3062
3063
3064
3065
3066
3067
3068
3069
3070
3071
3072
3073
3074
3075
3076
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 576 KM Standard Error of Mean 102.8
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.152 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.927 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 6.409 SD of Logged Detects 0.395
Median Detects 685 CV Detects 0.36
Skewness Detects -0.112 Kurtosis Detects -1.429
Variance Detects 54336 Percent Non-Detects 11.11%
Mean Detects 647.5 SD Detects 233.1
Minimum Detect 350 Minimum Non-Detect 3.8
Maximum Detect 980 Maximum Non-Detect 3.8
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 8 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 9
The data set for variable concDL (75-34-3__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (76-03-9__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (75-34-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 10.53
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.39 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.61
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.7 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 23.75
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 10.51
Page 57 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
3077
3078
3079
3080
3081
3082
3083
3084
3085
3086
3087
3088
3089
3090
3091
3092
3093
3094
3095
3096
3097
3098
3099
3100
3101
3102
3103
3104
3105
3106
3107
3108
3109
3110
3111
3112
3113
3114
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3120
3121
3122
3123
3124
3125
3126
3127
3128
3129
3130 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.208 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.896 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 831.1 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 900.6
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (49.19, α) 34.09 Adjusted Chi Square Value (49.19, β) 31.46
80% gamma percentile (KM) 830.8 90% gamma percentile (KM) 1043
95% gamma percentile (KM) 1242 99% gamma percentile (KM) 1675
nu hat (KM) 71.79 nu star (KM) 49.19
theta hat (KM) 144.4 theta star (KM) 210.8
Variance (KM) 83185 SE of Mean (KM) 102.8
k hat (KM) 3.988 k star (KM) 2.733
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 576 SD (KM) 288.4
Approximate Chi Square Value (55.70, α) 39.54 Adjusted Chi Square Value (55.70, β) 36.69
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 839.2 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 904.4
nu hat (MLE) 81.54 nu star (bias corrected) 55.7
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 4.53 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.094
Theta hat (MLE) 131.5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 192.6
Maximum 980 Median 660
SD 267.5 CV 0.449
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 182.7 Mean 595.9
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 647.5
Theta hat (MLE) 81.25 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 127.9
nu hat (MLE) 127.5 nu star (bias corrected) 81.03
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 7.97 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.064
K-S Test Statistic 0.193 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.295 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.405 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.717 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1218 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 1599
95% KM (z) UCL 745 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 743.1
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 884.3 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1024
KM SD 288.4 95% KM (BCA) UCL 734.4
95% KM (t) UCL 767.1 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 718.9
Page 58 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
3131
3132
3133
3134
3135
3136
3137
3138
3139
3140
3141
3142
3143
3144
3145
3146
3147
3148
3149
3150
3151
3152
3153
3154
3155
3156
3157
3158
3159
3160
3161
3162
3163
3164
3165
3166
3167
3168
3169
3170
3171
3172
3173
3174
3175
3176
3177
3178
3179
3180
3181
3182
3183
3184
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 9
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 3
The data set for variable concDL (78-87-5__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (79-01-6__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (78-87-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 767.1
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 306.4 SD in Log Scale 1.958
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 765.7 95% H-Stat UCL 104740
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 575.8 Mean in Log Scale 5.768
KM SD (logged) 1.632 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.772
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.582
KM SD (logged) 1.632 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.772
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.582 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 20559
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 5.845 KM Geo Mean 345.6
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 726.7 95% Bootstrap t UCL 771.8
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 900.7
SD in Original Scale 257.8 SD in Log Scale 0.487
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 761.5 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 740
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 601.6 Mean in Log Scale 6.303
Page 59 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
3185
3186
3187
3188
3189
3190
3191
3192
3193
3194
3195
3196
3197
3198
3199
3200
3201
3202
3203
3204
3205
3206
3207
3208
3209
3210
3211
3212
3213
3214
3215
3216
3217
3218
3219
3220
3221
3222
3223
3224
3225
3226
3227
3228
3229
3230
3231
3232
3233
3234
3235
3236
3237
3238 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1388 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 1800
95% KM (z) UCL 875.4 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 858.4
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1026 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1178
KM SD 312.6 95% KM (BCA) UCL 843.3
95% KM (t) UCL 899.3 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 860
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 692.2 KM Standard Error of Mean 111.4
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.268 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.854 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 6.61 SD of Logged Detects 0.343
Median Detects 865 CV Detects 0.29
Skewness Detects -0.933 Kurtosis Detects -0.478
Variance Detects 50764 Percent Non-Detects 11.11%
Mean Detects 777.5 SD Detects 225.3
Minimum Detect 400 Minimum Non-Detect 9.8
Maximum Detect 1000 Maximum Non-Detect 9.8
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 7
The data set for variable concDL (79-34-5__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (79-43-6__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (79-01-6__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (79-34-5__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Page 60 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
3239
3240
3241
3242
3243
3244
3245
3246
3247
3248
3249
3250
3251
3252
3253
3254
3255
3256
3257
3258
3259
3260
3261
3262
3263
3264
3265
3266
3267
3268
3269
3270
3271
3272
3273
3274
3275
3276
3277
3278
3279
3280
3281
3282
3283
3284
3285
3286
3287
3288
3289
3290
3291
3292
SD in Original Scale 255.1 SD in Log Scale 0.409
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 887.7 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 855.2
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 729.6 Mean in Log Scale 6.525
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.291 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.809 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 961.1 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 1032
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (60.19, α) 43.35 Adjusted Chi Square Value (60.19, β) 40.35
80% gamma percentile (KM) 974.6 90% gamma percentile (KM) 1200
95% gamma percentile (KM) 1409 99% gamma percentile (KM) 1859
nu hat (KM) 88.28 nu star (KM) 60.19
theta hat (KM) 141.1 theta star (KM) 207
Variance (KM) 97692 SE of Mean (KM) 111.4
k hat (KM) 4.905 k star (KM) 3.344
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 692.2 SD (KM) 312.6
Approximate Chi Square Value (93.41, α) 72.13 Adjusted Chi Square Value (93.41, β) 68.19
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 945.4 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 999.9
nu hat (MLE) 138.1 nu star (bias corrected) 93.41
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0231
k hat (MLE) 7.673 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.19
Theta hat (MLE) 95.12 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 140.6
Maximum 1000 Median 860
SD 254.5 CV 0.349
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 349.3 Mean 729.9
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 777.5
Theta hat (MLE) 70.34 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 111.2
nu hat (MLE) 176.9 nu star (bias corrected) 111.9
Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 11.05 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.992
K-S Test Statistic 0.295 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.729 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.715 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 61 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
3293
3294
3295
3296
3297
3298
3299
3300
3301
3302
3303
3304
3305
3306
3307
3308
3309
3310
3311
3312
3313
3314
3315
3316
3317
3318
3319
3320
3321
3322
3323
3324
3325
3326
3327
3328
3329
3330
3331
3332
3333
3334
3335
3336
3337
3338
3339
3340
3341
3342
3343
3344
3345
3346
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (87-86-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 8
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 4
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (87-86-5__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 9
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 7
concDL (87-68-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 899.3
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 332.8 SD in Log Scale 1.704
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 897.9 95% H-Stat UCL 35844
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 691.7 Mean in Log Scale 6.052
KM SD (logged) 1.393 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.172
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.496
KM SD (logged) 1.393 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.172
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.496 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 9461
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 6.129 KM Geo Mean 459.1
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 841.1 95% Bootstrap t UCL 865.2
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 1011
Page 62 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
3347
3348
3349
3350
3351
3352
3353
3354
3355
3356
3357
3358
3359
3360
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3367
3368
3369
3370
3371
3372
3373
3374
3375
3376
3377
3378
3379
3380
3381
3382
3383
3384
3385
3386
3387
3388
3389
3390
3391
3392
3393
3394
3395
3396
3397
3398
3399
3400
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 9
concDL (95-94-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (95-47-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 9
concDL (95-47-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (91-57-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
concDL (91-57-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (91-20-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 9
concDL (91-20-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Page 63 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
3401
3402
3403
3404
3405
3406
3407
3408
3409
3410
3411
3412
3413
3414
3415
3416
3417
3418
3419
3420
3421
3422
3423
3424
3425
3426
3427
3428
3429
3430
3431
3432
3433
3434
3435
3436
3437
3438
3439
3440
3441
3442
3443
3444
3445
3446
3447
3448
3449
3450
3451
3452
3453
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.376 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.722 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 3.7308E-6 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 4.5664E-6
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 3.701
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.5465E-6 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1.9847E-6
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 4.53
Theta hat (MLE) 1.9341E-6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.5472E-6
nu hat (MLE) 14.39 nu star (bias corrected) 10.93
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.8 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.607
5% K-S Critical Value 0.289 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.75 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.344 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.932 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 2.2602E-6 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2.2725E-6
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2.2750E-6
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.204 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.908 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation N/A Skewness 0.693
Maximum 3.9000E-6 Median 1.7000E-6
SD 1.1515E-6 Std. Error of Mean 3.8384E-7
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 8.2000E-9 Mean 1.5465E-6
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
concDL (calc-dx-0__mg/l)
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
Page 64 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
3454
3455
3456
3457
3458
3459
3460
3461
3462
3463
3464
3465
3466
3467
3468
3469
3470
3471
3472
3473
3474
3475
3476
3477
3478
3479
3480
3481
3482
3483
3484
3485
3486
3487
3488
3489
3490
3491
3492
3493
3494
3495
3496
3497
3498
3499
3500
3501
3502
3503
3504
3505
3506
3507
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 2.5496E-6 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2.6415E-6
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.247 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.868 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 1.3582E-6 Std. Error of Mean 4.5273E-7
Coefficient of Variation N/A Skewness 1.172
Minimum 1.0000E-8 Mean 1.7078E-6
Maximum 4.7000E-6 Median 1.7000E-6
Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__mg/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 2.2602E-6
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.6980E-6 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.2196E-6
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.9436E-6 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5.3657E-6
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 2.6070E-6 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.1678E-6
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.2456E-6
95% CLT UCL 2.1778E-6 95% Jackknife UCL 2.2602E-6
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 2.1291E-6 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 2.3351E-6
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.2487E-5 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.6484E-5
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.4335E-5
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 2.3760E-4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.6076E-6
Maximum of Logged Data -12.45 SD of logged Data 1.955
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -18.62 Mean of logged Data -14.12
Page 65 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_b.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 5 Uncertainty EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.12/19/2021 6:25:34 PM
3508
3509
3510
3511
3512
3513
3514
3515
3516
3517
3518
3519
3520
3521
3522
3523
3524
3525
3526
3527
3528
3529
3530
3531
3532
3533
3534
3535
3536
3537
3538
3539
3540
3541
3542
3543
3544
3545
3546
3547
3548
3549
3550
3551
3552
3553
3554
3555
3556
3557
3558
3559
3560
3561
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 2.5496E-6
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.0660E-6 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.6812E-6
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4.5350E-6 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.2123E-6
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5.8948E-6 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.4300E-6
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.5733E-6
95% CLT UCL 2.4524E-6 95% Jackknife UCL 2.5496E-6
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 2.3993E-6 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 2.7722E-6
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.2761E-5 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.6816E-5
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.4783E-5
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1.8854E-4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.8390E-6
Maximum of Logged Data -12.27 SD of logged Data 1.892
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -18.42 Mean of logged Data -14
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.385 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.729 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 4.0550E-6 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 4.9438E-6
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 3.887
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.7078E-6 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.1599E-6
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 4.739
Theta hat (MLE) 2.0659E-6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.7317E-6
nu hat (MLE) 14.88 nu star (bias corrected) 11.25
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.827 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.625
K-S Test Statistic 0.357 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.289 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.865 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.749 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2.5791E-6
Page 66 of 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JK L
The data set for variable concDL (107-06-2__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
The data set for variable concDL (106-46-7__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (107-06-2__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
The data set for variable concDL (10061-02-6__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (106-46-7__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
The data set for variable concDL (100-41-4__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (10061-02-6__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 8
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (100-41-4__ug/l)
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
Page 1 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.364 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.76 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 3.647 SD of Logged Detects 0.831
Median Detects 26.5 CV Detects 0.9
Skewness Detects 1.219 Kurtosis Detects -0.272
Variance Detects 2220 Percent Non-Detects 25%
Mean Detects 52.33 SD Detects 47.12
Minimum Detect 19 Minimum Non-Detect 0.63
Maximum Detect 130 Maximum Non-Detect 0.7
Number of Detects 6 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
The data set for variable concDL (117-81-7__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (118-74-1__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 8
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 6
The data set for variable concDL (111-44-4__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (117-81-7__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
concDL (111-44-4__ug/l)
Page 2 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.812 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 102.7 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 134.3
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (9.55, α) 3.665 Adjusted Chi Square Value (9.55, β) 2.804
80% gamma percentile (KM) 64.96 90% gamma percentile (KM) 102.6
95% gamma percentile (KM) 142 99% gamma percentile (KM) 237.5
nu hat (KM) 13.15 nu star (KM) 9.555
theta hat (KM) 47.93 theta star (KM) 65.99
Variance (KM) 1889 SE of Mean (KM) 16.83
k hat (KM) 0.822 k star (KM) 0.597
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 39.41 SD (KM) 43.46
Approximate Chi Square Value (4.59, α) 0.969 Adjusted Chi Square Value (4.59, β) 0.619
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 186 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 291.2
nu hat (MLE) 5.217 nu star (bias corrected) 4.594
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0195
k hat (MLE) 0.326 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.287
Theta hat (MLE) 120.4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 136.7
Maximum 130 Median 22.5
SD 46.61 CV 1.187
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 39.25
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 52.33
Theta hat (MLE) 29.79 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 52.89
nu hat (MLE) 21.08 nu star (bias corrected) 11.87
Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.757 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.989
K-S Test Statistic 0.353 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.337 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.72 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.706 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 144.5 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 206.9
95% KM (z) UCL 67.09 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 132.6
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 89.91 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 112.8
KM SD 43.46 95% KM (BCA) UCL 67.95
95% KM (t) UCL 71.3 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 67.03
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 39.41 KM Standard Error of Mean 16.83
Page 3 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
The data set for variable concDL (120-82-1__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (124-48-1__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
concDL (120-82-1__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
KM H-UCL 5469
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Lognormal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 46.53 SD in Log Scale 2.308
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 70.5 95% H-Stat UCL 76144
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 39.33 Mean in Log Scale 2.459
KM SD (logged) 1.897 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.843
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.735
KM SD (logged) 1.897 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 5.843
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.735 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 5469
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 2.62 KM Geo Mean 13.73
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 70.64 95% Bootstrap t UCL 157
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 251
SD in Original Scale 45.43 SD in Log Scale 1.168
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 70.96 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 67.76
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 40.53 Mean in Log Scale 3.143
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.314 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 4 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 15.24 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.78
Maximum of Logged Data 2.708 SD of logged Data 0.496
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.065 Mean of logged Data 2.161
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.261 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.832 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 13.17 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 14.36
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 39.53
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 9.475 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.897
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 43.11
Theta hat (MLE) 1.618 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.53
nu hat (MLE) 93.72 nu star (bias corrected) 59.91
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 5.858 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.744
5% K-S Critical Value 0.295 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.718 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.235 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.496 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 11.89 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 11.42
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 11.87
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.192 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.952 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.381 Skewness -0.327
Maximum 15 Median 9.35
SD 3.611 Std. Error of Mean 1.277
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.9 Mean 9.475
Page 5 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 1.249 Skewness 2.559
Maximum 0.0148 Median 0.0022
SD 0.0046 Std. Error of Mean 0.00163
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 6.9900E-4 Mean 0.00369
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
The data set for variable concDL (127-18-4__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (127-18-4__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 11.89
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.31 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.04
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.45 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 22.18
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 12.29 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 11.46
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 11.33
95% CLT UCL 11.58 95% Jackknife UCL 11.89
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 11.45 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 11.87
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.1 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 20.33
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 26.66
Page 6 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.0177 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00671
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00724
95% CLT UCL 0.00636 95% Jackknife UCL 0.00677
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.00617 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.0134
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00859 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0108
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.0152
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.0122 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.00698
Maximum of Logged Data -4.213 SD of logged Data 0.955
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -7.266 Mean of logged Data -6.057
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.212 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.913 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 0.00791 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.00976
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 5.192
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00369 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00397
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 6.405
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00297 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00429
nu hat (MLE) 19.88 nu star (bias corrected) 13.76
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.242 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.86
5% K-S Critical Value 0.3 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.732 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.278 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.629 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.00677 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.00794
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.00701
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.391 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.625 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 7 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0122 Adjusted Chi Square Value 1640
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3317 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 273
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 1675
Theta hat (MLE) 11.24 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 22.47
nu hat (MLE) 3541 nu star (bias corrected) 1772
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 295 k star (bias corrected MLE) 147.6
K-S Test Statistic 0.506 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.332 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.718 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.696 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 3471
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 3485 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 3365
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.492 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.496 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 204.1 Std. Error of Mean 83.33
Coefficient of Variation 0.0615 Skewness -2.449
Minimum 2900 Mean 3317
Maximum 3400 Median 3400
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (14797-55-8__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.00976
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.00857 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0108
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0138 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.0199
Page 8 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
SD 0.0894 Std. Error of Mean 0.04
Coefficient of Variation 0.0434 Skewness 1.258
Minimum 2 Mean 2.06
Maximum 2.2 Median 2
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (14797-73-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 3485 or 95% Modified-t UCL 3471
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3567 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3680
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3837 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4146
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% CLT UCL 3454 95% Jackknife UCL N/A
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap-t UCL N/A
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3700 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3866
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4192
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3581
Maximum of Logged Data 8.132 SD of logged Data 0.0649
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 7.972 Mean of logged Data 8.105
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.492 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.496 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 3508 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 3582
Page 9 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.232 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.306
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.452
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.178
Maximum of Logged Data 0.788 SD of logged Data 0.0428
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.693 Mean of logged Data 0.722
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.35 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.772 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 2.155 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 2.2
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0086 Adjusted Chi Square Value 2537
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 2.06 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.125
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 2589
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00304 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0076
nu hat (MLE) 6770 nu star (bias corrected) 2709
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 677 k star (bias corrected MLE) 270.9
K-S Test Statistic 0.374 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.357 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.69 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.678 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 2.149
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 2.145 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 2.15
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.349 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.771 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Page 10 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.716 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.202 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.362 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 6492 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 6307
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 6480
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.172 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.947 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.222 Skewness -0.441
Maximum 7400 Median 5900
SD 1257 Std. Error of Mean 444.4
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3700 Mean 5650
concDL (16984-48-8__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 2.145
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.18 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.234
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.31 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.458
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% CLT UCL 2.126 95% Jackknife UCL 2.145
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap-t UCL N/A
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Page 11 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657 Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 8
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (179601-23-1__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 6492
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6983 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7587
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8425 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10072
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 6268 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 6325
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 6288
95% CLT UCL 6381 95% Jackknife UCL 6492
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 6312 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 6378
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7748 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8653
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10430
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 6794 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7096
Maximum of Logged Data 8.909 SD of logged Data 0.239
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 8.216 Mean of logged Data 8.616
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.208 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.917 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 6678 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 6974
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 172.5
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 5650 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1549
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 180.1
Theta hat (MLE) 267.1 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 424.6
nu hat (MLE) 338.5 nu star (bias corrected) 212.9
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 21.16 k star (bias corrected MLE) 13.31
Page 12 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
Theta hat (MLE) 1.878 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 6.016
nu hat (MLE) 21.45 nu star (bias corrected) 6.696
Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 2.681 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.837
K-S Test Statistic 0.452 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.397 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.857 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.66 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 9.531 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 13.37
95% KM (z) UCL 4.763 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 6.167 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.576
KM SD 2.538 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 5.022 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 3.058 KM Standard Error of Mean 1.036
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.41 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.707 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 1.418 SD of Logged Detects 0.853
Median Detects 6.185 CV Detects 0.516
Skewness Detects -1.959 Kurtosis Detects 3.87
Variance Detects 6.754 Percent Non-Detects 50%
Mean Detects 5.035 SD Detects 2.599
Minimum Detect 1.15 Minimum Non-Detect 1.04
Maximum Detect 6.62 Maximum Non-Detect 1.72
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 4
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 7
The data set for variable concDL (179601-23-1__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (18540-29-9__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Page 13 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
KM SD (logged) 0.851 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.068
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.348
KM SD (logged) 0.851 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.068
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.348 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 8.138
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.748 KM Geo Mean 2.112
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4.43 95% Bootstrap t UCL 5
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 14.67
SD in Original Scale 2.824 SD in Log Scale 1.09
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 4.831 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 4.355
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 2.94 Mean in Log Scale 0.587
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.427 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.667 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 6.17 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 7.473
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (15.85, α) 7.857 Adjusted Chi Square Value (15.85, β) 6.486
80% gamma percentile (KM) 4.926 90% gamma percentile (KM) 7.058
95% gamma percentile (KM) 9.192 99% gamma percentile (KM) 14.15
nu hat (KM) 23.23 nu star (KM) 15.85
theta hat (KM) 2.107 theta star (KM) 3.087
Variance (KM) 6.442 SE of Mean (KM) 1.036
k hat (KM) 1.452 k star (KM) 0.991
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 3.058 SD (KM) 2.538
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.37, α) 4.815 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.37, β) 3.794
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 7.103 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 16.06 nu star (bias corrected) 11.37
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0195
k hat (MLE) 1.004 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.711
Theta hat (MLE) 2.997 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.233
Maximum 6.62 Median 1.601
SD 2.803 CV 0.932
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.173 Mean 3.008
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 5.035
Page 14 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
95% KM (z) UCL 0.89 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.171 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.453
KM SD 0.33 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 0.941 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.548 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.208
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.178 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.425 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.999 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Skewness Detects 0.122 Kurtosis Detects N/A
Mean of Logged Detects -0.568 SD of Logged Detects 0.865
Mean Detects 0.703 SD Detects 0.49
Median Detects 0.69 CV Detects 0.697
Maximum Detect 1.2 Maximum Non-Detect 0.75
Variance Detects 0.24 Percent Non-Detects 62.5%
Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
Minimum Detect 0.22 Minimum Non-Detect 0.75
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 4
Number of Detects 3 Number of Non-Detects 5
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (56-23-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 7.576
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 2.878 SD in Log Scale 1.12
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 4.793 95% H-Stat UCL 15.24
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 2.865 Mean in Log Scale 0.519
Page 15 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.749 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.847
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.988
SD in Original Scale 0.338 SD in Log Scale 0.641
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.738 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.722
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.512 Mean in Log Scale -0.85
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.257 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.425 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.961 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.899 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 1.026
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (28.89, α) 17.62 Adjusted Chi Square Value (28.89, β) 15.44
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.83 90% gamma percentile (KM) 1.092
95% gamma percentile (KM) 1.343 99% gamma percentile (KM) 1.904
nu hat (KM) 44.09 nu star (KM) 28.89
theta hat (KM) 0.199 theta star (KM) 0.304
Variance (KM) 0.109 SE of Mean (KM) 0.208
k hat (KM) 2.756 k star (KM) 1.806
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.548 SD (KM) 0.33
Approximate Chi Square Value (32.57, α) 20.53 Adjusted Chi Square Value (32.57, β) 18.15
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.861 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 49.99 nu star (bias corrected) 32.57
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0195
k hat (MLE) 3.124 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.036
Theta hat (MLE) 0.174 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.267
Maximum 1.2 Median 0.496
SD 0.334 CV 0.616
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.193 Mean 0.543
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.703
Theta hat (MLE) 0.285 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 14.83 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 2.472 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.845 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.614
Page 16 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925 Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
Mean of Logged Detects 0.456 SD of Logged Detects 0.454
Median Detects 1.65 CV Detects 0.404
Skewness Detects 0.111 Kurtosis Detects -0.278
Variance Detects 0.476 Percent Non-Detects 25%
Mean Detects 1.707 SD Detects 0.69
Minimum Detect 0.74 Minimum Non-Detect 1.7
Maximum Detect 2.7 Maximum Non-Detect 2.6
Number of Detects 6 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
The data set for variable concDL (608-93-5__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (67-66-3__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 8
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (608-93-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.941
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.312 SD in Log Scale 0.509
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.707 95% H-Stat UCL 0.787
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.498 Mean in Log Scale -0.826
KM SD (logged) 0.651 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.635
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.462
KM SD (logged) 0.651 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.635
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.462 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 1.06
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -0.802 KM Geo Mean 0.448
Page 17 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
nu hat (KM) 111.1 nu star (KM) 70.8
theta hat (KM) 0.232 theta star (KM) 0.364
Variance (KM) 0.373 SE of Mean (KM) 0.254
k hat (KM) 6.947 k star (KM) 4.425
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 1.609 SD (KM) 0.611
Approximate Chi Square Value (78.10, α) 58.74 Adjusted Chi Square Value (78.10, β) 54.51
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 2.134 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 2.3
nu hat (MLE) 122.8 nu star (bias corrected) 78.1
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0195
k hat (MLE) 7.677 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.881
Theta hat (MLE) 0.209 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.329
Maximum 2.7 Median 1.46
SD 0.616 CV 0.384
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.74 Mean 1.605
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 1.707
Theta hat (MLE) 0.261 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.505
nu hat (MLE) 78.37 nu star (bias corrected) 40.52
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 6.531 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.377
K-S Test Statistic 0.131 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.333 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.171 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.698 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.195 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 4.136
95% KM (z) UCL 2.027 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 2.085
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.371 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.716
KM SD 0.611 95% KM (BCA) UCL 2.015
95% KM (t) UCL 2.09 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 2.018
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 1.609 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.254
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.118 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.995 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Page 18 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033 Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
concDL (71-43-2__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 2.09
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.663 SD in Log Scale 0.442
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1.993 95% H-Stat UCL 2.292
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 1.549 Mean in Log Scale 0.355
KM SD (logged) 0.413 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.214
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.178
KM SD (logged) 0.413 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.214
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.178 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 2.286
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.396 KM Geo Mean 1.486
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.986 95% Bootstrap t UCL 2.208
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 2.25
SD in Original Scale 0.624 SD in Log Scale 0.402
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 2.009 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.945
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 1.591 Mean in Log Scale 0.396
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.168 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.963 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 2.173 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 2.351
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (70.80, α) 52.43 Adjusted Chi Square Value (70.80, β) 48.45
80% gamma percentile (KM) 2.193 90% gamma percentile (KM) 2.634
95% gamma percentile (KM) 3.038 99% gamma percentile (KM) 3.897
Page 19 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.831 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 147544 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 162290
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 32.14
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 102875 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 57786
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 35.36
Theta hat (MLE) 20835 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 32459
nu hat (MLE) 79 nu star (bias corrected) 50.71
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 4.938 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.169
5% K-S Critical Value 0.295 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.719 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.273 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.758 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 135975 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 140630
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 137381
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.318 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.808 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.48 Skewness 1.366
Maximum 210000 Median 98000
SD 49415 Std. Error of Mean 17471
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 32000 Mean 102875
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
The data set for variable concDL (71-43-2__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (7429-90-5__ug/l)
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Page 20 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.865 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.289 Skewness -1.199
Maximum 1400000 Median 1100000
SD 299902 Std. Error of Mean 106031
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 450000 Mean 1036250
concDL (7439-89-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 162290
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 155287 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 179029
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 211980 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 276708
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 314522 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 132000
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 139375
95% CLT UCL 131612 95% Jackknife UCL 135975
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 130251 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 149841
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 186996 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 222970
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 293634
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 167842 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 161077
Maximum of Logged Data 12.25 SD of logged Data 0.514
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 10.37 Mean of logged Data 11.44
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.308 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Page 21 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1354344 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1498430
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1698415 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2091248
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1171537 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1192500
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1168750
95% CLT UCL 1210656 95% Jackknife UCL 1237135
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1198665 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 1190432
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1636416 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1892370
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2395144
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1417200 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1452005
Maximum of Logged Data 14.15 SD of logged Data 0.365
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 13.02 Mean of logged Data 13.8
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.368 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.783 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 1323492 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1410837
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 76.11
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1036250 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 407201
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 81.13
Theta hat (MLE) 101311 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 160012
nu hat (MLE) 163.7 nu star (bias corrected) 103.6
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 10.23 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.476
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.715 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.367 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.817 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 1237135 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 1162626
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1229643
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.334 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 22 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 79.25 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 28.89
Theta hat (MLE) 6.657 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 10.53
nu hat (MLE) 190.5 nu star (bias corrected) 120.4
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 11.91 k star (bias corrected MLE) 7.524
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.715 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.174 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.322 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 95.3 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 93.75
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 95.39
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.158 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.947 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.302 Skewness 0.177
Maximum 120 Median 82
SD 23.96 Std. Error of Mean 8.47
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 48 Mean 79.25
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (7439-92-1__ug/l)
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 1237135
Page 23 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
1303
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
SD 1034 Std. Error of Mean 365.5
Coefficient of Variation 0.24 Skewness -1.097
Minimum 2600 Mean 4300
Maximum 5300 Median 4600
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7439-96-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 95.3
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 104.7 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 116.2
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 132.1 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 163.5
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 95.56 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 92.63
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 92.75
95% CLT UCL 93.18 95% Jackknife UCL 95.3
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 92.28 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 95.25
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 118.5 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 135.4
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 168.6
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 102.6 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 106.3
Maximum of Logged Data 4.787 SD of logged Data 0.318
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.871 Mean of logged Data 4.33
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.174 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.925 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 99.33 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 105.4
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 90.56
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 96.05
Page 24 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357 95% CLT UCL 4901 95% Jackknife UCL 4992
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6157 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6956
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8524
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 5358 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5582
Maximum of Logged Data 8.575 SD of logged Data 0.277
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 7.863 Mean of logged Data 8.336
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.327 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.778 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 5200 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 5463
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 131.3
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4300 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1332
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 137.9
Theta hat (MLE) 259.9 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 412.4
nu hat (MLE) 264.8 nu star (bias corrected) 166.8
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 16.55 k star (bias corrected MLE) 10.43
K-S Test Statistic 0.32 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.863 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.716 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 4969
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 4992 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 4750
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.289 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.821 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Page 25 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.297 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 4.584
95% KM (z) UCL 1.7 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 5.837
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.17 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.642
KM SD 0.909 95% KM (BCA) UCL 1.844
95% KM (t) UCL 1.787 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 1.8
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 1.129 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.347
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.483 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.506 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Skewness Detects 2.627 Kurtosis Detects 6.927
Mean of Logged Detects 0.0409 SD of Logged Detects 0.539
Mean Detects 1.231 SD Detects 1.002
Median Detects 0.88 CV Detects 0.814
Maximum Detect 3.5 Maximum Non-Detect 0.41
Variance Detects 1.004 Percent Non-Detects 12.5%
Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
Minimum Detect 0.73 Minimum Non-Detect 0.41
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Number of Detects 7 Number of Non-Detects 1
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (7439-97-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 4992
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5396 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5893
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6582 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7936
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 4728 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 4850
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4763
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 4854 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 4833
Page 26 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
1448
1449
1450
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.863 95% Bootstrap t UCL 5.623
SD in Original Scale 0.976 SD in Log Scale 0.617
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1.778 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.783
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 1.124 Mean in Log Scale -0.0873
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.456 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.573 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 2.226 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 2.679
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (16.74, α) 8.488 Adjusted Chi Square Value (16.74, β) 7.054
80% gamma percentile (KM) 1.81 90% gamma percentile (KM) 2.57
95% gamma percentile (KM) 3.328 99% gamma percentile (KM) 5.081
nu hat (KM) 24.65 nu star (KM) 16.74
theta hat (KM) 0.733 theta star (KM) 1.079
Variance (KM) 0.827 SE of Mean (KM) 0.347
k hat (KM) 1.541 k star (KM) 1.046
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 1.129 SD (KM) 0.909
Approximate Chi Square Value (10.77, α) 4.431 Adjusted Chi Square Value (10.77, β) 3.461
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 2.623 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 3.358
nu hat (MLE) 15.1 nu star (bias corrected) 10.77
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0195
k hat (MLE) 0.944 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.673
Theta hat (MLE) 1.143 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.602
Maximum 3.5 Median 0.875
SD 1.023 CV 0.949
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 1.079
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 1.231
Theta hat (MLE) 0.391 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.651
nu hat (MLE) 44.04 nu star (bias corrected) 26.5
Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 3.146 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.893
K-S Test Statistic 0.482 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.314 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 1.72 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.712 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 27 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519 95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 278.8
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 279.3 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 269.6
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.271 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.861 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 74.11 Std. Error of Mean 26.2
Coefficient of Variation 0.323 Skewness -0.32
Minimum 87 Mean 229.6
Maximum 360 Median 235
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7439-98-7__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 2.642
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.996 SD in Log Scale 0.761
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1.77 95% H-Stat UCL 2.591
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 1.103 Mean in Log Scale -0.162
KM SD (logged) 0.56 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.459
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.214
KM SD (logged) 0.56 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.459
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.214 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 1.824
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -0.0757 KM Geo Mean 0.927
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 2.017
Page 28 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
1547
1548
1549
1550
1551
1552
1553
1554
1555
1556
1557
1558
1559
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565
1566
1567
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572
1573
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 279.3
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 308.2 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 343.8
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 393.3 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 490.3
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 279.2 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 267.5
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 265
95% CLT UCL 272.7 95% Jackknife UCL 279.3
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 269.4 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 270.5
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 377.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 440
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 563.4
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 327.9 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 332
Maximum of Logged Data 5.886 SD of logged Data 0.403
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 4.466 Mean of logged Data 5.377
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.346 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.765 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 300.6 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 322.6
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 61.68
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 229.6 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 98.67
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 66.19
Theta hat (MLE) 26.92 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 42.4
nu hat (MLE) 136.5 nu star (bias corrected) 86.65
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 8.531 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.415
K-S Test Statistic 0.319 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.295 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.875 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.716 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 29 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
1582
1583
1584
1585
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1597
1598
1599
1600
1601
1602
1603
1604
1605
1606
1607
1608
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.232 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.922 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 299 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 311.9
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 179.7
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 253.8 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 68.29
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 187.5
Theta hat (MLE) 11.56 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 18.38
nu hat (MLE) 351.3 nu star (bias corrected) 220.9
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 21.96 k star (bias corrected MLE) 13.81
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.716 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.233 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.428 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 292 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 289.3
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 292.3
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.263 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.926 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.225 Skewness 0.306
Maximum 360 Median 260
SD 57.06 Std. Error of Mean 20.17
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 160 Mean 253.8
concDL (7440-02-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Page 30 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1628
1629
1630
1631
1632
1633
1634
1635
1636
1637
1638
1639
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
1645
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680
1681
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.19 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.882 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 0.952 SD of Logged Detects 0.0914
Median Detects 2.65 CV Detects 0.0877
Skewness Detects -1.214 Kurtosis Detects 1.257
Variance Detects 0.052 Percent Non-Detects 25%
Mean Detects 2.6 SD Detects 0.228
Minimum Detect 2.2 Minimum Non-Detect 2.5
Maximum Detect 2.8 Maximum Non-Detect 5
Number of Detects 6 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (7440-28-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 292
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 314.3 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 341.7
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 379.7 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 454.5
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 298.8 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 287.5
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 286.3
95% CLT UCL 286.9 95% Jackknife UCL 292
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 284.4 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 292
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 345.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 384.6
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 462.2
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 303.2 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 316.7
Maximum of Logged Data 5.886 SD of logged Data 0.233
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 5.075 Mean of logged Data 5.513
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 31 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
1703
1704
1705
1706
1707
1708
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
1716
1717
1718
1719
1720
1721
1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
1729
1730
1731
1732
1733
1734
1735
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.866 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 2.728 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 2.778
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (N/A, α) 1064 Adjusted Chi Square Value (N/A, β) 1045
80% gamma percentile (KM) 2.792 90% gamma percentile (KM) 2.936
95% gamma percentile (KM) 3.058 99% gamma percentile (KM) 3.295
nu hat (KM) 1824 nu star (KM) 1141
theta hat (KM) 0.0223 theta star (KM) 0.0357
Variance (KM) 0.0567 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0986
k hat (KM) 114 k star (KM) 71.32
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 2.543 SD (KM) 0.238
Approximate Chi Square Value (N/A, α) 1318 Adjusted Chi Square Value (N/A, β) 1296
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 2.717 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 2.762
nu hat (MLE) 2244 nu star (bias corrected) 1404
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0195
k hat (MLE) 140.2 k star (bias corrected MLE) 87.72
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0182 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0291
Maximum 2.8 Median 2.574
SD 0.227 CV 0.0889
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 2.2 Mean 2.551
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 2.6
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0176 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0351
nu hat (MLE) 1774 nu star (bias corrected) 888.2
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 147.8 k star (bias corrected MLE) 74.02
K-S Test Statistic 0.188 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.332 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.415 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.696 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.159 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.524
95% KM (z) UCL 2.705 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 2.7
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.839 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.973
KM SD 0.238 95% KM (BCA) UCL 2.714
95% KM (t) UCL 2.73 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 2.7
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 2.543 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0986
Page 32 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740
1741
1742
1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1748
1749
1750
1751
1752
1753
1754
1755
1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780
1781
1782
1783
1784
1785
1786
1787
1788
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 6.605 Std. Error of Mean 2.335
Coefficient of Variation 0.473 Skewness 1.805
Minimum 9.6 Mean 13.95
Maximum 28 Median 11
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-36-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 2.73
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.511 SD in Log Scale 0.268
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 2.761 95% H-Stat UCL 2.994
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 2.419 Mean in Log Scale 0.857
KM SD (logged) 0.0962 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) N/A
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0398
KM SD (logged) 0.0962 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) N/A
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0398 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) N/A
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.929 KM Geo Mean 2.531
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.663 95% Bootstrap t UCL 2.683
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) N/A
SD in Original Scale 0.228 SD in Log Scale 0.0913
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 2.702 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.673
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 2.55 Mean in Log Scale 0.932
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.198 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 33 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1789
1790
1791
1792
1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
1821
1822
1823
1824
1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837
1838
1839
1840
1841
1842
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 41.29 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 17.75
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 18.75
95% CLT UCL 17.79 95% Jackknife UCL 18.37
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 17.58 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 41.58
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 22.17 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 25.79
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 32.9
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 19.24 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19.57
Maximum of Logged Data 3.332 SD of logged Data 0.39
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.262 Mean of logged Data 2.559
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.326 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.758 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 18.93 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 20.51
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 46.73
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 13.95 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 6.731
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 50.64
Theta hat (MLE) 2.07 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.248
nu hat (MLE) 107.8 nu star (bias corrected) 68.72
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 6.738 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.295
K-S Test Statistic 0.349 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.295 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.063 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.718 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 18.62
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 18.37 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 19.38
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.366 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.703 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Page 34 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1843
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
1857
1858
1859
1860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
1869
1870
1871
1872
1873
1874
1875
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
1886
1887
1888
1889
1890
1891
1892
1893
1894
1895
1896
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 114
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 430 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 141.7
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 120.2
Theta hat (MLE) 29.47 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 46.72
nu hat (MLE) 233.5 nu star (bias corrected) 147.3
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 14.59 k star (bias corrected MLE) 9.203
K-S Test Statistic 0.239 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.51 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.716 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 508.7
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 508 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 502.3
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.273 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.91 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 116.4 Std. Error of Mean 41.14
Coefficient of Variation 0.271 Skewness 0.297
Minimum 230 Mean 430
Maximum 650 Median 435
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-38-2__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 18.37 or 95% Modified-t UCL 18.62
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 20.96 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 24.13
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 28.53 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 37.18
Page 35 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1897
1898
1899
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 731.9 Std. Error of Mean 258.8
Coefficient of Variation 0.684 Skewness 2.352
Minimum 480 Mean 1070
Maximum 2800 Median 825
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-39-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 508
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 553.4 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 609.3
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 686.9 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 839.4
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 536.5 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 492.5
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 495
95% CLT UCL 497.7 95% Jackknife UCL 508
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 493 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 508.2
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 624.4 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 708.2
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 872.7
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 542.3 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 564.1
Maximum of Logged Data 6.477 SD of logged Data 0.29
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 5.438 Mean of logged Data 6.029
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.238 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.887 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 526.7 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 555.3
Page 36 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 3534 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1523
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1786
95% CLT UCL 1496 95% Jackknife UCL 1560
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1470 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 2491
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1900 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2270
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2996
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1714 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1634
Maximum of Logged Data 7.937 SD of logged Data 0.524
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 6.174 Mean of logged Data 6.834
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.21 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.892 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 1632 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1825
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 22.4
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1070 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 692.4
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 25.06
Theta hat (MLE) 290.1 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 448
nu hat (MLE) 59.01 nu star (bias corrected) 38.21
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.688 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.388
K-S Test Statistic 0.239 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.296 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.665 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.719 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1596
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 1560 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 1725
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.305 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.7 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Page 37 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2053
2054
2055
2056
2057
2058
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 5.757 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.436
K-S Test Statistic 0.137 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.358 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.177 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.68 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 9.433 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 12.38
95% KM (z) UCL 5.77 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 5.905
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 6.849 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.931
KM SD 1.799 95% KM (BCA) UCL 5.716
95% KM (t) UCL 5.969 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 5.731
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 4.461 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.796
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.187 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.975 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 1.492 SD of Logged Detects 0.485
Median Detects 4.6 CV Detects 0.458
Skewness Detects 0.66 Kurtosis Detects 0.947
Variance Detects 4.958 Percent Non-Detects 37.5%
Mean Detects 4.86 SD Detects 2.227
Minimum Detect 2.2 Minimum Non-Detect 5.4
Maximum Detect 8.2 Maximum Non-Detect 6.8
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
concDL (7440-41-7__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 1825
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1846 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2198
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2686 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3645
Page 38 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2059
2060
2061
2062
2063
2064
2065
2066
2067
2068
2069
2070
2071
2072
2073
2074
2075
2076
2077
2078
2079
2080
2081
2082
2083
2084
2085
2086
2087
2088
2089
2090
2091
2092
2093
2094
2095
2096
2097
2098
2099
2100
2101
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
2108
2109
2110
2111
2112
KM SD (logged) 0.412 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.213
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.195
KM SD (logged) 0.412 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.213
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.195 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 6.315
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 1.413 KM Geo Mean 4.108
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.728 95% Bootstrap t UCL 6.516
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 6.053
SD in Original Scale 1.812 SD in Log Scale 0.385
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 5.595 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.455
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 4.381 Mean in Log Scale 1.41
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.173 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.987 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 6.147 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 6.688
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (62.83, α) 45.6 Adjusted Chi Square Value (62.83, β) 41.91
80% gamma percentile (KM) 6.164 90% gamma percentile (KM) 7.478
95% gamma percentile (KM) 8.689 99% gamma percentile (KM) 11.28
nu hat (KM) 98.4 nu star (KM) 62.83
theta hat (KM) 0.725 theta star (KM) 1.136
Variance (KM) 3.236 SE of Mean (KM) 0.796
k hat (KM) 6.15 k star (KM) 3.927
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 4.461 SD (KM) 1.799
Approximate Chi Square Value (80.41, α) 60.75 Adjusted Chi Square Value (80.41, β) 56.44
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 5.868 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 6.316
nu hat (MLE) 126.5 nu star (bias corrected) 80.41
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0195
k hat (MLE) 7.908 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.026
Theta hat (MLE) 0.561 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.882
Maximum 8.2 Median 3.865
SD 1.788 CV 0.403
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 2.2 Mean 4.433
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 4.86
Theta hat (MLE) 0.844 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.995
nu hat (MLE) 57.57 nu star (bias corrected) 24.36
Page 39 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2113
2114
2115
2116
2117
2118
2119
2120
2121
2122
2123
2124
2125
2126
2127
2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
2133
2134
2135
2136
2137
2138
2139
2140
2141
2142
2143
2144
2145
2146
2147
2148
2149
2150
2151
2152
2153
2154
2155
2156
2157
2158
2159
2160
2161
2162
2163
2164
2165
2166
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.345 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.284 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.535
95% KM (z) UCL 1.972 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.063 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.156
KM SD 0.136 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 1.988 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 1.86 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0678
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.254 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.914 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 0.618 SD of Logged Detects 0.0797
Median Detects 1.8 CV Detects 0.0815
Skewness Detects 1.118 Kurtosis Detects 1.456
Variance Detects 0.023 Percent Non-Detects 37.5%
Mean Detects 1.86 SD Detects 0.152
Minimum Detect 1.7 Minimum Non-Detect 2.5
Maximum Detect 2.1 Maximum Non-Detect 5
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (7440-43-9__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 5.969
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 1.927 SD in Log Scale 0.418
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 5.485 95% H-Stat UCL 6
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 4.194 Mean in Log Scale 1.353
Page 40 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2167
2168
2169
2170
2171
2172
2173
2174
2175
2176
2177
2178
2179
2180
2181
2182
2183
2184
2185
2186
2187
2188
2189
2190
2191
2192
2193
2194
2195
2196
2197
2198
2199
2200
2201
2202
2203
2204
2205
2206
2207
2208
2209
2210
2211
2212
2213
2214
2215
2216
2217
2218
2219
2220
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.938 95% Bootstrap t UCL 1.97
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) N/A
SD in Original Scale 0.123 SD in Log Scale 0.0646
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1.941 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.926
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 1.859 Mean in Log Scale 0.618
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.248 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.928 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 1.964 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 1.992
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (N/A, α) 1782 Adjusted Chi Square Value (N/A, β) 1757
80% gamma percentile (KM) 2.003 90% gamma percentile (KM) 2.083
95% gamma percentile (KM) 2.151 99% gamma percentile (KM) 2.282
nu hat (KM) 3008 nu star (KM) 1882
theta hat (KM) 0.00989 theta star (KM) 0.0158
Variance (KM) 0.0184 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0678
k hat (KM) 188 k star (KM) 117.6
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 1.86 SD (KM) 0.136
Approximate Chi Square Value (N/A, α) 2571 Adjusted Chi Square Value (N/A, β) 2542
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 1.946 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 1.969
nu hat (MLE) 4303 nu star (bias corrected) 2691
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0195
k hat (MLE) 269 k star (bias corrected MLE) 168.2
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00691 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0111
Maximum 2.1 Median 1.829
SD 0.123 CV 0.0661
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 1.7 Mean 1.859
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 1.86
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00958 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0239
nu hat (MLE) 1941 nu star (bias corrected) 777.8
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 194.1 k star (bias corrected MLE) 77.78
K-S Test Statistic 0.267 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.678 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 41 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2221
2222
2223
2224
2225
2226
2227
2228
2229
2230
2231
2232
2233
2234
2235
2236
2237
2238
2239
2240
2241
2242
2243
2244
2245
2246
2247
2248
2249
2250
2251
2252
2253
2254
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259
2260
2261
2262
2263
2264
2265
2266
2267
2268
2269
2270
2271
2272
2273
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 48.41
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 48.42 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 47.45
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.175 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.922 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 9.775 Std. Error of Mean 3.456
Coefficient of Variation 0.233 Skewness -0.0861
Minimum 28 Mean 41.88
Maximum 58 Median 44
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-48-4__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 1.988
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.415 SD in Log Scale 0.238
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 2.065 95% H-Stat UCL 2.145
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 1.788 Mean in Log Scale 0.557
KM SD (logged) 0.0713 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) N/A
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0356
KM SD (logged) 0.0713 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) N/A
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0356 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) N/A
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.618 KM Geo Mean 1.855
Page 42 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2274
2275
2276
2277
2278
2279
2280
2281
2282
2283
2284
2285
2286
2287
2288
2289
2290
2291
2292
2293
2294
2295
2296
2297
2298
2299
2300
2301
2302
2303
2304
2305
2306
2307
2308
2309
2310
2311
2312
2313
2314
2315
2316
2317
2318
2319
2320
2321
2322
2323
2324
2325
2326
2327 Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 48.42
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 52.24 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 56.94
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 63.46 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 76.26
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 48.01 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 47.13
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 47
95% CLT UCL 47.56 95% Jackknife UCL 48.42
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 47.3 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 48.41
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 57.86 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 64.77
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 78.32
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 50.65 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 52.89
Maximum of Logged Data 4.06 SD of logged Data 0.246
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.332 Mean of logged Data 3.709
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.217 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.896 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 49.79 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 52.08
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 160.1
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 41.88 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 11.87
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 167.4
Theta hat (MLE) 2.118 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.366
nu hat (MLE) 316.3 nu star (bias corrected) 199
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 19.77 k star (bias corrected MLE) 12.44
K-S Test Statistic 0.202 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.476 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.716 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 43 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2328
2329
2330
2331
2332
2333
2334
2335
2336
2337
2338
2339
2340
2341
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
2356
2357
2358
2359
2360
2361
2362
2363
2364
2365
2366
2367
2368
2369
2370
2371
2372
2373
2374
2375
2376
2377
2378
2379
2380
2381
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.297 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.844 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 207.6 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 218.7
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 117.2
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 169.9 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 55.32
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 123.5
Theta hat (MLE) 11.36 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 18.02
nu hat (MLE) 239.2 nu star (bias corrected) 150.9
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 14.95 k star (bias corrected MLE) 9.429
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.716 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.286 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.612 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 198.5 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 189.7
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 197.7
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.251 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.911 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.251 Skewness -0.873
Maximum 230 Median 180
SD 42.7 Std. Error of Mean 15.1
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 89 Mean 169.9
concDL (7440-50-8__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 6
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Page 44 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2382
2383
2384
2385
2386
2387
2388
2389
2390
2391
2392
2393
2394
2395
2396
2397
2398
2399
2400
2401
2402
2403
2404
2405
2406
2407
2408
2409
2410
2411
2412
2413
2414
2415
2416
2417
2418
2419
2420
2421
2422
2423
2424
2425
2426
2427
2428
2429
2430
2431
2432
2433
2434
2435 Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.292 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.895 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.309 Skewness -0.644
Maximum 2000 Median 1450
SD 419.5 Std. Error of Mean 148.3
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 580 Mean 1356
concDL (7440-62-2__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 198.5
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 215.2 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 235.7
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 264.1 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 320.1
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 190.9 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 191.3
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 188.8
95% CLT UCL 194.7 95% Jackknife UCL 198.5
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 193.9 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 194.1
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 248 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 281.5
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 347.4
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 215.3 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 223.8
Maximum of Logged Data 5.438 SD of logged Data 0.294
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 4.489 Mean of logged Data 5.101
Page 45 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2436
2437
2438
2439
2440
2441
2442
2443
2444
2445
2446
2447
2448
2449
2450
2451
2452
2453
2454
2455
2456
2457
2458
2459
2460
2461
2462
2463
2464
2465
2466
2467
2468
2469
2470
2471
2472
2473
2474
2475
2476
2477
2478
2479
2480
2481
2482
2483
2484
2485
2486
2487
2488
2489
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 1637
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1801 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2003
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2283 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2832
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1586 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1588
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1546
95% CLT UCL 1600 95% Jackknife UCL 1637
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1588 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 1597
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2166 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2511
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3190
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1877 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1917
Maximum of Logged Data 7.601 SD of logged Data 0.377
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 6.363 Mean of logged Data 7.159
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.34 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.82 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 1750 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1871
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 69.51
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1356 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 554
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 74.3
Theta hat (MLE) 143.4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 226.3
nu hat (MLE) 151.3 nu star (bias corrected) 95.89
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 9.455 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.993
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.715 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.332 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.72 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 1637 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 1564
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1632
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Page 46 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2490
2491
2492
2493
2494
2495
2496
2497
2498
2499
2500
2501
2502
2503
2504
2505
2506
2507
2508
2509
2510
2511
2512
2513
2514
2515
2516
2517
2518
2519
2520
2521
2522
2523
2524
2525
2526
2527
2528
2529
2530
2531
2532
2533
2534
2535
2536
2537
2538
2539
2540
2541
2542
2543
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 207.1
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 530 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 133.8
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 215.5
Theta hat (MLE) 21.21 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 33.75
nu hat (MLE) 399.8 nu star (bias corrected) 251.2
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 24.99 k star (bias corrected MLE) 15.7
5% K-S Critical Value 0.294 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.716 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.386 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.076 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 612 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 632.5
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 616.8
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.408 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.72 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.231 Skewness 1.916
Maximum 810 Median 510
SD 122.4 Std. Error of Mean 43.26
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 380 Mean 530
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 5
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (7440-66-6__ug/l)
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Page 47 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2544
2545
2546
2547
2548
2549
2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
2578
2579
2580
2581
2582
2583
2584
2585
2586
2587
2588
2589
2590
2591
2592
2593
2594
2595
The data set for variable concDL (74-83-9__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 8
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
concDL (74-83-9__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 612 or 95% Modified-t UCL 616.8
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 659.8 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 718.6
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 800.2 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 960.4
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1030 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 605
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 618.8
95% CLT UCL 601.2 95% Jackknife UCL 612
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 596.6 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 738.6
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 699.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 772.7
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 917.1
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 618.7 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 646.2
Maximum of Logged Data 6.697 SD of logged Data 0.208
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 5.94 Mean of logged Data 6.253
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.373 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.784 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 617.8 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 642.8
Page 48 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2596
2597
2598
2599
2600
2601
2602
2603
2604
2605
2606
2607
2608
2609
2610
2611
2612
2613
2614
2615
2616
2617
2618
2619
2620
2621
2622
2623
2624
2625
2626
2627
2628
2629
2630
2631
2632
2633
2634
2635
2636
2637
2638
2639
2640
2641
2642
2643
2644
2645
2646
2647
2648
2649
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 27.08 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 37.67
95% KM (z) UCL 13.93 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 17.81 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 21.69
KM SD 5.716 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 14.99 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 9.233 KM Standard Error of Mean 2.858
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.311 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.425 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.897 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
Mean of Logged Detects 2.524 SD of Logged Detects 0.471
Median Detects 11 CV Detects 0.494
Skewness Detects 1.439 Kurtosis Detects N/A
Variance Detects 44.25 Percent Non-Detects 50%
Mean Detects 13.47 SD Detects 6.652
Minimum Detect 8.4 Minimum Non-Detect 5
Maximum Detect 21 Maximum Non-Detect 5
Number of Detects 3 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 4
The data set for variable concDL (74-87-3__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (74-90-8__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (74-87-3__ug/l)
Page 49 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2650
2651
2652
2653
2654
2655
2656
2657
2658
2659
2660
2661
2662
2663
2664
2665
2666
2667
2668
2669
2670
2671
2672
2673
2674
2675
2676
2677
2678
2679
2680
2681
2682
2683
2684
2685
2686
2687
2688
2689
2690
2691
2692
2693
2694
2695
2696
2697
2698
2699
2700
2701
2702
2703
KM SD (logged) 0.532 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.715
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.266 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 17.35
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 2.066 KM Geo Mean 7.897
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 13.43 95% Bootstrap t UCL 16.72
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 50.96
SD in Original Scale 7.277 SD in Log Scale 0.969
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 14.08 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 12.82
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 8.091 Mean in Log Scale 1.726
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.272 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.425 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.947 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 18.1 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 23.65
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (16.99, α) 8.665 Adjusted Chi Square Value (16.99, β) 6.632
80% gamma percentile (KM) 14.38 90% gamma percentile (KM) 19.51
95% gamma percentile (KM) 24.52 99% gamma percentile (KM) 35.88
nu hat (KM) 31.31 nu star (KM) 16.99
theta hat (KM) 3.539 theta star (KM) 6.522
Variance (KM) 32.67 SE of Mean (KM) 2.858
k hat (KM) 2.609 k star (KM) 1.416
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 9.233 SD (KM) 5.716
Approximate Chi Square Value (2.79, α) 0.312 Adjusted Chi Square Value (2.79, β) 0.141
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 60.18 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 2.906 nu star (bias corrected) 2.786
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0122
k hat (MLE) 0.242 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.232
Theta hat (MLE) 27.83 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 29.02
Maximum 21 Median 4.205
SD 8.487 CV 1.259
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 6.738
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 13.47
Theta hat (MLE) 2.015 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 40.1 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 6.684 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
Page 50 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2704
2705
2706
2707
2708
2709
2710
2711
2712
2713
2714
2715
2716
2717
2718
2719
2720
2721
2722
2723
2724
2725
2726
2727
2728
2729
2730
2731
2732
2733
2734
2735
2736
2737
2738
2739
2740
2741
2742
2743
2744
2745
2746
2747
2748
2749
2750
2751
2752
2753
2754
2755
2756
2757 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.286 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.852 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.593 Skewness 1
Maximum 48 Median 17.5
SD 14.15 Std. Error of Mean 5.003
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 9.9 Mean 23.86
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
The data set for variable concDL (74-97-5__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (75-25-2__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
concDL (74-97-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 14.99
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 7.334 SD in Log Scale 0.929
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 14.02 95% H-Stat UCL 42.91
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 7.983 Mean in Log Scale 1.72
KM SD (logged) 0.532 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.715
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.266
Page 51 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2758
2759
2760
2761
2762
2763
2764
2765
2766
2767
2768
2769
2770
2771
2772
2773
2774
2775
2776
2777
2778
2779
2780
2781
2782
2783
2784
2785
2786
2787
2788
2789
2790
2791
2792
2793
2794
2795
2796
2797
2798
2799
2800
2801
2802
2803
2804
2805
2806
2807
2808
2809
2810
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 38.87 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 45.67
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 55.11 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 73.64
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 37.49 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 31.88
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 32.61
95% CLT UCL 32.09 95% Jackknife UCL 33.34
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 31.5 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 42.01
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 44.53 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 53.54
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 71.24
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 40.96 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 38.04
Maximum of Logged Data 3.871 SD of logged Data 0.563
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.293 Mean of logged Data 3.029
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.222 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.931 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 36.5 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 40.86
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 22.05
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 23.86 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 15.54
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 24.68
Theta hat (MLE) 6.552 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 10.11
nu hat (MLE) 58.27 nu star (bias corrected) 37.75
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.642 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.359
5% K-S Critical Value 0.296 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.72 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.256 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.426 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 33.34 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 33.98
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 33.64
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 52 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2811
2812
2813
2814
2815
2816
2817
2818
2819
2820
2821
2822
2823
2824
2825
2826
2827
2828
2829
2830
2831
2832
2833
2834
2835
2836
2837
2838
2839
2840
2841
2842
2843
2844
2845
2846
2847
2848
2849
2850
2851
2852
2853
2854
2855
2856
2857
2858
2859
2860
2861
2862
2863
2864
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 41
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4.425 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.253
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 44.65
Theta hat (MLE) 0.733 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.147
nu hat (MLE) 96.61 nu star (bias corrected) 61.71
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 6.038 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.857
5% K-S Critical Value 0.295 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.718 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.151 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.272 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 5.58 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 5.398
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 5.575
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.123 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.99 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.39 Skewness -0.13
Maximum 7.2 Median 4.45
SD 1.724 Std. Error of Mean 0.61
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 1.5 Mean 4.425
concDL (75-27-4__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 33.34
Page 53 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2865
2866
2867
2868
2869
2870
2871
2872
2873
2874
2875
2876
2877
2878
2879
2880
2881
2882
2883
2884
2885
2886
2887
2888
2889
2890
2891
2892
2893
2894
2895
2896
2897
2898
2899
2900
2901
2902
2903
2904
2905
2906
2907
2908
2909
2910
2911
2912
2913
2914
2915
2916
2917
2918
The data set for variable concDL (75-34-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (75-34-3__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 5.58
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.254 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.082
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8.232 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.49
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5.554 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.325
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.363
95% CLT UCL 5.428 95% Jackknife UCL 5.58
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.357 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 5.611
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7.815 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.255
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.09
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 6.916 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.777
Maximum of Logged Data 1.974 SD of logged Data 0.477
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 0.405 Mean of logged Data 1.402
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.183 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.904 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 6.117 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 6.661
Page 54 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2919
2920
2921
2922
2923
2924
2925
2926
2927
2928
2929
2930
2931
2932
2933
2934
2935
2936
2937
2938
2939
2940
2941
2942
2943
2944
2945
2946
2947
2948
2949
2950
2951
2952
2953
2954
2955
2956
2957
2958
2959
2960
2961
2962
2963
2964
2965
2966
2967
2968
2969
2970
2971
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.36 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.579 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 1528 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1933
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 3.91
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 653.1 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 767.8
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 4.948
Theta hat (MLE) 637.7 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 902.8
nu hat (MLE) 16.39 nu star (bias corrected) 11.57
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.024 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.723
5% K-S Critical Value 0.301 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.735 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.361 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.364 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 881 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 793.4
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 872.1
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.219 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.834 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.521 Skewness -1.266
Maximum 950 Median 790
SD 340.4 Std. Error of Mean 120.3
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 4.5 Mean 653.1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
concDL (76-03-9__ug/l)
Page 55 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
2972
2973
2974
2975
2976
2977
2978
2979
2980
2981
2982
2983
2984
2985
2986
2987
2988
2989
2990
2991
2992
2993
2994
2995
2996
2997
2998
2999
3000
3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3007
3008
3009
3010
3011
3012
3013
3014
3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021
3022
3023
3024
3025
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 8
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 3
The data set for variable concDL (78-87-5__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (79-01-6__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (78-87-5__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 881
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1014 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1178
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1405 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1850
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 795.8 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 827.5
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 805
95% CLT UCL 851 95% Jackknife UCL 881
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 835.1 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 827.5
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5050 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6654
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9805
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 98117 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3895
Maximum of Logged Data 6.856 SD of logged Data 1.828
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.504 Mean of logged Data 5.92
Page 56 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
3026
3027
3028
3029
3030
3031
3032
3033
3034
3035
3036
3037
3038
3039
3040
3041
3042
3043
3044
3045
3046
3047
3048
3049
3050
3051
3052
3053
3054
3055
3056
3057
3058
3059
3060
3061
3062
3063
3064
3065
3066
3067
3068
3069
3070
3071
3072
3073
3074
3075
3076
3077
3078
5% K-S Critical Value 0.303 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.741 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.44 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.509 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 1085 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 963.4
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1072
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.354 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.713 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.581 Skewness -1.337
Maximum 1100 Median 965
SD 453.8 Std. Error of Mean 160.4
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 4.5 Mean 780.6
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 6
The data set for variable concDL (79-34-5__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (79-43-6__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 1
The data set for variable concDL (79-01-6__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (79-34-5__ug/l)
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Page 57 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
3079
3080
3081
3082
3083
3084
3085
3086
3087
3088
3089
3090
3091
3092
3093
3094
3095
3096
3097
3098
3099
3100
3101
3102
3103
3104
3105
3106
3107
3108
3109
3110
3111
3112
3113
3114
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3120
3121
3122
3123
3124
3125
3126
3127
3128
3129
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
In Case Bootstrap t and/or Hall's Bootstrap yields an unreasonably large UCL value, use 97.5% or 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 964.8
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1262 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1480
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1783 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2377
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 964.8 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1016
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 982.5
95% CLT UCL 1044 95% Jackknife UCL 1085
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1028 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 998.6
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6625 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8761
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12956
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 241574 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5086
Maximum of Logged Data 7.003 SD of logged Data 1.967
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.504 Mean of logged Data 5.97
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.414 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.619 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 1996 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 2595
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 2.967
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 780.6 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 994.2
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 3.856
Theta hat (MLE) 915.1 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1266
nu hat (MLE) 13.65 nu star (bias corrected) 9.863
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.853 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.616
Page 58 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
3130
3131
3132
3133
3134
3135
3136
3137
3138
3139
3140
3141
3142
3143
3144
3145
3146
3147
3148
3149
3150
3151
3152
3153
3154
3155
3156
3157
3158
3159
3160
3161
3162
3163
3164
3165
3166
3167
3168
3169
3170
3171
3172
3173
3174
3175
3176
3177
3178
3179
3180
3181
3182
3183
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (91-57-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
concDL (91-57-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (91-20-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 4
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 4
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 8
concDL (91-20-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (87-86-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 3
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (87-86-5__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 8
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
concDL (87-68-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Page 59 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
3184
3185
3186
3187
3188
3189
3190
3191
3192
3193
3194
3195
3196
3197
3198
3199
3200
3201
3202
3203
3204
3205
3206
3207
3208
3209
3210
3211
3212
3213
3214
3215
3216
3217
3218
3219
3220
3221
3222
3223
3224
3225
3226
3227
3228
3229
3230
3231
3232
3233
3234
3235
3236
3237
95% Student's-t UCL 5.4590E-6 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 5.6071E-6
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 5.5296E-6
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.209 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.831 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation N/A Skewness 0.982
Maximum 8.9000E-6 Median 2.1000E-6
SD 3.4527E-6 Std. Error of Mean 1.2207E-6
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 1.5000E-7 Mean 3.1463E-6
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
concDL (calc-dx-0__mg/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 8
concDL (95-94-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (95-47-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 8
concDL (95-47-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Page 60 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
3238
3239
3240
3241
3242
3243
3244
3245
3246
3247
3248
3249
3250
3251
3252
3253
3254
3255
3256
3257
3258
3259
3260
3261
3262
3263
3264
3265
3266
3267
3268
3269
3270
3271
3272
3273
3274
3275
3276
3277
3278
3279
3280
3281
3282
3283
3284
3285
3286
3287
3288
3289
3290
3291
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 5.4590E-6
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.8084E-6 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8.4672E-6
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.0770E-5 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.5292E-5
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 8.0087E-6 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.1000E-6
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.5275E-6
95% CLT UCL 5.1541E-6 95% Jackknife UCL 5.4590E-6
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.0489E-6 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 7.2521E-6
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.2942E-5 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.6927E-5
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.4754E-5
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1.0240E-4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.0071E-5
Maximum of Logged Data -11.63 SD of logged Data 1.602
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -15.71 Mean of logged Data -13.51
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.182 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.911 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 8.8320E-6 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.1810E-5
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 2.265
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3.1463E-6 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.3165E-6
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 3.028
Theta hat (MLE) 4.3899E-6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 5.9221E-6
nu hat (MLE) 11.47 nu star (bias corrected) 8.5
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.717 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.531
5% K-S Critical Value 0.305 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.747 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.179 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.316 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
Page 61 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
3292
3293
3294
3295
3296
3297
3298
3299
3300
3301
3302
3303
3304
3305
3306
3307
3308
3309
3310
3311
3312
3313
3314
3315
3316
3317
3318
3319
3320
3321
3322
3323
3324
3325
3326
3327
3328
3329
3330
3331
3332
3333
3334
3335
3336
3337
3338
3339
3340
3341
3342
3343
3344
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.169 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.917 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 9.0842E-6 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.2061E-5
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0195 Adjusted Chi Square Value 2.42
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3.3125E-6 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.4641E-6
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 3.212
Theta hat (MLE) 4.4307E-6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 6.0162E-6
nu hat (MLE) 11.96 nu star (bias corrected) 8.81
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.748 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.551
K-S Test Statistic 0.186 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.304 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.312 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.745 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 5.8776E-6
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 5.7931E-6 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 6.0076E-6
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.219 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.831 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 3.7034E-6 Std. Error of Mean 1.3093E-6
Coefficient of Variation N/A Skewness 1.095
Minimum 2.0000E-7 Mean 3.3125E-6
Maximum 9.9000E-6 Median 2.1000E-6
Total Number of Observations 8 Number of Distinct Observations 8
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc-dx-2__mg/l)
General Statistics
Page 62 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JK L
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 6 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.16/3/2020 12:34:41 PM
3345
3346
3347
3348
3349
3350
3351
3352
3353
3354
3355
3356
3357
3358
3359
3360
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3367
3368
3369
3370
3371
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 5.7931E-6
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.2405E-6 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9.0197E-6
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.1489E-5 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.6340E-5
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1.5681E-5 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.4500E-6
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.9813E-6
95% CLT UCL 5.4662E-6 95% Jackknife UCL 5.7931E-6
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.3522E-6 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 9.0824E-6
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.2579E-5 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.6402E-5
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.3912E-5
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 7.5755E-5 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.8247E-6
Maximum of Logged Data -11.52 SD of logged Data 1.524
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -15.42 Mean of logged Data -13.42
Page 63 of 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
The data set for variable concDL (107-06-2__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (106-46-7__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (107-06-2__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (10061-02-6__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (106-46-7__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (100-41-4__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (10061-02-6__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (100-41-4__ug/l)
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
Page 1 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117 The data set for variable concDL (120-82-1__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (118-74-1__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (120-82-1__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (117-81-7__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (118-74-1__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (111-44-4__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (117-81-7__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (111-44-4__ug/l)
Page 2 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 26.75
Theta hat (MLE) 2.287 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 8.655
nu hat (MLE) 93.57 nu star (bias corrected) 24.73
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 11.7 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.091
K-S Test Statistic 0.302 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.395 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.495 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.657 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 55.23 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 78.9
95% KM (z) UCL 25.85 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 34.5 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 43.19
KM SD 14.64 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 27.75 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 15.34 KM Standard Error of Mean 6.388
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.321 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.801 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 3.243 SD of Logged Detects 0.328
Median Detects 23 CV Detects 0.364
Skewness Detects 1.723 Kurtosis Detects 2.932
Variance Detects 94.92 Percent Non-Detects 42.86%
Mean Detects 26.75 SD Detects 9.743
Minimum Detect 20 Minimum Non-Detect 0.13
Maximum Detect 41 Maximum Non-Detect 2.1
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 6
concDL (124-48-1__ug/l)
Page 3 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 15.69 SD in Log Scale 2.863
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 26.97 95% H-Stat UCL 11845238
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 15.45 Mean in Log Scale 1.079
KM SD (logged) 2.623 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 8.734
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 1.145
KM SD (logged) 2.623 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 8.734
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 1.145 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 959478
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.979 KM Geo Mean 2.661
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 27.96 95% Bootstrap t UCL 30.54
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 36.4
SD in Original Scale 11.31 SD in Log Scale 0.564
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 27.9 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 26.53
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 19.59 Mean in Log Scale 2.838
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.28 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.847 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 38.64 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 52.74
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (10.12, α) 4.019 Adjusted Chi Square Value (10.12, β) 2.945
80% gamma percentile (KM) 25.19 90% gamma percentile (KM) 38.22
95% gamma percentile (KM) 51.61 99% gamma percentile (KM) 83.5
nu hat (KM) 15.38 nu star (KM) 10.12
theta hat (KM) 13.96 theta star (KM) 21.22
Variance (KM) 214.2 SE of Mean (KM) 6.388
k hat (KM) 1.099 k star (KM) 0.723
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 15.34 SD (KM) 14.64
Approximate Chi Square Value (5.51, α) 1.395 Adjusted Chi Square Value (5.51, β) 0.865
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 65.38 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 7.309 nu star (bias corrected) 5.51
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
k hat (MLE) 0.522 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.394
Theta hat (MLE) 31.7 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 42.05
Maximum 41 Median 20
SD 14.57 CV 0.881
Minimum 0.01 Mean 16.55
Page 4 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
5% K-S Critical Value 0.325 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.745 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.201 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.286 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 1.4682E-4 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 1.6376E-4
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1.5122E-4
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.279 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.765 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation N/A Skewness 1.847
Maximum 2.8000E-4 Median 4.0000E-5
SD 1.0015E-4 Std. Error of Mean 3.7852E-5
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.2000E-6 Mean 7.3269E-5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 7
The data set for variable concDL (127-18-4__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (1336-36-3__mg/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (127-18-4__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 27.75
Page 5 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (14797-55-8__ug/l)
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 1.4682E-4
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.8682E-4 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.3826E-4
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3.0965E-4 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4.4989E-4
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 4.2478E-4 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.3768E-4
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.5671E-4
95% CLT UCL 1.3553E-4 95% Jackknife UCL 1.4682E-4
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1.3282E-4 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 2.9805E-4
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3.0195E-4 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3.9753E-4
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5.8529E-4
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.0078 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.3308E-4
Maximum of Logged Data -8.181 SD of logged Data 1.736
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -12.65 Mean of logged Data -10.55
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.169 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.929 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 2.6358E-4 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 4.1049E-4
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0158 Adjusted Chi Square Value 1.092
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 7.3269E-5 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1.1083E-4
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 1.701
Theta hat (MLE) 1.2248E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.6764E-4
nu hat (MLE) 8.375 nu star (bias corrected) 6.119
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.598 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.437
Page 6 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
k hat (MLE) 13 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.335
Theta hat (MLE) 76.79 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 187.2
Maximum 1400 Median 1000
SD 296.4 CV 0.297
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 583.6 Mean 998.7
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 1103
Theta hat (MLE) 29.01 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 114
nu hat (MLE) 304.1 nu star (bias corrected) 77.35
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 38.01 k star (bias corrected MLE) 9.669
K-S Test Statistic 0.234 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.394 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.299 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.656 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 2183 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 2928
95% KM (z) UCL 1257 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1530 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1803
KM SD 389.6 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 1355 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 926 KM Standard Error of Mean 201.2
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.255 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.918 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 6.992 SD of Logged Detects 0.185
Median Detects 1050 CV Detects 0.193
Skewness Detects 1.251 Kurtosis Detects 1.595
Variance Detects 45358 Percent Non-Detects 20%
Mean Detects 1103 SD Detects 213
Minimum Detect 910 Minimum Non-Detect 220
Maximum Detect 1400 Maximum Non-Detect 220
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
Page 7 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 1355
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 480.7 SD in Log Scale 1.037
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1362 95% H-Stat UCL 16306
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 904 Mean in Log Scale 6.534
KM SD (logged) 0.655 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.49
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.338
KM SD (logged) 0.655 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.49
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.338 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 3073
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 6.672 KM Geo Mean 790.3
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1193 95% Bootstrap t UCL 1305
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 1408
SD in Original Scale 269 SD in Log Scale 0.272
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1271 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1193
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 1015 Mean in Log Scale 6.894
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.226 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.948 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 1606 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 2093
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (23.92, α) 13.79 Adjusted Chi Square Value (23.92, β) 10.58
80% gamma percentile (KM) 1357 90% gamma percentile (KM) 1728
95% gamma percentile (KM) 2078 99% gamma percentile (KM) 2846
nu hat (KM) 56.48 nu star (KM) 23.92
theta hat (KM) 164 theta star (KM) 387
Variance (KM) 151824 SE of Mean (KM) 201.2
k hat (KM) 5.648 k star (KM) 2.392
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 926 SD (KM) 389.6
Approximate Chi Square Value (53.35, α) 37.57 Adjusted Chi Square Value (53.35, β) 31.88
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 1418 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 130 nu star (bias corrected) 53.35
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0086
Page 8 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.382 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.64 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 1.237 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.834
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0086 Adjusted Chi Square Value 3.918
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.558 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.492
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 5.811
Theta hat (MLE) 0.193 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.433
nu hat (MLE) 28.86 nu star (bias corrected) 12.88
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.886 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.288
K-S Test Statistic 0.369 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.36 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.981 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.683 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.789
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.806 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.644
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.321 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.708 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 0.26 Std. Error of Mean 0.116
Coefficient of Variation 0.466 Skewness -1.885
Minimum 0.11 Mean 0.558
Maximum 0.71 Median 0.71
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (14797-73-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 9 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 1.654 Skewness 2.259
Maximum 90000 Median 1900
SD 32327 Std. Error of Mean 12218
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 1600 Mean 19543
concDL (16984-48-8__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 0.806
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.907 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.065
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.284 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.714
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% CLT UCL 0.749 95% Jackknife UCL 0.806
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap-t UCL N/A
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.523 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.923
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.708
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 3.444 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.235
Maximum of Logged Data -0.342 SD of logged Data 0.813
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -2.207 Mean of logged Data -0.767
Page 10 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 125505 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 39586
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 47957
95% CLT UCL 39640 95% Jackknife UCL 43285
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 37600 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 113918
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 62604 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 82240
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 120810
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 1151126 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 48457
Maximum of Logged Data 11.41 SD of logged Data 1.665
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 7.378 Mean of logged Data 8.702
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.327 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.8 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 76003 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 121811
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0158 Adjusted Chi Square Value 0.899
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 19543 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 30889
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 1.441
Theta hat (MLE) 36608 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 48822
nu hat (MLE) 7.474 nu star (bias corrected) 5.604
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.534 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.4
5% K-S Critical Value 0.327 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.749 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.343 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.763 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 43285 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 50788
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 45024
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.302 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.651 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 11 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656 The data set for variable concDL (56-23-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 3
The data set for variable concDL (18540-29-9__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (56-23-5__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 5
The data set for variable concDL (179601-23-1__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (18540-29-9__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (179601-23-1__ug/l)
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 43285
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 56198 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 72802
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 95847 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 141114
Page 12 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.968 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 17.55 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 26.38
95% KM (z) UCL 6.592 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 9.821 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 13.06
KM SD 2.918 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 7.303 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 2.673 KM Standard Error of Mean 2.383
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
Mean of Logged Detects 0.711 SD of Logged Detects 1.705
Median Detects 3.705 CV Detects 1.181
Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A
Variance Detects 19.16 Percent Non-Detects 71.43%
Mean Detects 3.705 SD Detects 4.377
Minimum Detect 0.61 Minimum Non-Detect 5.8
Maximum Detect 6.8 Maximum Non-Detect 18
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 7
It is suggested to collect at least 8 to 10 observations before using these statistical methods!
If possible, compute and collect Data Quality Objectives (DQO) based sample size and analytical results.
concDL (67-66-3__ug/l)
Warning: This data set only has 2 observations!
Data set is too small to compute reliable and meaningful statistics and estimates!
The data set for variable concDL (608-93-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 2 Number of Distinct Observations 2
concDL (608-93-5__ug/l)
Page 13 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Warning: Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
Suggested UCL to Use
975% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 17.55
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 2.689 SD in Log Scale 0.887
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 6.841 95% H-Stat UCL 19.45
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 4.866 Mean in Log Scale 1.35
KM SD (logged) 1.137 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.09
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.928
KM SD (logged) 1.137 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.09
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.928 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 17.35
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.309 KM Geo Mean 1.363
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 5.145
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 3.489 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap t UCL N/A
Mean in Original Scale 1.878 Mean in Log Scale 0.275
SD in Original Scale 2.193 SD in Log Scale 0.804
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Approximate Chi Square Value (8.05, α) 2.763 Adjusted Chi Square Value (8.05, β) 1.919
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 7.787 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 11.21
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
80% gamma percentile (KM) 4.406 90% gamma percentile (KM) 7.02
95% gamma percentile (KM) 9.769 99% gamma percentile (KM) 16.44
nu hat (KM) 11.75 nu star (KM) 8.048
theta hat (KM) 3.185 theta star (KM) 4.65
Variance (KM) 8.515 SE of Mean (KM) 2.383
k hat (KM) 0.839 k star (KM) 0.575
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 2.673 SD (KM) 2.918
Mean (detects) 3.705
Theta hat (MLE) 3.826 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 3.873 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Page 14 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818 Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.313 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.359 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.722 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.682 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 40858 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 57245
95% KM (z) UCL 20512 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 19254
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 26506 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 32516
KM SD 10467 95% KM (BCA) UCL 19771
95% KM (t) UCL 21832 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 19733
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 13237 KM Standard Error of Mean 4423
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.261 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.828 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Skewness Detects -1.591 Kurtosis Detects 2.331
Mean of Logged Detects 9.668 SD of Logged Detects 0.731
Mean Detects 18480 SD Detects 8453
Median Detects 22000 CV Detects 0.457
Maximum Detect 25000 Maximum Non-Detect 630
Variance Detects 71452000 Percent Non-Detects 28.57%
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
Minimum Detect 4400 Minimum Non-Detect 130
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 2
concDL (7429-90-5__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (71-43-2__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
concDL (71-43-2__ug/l)
General Statistics
Page 15 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
KM SD (logged) 2.238 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 7.502
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.946 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 46493515
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 8.297 KM Geo Mean 4010
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 19771 95% Bootstrap t UCL 21086
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 64990
SD in Original Scale 10081 SD in Log Scale 0.956
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 21582 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 20346
Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 14178 Mean in Log Scale 9.231
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.34 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.718 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 28083 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 36020
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (14.13, α) 6.66 Adjusted Chi Square Value (14.13, β) 5.192
80% gamma percentile (KM) 21288 90% gamma percentile (KM) 30411
95% gamma percentile (KM) 39526 99% gamma percentile (KM) 60678
nu hat (KM) 22.39 nu star (KM) 14.13
theta hat (KM) 8276 theta star (KM) 13116
Variance (KM) 1.095E+8 SE of Mean (KM) 4423
k hat (KM) 1.599 k star (KM) 1.009
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 13237 SD (KM) 10467
Approximate Chi Square Value (16.38, α) 8.23 Adjusted Chi Square Value (16.38, β) 6.563
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 28618 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 35883
nu hat (MLE) 26.33 nu star (bias corrected) 16.38
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
k hat (MLE) 1.881 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.17
Theta hat (MLE) 7646 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 12292
Maximum 25000 Median 17000
SD 9832 CV 0.684
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 4129 Mean 14380
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 18480
Theta hat (MLE) 5500 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 12509
nu hat (MLE) 33.6 nu star (bias corrected) 14.77
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 3.36 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.477
Page 16 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 321650 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 424922
95% KM (z) UCL 193421 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 231196 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 269075
KM SD 67324 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 201737 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 147571 KM Standard Error of Mean 27875
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.285 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.862 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 11.98 SD of Logged Detects 0.358
Median Detects 175000 CV Detects 0.317
Skewness Detects -0.529 Kurtosis Detects -1.414
Variance Detects 2.840E+9 Percent Non-Detects 14.29%
Mean Detects 168000 SD Detects 53292
Minimum Detect 88000 Minimum Non-Detect 25000
Maximum Detect 220000 Maximum Non-Detect 25000
Number of Detects 6 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
concDL (7439-89-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 21832
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 11282 SD in Log Scale 2.415
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 21541 95% H-Stat UCL 2.171E+8
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 13254 Mean in Log Scale 8.324
KM SD (logged) 2.238 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 7.502
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.946
Page 17 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
SD in Original Scale 61297 SD in Log Scale 0.455
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 198925 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 191429
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 153905 Mean in Log Scale 11.86
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.276 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.325 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.849 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 222966 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 254368
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (39.77, α) 26.32 Adjusted Chi Square Value (39.77, β) 23.07
80% gamma percentile (KM) 211866 90% gamma percentile (KM) 264947
95% gamma percentile (KM) 314614 99% gamma percentile (KM) 422593
nu hat (KM) 67.27 nu star (KM) 39.77
theta hat (KM) 30714 theta star (KM) 51948
Variance (KM) 4.533E+9 SE of Mean (KM) 27875
k hat (KM) 4.805 k star (KM) 2.841
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 147571 SD (KM) 67324
Approximate Chi Square Value (47.32, α) 32.53 Adjusted Chi Square Value (47.32, β) 28.88
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 222430 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 250575
nu hat (MLE) 80.48 nu star (bias corrected) 47.32
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
k hat (MLE) 5.748 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.38
Theta hat (MLE) 26604 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 45245
Maximum 220000 Median 140000
SD 62910 CV 0.411
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 62466 Mean 152924
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 168000
Theta hat (MLE) 16275 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 31865
nu hat (MLE) 123.9 nu star (bias corrected) 63.27
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 10.32 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.272
K-S Test Statistic 0.301 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.332 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.529 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.698 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 18 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
Coefficient of Variation 0.622 Skewness 1.571
Maximum 19000 Median 5800
SD 5283 Std. Error of Mean 1997
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 4500 Mean 8500
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 7
The data set for variable concDL (7439-92-1__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (7439-96-5__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
concDL (7439-92-1__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 201737
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 76295 SD in Log Scale 1.017
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 201821 95% H-Stat UCL 884344
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 145786 Mean in Log Scale 11.62
KM SD (logged) 0.717 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.944
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.297
KM SD (logged) 0.717 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.944
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.297 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 375300
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 11.72 KM Geo Mean 122685
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 185429 95% Bootstrap t UCL 199151
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 244312
Page 19 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088 95% CLT UCL 11785 95% Jackknife UCL 12380
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15943 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19213
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 25636
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 15131 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13587
Maximum of Logged Data 9.852 SD of logged Data 0.544
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 8.412 Mean of logged Data 8.91
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.245 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.874 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 13604 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 15823
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0158 Adjusted Chi Square Value 16.94
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8500 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5664
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 19.7
Theta hat (MLE) 2252 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3774
nu hat (MLE) 52.85 nu star (bias corrected) 31.53
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.775 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.252
5% K-S Critical Value 0.313 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.71 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.27 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.528 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 12380 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 13051
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 12578
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.267 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.8 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Page 20 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
Mean of Logged Detects 2.988 SD of Logged Detects 1.25
Median Detects 28.1 CV Detects 1.002
Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A
Variance Detects 792 Percent Non-Detects 71.43%
Mean Detects 28.1 SD Detects 28.14
Minimum Detect 8.2 Minimum Non-Detect 4
Maximum Detect 48 Maximum Non-Detect 45
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 7
The data set for variable concDL (7439-97-6__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (7439-98-7__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 4
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 4
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (7439-97-6__ug/l)
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 12380
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14491 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17204
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 20971 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 28369
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 20670 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 11900
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 12614
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 11476 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 16900
Page 21 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 17.24 Mean in Log Scale 2.463
KM SD (logged) 0.815 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.193
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.503
KM SD (logged) 0.815 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.193
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.503 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 31.28
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 2.049 KM Geo Mean 7.76
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 63.53
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 22.51 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap t UCL N/A
Mean in Original Scale 10.16 Mean in Log Scale 1.589
SD in Original Scale 16.82 SD in Log Scale 1.141
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Approximate Chi Square Value (6.68, α) 1.994 Adjusted Chi Square Value (6.68, β) 1.315
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 40.46 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 61.35
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
80% gamma percentile (KM) 19.8 90% gamma percentile (KM) 33.02
95% gamma percentile (KM) 47.22 99% gamma percentile (KM) 82.3
nu hat (KM) 9.348 nu star (KM) 6.675
theta hat (KM) 18.1 theta star (KM) 25.35
Variance (KM) 218.8 SE of Mean (KM) 8.041
k hat (KM) 0.668 k star (KM) 0.477
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 12.09 SD (KM) 14.79
Mean (detects) 28.1
Theta hat (MLE) 17.76 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 6.33 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.582 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 62.3 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 92.09
95% KM (z) UCL 25.31 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 36.21 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 47.14
KM SD 14.79 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 27.71 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 12.09 KM Standard Error of Mean 8.041
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Page 22 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
Theta hat (MLE) 25.7 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 43.92
nu hat (MLE) 96.49 nu star (bias corrected) 56.47
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 6.892 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.034
K-S Test Statistic 0.393 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.313 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.901 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.709 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 242.2
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 238.4 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 253.2
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.386 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.724 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 83.41 Std. Error of Mean 31.53
Coefficient of Variation 0.471 Skewness 1.904
Minimum 110 Mean 177.1
Maximum 350 Median 140
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 4
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-02-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 47.14
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 15.55 SD in Log Scale 1.023
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 28.66 95% H-Stat UCL 95.23
Page 23 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
1303 The data set for variable concDL (7440-28-0__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (7440-28-0__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 238.4 or 95% Modified-t UCL 242.2
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 271.7 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 314.6
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 374 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 490.8
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% CLT UCL 229 95% Jackknife UCL 238.4
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap-t UCL N/A
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 289.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 338.4
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 435
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 255.8 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 253.8
Maximum of Logged Data 5.858 SD of logged Data 0.392
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 4.7 Mean of logged Data 5.103
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.374 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.801 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 248.8 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 277.1
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0158 Adjusted Chi Square Value 36.09
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 177.1 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 88.2
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 40.2
Page 24 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 74.43 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 27.96
Theta hat (MLE) 6.083 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 10.5
nu hat (MLE) 171.3 nu star (bias corrected) 99.21
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 12.23 k star (bias corrected MLE) 7.086
5% K-S Critical Value 0.312 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.708 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.256 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.52 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 90.7 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 87.51
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 90.59
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.24 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.852 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.298 Skewness -0.203
Maximum 97 Median 73
SD 22.15 Std. Error of Mean 8.372
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 47 Mean 74.43
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 6
The data set for variable concDL (7440-36-0__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (7440-38-2__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 3
concDL (7440-36-0__ug/l)
Page 25 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
Variance Detects 217800 Percent Non-Detects 71.43%
Mean Detects 770 SD Detects 466.7
Minimum Detect 440 Minimum Non-Detect 260
Maximum Detect 1100 Maximum Non-Detect 390
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (7440-39-3__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 90.7
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 99.54 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 110.9
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 126.7 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 157.7
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 84.68 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 87.71
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 86
95% CLT UCL 88.2 95% Jackknife UCL 90.7
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 87.26 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 90.35
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 113.6 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 130.6
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 163.8
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 100.4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 101.5
Maximum of Logged Data 4.575 SD of logged Data 0.318
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.85 Mean of logged Data 4.268
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.235 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.848 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 95.61 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 103.4
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0158 Adjusted Chi Square Value 71.39
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 77.23
Page 26 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
1448
1449
1450
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 542 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap t UCL N/A
Mean in Original Scale 242.7 Mean in Log Scale 4.34
SD in Original Scale 407.5 SD in Log Scale 1.529
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Approximate Chi Square Value (16.97, α) 8.653 Adjusted Chi Square Value (16.97, β) 6.936
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 795.8 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 992.8
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
80% gamma percentile (KM) 641.8 90% gamma percentile (KM) 890.8
95% gamma percentile (KM) 1136 99% gamma percentile (KM) 1698
nu hat (KM) 27.37 nu star (KM) 16.97
theta hat (KM) 207.5 theta star (KM) 334.6
Variance (KM) 84196 SE of Mean (KM) 155.1
k hat (KM) 1.955 k star (KM) 1.212
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 405.7 SD (KM) 290.2
Mean (detects) 770
Theta hat (MLE) 151.3 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 20.35 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 5.088 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1374 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 1949
95% KM (z) UCL 660.8 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 871 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1082
KM SD 290.2 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 707.1 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 405.7 KM Standard Error of Mean 155.1
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
Mean of Logged Detects 6.545 SD of Logged Detects 0.648
Median Detects 770 CV Detects 0.606
Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A
Page 27 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.328 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.805 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 0.285 SD of Logged Detects 0.727
Median Detects 2 CV Detects 0.47
Skewness Detects -1.393 Kurtosis Detects 1.104
Variance Detects 0.535 Percent Non-Detects 28.57%
Mean Detects 1.556 SD Detects 0.731
Minimum Detect 0.38 Minimum Non-Detect 0.5
Maximum Detect 2.1 Maximum Non-Detect 2.5
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (7440-41-7__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 1082
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 353.3 SD in Log Scale 0.776
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 595.2 95% H-Stat UCL 877.1
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 335.7 Mean in Log Scale 5.496
KM SD (logged) 0.508 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.48
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.271
KM SD (logged) 0.508 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.48
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.271 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 655
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 5.842 KM Geo Mean 344.4
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 6646
Page 28 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
1547
1548
1549
1550
1551
1552
1553
1554
1555
1556
1557
1558
1559
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565
1566
1567
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.313 Lilliefors GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.728 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 2.242 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 2.635
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (28.31, α) 17.17 Adjusted Chi Square Value (28.31, β) 14.61
80% gamma percentile (KM) 2.033 90% gamma percentile (KM) 2.638
95% gamma percentile (KM) 3.215 99% gamma percentile (KM) 4.492
nu hat (KM) 47.21 nu star (KM) 28.31
theta hat (KM) 0.403 theta star (KM) 0.673
Variance (KM) 0.549 SE of Mean (KM) 0.338
k hat (KM) 3.372 k star (KM) 2.022
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 1.36 SD (KM) 0.741
Approximate Chi Square Value (29.87, α) 18.39 Adjusted Chi Square Value (29.87, β) 15.73
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 2.27 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 2.653
nu hat (MLE) 49.94 nu star (bias corrected) 29.87
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
k hat (MLE) 3.567 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.133
Theta hat (MLE) 0.392 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.655
Maximum 2.1 Median 1.322
SD 0.681 CV 0.488
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.38 Mean 1.397
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 1.556
Theta hat (MLE) 0.467 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.061
nu hat (MLE) 33.32 nu star (bias corrected) 14.66
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 3.332 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.466
K-S Test Statistic 0.345 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.359 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.721 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.682 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.471 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 4.724
95% KM (z) UCL 1.916 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.374 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.834
KM SD 0.741 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 2.017 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 1.36 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.338
Page 29 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1573
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
1582
1583
1584
1585
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1597
1598
1599
1600
1601
1602
1603
1604
1605
1606
1607
1608
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 0.829 SD of Logged Detects 0.105
Median Detects 2.25 CV Detects 0.106
Skewness Detects 0.544 Kurtosis Detects -2.944
Variance Detects 0.06 Percent Non-Detects 42.86%
Mean Detects 2.3 SD Detects 0.245
Minimum Detect 2.1 Minimum Non-Detect 1
Maximum Detect 2.6 Maximum Non-Detect 2.5
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (7440-43-9__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 5
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 2.017
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.771 SD in Log Scale 0.864
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1.892 95% H-Stat UCL 4.866
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 1.326 Mean in Log Scale 0.0371
KM SD (logged) 0.755 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.039
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.345
KM SD (logged) 0.755 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.039
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.345 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 3.659
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.0759 KM Geo Mean 1.079
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.719 95% Bootstrap t UCL 1.823
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 3.279
SD in Original Scale 0.721 SD in Log Scale 0.696
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1.874 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.719
Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 1.345 Mean in Log Scale 0.122
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 30 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1627
1628
1629
1630
1631
1632
1633
1634
1635
1636
1637
1638
1639
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
1645
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675
1676
1677
1678
1679
80% gamma percentile (KM) 2.571 90% gamma percentile (KM) 2.967
95% gamma percentile (KM) 3.323 99% gamma percentile (KM) 4.06
nu hat (KM) 184 nu star (KM) 106.5
theta hat (KM) 0.152 theta star (KM) 0.263
Variance (KM) 0.304 SE of Mean (KM) 0.285
k hat (KM) 13.15 k star (KM) 7.607
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 2 SD (KM) 0.552
Approximate Chi Square Value (664.95, α) 606.1 Adjusted Chi Square Value (664.95, β) 589
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 2.387 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 1161 nu star (bias corrected) 664.9
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
k hat (MLE) 82.95 k star (bias corrected MLE) 47.5
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0262 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0458
Maximum 2.6 Median 2.1
SD 0.26 CV 0.119
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 1.813 Mean 2.176
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 2.3
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0193 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0767
nu hat (MLE) 954.8 nu star (bias corrected) 240
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 119.3 k star (bias corrected MLE) 30
K-S Test Statistic 0.328 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.394 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.446 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.657 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.78 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 4.836
95% KM (z) UCL 2.469 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.855 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.242
KM SD 0.552 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 2.554 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 2 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.285
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.293 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.862 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 31 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1680
1681
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
1703
1704
1705
1706
1707
1708
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
1716
1717
1718
1719
1720
1721
1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
1729
1730
1731
1732
1733
SD 41.45 Std. Error of Mean 15.67
Coefficient of Variation 0.724 Skewness 1.742
Minimum 31 Mean 57.29
Maximum 140 Median 35
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-48-4__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 2.554
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.759 SD in Log Scale 0.58
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 2.3 95% H-Stat UCL 3.415
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 1.743 Mean in Log Scale 0.438
KM SD (logged) 0.344 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.264
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.18
KM SD (logged) 0.344 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.264
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.18 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 2.771
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.642 KM Geo Mean 1.9
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.344 95% Bootstrap t UCL 2.428
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 2.384
SD in Original Scale 0.253 SD in Log Scale 0.115
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 2.366 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.323
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 2.18 Mean in Log Scale 0.774
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.295 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.859 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 2.545 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 2.745
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (106.50, α) 83.68 Adjusted Chi Square Value (106.50, β) 77.59
Page 32 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1734
1735
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740
1741
1742
1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1748
1749
1750
1751
1752
1753
1754
1755
1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780
1781
1782
1783
1784
1785
1786
1787
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 110.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 133.7
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 179.9
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 108.2 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 93.22
Maximum of Logged Data 4.942 SD of logged Data 0.588
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.434 Mean of logged Data 3.876
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.323 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.765 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 97 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 115
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0158 Adjusted Chi Square Value 12.88
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 57.29 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 42.15
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 15.27
Theta hat (MLE) 18.69 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 31.01
nu hat (MLE) 42.92 nu star (bias corrected) 25.86
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 3.066 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.847
K-S Test Statistic 0.354 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.314 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.957 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.712 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 89.45
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 87.73 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 94.08
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.367 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.706 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Page 33 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1788
1789
1790
1791
1792
1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
1821
1822
1823
1824
1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837
1838
1839
1840
1841 K-S Test Statistic 0.358 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.597 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.681 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 86.28 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 119
95% KM (z) UCL 45.66 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 44.29
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 57.63 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 69.63
KM SD 20.76 95% KM (BCA) UCL 45.43
95% KM (t) UCL 48.3 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 45.14
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 31.14 KM Standard Error of Mean 8.829
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.328 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.817 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 3.586 SD of Logged Detects 0.585
Median Detects 52 CV Detects 0.463
Skewness Detects -0.773 Kurtosis Detects -2.205
Variance Detects 353.8 Percent Non-Detects 28.57%
Mean Detects 40.6 SD Detects 18.81
Minimum Detect 15 Minimum Non-Detect 5
Maximum Detect 56 Maximum Non-Detect 25
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (7440-50-8__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 7
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 125.6
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 104.3 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 125.6
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 155.1 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 213.2
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 274.1 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 81.29
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 88.14
95% CLT UCL 83.06 95% Jackknife UCL 87.73
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 81.04 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 324.1
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Page 34 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1842
1843
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
1857
1858
1859
1860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
1869
1870
1871
1872
1873
1874
1875
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
1886
1887
1888
1889
1890
1891
1892
1893
1894
1895
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 3.1 KM Geo Mean 22.2
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 44.46 95% Bootstrap t UCL 49
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 88.71
SD in Original Scale 21.08 SD in Log Scale 0.762
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 47.66 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 43.89
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 32.18 Mean in Log Scale 3.245
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.334 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.809 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 58.11 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 71.24
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (19.33, α) 10.36 Adjusted Chi Square Value (19.33, β) 8.45
80% gamma percentile (KM) 48.62 90% gamma percentile (KM) 66.22
95% gamma percentile (KM) 83.42 99% gamma percentile (KM) 122.5
nu hat (KM) 31.5 nu star (KM) 19.33
theta hat (KM) 13.84 theta star (KM) 22.55
Variance (KM) 431.1 SE of Mean (KM) 8.829
k hat (KM) 2.25 k star (KM) 1.381
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 31.14 SD (KM) 20.76
Approximate Chi Square Value (17.03, α) 8.696 Adjusted Chi Square Value (17.03, β) 6.974
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 62.09 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 77.42
nu hat (MLE) 27.47 nu star (bias corrected) 17.03
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
k hat (MLE) 1.962 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.217
Theta hat (MLE) 16.15 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 26.05
Maximum 56 Median 26
SD 21.71 CV 0.685
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 5.81 Mean 31.7
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 40.6
Theta hat (MLE) 9.19 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 21.36
nu hat (MLE) 44.18 nu star (bias corrected) 19.01
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 4.418 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.901
5% K-S Critical Value 0.358 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 35 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1896
1897
1898
1899
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949 95% KM (z) UCL 259.1 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
KM SD 142.5 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 277.7 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 156.9 KM Standard Error of Mean 62.18
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.428 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.677 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 5.546 SD of Logged Detects 0.403
Median Detects 310 CV Detects 0.321
Skewness Detects -1.982 Kurtosis Detects 3.943
Variance Detects 7533 Percent Non-Detects 42.86%
Mean Detects 270 SD Detects 86.79
Minimum Detect 140 Minimum Non-Detect 6
Maximum Detect 320 Maximum Non-Detect 75
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
concDL (7440-62-2__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 48.3
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 22.47 SD in Log Scale 1.128
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 47.65 95% H-Stat UCL 260.1
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 31.14 Mean in Log Scale 3.053
KM SD (logged) 0.923 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.482
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.404
KM SD (logged) 0.923 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.482
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.404 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 126.1
Page 36 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 199.3 Mean in Log Scale 5.163
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.432 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.662 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 376.5 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 504.8
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.03, α) 4.596 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.03, β) 3.428
80% gamma percentile (KM) 256.5 90% gamma percentile (KM) 382.8
95% gamma percentile (KM) 511.6 99% gamma percentile (KM) 816.2
nu hat (KM) 16.97 nu star (KM) 11.03
theta hat (KM) 129.4 theta star (KM) 199.1
Variance (KM) 20297 SE of Mean (KM) 62.18
k hat (KM) 1.212 k star (KM) 0.788
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 156.9 SD (KM) 142.5
Approximate Chi Square Value (33.36, α) 21.16 Adjusted Chi Square Value (33.36, β) 18.28
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 314.7 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 56.05 nu star (bias corrected) 33.36
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
k hat (MLE) 4.004 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.383
Theta hat (MLE) 49.84 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 83.73
Maximum 320 Median 140
SD 107.2 CV 0.537
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 105.6 Mean 199.5
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 270
Theta hat (MLE) 27.95 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 104.6
nu hat (MLE) 77.29 nu star (bias corrected) 20.66
Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 9.661 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.582
K-S Test Statistic 0.457 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.395 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.879 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.657 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 545.2 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 775.5
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 343.4 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 427.9
Page 37 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2053
2054
2055
2056
2057
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.261 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.858 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
SD 88.05 Std. Error of Mean 33.28
Coefficient of Variation 0.568 Skewness -0.0623
Minimum 43 Mean 155
Maximum 250 Median 130
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (7440-66-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available!
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 277.7 KM H-UCL 38820
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 149.4 SD in Log Scale 1.933
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 270.9 95% H-Stat UCL 70144
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 161.1 Mean in Log Scale 4.132
KM SD (logged) 1.876 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 6.357
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.819
KM SD (logged) 1.876 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 6.357
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.819 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 38820
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 3.937 KM Geo Mean 51.26
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap t UCL N/A
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 365.9
SD in Original Scale 107.5 SD in Log Scale 0.556
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 278.2 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A
Page 38 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2058
2059
2060
2061
2062
2063
2064
2065
2066
2067
2068
2069
2070
2071
2072
2073
2074
2075
2076
2077
2078
2079
2080
2081
2082
2083
2084
2085
2086
2087
2088
2089
2090
2091
2092
2093
2094
2095
2096
2097
2098
2099
2100
2101
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
2108
2109
2110
2111
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 219.7
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 254.8 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 300.1
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 362.8 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 486.1
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 195 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 204.6
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 201.7
95% CLT UCL 209.7 95% Jackknife UCL 219.7
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 205.7 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 220.6
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 343.4 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 423.4
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 580.4
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 380.4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 285.8
Maximum of Logged Data 5.521 SD of logged Data 0.702
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 3.761 Mean of logged Data 4.861
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.24 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.87 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 266.9 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 318.2
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0158 Adjusted Chi Square Value 11.93
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 155 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 117.2
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 14.22
Theta hat (MLE) 53.54 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 88.6
nu hat (MLE) 40.53 nu star (bias corrected) 24.49
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 2.895 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.749
K-S Test Statistic 0.268 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.314 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.48 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.712 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 219.5
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 219.7 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 208.9
Page 39 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2112
2113
2114
2115
2116
2117
2118
2119
2120
2121
2122
2123
2124
2125
2126
2127
2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
2133
2134
2135
2136
2137
2138
2139
2140
2141
2142
2143
2144
2145
2146
2147
2148
2149
2150
2151
2152
2153
2154
2155
2156
2157
2158
2159
2160
2161
2162
2163
2164
2165
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (74-90-8__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (74-97-5__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 6
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 6 Number of Distinct Observations 3
The data set for variable concDL (74-87-3__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (74-90-8__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (74-83-9__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (74-87-3__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (74-83-9__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Page 40 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2166
2167
2168
2169
2170
2171
2172
2173
2174
2175
2176
2177
2178
2179
2180
2181
2182
2183
2184
2185
2186
2187
2188
2189
2190
2191
2192
2193
2194
2195
2196
2197
2198
2199
2200
2201
2202
2203
2204
2205
2206
2207
2208
2209
2210
2211
2212
2213
2214
2215
2216
2217
2218
2219 Theta hat (MLE) 18.71 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 38.63
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.581 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.766
K-S Test Statistic 0.268 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.361 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.394 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.686 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 73.6 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 104.7
95% KM (z) UCL 34.97 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 35.14
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 46.35 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 57.76
KM SD 19.87 95% KM (BCA) UCL 33.6
95% KM (t) UCL 37.47 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 34
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 21.16 KM Standard Error of Mean 8.397
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.152 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.994 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 3.039 SD of Logged Detects 1.155
Median Detects 30 CV Detects 0.66
Skewness Detects -0.0324 Kurtosis Detects 0.63
Variance Detects 380.6 Percent Non-Detects 28.57%
Mean Detects 29.58 SD Detects 19.51
Minimum Detect 2.9 Minimum Non-Detect 0.1
Maximum Detect 56 Maximum Non-Detect 0.1
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 6
The data set for variable concDL (74-97-5__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (75-25-2__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
Page 41 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2220
2221
2222
2223
2224
2225
2226
2227
2228
2229
2230
2231
2232
2233
2234
2235
2236
2237
2238
2239
2240
2241
2242
2243
2244
2245
2246
2247
2248
2249
2250
2251
2252
2253
2254
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259
2260
2261
2262
2263
2264
2265
2266
2267
2268
2269
2270
2271
2272
KM SD (logged) 2.566 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 8.55
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 1.084
KM SD (logged) 2.566 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 8.55
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 1.084 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 946691
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 1.513 KM Geo Mean 4.538
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 34.28 95% Bootstrap t UCL 39.19
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 1458
SD in Original Scale 21 SD in Log Scale 1.624
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 36.99 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 33.57
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 21.57 Mean in Log Scale 2.275
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.318 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.822 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 52.47 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 71.19
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (10.40, α) 4.195 Adjusted Chi Square Value (10.40, β) 3.091
80% gamma percentile (KM) 34.7 90% gamma percentile (KM) 52.36
95% gamma percentile (KM) 70.48 99% gamma percentile (KM) 113.5
nu hat (KM) 15.87 nu star (KM) 10.4
theta hat (KM) 18.66 theta star (KM) 28.47
Variance (KM) 394.9 SE of Mean (KM) 8.397
k hat (KM) 1.134 k star (KM) 0.743
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 21.16 SD (KM) 19.87
Approximate Chi Square Value (3.83, α) 0.655 Adjusted Chi Square Value (3.83, β) 0.357
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 123.5 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 226.6
nu hat (MLE) 4.368 nu star (bias corrected) 3.829
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
k hat (MLE) 0.312 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.274
Theta hat (MLE) 67.73 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 77.26
Maximum 56 Median 22
SD 21.49 CV 1.017
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 21.13
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 29.58
nu hat (MLE) 15.81 nu star (bias corrected) 7.657
Page 42 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2273
2274
2275
2276
2277
2278
2279
2280
2281
2282
2283
2284
2285
2286
2287
2288
2289
2290
2291
2292
2293
2294
2295
2296
2297
2298
2299
2300
2301
2302
2303
2304
2305
2306
2307
2308
2309
2310
2311
2312
2313
2314
2315
2316
2317
2318
2319
2320
2321
2322
2323
2324
2325
2326
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.337 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 33.89 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 48.45
95% KM (z) UCL 15.81 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 21.14 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 26.48
KM SD 9.005 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 16.98 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 9.346 KM Standard Error of Mean 3.93
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.247 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.891 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 2.734 SD of Logged Detects 0.374
Median Detects 14.5 CV Detects 0.394
Skewness Detects 1.143 Kurtosis Detects 0.334
Variance Detects 40.92 Percent Non-Detects 42.86%
Mean Detects 16.25 SD Detects 6.397
Minimum Detect 11 Minimum Non-Detect 0.14
Maximum Detect 25 Maximum Non-Detect 2
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (75-27-4__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 37.47
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 21.48 SD in Log Scale 3.092
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 36.92 95% H-Stat UCL 1.819E+8
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 21.14 Mean in Log Scale 1.315
Page 43 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2327
2328
2329
2330
2331
2332
2333
2334
2335
2336
2337
2338
2339
2340
2341
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
2356
2357
2358
2359
2360
2361
2362
2363
2364
2365
2366
2367
2368
2369
2370
2371
2372
2373
2374
2375
2376
2377
2378
2379
2380
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 16.18 95% Bootstrap t UCL 18.96
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 25.42
SD in Original Scale 7.5 SD in Log Scale 0.662
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 16.98 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 16.16
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 11.48 Mean in Log Scale 2.256
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.247 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.375 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.923 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 23.78 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 32.57
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (9.95, α) 3.91 Adjusted Chi Square Value (9.95, β) 2.855
80% gamma percentile (KM) 15.35 90% gamma percentile (KM) 23.38
95% gamma percentile (KM) 31.64 99% gamma percentile (KM) 51.33
nu hat (KM) 15.08 nu star (KM) 9.95
theta hat (KM) 8.677 theta star (KM) 13.15
Variance (KM) 81.09 SE of Mean (KM) 3.93
k hat (KM) 1.077 k star (KM) 0.711
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 9.346 SD (KM) 9.005
Approximate Chi Square Value (4.52, α) 0.935 Adjusted Chi Square Value (4.52, β) 0.541
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 46.45 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A
nu hat (MLE) 5.569 nu star (bias corrected) 4.516
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
k hat (MLE) 0.398 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.323
Theta hat (MLE) 24.19 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 29.83
Maximum 25 Median 11
SD 9.454 CV 0.983
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 9.621
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 16.25
Theta hat (MLE) 1.736 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 6.483
nu hat (MLE) 74.88 nu star (bias corrected) 20.05
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 9.36 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.507
K-S Test Statistic 0.28 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.395 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.657 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Page 44 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2381
2382
2383
2384
2385
2386
2387
2388
2389
2390
2391
2392
2393
2394
2395
2396
2397
2398
2399
2400
2401
2402
2403
2404
2405
2406
2407
2408
2409
2410
2411
2412
2413
2414
2415
2416
2417
2418
2419
2420
2421
2422
2423
2424
2425
2426
2427
2428
2429
2430
2431
2432
2433
2434
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.897 Skewness -0.224
Maximum 1400 Median 1000
SD 631.9 Std. Error of Mean 238.8
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 11 Mean 704.7
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 7
The data set for variable concDL (75-34-3__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (76-03-9__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (75-34-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 16.98
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 9.618 SD in Log Scale 2.58
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 16.51 95% H-Stat UCL 533416
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 9.449 Mean in Log Scale 0.802
KM SD (logged) 2.339 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 7.823
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 1.021
KM SD (logged) 2.339 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 7.823
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 1.021 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 55440
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 0.72 KM Geo Mean 2.053
Page 45 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2435
2436
2437
2438
2439
2440
2441
2442
2443
2444
2445
2446
2447
2448
2449
2450
2451
2452
2453
2454
2455
2456
2457
2458
2459
2460
2461
2462
2463
2464
2465
2466
2467
2468
2469
2470
2471
2472
2473
2474
2475
2476
2477
2478
2479
2480
2481
2482
2483
2484
2485
2486
2487
2488
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 964.8 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1073
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1059
95% CLT UCL 1098 95% Jackknife UCL 1169
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1072 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 1118
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5411 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7202
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10720
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 2120659 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4121
Maximum of Logged Data 7.244 SD of logged Data 2.213
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 2.398 Mean of logged Data 5.415
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.321 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.772 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 2690 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 4283
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0158 Adjusted Chi Square Value 0.941
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 704.7 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1103
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 1.498
Theta hat (MLE) 1285 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1725
nu hat (MLE) 7.676 nu star (bias corrected) 5.719
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.548 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.409
5% K-S Critical Value 0.326 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.749 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.335 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.794 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 1169 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 1076
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 1165
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.255 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.812 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 46 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2489
2490
2491
2492
2493
2494
2495
2496
2497
2498
2499
2500
2501
2502
2503
2504
2505
2506
2507
2508
2509
2510
2511
2512
2513
2514
2515
2516
2517
2518
2519
2520
2521
2522
2523
2524
2525
2526
2527
2528
2529
2530
2531
2532
2533
2534
2535
2536
2537
2538
2539
2540
2541
2542 The data set for variable concDL (79-34-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
The data set for variable concDL (79-01-6__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (79-34-5__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 3
The data set for variable concDL (78-87-5__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (79-01-6__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Note: For highly negatively-skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be
reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets.
concDL (78-87-5__ug/l)
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 1169
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1421 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1746
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2196 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 3081
Page 47 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2543
2544
2545
2546
2547
2548
2549
2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
2578
2579
2580
2581
2582
2583
2584
2585
2586
2587
2588
2589
2590
2591
2592
2593
2594
2595
2596 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 854
Theta hat (MLE) 398.1 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 861.4
nu hat (MLE) 21.45 nu star (bias corrected) 9.914
Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 2.145 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.991
K-S Test Statistic 0.318 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.36 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.72 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.684 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1962 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 2762
95% KM (z) UCL 968 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1261 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1554
KM SD 511.1 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A
95% KM (t) UCL 1032 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 612.8 KM Standard Error of Mean 216
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.227 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.843 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Mean of Logged Detects 6.499 SD of Logged Detects 0.976
Median Detects 1000 CV Detects 0.527
Skewness Detects -1.419 Kurtosis Detects 1.731
Variance Detects 202580 Percent Non-Detects 28.57%
Mean Detects 854 SD Detects 450.1
Minimum Detect 120 Minimum Non-Detect 9.8
Maximum Detect 1200 Maximum Non-Detect 9.8
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 5
concDL (79-43-6__ug/l)
Page 48 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2597
2598
2599
2600
2601
2602
2603
2604
2605
2606
2607
2608
2609
2610
2611
2612
2613
2614
2615
2616
2617
2618
2619
2620
2621
2622
2623
2624
2625
2626
2627
2628
2629
2630
2631
2632
2633
2634
2635
2636
2637
2638
2639
2640
2641
2642
2643
2644
2645
2646
2647
2648
2649
2650
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 553.8 SD in Log Scale 2.525
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1018 95% H-Stat UCL 23226536
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 611.4 Mean in Log Scale 5.096
KM SD (logged) 2.043 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 6.882
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.863
KM SD (logged) 2.043 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 6.882
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.863 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 498997
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 5.294 KM Geo Mean 199.2
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 952.9 95% Bootstrap t UCL 982.8
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 9543
SD in Original Scale 524.4 SD in Log Scale 1.296
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1020 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 930.5
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 635.1 Mean in Log Scale 5.909
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.349 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.709 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 1360 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 1773
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (12.83, α) 5.782 Adjusted Chi Square Value (12.83, β) 4.435
80% gamma percentile (KM) 992.9 90% gamma percentile (KM) 1441
95% gamma percentile (KM) 1893 99% gamma percentile (KM) 2949
nu hat (KM) 20.13 nu star (KM) 12.83
theta hat (KM) 426.2 theta star (KM) 668.4
Variance (KM) 261204 SE of Mean (KM) 216
k hat (KM) 1.438 k star (KM) 0.917
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 612.8 SD (KM) 511.1
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.03, α) 4.598 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.03, β) 3.43
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 1556 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 2086
nu hat (MLE) 16.98 nu star (bias corrected) 11.03
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0158
k hat (MLE) 1.213 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.788
Theta hat (MLE) 534.6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 822.6
Maximum 1200 Median 750
SD 509.6 CV 0.786
Minimum 72.81 Mean 648.3
Page 49 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2651
2652
2653
2654
2655
2656
2657
2658
2659
2660
2661
2662
2663
2664
2665
2666
2667
2668
2669
2670
2671
2672
2673
2674
2675
2676
2677
2678
2679
2680
2681
2682
2683
2684
2685
2686
2687
2688
2689
2690
2691
2692
2693
2694
2695
2696
2697
2698
2699
2700
2701
2702
2703
2704
Total Number of Observations 5 Number of Distinct Observations 2
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 5
concDL (91-57-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (91-20-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 4
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 4
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
concDL (91-20-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (87-86-5__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 6
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 4
The data set for variable concDL (87-68-3__ug/l) was not processed!
concDL (87-86-5__ug/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
concDL (87-68-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 6
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 1032
Page 50 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2705
2706
2707
2708
2709
2710
2711
2712
2713
2714
2715
2716
2717
2718
2719
2720
2721
2722
2723
2724
2725
2726
2727
2728
2729
2730
2731
2732
2733
2734
2735
2736
2737
2738
2739
2740
2741
2742
2743
2744
2745
2746
2747
2748
2749
2750
2751
2752
2753
2754
2755
2756
2757
2758
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.724 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation N/A Skewness 2.099
Maximum 1.1000E-7 Median 1.5000E-8
SD 3.8392E-8 Std. Error of Mean 1.4511E-8
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.000E-10 Mean 2.7791E-8
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 6
concDL (calc-dx-0__mg/l)
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (95-94-3__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 4
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 4
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
concDL (95-94-3__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (95-47-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 3
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 7
concDL (95-47-6__ug/l)
General Statistics
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable concDL (91-57-6__ug/l) was not processed!
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
Page 51 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2759
2760
2761
2762
2763
2764
2765
2766
2767
2768
2769
2770
2771
2772
2773
2774
2775
2776
2777
2778
2779
2780
2781
2782
2783
2784
2785
2786
2787
2788
2789
2790
2791
2792
2793
2794
2795
2796
2797
2798
2799
2800
2801
2802
2803
2804
2805
2806
2807
2808
2809
2810
2811
2812
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.1324E-8 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9.1042E-8
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.1841E-7 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.7217E-7
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1.8040E-7 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.1649E-8
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 6.0314E-8
95% CLT UCL 5.1660E-8 95% Jackknife UCL 5.5988E-8
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 4.9223E-8 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 1.1890E-7
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.2726E-7 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3.0326E-7
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4.5256E-7
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 2.8664E-4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.7250E-7
Maximum of Logged Data -16.02 SD of logged Data 2.383
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -22.33 Mean of logged Data -18.75
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.335 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.847 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 1.1748E-7 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.9405E-7
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0158 Adjusted Chi Square Value 0.735
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 2.7791E-8 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.5894E-8
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 1.214
Theta hat (MLE) 5.8502E-8 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 7.5789E-8
nu hat (MLE) 6.651 nu star (bias corrected) 5.134
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.475 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.367
5% K-S Critical Value 0.328 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.756 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.26 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.415 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 5.5988E-8 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 6.3963E-8
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 5.7907E-8
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.335 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 52 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2813
2814
2815
2816
2817
2818
2819
2820
2821
2822
2823
2824
2825
2826
2827
2828
2829
2830
2831
2832
2833
2834
2835
2836
2837
2838
2839
2840
2841
2842
2843
2844
2845
2846
2847
2848
2849
2850
2851
2852
2853
2854
2855
2856
2857
2858
2859
2860
2861
2862
2863
2864
2865
2866
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0158 Adjusted Chi Square Value 3.587
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3.4686E-8 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.8566E-8
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 4.786
Theta hat (MLE) 2.7773E-8 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.2880E-8
nu hat (MLE) 17.48 nu star (bias corrected) 11.32
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.249 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.809
5% K-S Critical Value 0.318 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.724 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.203 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.34 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 6.0767E-8 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 6.7524E-8
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 6.2445E-8
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.287 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.773 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use
guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest.
For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012).
Chebyshev UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.1
Coefficient of Variation N/A Skewness 1.985
Maximum 1.1000E-7 Median 1.9000E-8
SD 3.5511E-8 Std. Error of Mean 1.3422E-8
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 2.8000E-9 Mean 3.4686E-8
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 7 Number of Distinct Observations 7
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (calc-dx-2__mg/l)
Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 1.9405E-7
Page 53 of 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
From File WorkSheet_a.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for PRI 8 EPCs for Surface Water
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.17/13/2020 1:04:25 PM
2867
2868
2869
2870
2871
2872
2873
2874
2875
2876
2877
2878
2879
2880
2881
2882
2883
2884
2885
2886
2887
2888
2889
2890
2891
2892
2893
2894
2895
2896
2897
2898
2899
2900
2901
2902
2903
2904
2905
2906
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 6.0767E-8
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.4951E-8 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9.3190E-8
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.1851E-7 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.6823E-7
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1.4951E-7 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.5371E-8
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 6.5114E-8
95% CLT UCL 5.6763E-8 95% Jackknife UCL 6.0767E-8
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.5640E-8 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 9.5257E-8
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.0474E-7 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.3417E-7
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.9196E-7
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 2.6615E-7 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8.3544E-8
Maximum of Logged Data -16.02 SD of logged Data 1.123
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -19.69 Mean of logged Data -17.63
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.304 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.265 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.926 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 8.2080E-8 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.0950E-7
Page 54 of 54
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
PROUCL OUTPUTS – AIR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Detects 33 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 31 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 34 Number of Distinct Observations 32
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
concDL (118-74-1__µg/m3)
Median Detects 0.0108 CV Detects 0.458
Skewness Detects 0.176 Kurtosis Detects -0.398
Variance Detects 2.8605E-5 Percent Non-Detects 2.941%
Mean Detects 0.0117 SD Detects 0.00535
Minimum Detect 0.00177 Minimum Non-Detect 0.00166
Maximum Detect 0.0243 Maximum Non-Detect 0.00166
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.089 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.152 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.975 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.931 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -4.586 SD of Logged Detects 0.585
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0129 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.013
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0142 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0155
KM SD 0.00546 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.013
95% KM (t) UCL 0.013 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0129
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0114 KM Standard Error of Mean 9.5045E-4
K-S Test Statistic 0.146 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.154 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.512 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.752 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0173 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0208
Mean (detects) 0.0117
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00302 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0033
nu hat (MLE) 254.9 nu star (bias corrected) 233.1
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 3.862 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.532
Maximum 0.0243 Median 0.0108
SD 0.00527 CV 0.454
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.00177 Mean 0.0116
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
nu hat (MLE) 269.7 nu star (bias corrected) 247.2
k hat (MLE) 3.966 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.635
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00293 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0032
Page 1 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
Approximate Chi Square Value (247.19, α) 211.8 Adjusted Chi Square Value (247.19, β) 210.2
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0136 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0137
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0422
nu hat (KM) 295.5 nu star (KM) 270.7
theta hat (KM) 0.00262 theta star (KM) 0.00286
Variance (KM) 2.9783E-5 SE of Mean (KM) 9.5045E-4
k hat (KM) 4.345 k star (KM) 3.982
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0114 SD (KM) 0.00546
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0132 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0133
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (270.74, α) 233.6 Adjusted Chi Square Value (270.74, β) 231.9
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0157 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.019
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0221 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0286
Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0114 Mean in Log Scale -4.627
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.183 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.152 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.907 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.931 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -4.639 KM Geo Mean 0.00967
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0129 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0131
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0149
SD in Original Scale 0.0055 SD in Log Scale 0.625
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.013 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.013
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0114 Mean in Log Scale -4.659
KM SD (logged) 0.645 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.065
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.112
KM SD (logged) 0.645 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.065
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.112 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.015
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.013
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.00559 SD in Log Scale 0.719
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.013 95% H-Stat UCL 0.016
Page 2 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Minimum 68.1 Mean 187.6
Maximum 495 Median 179.5
Total Number of Observations 32 Number of Distinct Observations 31
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (1336-36-3__pg/m3)
General Statistics
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.154 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.93 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.113 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.888 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 81.92 Std. Error of Mean 14.48
Coefficient of Variation 0.437 Skewness 1.554
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.391 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.748 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 212.8
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 212.2 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 215.7
Theta hat (MLE) 31.97 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 35.14
nu hat (MLE) 375.6 nu star (bias corrected) 341.7
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 5.868 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.339
K-S Test Statistic 0.111 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.156 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 213.8 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 215.3
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0416 Adjusted Chi Square Value 297.8
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 187.6 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 81.2
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 299.9
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 4.221 Mean of logged Data 5.147
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.154 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.93 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.139 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.96 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Maximum of Logged Data 6.205 SD of logged Data 0.433
Page 3 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 253.1 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 281.1
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 336.3
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 218.5 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 232.8
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 226 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 212.9
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 215.4
95% CLT UCL 211.4 95% Jackknife UCL 212.2
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 211.1 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 216.8
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Student's-t UCL 212.2
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 231.1 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 250.7
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 278.1 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 331.7
Number of Detects 22 Number of Non-Detects 11
Number of Distinct Detects 21 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 11
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 33 Number of Distinct Observations 32
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (7439-96-5__µg/m3)
Median Detects 0.0164 CV Detects 0.345
Skewness Detects 0.424 Kurtosis Detects -0.0355
Variance Detects 3.0408E-5 Percent Non-Detects 33.33%
Mean Detects 0.016 SD Detects 0.00551
Minimum Detect 0.00739 Minimum Non-Detect 0.00144
Maximum Detect 0.0281 Maximum Non-Detect 0.00621
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.0961 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.184 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.965 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.911 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -4.197 SD of Logged Detects 0.363
95% KM (z) UCL 0.0135 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0136
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0155 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0174
KM SD 0.00814 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0139
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0136 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0136
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0111 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.00145
Page 4 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
K-S Test Statistic 0.115 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.185 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.221 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.744 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0202 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0256
Mean (detects) 0.016
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00188 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00217
nu hat (MLE) 372.9 nu star (bias corrected) 323.4
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 8.475 k star (bias corrected MLE) 7.35
Maximum 0.0281 Median 0.0117
SD 0.0053 CV 0.379
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.00739 Mean 0.014
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Approximate Chi Square Value (486.87, α) 436.7 Adjusted Chi Square Value (486.87, β) 434.3
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0156 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0157
nu hat (MLE) 534.1 nu star (bias corrected) 486.9
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0419
k hat (MLE) 8.092 k star (bias corrected MLE) 7.377
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00173 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0019
nu hat (KM) 123.3 nu star (KM) 113.4
theta hat (KM) 0.00596 theta star (KM) 0.00647
Variance (KM) 6.6263E-5 SE of Mean (KM) 0.00145
k hat (KM) 1.868 k star (KM) 1.719
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0111 SD (KM) 0.00814
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.014 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.0142
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (113.43, α) 89.84 Adjusted Chi Square Value (113.43, β) 88.76
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.017 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0224
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0277 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0395
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0128 Mean in Log Scale -4.473
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.133 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.184 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.966 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.911 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.00634 SD in Log Scale 0.494
Page 5 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -4.979 KM Geo Mean 0.00688
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0148 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0149
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0153
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0147 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0147
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0113 Mean in Log Scale -4.912
KM SD (logged) 1.143 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.616
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.204
KM SD (logged) 1.143 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.616
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.204 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.0224
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0136
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0081 SD in Log Scale 1.093
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0137 95% H-Stat UCL 0.0219
Number of Detects 31 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 30 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
concDL (7439-97-6__µg/m3)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 33 Number of Distinct Observations 32
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Median Detects 1.6600E-5 CV Detects N/A
Skewness Detects 0.872 Kurtosis Detects -0.303
Variance Detects 1.397E-10 Percent Non-Detects 6.061%
Mean Detects 1.9805E-5 SD Detects 1.1819E-5
Minimum Detect 5.9900E-6 Minimum Non-Detect 5.4000E-6
Maximum Detect 4.6200E-5 Maximum Non-Detect 5.4200E-6
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.143 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.156 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.892 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.929 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -11 SD of Logged Detects 0.601
KM SD 1.1782E-5 95% KM (BCA) UCL 2.2174E-5
95% KM (t) UCL 2.2464E-5 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 2.2260E-5
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 1.8932E-5 KM Standard Error of Mean 2.0849E-6
Page 6 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
95% KM (z) UCL 2.2361E-5 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 2.3028E-5
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.5187E-5 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.8020E-5
K-S Test Statistic 0.104 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.159 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.407 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.753 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.1952E-5 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.9676E-5
Mean (detects) 1.9805E-5
Theta hat (MLE) 6.4447E-6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 7.0804E-6
nu hat (MLE) 190.5 nu star (bias corrected) 173.4
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 3.073 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.797
Maximum 0.01 Median 1.8100E-5
SD 0.00242 CV 3.871
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 5.9900E-6 Mean 6.2467E-4
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Approximate Chi Square Value (14.75, α) 7.085 Adjusted Chi Square Value (14.75, β) 6.811
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0013 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.00135
nu hat (MLE) 14.75 nu star (bias corrected) 14.75
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0419
k hat (MLE) 0.224 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.223
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00279 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0028
nu hat (KM) 170.4 nu star (KM) 156.3
theta hat (KM) 7.3321E-6 theta star (KM) 7.9964E-6
Variance (KM) 1.388E-10 SE of Mean (KM) 2.0849E-6
k hat (KM) 2.582 k star (KM) 2.368
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 1.8932E-5 SD (KM) 1.1782E-5
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 2.3047E-5 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 2.3283E-5
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (156.26, α) 128.4 Adjusted Chi Square Value (156.26, β) 127.1
80% gamma percentile (KM) 2.7781E-5 90% gamma percentile (KM) 3.5408E-5
95% gamma percentile (KM) 4.2614E-5 99% gamma percentile (KM) 5.8439E-5
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.0763 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.156 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.959 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.929 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 7 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 1.8847E-5 Mean in Log Scale -11.09
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -11.07 KM Geo Mean 1.5582E-5
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.2639E-5 95% Bootstrap t UCL 2.2751E-5
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 2.4727E-5
SD in Original Scale 1.2068E-5 SD in Log Scale 0.678
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 2.2405E-5 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.2438E-5
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 1.8769E-5 Mean in Log Scale -11.11
KM SD (logged) 0.633 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.049
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.112
KM SD (logged) 0.633 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.049
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.112 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 2.3956E-5
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 2.2464E-5
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 1.2171E-5 SD in Log Scale 0.73
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 2.2358E-5 95% H-Stat UCL 2.5729E-5
Number of Detects 31 Number of Non-Detects 2
Number of Distinct Detects 30 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 33 Number of Distinct Observations 32
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
concDL (7440-38-2__µg/m3)
Median Detects 0.00313 CV Detects 0.815
Skewness Detects 1.436 Kurtosis Detects 2.797
Variance Detects 7.9278E-6 Percent Non-Detects 6.061%
Mean Detects 0.00346 SD Detects 0.00282
Minimum Detect 2.9800E-4 Minimum Non-Detect 3.1500E-4
Maximum Detect 0.0128 Maximum Non-Detect 3.1600E-4
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.16 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.156 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.881 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.929 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -6.052 SD of Logged Detects 0.994
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Page 8 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
95% KM (z) UCL 0.00408 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.00426
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00474 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00542
KM SD 0.00279 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0041
95% KM (t) UCL 0.0041 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00411
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.00326 KM Standard Error of Mean 4.9341E-4
K-S Test Statistic 0.132 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.161 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.358 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.765 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00635 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00817
Mean (detects) 0.00346
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00239 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0026
nu hat (MLE) 89.65 nu star (bias corrected) 82.31
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.446 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.328
Maximum 0.0128 Median 0.00318
SD 0.00315 CV 0.819
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 2.9800E-4 Mean 0.00385
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Approximate Chi Square Value (83.98, α) 63.86 Adjusted Chi Square Value (83.98, β) 62.95
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.00507 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.00514
nu hat (MLE) 90.91 nu star (bias corrected) 83.98
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0419
k hat (MLE) 1.377 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.272
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0028 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00303
nu hat (KM) 90.47 nu star (KM) 83.58
theta hat (KM) 0.00238 theta star (KM) 0.00258
Variance (KM) 7.7749E-6 SE of Mean (KM) 4.9341E-4
k hat (KM) 1.371 k star (KM) 1.266
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.00326 SD (KM) 0.00279
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0043 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.00436
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (83.58, α) 63.51 Adjusted Chi Square Value (83.58, β) 62.61
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.00514 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.00709
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.00901 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.0134
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.935 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.929 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Page 9 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.00327 Mean in Log Scale -6.174
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.181 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.156 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -6.177 KM Geo Mean 0.00208
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00425 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00428
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.00605
SD in Original Scale 0.00283 SD in Log Scale 1.079
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0041 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00407
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.00326 Mean in Log Scale -6.215
KM SD (logged) 1.068 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.522
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.189
KM SD (logged) 1.068 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.522
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.189 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.00592
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.00436 95% GROS Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.00514
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.00284 SD in Log Scale 1.164
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00409 95% H-Stat UCL 0.00678
Number of Detects 23 Number of Non-Detects 11
Number of Distinct Detects 22 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 11
concDL (87-68-3__µg/m3)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 34 Number of Distinct Observations 32
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Median Detects 0.00132 CV Detects 0.497
Skewness Detects 1.186 Kurtosis Detects 1.277
Variance Detects 6.6810E-7 Percent Non-Detects 32.35%
Mean Detects 0.00164 SD Detects 8.1737E-4
Minimum Detect 5.4900E-4 Minimum Non-Detect 5.0100E-4
Maximum Detect 0.00384 Maximum Non-Detect 0.00139
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.176 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.899 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -6.519 SD of Logged Detects 0.477
Page 10 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
95% KM (z) UCL 0.00155 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.00162
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00175 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00194
KM SD 8.2402E-4 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.00156
95% KM (t) UCL 0.00156 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00156
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.00131 KM Standard Error of Mean 1.4569E-4
K-S Test Statistic 0.145 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.362 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.747 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00222 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00276
Mean (detects) 0.00164
Theta hat (MLE) 3.4741E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.9673E-4
nu hat (MLE) 217.8 nu star (bias corrected) 190.7
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 4.735 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.146
Maximum 0.01 Median 0.00202
SD 0.00402 CV 0.925
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 5.4900E-4 Mean 0.00435
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Approximate Chi Square Value (77.09, α) 57.87 Adjusted Chi Square Value (77.09, β) 57.04
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.00579 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.00588
nu hat (MLE) 83.09 nu star (bias corrected) 77.09
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0422
k hat (MLE) 1.222 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.134
Theta hat (MLE) 0.00356 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00384
nu hat (KM) 171.7 nu star (KM) 157.9
theta hat (KM) 5.1854E-4 theta star (KM) 5.6392E-4
Variance (KM) 6.7901E-7 SE of Mean (KM) 1.4569E-4
k hat (KM) 2.525 k star (KM) 2.322
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.00131 SD (KM) 8.2402E-4
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.00159 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.00161
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (157.90, α) 129.9 Adjusted Chi Square Value (157.90, β) 128.6
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.00193 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.00246
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.00296 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.00408
Page 11 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0013 Mean in Log Scale -6.823
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.12 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.18 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.98 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -6.818 KM Geo Mean 0.00109
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00157 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00161
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.00161
SD in Original Scale 8.3773E-4 SD in Log Scale 0.601
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00155 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00153
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.00126 Mean in Log Scale -6.923
KM SD (logged) 0.596 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.019
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.108
KM SD (logged) 0.596 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.019
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.108 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.00161
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.00156
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 8.8055E-4 SD in Log Scale 0.737
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00151 95% H-Stat UCL 0.0017
concDL (calc_dx_0__pg/m3)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 32 Number of Distinct Observations 32
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Coefficient of Variation 2.445 Skewness 3.402
Maximum 1.55 Median 0.0291
SD 0.353 Std. Error of Mean 0.0623
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 0.00245 Mean 0.144
Page 12 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.416 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.154 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.425 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.93 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.824 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.241 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 2.545 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 0.25 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.287
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.256
Theta hat (MLE) 0.329 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.345
nu hat (MLE) 28.02 nu star (bias corrected) 26.73
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.438 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.418
5% K-S Critical Value 0.166 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.242 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.249
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0416 Adjusted Chi Square Value 15.49
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.144 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.223
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 15.94
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -6.012 Mean of logged Data -3.418
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.154 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.93 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.108 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.949 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.285 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.361
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.51
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.304 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.23
Maximum of Logged Data 0.438 SD of logged Data 1.607
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.323 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.247
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.296
95% CLT UCL 0.247 95% Jackknife UCL 0.25
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.246 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.452
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Page 13 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 0.416
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.331 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.416
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.533 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.764
Minimum 0.0129 Mean 0.174
Maximum 1.64 Median 0.0575
Total Number of Observations 32 Number of Distinct Observations 30
Number of Missing Observations 0
concDL (calc_dx_2__pg/m3)
General Statistics
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.154 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.93 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.412 Lilliefors GOF Test
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.443 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
SD 0.363 Std. Error of Mean 0.0641
Coefficient of Variation 2.081 Skewness 3.392
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 3.376 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.794 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 0.29
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
95% Student's-t UCL 0.283 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 0.321
Theta hat (MLE) 0.256 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.274
nu hat (MLE) 43.51 nu star (bias corrected) 40.77
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 0.68 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.637
K-S Test Statistic 0.257 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.162 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.262 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.268
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0416 Adjusted Chi Square Value 26.54
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.174 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.218
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 27.14
Page 14 of 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ABCDEFGHI JKL
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options ProUCL Output for OU-2 EPCs for Air
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.11/2/2020 10:40:50 AM
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data -4.351 Mean of logged Data -2.639
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.154 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.93 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.157 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.889 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.267 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.325
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.44
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 0.229 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.224
Maximum of Logged Data 0.495 SD of logged Data 1.13
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.364 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.288
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.34
95% CLT UCL 0.28 95% Jackknife UCL 0.283
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.279 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 0.481
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 0.454
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.367 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.454
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.575 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.812
Page 15 of 15
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
APPENDIX G RISK CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX G – LIST OF TABLES 
Table G‐1: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 2 – Landfill  
Table G‐2: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 3 – Sanitary Lagoon 
Table G‐3: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 4 – Gypsum Pile 
Table G‐4: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 5 – Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon 
Table G‐5: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 6 – Northwest Ponded Waste 
Table G‐6: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 7 – Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon 
Table G‐7: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 8 – Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow 
Table G‐8: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 9 – Smut Area 
Table G‐9: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 10 – Barium Sulfate Area 
Table G‐10: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 11 – ATI Titanium Plant and USM Parking Lots 
Table G‐11: Risk Calculations – USM Worker – PRI 12 – Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas 
Table G‐12: Risk Calculations – Nearby Worker – PRI 11 – ATI Titanium Plant and USM Parking Lots 
Table G‐13: Risk Calculations – Nearby Worker – PRI 12 – Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas 
Table G‐14: Risk Calculations – Resource Manager – PRI 8 – Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow 
Table G‐15: Risk Calculations – Resource Manager – PRI 11 – ATI Titanium Plant and USM Parking Lots 
Table G‐16: Risk Calculations – Resource Manager – PRI 13 – Buffer Area North and East 
Table G‐17: Risk Calculations – Resource Manager – PRI 13 – CTE – 80% Shoreline – 20% GSLIC Exposure 
Scenario 
Table G‐18: Risk Calculations – Resource Manager – PRI 13 – RME – 80% Shoreline – 20% GSLIC Exposure 
Scenario 
Table G‐19: Risk Calculations – Resource Manager – PRI 14 – Buffer Area South 
Table G‐20: Risk Calculations – Resource Manager – PRI 15 – Buffer Area West 
Table G‐21: Risk Calculations – Resource Manager – PRI 16 – Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area 
Table G‐22: Risk Calculations – Brine Shrimp Worker – PRI 13 – Buffer Area North and East 
Table G‐23: Risk Calculations – Brine Shrimp Worker – 90% Shoreline – 10% GSLIC Exposure Time 
Scenario 
Table G‐24: Risk Calculations – Brine Shrimp Worker – 80% Shoreline – 20% GSLIC Exposure Time 
Scenario 
Table G‐25: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Adult) – PRI 13 – Buffer Area North and East 
Table G‐26: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Adult) – PRI 13 – CTE – 80% Shoreline – 20% GSLIC 
Exposure Scenario 
Table G‐27: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Adult) – PRI 13 – RME – 80% Shoreline – 20% GSLIC 
Exposure Scenario 
Table G‐28: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Adult) – PRI 14 – Buffer Area South 
Table G‐29: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Adult) – PRI 15 – Buffer Area West 
Table G‐30: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Adult) – PRI 16 – Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area 
Table G‐31: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Child 0‐6) – PRI 14 – Buffer Area South 
Table G‐32: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Child 0‐6) – PRI 15 – Buffer Area West 
Table G‐33: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Child 0‐6) – PRI 16 – Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area 
Table G‐34: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Child 6‐16) – PRI 14 – Buffer Area South 
Table G‐35: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Child 6‐16) – PRI 15 – Buffer Area West 
Table G‐36: Risk Calculations – Recreational Visitor (Child 6‐16) – PRI 16 – Lakeside Mountains Buffer 
Area 
Table G‐37: Risk Calculations – Rancher – PRI 15 – Buffer Area West 
Table G‐38: Risk Calculations – Rancher – PRI 16 – Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area  
Table G‐39: Cumulative Risk Calculations – USM Worker 
Table G‐40: Cumulative Risk Calculations – USM Worker – 38 % TEQ Bioavailability 
Table G‐41: Site and Background ILCR Comparison 
Table G‐42: Notes and Abbreviations 
Table G-1
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 2 - Landfill
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3)HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3)HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3)ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Total PCBs 3.73E+00 1.56E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 5.56E-09 1E-08 0.36%3.35E-04 1.40E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.99E-13 1E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 7.84E+00 7.00E-09 2.E-05 0.03% 2.50E-09 4E-09 0.12%6.43E+00 5.75E-09 2.E-05 4.69% 2.05E-09 3E-09 1.71%
Hexachlorobenzene 2.31E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 2.45E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.10E-03 3.67E-12 5.E-03 6.49% 1.31E-12 2E-07 5.50%3.35E-07 2.99E-16 4.E-07 0.10% 1.07E-16 1E-11 0.01%
Dermal Total 2.45E+01 2.26E-08 5.E-03 6.52% 8.06E-09 2E-07 5.98%1.17E+01 5.75E-09 2.E-05 4.79% 2.05E-09 3E-09 1.72%
Total PCBs 3.73E+00 4.15E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.48E-08 3E-08 0.96%3.35E-04 3.73E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.33E-12 3E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 7.84E+00 8.72E-08 2.E-04 0.22% 3.12E-08 3E-08 0.91%6.43E+00 7.16E-08 1.E-04 35.02% 2.56E-08 2E-08 12.81%
Hexachlorobenzene 2.31E+01 2.58E-07 3.E-04 0.40% 9.20E-08 1E-07 4.75%1.15E-03 1.28E-11 2.E-08 0.00% 4.57E-12 7E-12 0.00%
Total Chromium 2.45E+01 2.73E-07 9.E-05 0.11% 9.75E-08 5E-08 1.58%1.17E+01 1.30E-07 4.E-05 10.58% 4.63E-08 2E-08 12.89%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.10E-03 4.57E-11 7.E-02 80.83% 1.63E-11 2E-06 68.49%3.35E-07 3.73E-15 5.E-06 1.30% 1.33E-15 2E-10 0.10%
Ingestion Total 2.45E+01 6.60E-07 7.E-02 81.56% 2.36E-07 2E-06 76.68%1.17E+01 2.01E-07 2.E-04 46.90% 7.19E-08 5E-08 25.80%
Total PCBs 3.73E+00 1.35E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.83E-10 3E-10 0.01%3.35E-04 1.21E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 4.33E-14 2E-14 0.00%
Total Arsenic 7.84E+00 2.84E-09 2.E-04 0.23% 1.01E-09 4E-09 0.14%6.43E+00 2.33E-09 2.E-04 37.98% 8.32E-10 4E-09 1.99%
Hexachlorobenzene 2.31E+01 8.38E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.99E-09 1E-09 0.04%1.15E-03 4.17E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.49E-13 7E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 2.45E+01 8.89E-09 9.E-05 0.11% 3.17E-09 3E-07 8.61%1.17E+01 4.22E-09 4.E-05 10.33% 1.51E-09 1E-07 70.49%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.10E-03 1.49E-12 4.E-05 0.05% 5.31E-13 2E-08 0.65%3.35E-07 1.21E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 4.33E-17 2E-12 0.00%
Inhalation Total 2.45E+01 2.15E-08 3.E-04 0.39% 7.66E-09 3E-07 9.46%1.17E+01 6.55E-09 2.E-04 48.31% 2.34E-09 1E-07 72.48%
Soil Total 2.45E+01 7.04E-07 7.E-02 88.47% 2.51E-07 3E-06 92.12%1.17E+01 2.14E-07 4.E-04 100.00% 7.63E-08 2E-07 100.00%
Total PCBs 2.12E-07 3.44E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.23E-09 7E-10 0.02%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 7.07E-08 5.E-03 5.84% 2.52E-08 1E-07 3.51%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 2.11E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 7.53E-08 3E-08 1.12%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobutadiene 1.56E-06 2.53E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 9.03E-09 2E-10 0.01%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 2.20E-07 4.E-03 5.46% 7.87E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 3.64E-10 1.E-06 0.00% 1.30E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 7.36E-12 2.E-04 0.23% 2.63E-12 1E-07 3.23%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 5.31E-07 9.E-03 11.53% 1.90E-07 2E-07 7.88%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 5.31E-07 9.E-03 11.53% 1.90E-07 2E-07 7.88%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 2.45E+01 1.23E-06 8.E-02 100%4.41E-07 3.1E-06 100%1.17E+01 2.14E-07 4.E-04 100%7.63E-08 1.8E-07 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Soil
Air (Facility)Inhalation
Inhalation
Ingestion
Dermal
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
BGSITE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-1
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 2 - Landfill
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Soil
Air (Facility) Inhalation
Inhalation
Ingestion
Dermal
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3)HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3)ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3)HQ
HQ
(% of
Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
3.73E+00 1.89E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 6.76E-08 1E-07 0.60%3.35E-04 1.70E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 6.07E-12 1E-11 0.00%
7.84E+00 8.52E-08 3.E-04 0.05% 3.04E-08 5E-08 0.20%6.43E+00 6.99E-08 2.E-04 9.68% 2.50E-08 4E-08 4.39%
2.31E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
2.45E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
4.10E-03 4.46E-11 6.E-02 10.55% 1.59E-11 2E-06 9.24%3.35E-07 3.64E-15 5.E-06 0.22% 1.30E-15 2E-10 0.02%
2.45E+01 2.75E-07 6.E-02 10.59% 9.80E-08 2E-06 10.05%1.17E+01 7.00E-08 2.E-04 9.89% 2.50E-08 4E-08 4.41%
3.73E+00 3.19E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.14E-07 2E-07 1.02%3.35E-04 2.87E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.02E-11 2E-11 0.00%
7.84E+00 6.71E-07 1.E-03 0.22% 2.40E-07 2E-07 0.96%6.43E+00 5.51E-07 1.E-03 45.72% 1.97E-07 2E-07 20.75%
2.31E+01 1.98E-06 2.E-03 0.41% 7.08E-07 1E-06 5.05%1.15E-03 9.85E-11 1.E-07 0.01% 3.52E-11 6E-11 0.01%
2.45E+01 2.10E-06 7.E-04 0.12% 7.50E-07 4E-07 1.67%1.17E+01 9.98E-07 3.E-04 13.81% 3.57E-07 2E-07 20.90%
4.10E-03 3.51E-10 5.E-01 83.05% 1.25E-10 2E-05 72.80%3.35E-07 2.87E-14 4.E-05 1.70% 1.02E-14 1E-09 0.16%
2.45E+01 5.07E-06 5.E-01 83.80% 1.81E-06 2E-05 81.51%1.17E+01 1.55E-06 1.E-03 61.24% 5.53E-07 4E-07 41.82%
3.73E+00 4.76E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.70E-09 1E-09 0.00%3.35E-04 4.27E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.53E-13 9E-14 0.00%
7.84E+00 1.00E-08 7.E-04 0.11% 3.57E-09 2E-08 0.07%6.43E+00 8.21E-09 5.E-04 22.70% 2.93E-09 1E-08 1.48%
2.31E+01 2.95E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.05E-08 5E-09 0.02%1.15E-03 1.47E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 5.24E-13 2E-13 0.00%
2.45E+01 3.13E-08 3.E-04 0.05% 1.12E-08 9E-07 4.19%1.17E+01 1.49E-08 1.E-04 6.17% 5.31E-09 4E-07 52.29%
4.10E-03 5.23E-12 1.E-04 0.02% 1.87E-12 7E-08 0.32%3.35E-07 4.27E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 1.53E-16 6E-12 0.00%
2.45E+01 7.56E-08 1.E-03 0.18% 2.70E-08 1E-06 4.60%1.17E+01 2.31E-08 7.E-04 28.87% 8.24E-09 5E-07 53.77%
2.45E+01 5.42E-06 6.E-01 94.58% 1.94E-06 2E-05 96.17%1.17E+01 1.64E-06 2.E-03 100.00% 5.87E-07 9E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 1.21E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 4.33E-09 2E-09 0.01%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 2.49E-07 2.E-02 2.75% 8.89E-08 4E-07 1.71%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 7.42E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 2.65E-07 1E-07 0.54%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.56E-06 8.90E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 3.18E-08 7E-10 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 7.76E-07 2.E-02 2.57% 2.77E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 1.28E-09 4.E-06 0.00% 4.58E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 2.59E-11 6.E-04 0.11% 9.25E-12 4E-07 1.57%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.87E-06 3.E-02 5.42% 6.68E-07 9E-07 3.83%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.87E-06 3.E-02 5.42% 6.68E-07 9E-07 3.83%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.45E+01 7.29E-06 6.E-01 100%2.60E-06 2.2E-05 100%1.17E+01 1.64E-06 2.E-03 100%5.87E-07 8.5E-07 100%
BGSITE
RME
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-2
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 3 - Sanitary Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3)HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3)HQ
HQ
(% of
Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Total PCBs -- 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% -- 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Arsenic -- 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Dermal Total --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total PCBs --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Arsenic --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Ingestion Total --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total PCBs --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Arsenic --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Inhalation Total --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Soil Total --0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%--0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total PCBs 9.00E-05 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%9.00E-05 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.50E-03 1.24E-09 4.E-06 0.10% 4.42E-10 7E-10 0.60%9.50E-03 1.78E-09 6.E-06 0.05% 6.34E-10 1E-09 0.28%
Total Manganese 6.10E-01 7.94E-08 6.E-07 0.01% 2.84E-08 0E+00 0.00%6.10E-01 1.14E-07 8.E-07 0.01% 4.07E-08 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.30E-04 1.69E-11 8.E-07 0.02% 6.04E-12 0E+00 0.00%1.30E-04 2.43E-11 1.E-06 0.01% 8.68E-12 0E+00 0.00%
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 6.30E-03 8.59E-08 1.E-06 0.03% 3.07E-08 2E-10 0.15%6.30E-03 1.23E-07 2.E-06 0.01% 4.41E-08 2E-10 0.07%
Dibromochloromethane 1.00E-03 1.29E-09 6.E-08 0.00% 4.61E-10 4E-11 0.03%1.00E-03 1.86E-09 9.E-08 0.00% 6.63E-10 6E-11 0.02%
Nitrate as N 8.70E-01 1.13E-07 7.E-08 0.00% 4.04E-08 0E+00 0.00%8.70E-01 1.63E-07 1.E-07 0.00% 5.81E-08 0E+00 0.00%
Perchlorate 5.70E-04 7.42E-11 1.E-07 0.00% 2.65E-11 0E+00 0.00%5.70E-04 1.07E-10 2.E-07 0.00% 3.81E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Fluoride 1.20E+00 1.56E-07 4.E-06 0.09% 5.58E-08 0E+00 0.00%1.20E+00 2.24E-07 6.E-06 0.04% 8.01E-08 0E+00 0.00%
m,p Xylenes 1.10E-03 1.34E-08 7.E-08 0.00% 4.77E-09 0E+00 0.00%1.10E-03 1.92E-08 1.E-07 0.00% 6.86E-09 0E+00 0.00%
Chloroform 7.40E-04 1.27E-09 1.E-07 0.00% 4.55E-10 1E-11 0.01%7.40E-04 1.83E-09 2.E-07 0.00% 6.53E-10 2E-11 0.01%
Total Aluminum 7.40E-01 9.63E-08 1.E-07 0.00% 3.44E-08 0E+00 0.00%7.40E-01 1.38E-07 1.E-07 0.00% 4.94E-08 0E+00 0.00%
Total Iron 6.60E+00 8.59E-07 1.E-06 0.03% 3.07E-07 0E+00 0.00%6.60E+00 1.23E-06 2.E-06 0.01% 4.41E-07 0E+00 0.00%
Total Lead 7.60E-03 9.89E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.53E-11 0E+00 0.00%7.60E-03 1.42E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 5.08E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Total Molybdenum 1.80E-02 2.34E-09 5.E-07 0.01% 8.37E-10 0E+00 0.00%1.80E-02 3.37E-09 7.E-07 0.01% 1.20E-09 0E+00 0.00%
Total Nickel 1.50E-02 3.90E-10 5.E-07 0.01% 1.39E-10 0E+00 0.00%1.50E-02 5.61E-10 7.E-07 0.01% 2.00E-10 0E+00 0.00%
Total Barium 3.10E-01 4.03E-08 3.E-06 0.07% 1.44E-08 0E+00 0.00%3.10E-01 5.80E-08 4.E-06 0.03% 2.07E-08 0E+00 0.00%
Total Cobalt 2.40E-03 1.25E-10 4.E-07 0.01% 4.46E-11 0E+00 0.00%2.40E-03 1.80E-10 6.E-07 0.00% 6.41E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Total Copper 2.60E-02 3.38E-09 8.E-08 0.00% 1.21E-09 0E+00 0.00%2.60E-02 4.86E-09 1.E-07 0.00% 1.74E-09 0E+00 0.00%
Total Vanadium 6.10E-03 7.94E-10 6.E-06 0.14% 2.84E-10 0E+00 0.00%6.10E-03 1.14E-09 9.E-06 0.07% 4.07E-10 0E+00 0.00%
Bromoform 3.00E-03 4.19E-09 2.E-07 0.00% 1.50E-09 1E-11 0.01%3.00E-03 6.03E-09 3.E-07 0.00% 2.15E-09 2E-11 0.00%
Trichloroacetic acid 3.30E-03 1.60E-09 8.E-08 0.00% 5.72E-10 4E-11 0.04%3.30E-03 2.30E-09 1.E-07 0.00% 8.21E-10 6E-11 0.02%
Dichloroacetic Acid 6.70E-03 2.17E-09 5.E-07 0.01% 7.76E-10 4E-11 0.03%6.70E-03 3.12E-09 8.E-07 0.01% 1.11E-09 6E-11 0.02%
2-Methylnaphthalene 7.90E-06 2.11E-10 5.E-08 0.00% 7.55E-11 0E+00 0.00%7.90E-06 3.04E-10 8.E-08 0.00% 1.08E-10 0E+00 0.00%
o-Xylene 1.00E-03 1.12E-08 6.E-08 0.00% 3.98E-09 0E+00 0.00%1.00E-03 1.60E-08 8.E-08 0.00% 5.72E-09 0E+00 0.00%
Total Zinc 5.60E-02 6.50E-09 2.E-08 0.00% 2.32E-09 0E+00 0.00%5.60E-02 9.35E-09 3.E-08 0.00% 3.34E-09 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.10E-07 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.10E-07 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Dermal Total 6.60E+00 1.48E-06 2.E-05 0.56% 5.29E-07 1E-09 0.88%6.60E+00 2.13E-06 3.E-05 0.26% 7.60E-07 1E-09 0.40%
Water Total 6.60E+00 1.48E-06 2.E-05 0.56% 5.29E-07 1E-09 0.88%6.60E+00 2.13E-06 3.E-05 0.26% 7.60E-07 1E-09 0.40%
Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.55E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 5.54E-10 3E-10 0.28%2.12E-07 4.84E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.73E-09 1E-09 0.29%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 3.19E-08 2.E-03 50.35% 1.14E-08 5E-08 44.14%4.36E-06 9.95E-08 7.E-03 50.50% 3.56E-08 2E-07 44.35%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 9.50E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 3.39E-08 2E-08 14.08%1.30E-05 2.97E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.06E-07 5E-08 14.15%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 9.94E-08 2.E-03 47.11% 3.55E-08 0E+00 0.00%1.36E-05 3.11E-07 6.E-03 47.26% 1.11E-07 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 1.64E-10 5.E-07 0.01% 5.86E-11 0E+00 0.00%2.25E-08 5.13E-10 2.E-06 0.01% 1.83E-10 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 3.32E-12 8.E-05 1.97% 1.18E-12 5E-08 40.62%4.54E-10 1.04E-11 3.E-04 1.97% 3.70E-12 1E-07 40.81%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 2.28E-07 4.E-03 99.44% 8.14E-08 1E-07 99.12%1.36E-05 7.12E-07 1.E-02 99.74% 2.54E-07 3E-07 99.60%
Air (OU2) Total 1.36E-05 2.28E-07 4.E-03 99.44% 8.14E-08 1E-07 99.12%1.36E-05 7.12E-07 1.E-02 99.74% 2.54E-07 3E-07 99.60%
Grand Total 6.60E+00 1.71E-06 4.E-03 100%6.10E-07 1.1E-07 100%6.60E+00 2.84E-06 1.E-02 100%1.01E-06 3.4E-07 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Water Dermal
Air (OU2)Inhalation
EPCEPC
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE RME
Soil Dermal
Ingestion
Inhalation
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-3
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 4 - Gypsum Pile
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Total PCBs 1.48E+00 2.62E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 9.34E-10 2E-09 0.08% 3.35E-04 5.91E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 2.11E-13 4E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 2.04E+01 7.70E-09 3.E-05 0.04% 2.75E-09 4E-09 0.18% 6.43E+00 2.43E-09 8.E-06 2.45% 8.69E-10 1E-09 0.73%
Hexachlorobenzene 2.64E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 8.97E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 9.29E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.18E-03 1.96E-12 3.E-03 4.50% 6.99E-13 9E-08 3.98% 3.35E-07 1.27E-16 2.E-07 0.05% 4.52E-17 6E-12 0.00%
Dermal Total 2.64E+01 1.03E-08 3.E-03 4.54% 3.68E-09 1E-07 4.24%1.17E+01 2.43E-09 8.E-06 2.51% 8.69E-10 1E-09 0.73%
Total PCBs 1.48E+00 6.98E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.49E-09 5E-09 0.22%3.35E-04 1.58E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 5.63E-13 1E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 2.04E+01 9.59E-08 2.E-04 0.31% 3.42E-08 3E-08 1.35%6.43E+00 3.03E-08 6.E-05 18.34% 1.08E-08 1E-08 5.43%
Hexachlorobenzene 2.64E+01 1.24E-07 2.E-04 0.25% 4.44E-08 7E-08 3.11%1.15E-03 5.42E-12 7.E-09 0.00% 1.93E-12 3E-12 0.00%
Total Chromium 8.97E+00 4.23E-08 1.E-05 0.02% 1.51E-08 8E-09 0.33%1.17E+01 5.49E-08 2.E-05 5.54% 1.96E-08 1E-08 5.47%
Total Mercury 9.29E-02 4.37E-10 1.E-06 0.00% 1.56E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.74E-10 6.E-07 0.18% 6.21E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.18E-03 2.44E-11 3.E-02 56.03% 8.71E-12 1E-06 49.53%3.35E-07 1.58E-15 2.E-06 0.68% 5.63E-16 7E-11 0.04%
Ingestion Total 2.64E+01 2.70E-07 4.E-02 56.61% 9.64E-08 1E-06 54.53%1.17E+01 8.54E-08 8.E-05 24.74% 3.05E-08 2E-08 10.94%
Total PCBs 1.48E+00 6.53E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.33E-10 1E-10 0.01%3.35E-04 1.48E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 5.27E-14 3E-14 0.00%
Total Arsenic 2.04E+01 8.97E-09 6.E-04 0.96% 3.20E-09 1E-08 0.60%6.43E+00 2.83E-09 2.E-04 57.19% 1.01E-09 4E-09 2.43%
Hexachlorobenzene 2.64E+01 1.16E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 4.15E-09 2E-09 0.08%1.15E-03 5.07E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.81E-13 8E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 8.97E+00 3.95E-09 4.E-05 0.06% 1.41E-09 1E-07 5.19%1.17E+01 5.14E-09 5.E-05 15.55% 1.83E-09 2E-07 85.90%
Total Mercury 9.29E-02 4.09E-11 1.E-07 0.00% 1.46E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.63E-11 5.E-08 0.02% 5.81E-12 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.18E-03 2.28E-12 6.E-05 0.09% 8.15E-13 3E-08 1.35%3.35E-07 1.48E-16 4.E-09 0.00% 5.27E-17 2E-12 0.00%
Inhalation Total 2.64E+01 2.52E-08 7.E-04 1.12% 9.02E-09 2E-07 7.23%1.17E+01 7.99E-09 2.E-04 72.75% 2.85E-09 2E-07 88.33%
Soil Total 2.64E+01 3.05E-07 4.E-02 62.27% 1.09E-07 2E-06 66.01%1.17E+01 9.58E-08 3.E-04 100.00% 3.42E-08 2E-07 100.00%
Total PCBs 6.60E-04 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 3.90E-01 2.03E-07 7.E-04 1.09% 7.25E-08 1E-07 4.76%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 4.00E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 5.30E+00 2.76E-06 2.E-05 0.03%9.85E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Dibromochloromethane 3.40E-01 1.76E-06 9.E-05 0.14% 6.27E-07 5E-08 2.30%------0.00%----0.00%
Nitrate as N 4.00E+00 2.08E-06 1.E-06 0.00% 7.44E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Perchlorate 8.20E-04 4.27E-10 6.E-07 0.00%1.52E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Fluoride 1.50E+01 7.81E-06 2.E-04 0.31% 2.79E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Chromium, Hexavalent 3.63E-03 3.78E-09 5.E-05 0.08% 1.35E-09 3E-08 1.18%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Aluminum 9.40E+00 4.89E-06 5.E-06 0.01% 1.75E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Iron 3.00E+02 1.56E-04 2.E-04 0.36%5.58E-05 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Nickel 3.70E-01 3.85E-08 5.E-05 0.08%1.38E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Barium 2.90E+00 1.51E-06 1.E-04 0.17%5.39E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Cobalt 1.40E-02 2.92E-09 1.E-05 0.02%1.04E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Copper 2.80E-02 1.46E-08 4.E-07 0.00%5.21E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Vanadium 5.70E-01 2.97E-07 2.E-03 3.67%1.06E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Bromoform 9.90E-01 5.54E-06 3.E-04 0.45%1.98E-06 2E-08 0.68%------0.00%----0.00%
Trichloroacetic acid 7.20E-01 1.40E-06 7.E-05 0.11% 4.99E-07 3E-08 1.53%------0.00%----0.00%
Dichloroacetic Acid 1.40E+00 1.81E-06 5.E-04 0.73% 6.48E-07 3E-08 1.42%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Thallium 7.30E-03 3.80E-09 4.E-04 0.61% 1.36E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Beryllium 1.80E-03 9.37E-10 7.E-05 0.11% 3.35E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Cadmium 4.70E-03 2.45E-09 1.E-04 0.16% 8.74E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Chloromethane 2.40E-03 5.73E-09 0.E+00 0.00%2.05E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Bromodichloromethane 2.10E-01 1.13E-06 6.E-05 0.09% 4.05E-07 3E-08 1.10%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Zinc 7.40E-01 3.44E-07 1.E-06 0.00%1.23E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 9.10E-07 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Dermal Total 3.00E+02 1.88E-04 5.E-03 8.22% 6.71E-05 3E-07 12.97%------0.00%----0.00%
Water Total 3.00E+02 1.88E-04 5.E-03 8.22% 6.71E-05 3E-07 12.97%------0.00%----0.00%
Total PCBs 2.12E-07 6.78E-09 0.E+00 0.00%2.42E-09 1E-09 0.06%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 1.39E-07 9.E-03 14.94% 4.98E-08 2E-07 9.36%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 4.16E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.48E-07 7E-08 2.99%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 4.35E-07 9.E-03 13.98%1.55E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 7.18E-10 2.E-06 0.00% 2.56E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 1.45E-11 4.E-04 0.58%5.18E-12 2E-07 8.62%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 9.97E-07 2.E-02 29.51% 3.56E-07 5E-07 21.02%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 9.97E-07 2.E-02 29.51% 3.56E-07 5E-07 21.02%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 3.00E+02 1.89E-04 6.E-02 100%6.75E-05 2E-06 100%1.17E+01 9.58E-08 3.E-04 100%3.42E-08 1.8E-07 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
SITE BG
Air (Facility)
Water
Soil
Inhalation
Dermal
Inhalation
Ingestion
Dermal
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-3
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 4 - Gypsum Pile
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Dibromochloromethane
Nitrate as N
Perchlorate
Fluoride
Chromium, Hexavalent
Total Aluminum
Total Iron
Total Nickel
Total Barium
Total Cobalt
Total Copper
Total Vanadium
Bromoform
Trichloroacetic acid
Dichloroacetic Acid
Total Thallium
Total Beryllium
Total Cadmium
Chloromethane
Bromodichloromethane
Total Zinc
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Water Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Air (Facility)
Water
Soil
Inhalation
Dermal
Inhalation
Ingestion
Dermal
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
1.48E+00 1.88E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 6.72E-09 1E-08 0.14%3.35E-04 4.25E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.52E-12 3E-12 0.00%
2.04E+01 5.53E-08 2.E-04 0.07% 1.98E-08 3E-08 0.32%6.43E+00 1.75E-08 6.E-05 5.21% 6.24E-09 9E-09 1.70%
2.64E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
8.97E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
9.29E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
5.18E-03 1.41E-11 2.E-02 7.95% 5.03E-12 7E-07 7.05%3.35E-07 9.10E-16 1.E-06 0.12% 3.25E-16 4E-11 0.01%
2.64E+01 7.42E-08 2.E-02 8.02% 2.65E-08 7E-07 7.51%1.17E+01 1.75E-08 6.E-05 5.33% 6.25E-09 9E-09 1.71%
1.48E+00 3.17E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.13E-08 2E-08 0.24%3.35E-04 7.17E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.56E-12 5E-12 0.00%
2.04E+01 4.36E-07 9.E-04 0.34% 1.56E-07 1E-07 1.51%6.43E+00 1.38E-07 3.E-04 24.64% 4.92E-08 4E-08 8.03%
2.64E+01 5.65E-07 7.E-04 0.28% 2.02E-07 3E-07 3.48%1.15E-03 2.46E-11 3.E-08 0.00% 8.79E-12 1E-11 0.00%
8.97E+00 1.92E-07 6.E-05 0.03% 6.86E-08 3E-08 0.37%1.17E+01 2.50E-07 8.E-05 7.44% 8.91E-08 4E-08 8.08%
9.29E-02 1.99E-09 7.E-06 0.00% 7.10E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 7.90E-10 3.E-06 0.24% 2.82E-10 0E+00 0.00%
5.18E-03 1.11E-10 2.E-01 62.57% 3.96E-11 5E-06 55.50%3.35E-07 7.17E-15 1.E-05 0.92% 2.56E-15 3E-10 0.06%
2.64E+01 1.23E-06 2.E-01 63.23% 4.38E-07 6E-06 61.10%1.17E+01 3.88E-07 4.E-04 33.23% 1.39E-07 9E-08 16.18%
1.48E+00 1.87E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 6.67E-10 4E-10 0.00%3.35E-04 4.22E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.51E-13 9E-14 0.00%
2.04E+01 2.56E-08 2.E-03 0.68% 9.15E-09 4E-08 0.42%6.43E+00 8.10E-09 5.E-04 48.29% 2.89E-09 1E-08 2.26%
2.64E+01 3.32E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.19E-08 5E-09 0.06%1.15E-03 1.45E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 5.17E-13 2E-13 0.00%
8.97E+00 1.13E-08 1.E-04 0.04% 4.03E-09 3E-07 3.65%1.17E+01 1.47E-08 1.E-04 13.13% 5.24E-09 4E-07 79.86%
9.29E-02 1.17E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 4.18E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 4.64E-11 2.E-07 0.01% 1.66E-11 0E+00 0.00%
5.18E-03 6.52E-12 2.E-04 0.06% 2.33E-12 9E-08 0.95%3.35E-07 4.22E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 1.51E-16 6E-12 0.00%
2.64E+01 7.21E-08 2.E-03 0.78% 2.58E-08 5E-07 5.10%1.17E+01 2.28E-08 7.E-04 61.44% 8.15E-09 5E-07 82.12%
2.64E+01 1.37E-06 2.E-01 72.03% 4.90E-07 7E-06 73.71%1.17E+01 4.28E-07 1.E-03 100.00% 1.53E-07 6E-07 100.00%
6.60E-04 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
3.90E-01 7.29E-07 2.E-03 0.96% 2.60E-07 4E-07 4.21% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.00E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
5.30E+00 9.91E-06 7.E-05 0.03% 3.54E-06 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
3.40E-01 6.31E-06 3.E-04 0.12% 2.25E-06 2E-07 2.04% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.00E+00 7.48E-06 5.E-06 0.00% 2.67E-06 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
8.20E-04 1.53E-09 2.E-06 0.00% 5.48E-10 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.50E+01 2.80E-05 7.E-04 0.28% 1.00E-05 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
3.63E-03 1.36E-08 2.E-04 0.07% 4.85E-09 1E-07 1.05% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
9.40E+00 1.76E-05 2.E-05 0.01% 6.28E-06 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
3.00E+02 5.61E-04 8.E-04 0.32% 2.00E-04 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
3.70E-01 1.38E-07 2.E-04 0.07% 4.94E-08 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.90E+00 5.42E-06 4.E-04 0.15% 1.94E-06 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.40E-02 1.05E-08 3.E-05 0.01% 3.74E-09 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.80E-02 5.24E-08 1.E-06 0.00% 1.87E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
5.70E-01 1.07E-06 8.E-03 3.24% 3.81E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
9.90E-01 1.99E-05 1.E-03 0.39% 7.10E-06 6E-08 0.61%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
7.20E-01 5.02E-06 3.E-04 0.10% 1.79E-06 1E-07 1.35%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.40E+00 6.52E-06 2.E-03 0.64% 2.33E-06 1E-07 1.26%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
7.30E-03 1.37E-08 1.E-03 0.54% 4.88E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.80E-03 3.37E-09 2.E-04 0.09% 1.20E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.70E-03 8.79E-09 4.E-04 0.14% 3.14E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.40E-03 2.06E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 7.35E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.10E-01 4.07E-06 2.E-04 0.08% 1.45E-06 9E-08 0.97%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
7.40E-01 1.24E-06 4.E-06 0.00% 4.41E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
9.10E-07 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
3.00E+02 6.74E-04 2.E-02 7.25% 2.41E-04 1E-06 11.48%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
3.00E+02 6.74E-04 2.E-02 7.25% 2.41E-04 1E-06 11.48%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.12E-07 1.94E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 6.92E-09 4E-09 0.04%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 3.98E-07 3.E-02 10.49% 1.42E-07 6E-07 6.59%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 1.19E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 4.24E-07 2E-07 2.10%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.24E-06 2.E-02 9.82% 4.44E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 2.05E-09 7.E-06 0.00% 7.33E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 4.15E-11 1.E-03 0.41% 1.48E-11 6E-07 6.07%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 2.85E-06 5.E-02 20.72% 1.02E-06 1E-06 14.81%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 2.85E-06 5.E-02 20.72% 1.02E-06 1E-06 14.81%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
3.00E+02 6.79E-04 3.E-01 100%2.42E-04 9.3E-06 100%1.17E+01 4.28E-07 1.E-03 100%1.53E-07 5.5E-07 100%
RME
BGSITE
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-4
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 5 - Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Total PCBs 1.51E+01 1.33E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 4.77E-09 1E-08 0.27% 3.35E-04 2.96E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.06E-13 2E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.27E+01 2.41E-09 8.E-06 0.02% 8.59E-10 1E-09 0.04%6.43E+00 1.22E-09 4.E-06 2.28% 4.34E-10 7E-10 1.56%
Hexachlorobenzene 2.24E+02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 3.83E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Iron 1.22E+04 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.30E+04 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Thallium 1.03E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.76E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Bromodichloromethane 2.03E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Benzo(a)pyrene 3.74E-02 3.06E-11 1.E-07 0.00% 1.09E-11 1E-11 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene 3.66E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.16E-02 2.19E-12 3.E-03 6.24% 7.82E-13 1E-07 2.87%3.35E-07 6.33E-17 9.E-08 0.05% 2.26E-17 3E-12 0.01%
Dermal Total 1.22E+04 1.58E-08 3.E-03 6.26% 5.64E-09 1E-07 3.17%1.30E+04 1.22E-09 4.E-06 2.33% 4.34E-10 7E-10 1.57%
Total PCBs 1.51E+01 3.56E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.27E-08 3E-08 0.72%3.35E-04 7.89E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 2.82E-13 6E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.27E+01 3.00E-08 6.E-05 0.12% 1.07E-08 1E-08 0.27%6.43E+00 1.51E-08 3.E-05 17.06% 5.41E-09 5E-09 11.69%
Hexachlorobenzene 2.24E+02 5.27E-07 7.E-04 1.31% 1.88E-07 3E-07 8.49%1.15E-03 2.71E-12 3.E-09 0.00% 9.67E-13 2E-12 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.17E+01 2.75E-08 9.E-06 0.02% 9.83E-09 5E-09 0.14%1.17E+01 2.75E-08 9.E-06 5.15% 9.80E-09 5E-09 11.77%
Total Mercury 3.83E+00 9.01E-09 3.E-05 0.06% 3.22E-09 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 8.69E-11 3.E-07 0.16% 3.10E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Total Iron 1.22E+04 2.88E-05 4.E-05 0.08% 1.03E-05 0E+00 0.00%1.30E+04 3.07E-05 4.E-05 24.70% 1.10E-05 0E+00 0.00%
Total Thallium 1.03E-01 2.43E-10 2.E-05 0.05% 8.66E-11 0E+00 0.00%1.76E-01 4.14E-10 4.E-05 23.33% 1.48E-10 0E+00 0.00%
Bromodichloromethane 2.03E-02 4.78E-11 2.E-09 0.00% 1.71E-11 1E-12 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Benzo(a)pyrene 3.74E-02 8.81E-11 3.E-07 0.00% 3.14E-11 3E-11 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene 3.66E+00 8.61E-09 1.E-05 0.02% 3.08E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.16E-02 2.73E-11 4.E-02 77.71% 9.75E-12 1E-06 35.72%3.35E-07 7.89E-16 1.E-06 0.63% 2.82E-16 4E-11 0.09%
Ingestion Total 1.22E+04 2.94E-05 4.E-02 79.38% 1.05E-05 2E-06 45.34%1.30E+04 3.08E-05 1.E-04 71.04% 1.10E-05 1E-08 23.56%
Total PCBs 1.51E+01 1.31E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.68E-10 3E-10 0.01%3.35E-04 2.90E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.04E-14 6E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.27E+01 1.10E-09 7.E-05 0.15% 3.94E-10 2E-09 0.05%6.43E+00 5.58E-10 4.E-05 20.93% 1.99E-10 9E-10 2.06%
Hexachlorobenzene 2.24E+02 1.94E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 6.93E-09 3E-09 0.09%1.15E-03 9.97E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.56E-14 2E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.17E+01 1.01E-09 1.E-05 0.02% 3.62E-10 3E-08 0.86%1.17E+01 1.01E-09 1.E-05 5.69% 3.61E-10 3E-08 72.81%
Total Mercury 3.83E+00 3.32E-10 1.E-06 0.00% 1.19E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 3.20E-12 1.E-08 0.01% 1.14E-12 0E+00 0.00%
Total Iron 1.22E+04 1.06E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 3.78E-07 0E+00 0.00%1.30E+04 1.13E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 4.04E-07 0E+00 0.00%
Total Thallium 1.03E-01 8.93E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.19E-12 0E+00 0.00%1.76E-01 1.53E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 5.45E-12 0E+00 0.00%
Bromodichloromethane 2.03E-02 1.76E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 6.28E-13 2E-14 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Benzo(a)pyrene 3.74E-02 3.24E-12 2.E-06 0.00% 1.16E-12 7E-13 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene 3.66E+00 3.17E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.13E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.16E-02 1.00E-12 3.E-05 0.05% 3.59E-13 1E-08 0.38%3.35E-07 2.90E-17 7.E-10 0.00% 1.04E-17 4E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.22E+04 1.08E-06 1.E-04 0.22% 3.87E-07 5E-08 1.39%1.30E+04 1.13E-06 5.E-05 26.63% 4.04E-07 3E-08 74.87%
Soil Total 1.22E+04 3.05E-05 4.E-02 85.86% 1.09E-05 2E-06 49.90%1.30E+04 3.19E-05 2.E-04 100.00% 1.14E-05 4E-08 100.00%
Total PCBs 3.08E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 3.80E-01 4.94E-08 2.E-04 0.33% 1.77E-08 3E-08 0.75%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.59E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 7.19E+00 9.36E-07 7.E-06 0.01% 3.34E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 1.03E-03 1.34E-10 6.E-06 0.01% 4.79E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Dibromochloromethane 2.01E-02 2.60E-08 1.E-06 0.00% 9.28E-09 8E-10 0.02%------0.00%----0.00%
Nitrate as N 4.22E+00 5.49E-07 3.E-07 0.00% 1.96E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Perchlorate 2.36E-03 3.07E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 1.10E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Fluoride 8.28E+00 1.08E-06 3.E-05 0.05% 3.85E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Chromium, Hexavalent 4.56E-03 1.19E-09 2.E-05 0.03% 4.24E-10 8E-09 0.24%------0.00%----0.00%
Chloroform 5.70E-03 9.80E-09 1.E-06 0.00%3.50E-09 1E-10 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Aluminum 9.19E+01 1.20E-05 1.E-05 0.02% 4.27E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Iron 9.13E+02 1.19E-04 2.E-04 0.34%4.24E-05 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Lead 6.27E-02 8.15E-10 0.E+00 0.00%2.91E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Molybdenum 2.28E-01 2.97E-08 6.E-06 0.01% 1.06E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Nickel 2.24E-01 5.84E-09 7.E-06 0.01% 2.08E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Antimony 2.10E-02 2.73E-09 5.E-05 0.09% 9.74E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Barium 8.20E-01 1.07E-07 8.E-06 0.02% 3.81E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Cobalt 3.16E-02 1.65E-09 5.E-06 0.01% 5.88E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Copper 1.52E-01 1.98E-08 5.E-07 0.00%7.06E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Vanadium 1.21E+00 1.58E-07 1.E-03 2.42% 5.63E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Bromoform 7.68E-02 1.07E-07 5.E-06 0.01%3.84E-08 3E-10 0.01%------0.00%----0.00%
Trichloroacetic acid 7.67E-01 3.72E-07 2.E-05 0.04% 1.33E-07 9E-09 0.26%------0.00%----0.00%
Dichloroacetic Acid 8.99E-01 2.91E-07 7.E-05 0.15% 1.04E-07 5E-09 0.15%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Thallium 2.32E-03 3.02E-10 3.E-05 0.06% 1.08E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Beryllium 3.96E-03 5.15E-10 4.E-05 0.07% 1.84E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Cadmium 1.97E-03 2.57E-10 1.E-05 0.02% 9.17E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Bromodichloromethane 1.05E-02 1.42E-08 7.E-07 0.00% 5.07E-09 3E-10 0.01%------0.00%----0.00%
Water Dermal
Soil
Inhalation
Ingestion
Dermal
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-4
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 5 - Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
Tetrachloroethene 1.70E-03 1.93E-08 3.E-06 0.01% 6.89E-09 1E-11 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Carbon tetrachloride 5.74E-03 2.94E-08 7.E-06 0.01% 1.05E-08 7E-10 0.02%------0.00%----0.00%
Bromochloromethane 7.80E-04 5.34E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.91E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Cyanide 5.94E-02 1.55E-08 3.E-05 0.05% 5.52E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Zinc 4.85E-01 5.63E-08 2.E-07 0.00%2.01E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Pentachlorophenol 1.40E-01 1.15E-05 2.E-03 4.60% 4.12E-06 2E-06 46.51%------0.00%----0.00%
Bromomethane 2.20E-03 1.39E-09 1.E-06 0.00% 4.97E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 2.55E-06 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Dermal Total 9.13E+02 1.46E-04 4.E-03 8.40% 5.22E-05 2E-06 47.97%------0.00%----0.00%
Water Total 9.13E+02 1.46E-04 4.E-03 8.40% 5.22E-05 2E-06 47.97%------0.00%----0.00%
Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.07E-09 0.E+00 0.00%3.81E-10 2E-10 0.01%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 2.19E-08 1.E-03 2.91% 7.82E-09 3E-08 0.95%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 6.53E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.33E-08 1E-08 0.30%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 6.83E-08 1.E-03 2.72% 2.44E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 1.13E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 4.03E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobutadiene 1.56E-06 7.84E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.80E-09 6E-11 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 2.28E-12 6.E-05 0.11% 8.14E-13 3E-08 0.87%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.65E-07 3.E-03 5.75% 5.88E-08 8E-08 2.13%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.65E-07 3.E-03 5.75% 5.88E-08 8E-08 2.13%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 1.22E+04 1.77E-04 5.E-02 100%6.32E-05 3.5E-06 100%1.30E+04 3.19E-05 2.E-04 100%1.14E-05 4.2E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
DermalWater
Air (Facility)Inhalation
ERM Page 2 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-4
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 5 - Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Total Iron
Total Thallium
Bromodichloromethane
Benzo(a)pyrene
Pentachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Total Iron
Total Thallium
Bromodichloromethane
Benzo(a)pyrene
Pentachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Total Iron
Total Thallium
Bromodichloromethane
Benzo(a)pyrene
Pentachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Dibromochloromethane
Nitrate as N
Perchlorate
Fluoride
Chromium, Hexavalent
Chloroform
Total Aluminum
Total Iron
Total Lead
Total Molybdenum
Total Nickel
Total Antimony
Total Barium
Total Cobalt
Total Copper
Total Vanadium
Bromoform
Trichloroacetic acid
Dichloroacetic Acid
Total Thallium
Total Beryllium
Total Cadmium
Bromodichloromethane
Water Dermal
Soil
Inhalation
Ingestion
Dermal
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of
Total)
Sum of
LADD (mg/kg-
d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
1.51E+01 4.99E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.78E-08 4E-08 0.51%3.35E-04 1.10E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.95E-13 8E-13 0.00%
1.27E+01 9.00E-09 3.E-05 0.03% 3.21E-09 5E-09 0.07%6.43E+00 4.55E-09 2.E-05 3.60% 1.62E-09 2E-09 2.52%
2.24E+02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
3.83E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.22E+04 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.30E+04 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.03E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.76E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
2.03E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
3.74E-02 1.15E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 4.09E-11 4E-11 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
3.66E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.16E-02 8.19E-12 1.E-02 9.86% 2.93E-12 4E-07 5.47%3.35E-07 2.37E-16 3.E-07 0.08% 8.45E-17 1E-11 0.01%
1.22E+04 5.90E-08 1.E-02 9.88% 2.11E-08 4E-07 6.05%1.30E+04 4.55E-09 2.E-05 3.68% 1.62E-09 2E-09 2.54%
1.51E+01 8.42E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 3.01E-08 6E-08 0.87%3.35E-04 1.86E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 6.66E-13 1E-12 0.00%
1.27E+01 7.08E-08 1.E-04 0.12% 2.53E-08 2E-08 0.33%6.43E+00 3.58E-08 7.E-05 17.00% 1.28E-08 1E-08 11.93%
2.24E+02 1.25E-06 2.E-03 1.31% 4.45E-07 7E-07 10.24%1.15E-03 6.40E-12 8.E-09 0.00% 2.29E-12 4E-12 0.00%
1.17E+01 6.51E-08 2.E-05 0.02% 2.32E-08 1E-08 0.17%1.17E+01 6.49E-08 2.E-05 5.13% 2.32E-08 1E-08 12.01%
3.83E+00 2.13E-08 7.E-05 0.06% 7.61E-09 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 2.05E-10 7.E-07 0.16% 7.33E-11 0E+00 0.00%
1.22E+04 6.80E-05 1.E-04 0.08% 2.43E-05 0E+00 0.00%1.30E+04 7.26E-05 1.E-04 24.62% 2.59E-05 0E+00 0.00%
1.03E-01 5.73E-10 6.E-05 0.05% 2.05E-10 0E+00 0.00%1.76E-01 9.79E-10 1.E-04 23.25% 3.50E-10 0E+00 0.00%
2.03E-02 1.13E-10 6.E-09 0.00% 4.03E-11 3E-12 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
3.74E-02 2.08E-10 7.E-07 0.00% 7.43E-11 7E-11 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
3.66E+00 2.04E-08 3.E-05 0.02% 7.27E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.16E-02 6.45E-11 9.E-02 77.62% 2.30E-11 3E-06 43.09%3.35E-07 1.86E-15 3.E-06 0.63% 6.66E-16 9E-11 0.09%
1.22E+04 6.95E-05 9.E-02 79.29% 2.48E-05 4E-06 54.69%1.30E+04 7.27E-05 3.E-04 70.80% 2.60E-05 2E-08 24.03%
1.51E+01 2.98E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.06E-09 6E-10 0.01%3.35E-04 6.60E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 2.36E-14 1E-14 0.00%
1.27E+01 2.51E-09 2.E-04 0.14% 8.96E-10 4E-09 0.06%6.43E+00 1.27E-09 8.E-05 20.06% 4.53E-10 2E-09 2.02%
2.24E+02 4.41E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.58E-08 7E-09 0.10%1.15E-03 2.27E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 8.09E-14 4E-14 0.00%
1.17E+01 2.30E-09 2.E-05 0.02% 8.22E-10 7E-08 0.99%1.17E+01 2.30E-09 2.E-05 5.45% 8.20E-10 7E-08 71.42%
3.83E+00 7.54E-10 3.E-06 0.00% 2.69E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 7.27E-12 2.E-08 0.01% 2.60E-12 0E+00 0.00%
1.22E+04 2.41E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 8.59E-07 0E+00 0.00%1.30E+04 2.57E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 9.18E-07 0E+00 0.00%
1.03E-01 2.03E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 7.25E-12 0E+00 0.00%1.76E-01 3.47E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.24E-11 0E+00 0.00%
2.03E-02 4.00E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.43E-12 5E-14 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
3.74E-02 7.37E-12 4.E-06 0.00% 2.63E-12 2E-12 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
3.66E+00 7.21E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.57E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.16E-02 2.28E-12 6.E-05 0.05% 8.16E-13 3E-08 0.45%3.35E-07 6.60E-17 2.E-09 0.00% 2.36E-17 9E-13 0.00%
1.22E+04 2.46E-06 3.E-04 0.21% 8.78E-07 1E-07 1.61%1.30E+04 2.57E-06 1.E-04 25.52% 9.19E-07 7E-08 73.43%
1.22E+04 7.20E-05 1.E-01 89.38% 2.57E-05 4E-06 62.35%1.30E+04 7.53E-05 4.E-04 100.00% 2.69E-05 1E-07 100.00%
3.08E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
3.80E-01 7.10E-08 2.E-04 0.20% 2.54E-08 4E-08 0.55%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.59E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
7.19E+00 1.34E-06 1.E-05 0.01% 4.80E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.03E-03 1.93E-10 9.E-06 0.01% 6.88E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.01E-02 3.73E-08 2.E-06 0.00% 1.33E-08 1E-09 0.02%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
4.22E+00 7.89E-07 5.E-07 0.00% 2.82E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.36E-03 4.41E-10 6.E-07 0.00% 1.57E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
8.28E+00 1.55E-06 4.E-05 0.03% 5.53E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
4.56E-03 1.71E-09 2.E-05 0.02% 6.09E-10 1E-08 0.18%------ 0.00%----0.00%
5.70E-03 1.41E-08 1.E-06 0.00% 5.03E-09 2E-10 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
9.19E+01 1.72E-05 2.E-05 0.01% 6.14E-06 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
9.13E+02 1.71E-04 2.E-04 0.21% 6.10E-05 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
6.27E-02 1.17E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.18E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.28E-01 4.27E-08 9.E-06 0.01% 1.53E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.24E-01 8.38E-09 1.E-05 0.01% 2.99E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.10E-02 3.92E-09 7.E-05 0.06% 1.40E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
8.20E-01 1.53E-07 1.E-05 0.01% 5.48E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
3.16E-02 2.37E-09 8.E-06 0.01% 8.45E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.52E-01 2.84E-08 7.E-07 0.00% 1.01E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.21E+00 2.26E-07 2.E-03 1.47% 8.09E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
7.68E-02 1.54E-07 8.E-06 0.01% 5.51E-08 4E-10 0.01%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
7.67E-01 5.35E-07 3.E-05 0.02% 1.91E-07 1E-08 0.19%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
8.99E-01 4.19E-07 1.E-04 0.09% 1.50E-07 7E-09 0.11%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.32E-03 4.33E-10 4.E-05 0.04% 1.55E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
3.96E-03 7.40E-10 5.E-05 0.04% 2.64E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.97E-03 3.69E-10 1.E-05 0.01% 1.32E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.05E-02 2.04E-08 1.E-06 0.00% 7.29E-09 5E-10 0.01%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 3 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-4
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 5 - Southeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Tetrachloroethene
Carbon tetrachloride
Bromochloromethane
Total Cyanide
Total Zinc
Pentachlorophenol
Bromomethane
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Water Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Hexachlorobutadiene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
DermalWater
Air (Facility)Inhalation
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of
Total)
Sum of
LADD (mg/kg-
d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
RME
SITE BG
1.70E-03 2.77E-08 5.E-06 0.00% 9.90E-09 2E-11 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
5.74E-03 4.23E-08 1.E-05 0.01% 1.51E-08 1E-09 0.02%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
7.80E-04 7.68E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.74E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
5.94E-02 2.22E-08 4.E-05 0.03% 7.93E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
4.85E-01 8.09E-08 3.E-07 0.00% 2.89E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.40E-01 1.66E-05 3.E-03 2.80% 5.93E-06 2E-06 34.11%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.20E-03 2.00E-09 1.E-06 0.00% 7.15E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.55E-06 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
9.13E+02 2.10E-04 6.E-03 5.10% 7.50E-05 2E-06 35.17%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
9.13E+02 2.10E-04 6.E-03 5.10% 7.50E-05 2E-06 35.17%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.12E-07 2.42E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 8.65E-10 5E-10 0.01%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 4.98E-08 3.E-03 2.80% 1.78E-08 8E-08 1.10%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 1.48E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 5.30E-08 2E-08 0.35%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.55E-07 3.E-03 2.62% 5.54E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 2.56E-10 9.E-07 0.00% 9.16E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.56E-06 1.78E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 6.36E-09 1E-10 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 5.18E-12 1.E-04 0.11% 1.85E-12 7E-08 1.01%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 3.74E-07 7.E-03 5.52% 1.34E-07 2E-07 2.47%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 3.74E-07 7.E-03 5.52% 1.34E-07 2E-07 2.47%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.22E+04 2.82E-04 1.E-01 100%1.01E-04 7.0E-06 100%1.30E+04 7.53E-05 4.E-04 100%2.69E-05 9.6E-08 100%
ERM Page 4 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-5
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 6 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Total PCBs 2.68E+00 3.22E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.15E-09 2E-09 0.05% 3.35E-04 4.03E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.44E-13 3E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.47E+01 3.79E-09 1.E-05 0.02% 1.35E-09 2E-09 0.04% 6.43E+00 1.66E-09 6.E-06 4.38% 5.92E-10 9E-10 1.56%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.48E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.52E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 9.82E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene 3.50E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 3.63E-03 9.36E-13 1.E-03 2.52% 3.34E-13 4E-08 0.87%3.35E-07 8.63E-17 1.E-07 0.10% 3.08E-17 4E-12 0.01%
Dermal Total 6.48E+01 7.02E-09 1.E-03 2.55% 2.51E-09 5E-08 0.96%1.17E+01 1.66E-09 6.E-06 4.47% 5.92E-10 9E-10 1.56%
Total PCBs 2.68E+00 8.60E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 3.07E-09 6E-09 0.12%3.35E-04 1.08E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.84E-13 8E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.47E+01 4.72E-08 9.E-05 0.18% 1.69E-08 2E-08 0.30%6.43E+00 2.07E-08 4.E-05 32.71% 7.38E-09 7E-09 11.64%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.48E+01 2.08E-07 3.E-04 0.49% 7.43E-08 1E-07 2.38%1.15E-03 3.69E-12 5.E-09 0.00% 1.32E-12 2E-12 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.52E+01 4.89E-08 2.E-05 0.03% 1.75E-08 9E-09 0.17%1.17E+01 3.74E-08 1.E-05 9.88% 1.34E-08 7E-09 11.71%
Total Mercury 9.82E-02 3.15E-10 1.E-06 0.00% 1.13E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.18E-10 4.E-07 0.31% 4.23E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene 3.50E+00 1.12E-08 1.E-05 0.03% 4.01E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 3.63E-03 1.17E-11 2.E-02 31.43% 4.17E-12 5E-07 10.83%3.35E-07 1.08E-15 2.E-06 1.22% 3.84E-16 5E-11 0.09%
Ingestion Total 6.48E+01 3.24E-07 2.E-02 32.15% 1.16E-07 7E-07 13.81%1.17E+01 5.82E-08 6.E-05 44.12% 2.08E-08 1E-08 23.44%
Total PCBs 2.68E+00 3.19E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.14E-10 6E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 3.99E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.42E-14 8E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.47E+01 1.75E-09 1.E-04 0.22% 6.25E-10 3E-09 0.05%6.43E+00 7.66E-10 5.E-05 40.41% 2.73E-10 1E-09 2.06%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.48E+01 7.71E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.75E-09 1E-09 0.03%1.15E-03 1.37E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 4.89E-14 2E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.52E+01 1.81E-09 2.E-05 0.03% 6.47E-10 5E-08 1.09%1.17E+01 1.39E-09 1.E-05 10.98% 4.95E-10 4E-08 72.93%
Total Mercury 9.82E-02 1.17E-11 4.E-08 0.00% 4.17E-12 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 4.39E-12 1.E-08 0.01% 1.57E-12 0E+00 0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene 3.50E+00 4.16E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.49E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 3.63E-03 4.32E-13 1.E-05 0.02% 1.54E-13 6E-09 0.12%3.35E-07 3.99E-17 1.E-09 0.00% 1.42E-17 5E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 6.48E+01 1.20E-08 1.E-04 0.27% 4.29E-09 6E-08 1.29%1.17E+01 2.16E-09 6.E-05 51.40% 7.70E-10 4E-08 74.99%
Soil Total 6.48E+01 3.43E-07 2.E-02 34.98% 1.23E-07 8E-07 16.05%1.17E+01 6.20E-08 1.E-04 100.00% 2.22E-08 6E-08 100.00%
Total PCBs 9.76E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.08E-01 6.61E-07 2.E-03 4.16% 2.36E-07 4E-07 7.08%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 4.99E+00 6.50E-06 5.E-05 0.09% 2.32E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.64E-03 3.44E-09 2.E-04 0.31% 1.23E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Dibromochloromethane 1.19E-02 1.54E-07 8.E-06 0.01% 5.48E-08 5E-09 0.09%------0.00%----0.00%
Nitrate as N 3.40E+00 4.42E-06 3.E-06 0.01% 1.58E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Perchlorate 2.15E-03 2.79E-09 4.E-06 0.01% 9.97E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Fluoride 6.49E+00 8.45E-06 2.E-04 0.40% 3.02E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Chromium, Hexavalent 6.62E-03 1.72E-08 2.E-04 0.43% 6.15E-09 1E-07 2.46%------0.00%----0.00%
Chloroform 2.09E-03 3.59E-08 4.E-06 0.01%1.28E-08 4E-10 0.01%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Aluminum 1.62E+02 2.11E-04 2.E-04 0.40% 7.54E-05 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Iron 1.24E+03 1.61E-03 2.E-03 4.34%5.75E-04 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Molybdenum 2.79E-01 3.63E-07 7.E-05 0.14% 1.30E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Nickel 2.92E-01 7.60E-08 1.E-04 0.18% 2.71E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Antimony 1.84E-02 2.39E-08 4.E-04 0.75% 8.54E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Barium 1.83E+00 2.38E-06 2.E-04 0.32% 8.48E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Cobalt 4.84E-02 2.52E-08 8.E-05 0.16% 9.00E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Copper 1.99E-01 2.58E-07 6.E-06 0.01%9.23E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Vanadium 1.64E+00 2.13E-06 2.E-02 30.91% 7.61E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Bromoform 3.33E-02 4.66E-07 2.E-05 0.04%1.66E-07 1E-09 0.03%------0.00%----0.00%
Trichloroacetic acid 8.81E-01 4.27E-06 2.E-04 0.40% 1.53E-06 1E-07 2.14%------0.00%----0.00%
Dichloroacetic Acid 9.65E-01 3.13E-06 8.E-04 1.47% 1.12E-06 6E-08 1.12%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Thallium 2.73E-03 3.55E-09 4.E-04 0.67% 1.27E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Beryllium 5.97E-03 7.77E-09 6.E-04 1.05% 2.77E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Cadmium 1.99E-03 2.59E-09 1.E-04 0.20% 9.24E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Bromodichloromethane 5.58E-03 7.52E-08 4.E-06 0.01% 2.69E-08 2E-09 0.03%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Cyanide 1.50E-02 3.90E-08 7.E-05 0.12% 1.39E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Lead 9.53E-02 1.24E-08 0.E+00 0.00%4.43E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Carbon tetrachloride 9.41E-04 4.82E-08 1.E-05 0.02% 1.72E-08 1E-09 0.02%------0.00%----0.00%
Pentachlorophenol 2.90E-02 2.39E-05 5.E-03 9.02% 8.54E-06 3E-06 68.36%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Zinc 6.12E-01 7.11E-07 2.E-06 0.00%2.54E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.79E-06 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Dermal Total 1.24E+03 1.88E-03 3.E-02 55.63% 6.71E-04 4E-06 81.34%------0.00%----0.00%
Water Total 1.24E+03 1.88E-03 3.E-02 55.63% 6.71E-04 4E-06 81.34%------0.00%----0.00%
SITE BG
Soil
Water
Inhalation
Ingestion
Dermal
Dermal
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
ERM Page 1 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-5
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 6 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
SITE BG
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.84E-09 0.E+00 0.00%6.58E-10 4E-10 0.01%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 3.78E-08 3.E-03 4.76% 1.35E-08 6E-08 1.16%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 1.13E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 4.03E-08 2E-08 0.37%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 1.18E-07 2.E-03 4.45% 4.21E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 1.95E-10 6.E-07 0.00% 6.96E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 3.94E-12 1.E-04 0.19% 1.41E-12 5E-08 1.07%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 2.71E-07 5.E-03 9.39% 9.67E-08 1E-07 2.61%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 2.71E-07 5.E-03 9.39% 9.67E-08 1E-07 2.61%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 1.24E+03 1.88E-03 5.E-02 100%6.71E-04 5.0E-06 100%1.17E+01 6.20E-08 1.E-04 100%2.22E-08 5.7E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
InhalationAir (Facility)
ERM Page 2 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-5
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 6 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Pentachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Pentachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Pentachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Dibromochloromethane
Nitrate as N
Perchlorate
Fluoride
Chromium, Hexavalent
Chloroform
Total Aluminum
Total Iron
Total Molybdenum
Total Nickel
Total Antimony
Total Barium
Total Cobalt
Total Copper
Total Vanadium
Bromoform
Trichloroacetic acid
Dichloroacetic Acid
Total Thallium
Total Beryllium
Total Cadmium
Bromodichloromethane
Total Cyanide
Total Lead
Carbon tetrachloride
Pentachlorophenol
Total Zinc
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Water Total
Soil
Water
Inhalation
Ingestion
Dermal
Dermal
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of
Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
2.68E+00 1.36E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 4.86E-09 1E-08 0.11%3.35E-04 1.70E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 6.07E-13 1E-12 0.00%
1.47E+01 1.60E-08 5.E-05 0.05% 5.71E-09 9E-09 0.10%6.43E+00 6.99E-09 2.E-05 5.91% 2.50E-09 4E-09 2.02%
6.48E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.52E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
9.82E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
3.50E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
3.63E-03 3.95E-12 6.E-03 5.08% 1.41E-12 2E-07 2.14%3.35E-07 3.64E-16 5.E-07 0.13% 1.30E-16 2E-11 0.01%
6.48E+01 2.96E-08 6.E-03 5.13% 1.06E-08 2E-07 2.36%1.17E+01 7.00E-09 2.E-05 6.04% 2.50E-09 4E-09 2.03%
2.68E+00 2.29E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 8.19E-09 2E-08 0.19%3.35E-04 2.87E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.02E-12 2E-12 0.00%
1.47E+01 1.26E-07 3.E-04 0.23% 4.50E-08 4E-08 0.47%6.43E+00 5.51E-08 1.E-04 27.92% 1.97E-08 2E-08 9.53%
6.48E+01 5.54E-07 7.E-04 0.62% 1.98E-07 3E-07 3.70%1.15E-03 9.85E-12 1.E-08 0.00% 3.52E-12 6E-12 0.00%
1.52E+01 1.30E-07 4.E-05 0.04% 4.66E-08 2E-08 0.27%1.17E+01 9.98E-08 3.E-05 8.43% 3.57E-08 2E-08 9.59%
9.82E-02 8.41E-10 3.E-06 0.00% 3.00E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 3.16E-10 1.E-06 0.27% 1.13E-10 0E+00 0.00%
3.50E+00 3.00E-08 4.E-05 0.03% 1.07E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
3.63E-03 3.11E-11 4.E-02 40.00% 1.11E-11 1E-06 16.89%3.35E-07 2.87E-15 4.E-06 1.04% 1.02E-15 1E-10 0.07%
6.48E+01 8.65E-07 5.E-02 40.93% 3.09E-07 2E-06 21.53%1.17E+01 1.55E-07 1.E-04 37.67% 5.54E-08 4E-08 19.20%
2.68E+00 1.09E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 3.90E-10 2E-10 0.00%3.35E-04 1.36E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 4.87E-14 3E-14 0.00%
1.47E+01 5.99E-09 4.E-04 0.36% 2.14E-09 9E-09 0.11%6.43E+00 2.62E-09 2.E-04 44.25% 9.35E-10 4E-09 2.16%
6.48E+01 2.64E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 9.41E-09 4E-09 0.05%1.15E-03 4.68E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.67E-13 8E-14 0.00%
1.52E+01 6.20E-09 6.E-05 0.06% 2.21E-09 2E-07 2.17%1.17E+01 4.75E-09 5.E-05 12.03% 1.69E-09 1E-07 76.61%
9.82E-02 4.00E-11 1.E-07 0.00% 1.43E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.50E-11 5.E-08 0.01% 5.36E-12 0E+00 0.00%
3.50E+00 1.42E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 5.09E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
3.63E-03 1.48E-12 4.E-05 0.03% 5.28E-13 2E-08 0.23%3.35E-07 1.36E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 4.87E-17 2E-12 0.00%
6.48E+01 4.11E-08 5.E-04 0.45% 1.47E-08 2E-07 2.57%1.17E+01 7.38E-09 2.E-04 56.29% 2.64E-09 1E-07 78.78%
6.48E+01 9.35E-07 5.E-02 46.50% 3.34E-07 2E-06 26.46%1.17E+01 1.70E-07 4.E-04 100.00% 6.06E-08 2E-07 100.00%
9.76E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
5.08E-01 9.50E-07 3.E-03 2.85% 3.39E-07 5E-07 5.95%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.30E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
4.99E+00 9.33E-06 7.E-05 0.06% 3.33E-06 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
2.64E-03 4.94E-09 2.E-04 0.21% 1.76E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.19E-02 2.21E-07 1.E-05 0.01% 7.88E-08 7E-09 0.08%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
3.40E+00 6.36E-06 4.E-06 0.00% 2.27E-06 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
2.15E-03 4.01E-09 6.E-06 0.01% 1.43E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
6.49E+00 1.21E-05 3.E-04 0.27% 4.34E-06 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
6.62E-03 2.48E-08 3.E-04 0.30% 8.84E-09 2E-07 2.07%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
2.09E-03 5.17E-08 5.E-06 0.00% 1.84E-08 6E-10 0.01%------0.00%----0.00%
1.62E+02 3.03E-04 3.E-04 0.27% 1.08E-04 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.24E+03 2.31E-03 3.E-03 2.98% 8.26E-04 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
2.79E-01 5.22E-07 1.E-04 0.09% 1.87E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
2.92E-01 1.09E-07 1.E-04 0.12% 3.90E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.84E-02 3.43E-08 6.E-04 0.52% 1.23E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.83E+00 3.41E-06 2.E-04 0.22% 1.22E-06 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
4.84E-02 3.62E-08 1.E-04 0.11% 1.29E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.99E-01 3.71E-07 9.E-06 0.01% 1.33E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.64E+00 3.06E-06 2.E-02 21.20% 1.09E-06 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
3.33E-02 6.70E-07 3.E-05 0.03% 2.39E-07 2E-09 0.02%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
8.81E-01 6.14E-06 3.E-04 0.28% 2.19E-06 2E-07 1.79%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
9.65E-01 4.49E-06 1.E-03 1.01% 1.60E-06 8E-08 0.94%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
2.73E-03 5.10E-09 5.E-04 0.46% 1.82E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
5.97E-03 1.12E-08 8.E-04 0.72% 3.99E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.99E-03 3.72E-09 1.E-04 0.13% 1.33E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
5.58E-03 1.08E-07 5.E-06 0.00% 3.86E-08 2E-09 0.03%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.50E-02 5.61E-08 9.E-05 0.08% 2.00E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
9.53E-02 1.78E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 6.36E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
9.41E-04 6.93E-08 2.E-05 0.02% 2.48E-08 2E-09 0.02%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
2.90E-02 3.44E-05 7.E-03 6.19% 1.23E-05 5E-06 57.42%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
6.12E-01 1.02E-06 3.E-06 0.00% 3.65E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
5.79E-06 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.24E+03 2.70E-03 4.E-02 38.16% 9.64E-04 6E-06 68.32%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.24E+03 2.70E-03 4.E-02 38.16% 9.64E-04 6E-06 68.32%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
RME
BGSITE
ERM Page 3 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-5
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 6 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
InhalationAir (Facility)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of
Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
RME
BGSITE
2.12E-07 6.30E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.25E-09 1E-09 0.01%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
4.36E-06 1.29E-07 9.E-03 7.77% 4.62E-08 2E-07 2.32%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.30E-05 3.86E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.38E-07 6E-08 0.74%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.36E-05 4.04E-07 8.E-03 7.27% 1.44E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
2.25E-08 6.67E-10 2.E-06 0.00% 2.38E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
4.54E-10 1.35E-11 3.E-04 0.30% 4.81E-12 2E-07 2.14%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.36E-05 9.26E-07 2.E-02 15.34% 3.31E-07 4E-07 5.22%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.36E-05 9.26E-07 2.E-02 15.34% 3.31E-07 4E-07 5.22%------ 0.00% ----0.00%
1.24E+03 2.70E-03 1.E-01 100%9.65E-04 8.6E-06 100%1.17E+01 1.70E-07 4.E-04 100%6.06E-08 1.9E-07 100%
ERM Page 4 of 4 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-6
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 7 - Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 7.16E-01 1.09E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 3.90E-10 8E-10 0.04% 1.01E-03 1.54E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 5.50E-13 1E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.92E+01 6.27E-09 2.E-05 0.04% 2.24E-09 3E-09 0.19%1.16E+01 3.78E-09 1.E-05 5.58% 1.35E-09 2E-09 2.66%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.66E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 2.90E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 4.44E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene 5.60E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 7.18E-03 2.35E-12 3.E-03 6.86% 8.38E-13 1E-07 6.26%1.08E-06 3.51E-16 5.E-07 0.22% 1.25E-16 2E-11 0.02%
Dermal Total 2.90E+01 7.36E-09 3.E-03 6.90% 2.63E-09 1E-07 6.50%1.55E+01 3.78E-09 1.E-05 5.80% 1.35E-09 2E-09 2.69%
Ingestion Total PCBs 7.16E-01 2.91E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.04E-09 2E-09 0.12%1.01E-03 4.11E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.47E-12 3E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.92E+01 7.80E-08 2.E-04 0.32% 2.79E-08 3E-08 1.44%1.16E+01 4.71E-08 9.E-05 41.68% 1.68E-08 2E-08 19.91%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.66E+01 6.75E-08 8.E-05 0.17% 2.41E-08 4E-08 2.22%4.98E-03 2.03E-11 3.E-08 0.01% 7.23E-12 1E-11 0.02%
Total Chromium 2.90E+01 1.18E-07 4.E-05 0.08% 4.20E-08 2E-08 1.21%1.55E+01 6.32E-08 2.E-05 9.33% 2.26E-08 1E-08 14.86%
Total Mercury 4.44E-02 1.81E-10 6.E-07 0.00% 6.45E-11 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 1.96E-10 7.E-07 0.29% 6.99E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene 5.60E+00 2.28E-08 3.E-05 0.06% 8.13E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 7.18E-03 2.92E-11 4.E-02 85.41% 1.04E-11 1E-06 77.97%1.08E-06 4.38E-15 6.E-06 2.77% 1.56E-15 2E-10 0.27%
Ingestion Total 2.90E+01 2.89E-07 4.E-02 86.04% 1.03E-07 1E-06 82.96%1.55E+01 1.10E-07 1.E-04 54.08% 3.95E-08 3E-08 35.05%
Inhalation Total PCBs 7.16E-01 7.00E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.50E-11 1E-11 0.00%1.01E-03 9.87E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.52E-14 2E-14 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.92E+01 1.88E-09 1.E-04 0.26% 6.70E-10 3E-09 0.17%1.16E+01 1.13E-09 8.E-05 33.38% 4.04E-10 2E-09 2.29%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.66E+01 1.62E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 5.79E-10 3E-10 0.02%4.98E-03 4.87E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.74E-13 8E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 2.90E+01 2.83E-09 3.E-05 0.06% 1.01E-09 8E-08 4.88%1.55E+01 1.52E-09 2.E-05 6.73% 5.42E-10 5E-08 59.97%
Total Mercury 4.44E-02 4.34E-12 1.E-08 0.00% 1.55E-12 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 4.70E-12 2.E-08 0.01% 1.68E-12 0E+00 0.00%
Pentachlorobenzene 5.60E+00 5.47E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.95E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 7.18E-03 7.02E-13 2.E-05 0.04% 2.51E-13 1E-08 0.55%1.08E-06 1.05E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 3.75E-17 1E-12 0.00%
Inhalation Total 2.90E+01 6.95E-09 2.E-04 0.35% 2.48E-09 1E-07 5.61%1.55E+01 2.65E-09 9.E-05 40.12% 9.48E-10 5E-08 62.26%
Soil Total 2.90E+01 3.03E-07 5.E-02 93.29% 1.08E-07 2E-06 95.07%1.55E+01 1.17E-07 2.E-04 100.00% 4.18E-08 8E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.21E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.33E-10 2E-10 0.01%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 2.49E-08 2.E-03 3.40%8.89E-09 4E-08 2.20%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 7.42E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.65E-08 1E-08 0.70%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 7.76E-08 2.E-03 3.18% 2.77E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 1.28E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 4.58E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 2.59E-12 6.E-05 0.13% 9.25E-13 4E-08 2.02%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.78E-07 3.E-03 6.71% 6.36E-08 9E-08 4.93%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.78E-07 3.E-03 6.71% 6.36E-08 9E-08 4.93%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 2.90E+01 4.82E-07 5.E-02 100%1.72E-07 1.7E-06 100%1.55E+01 1.17E-07 2.E-04 100%4.18E-08 7.6E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
CTE
Matrix Pathway Analyte
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-6
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 7 - Northeast Ponded Waste Lagoon
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Pentachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Pentachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Pentachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of
Total)
Sum of
LADD (mg/kg-
d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
7.16E-01 4.72E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.69E-09 3E-09 0.07%1.01E-03 6.66E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.38E-12 5E-12 0.00%
1.92E+01 2.71E-08 9.E-05 0.07% 9.69E-09 1E-08 0.31%1.16E+01 1.64E-08 5.E-05 11.32% 5.84E-09 9E-09 6.79%
1.66E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
2.90E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
4.44E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
5.60E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
7.18E-03 1.02E-11 1.E-02 10.90% 3.63E-12 5E-07 10.20%1.08E-06 1.52E-15 2.E-06 0.45% 5.43E-16 7E-11 0.05%
2.90E+01 3.19E-08 1.E-02 10.96% 1.14E-08 5E-07 10.58%1.55E+01 1.64E-08 6.E-05 11.77% 5.84E-09 9E-09 6.85%
7.16E-01 7.97E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.85E-09 6E-09 0.12%1.01E-03 1.12E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 4.01E-12 8E-12 0.01%
1.92E+01 2.14E-07 4.E-04 0.32% 7.63E-08 7E-08 1.49%1.16E+01 1.29E-07 3.E-04 53.50% 4.60E-08 4E-08 32.09%
1.66E+01 1.85E-07 2.E-04 0.17% 6.60E-08 1E-07 2.28%4.98E-03 5.54E-11 7.E-08 0.01% 1.98E-11 3E-11 0.02%
2.90E+01 3.22E-07 1.E-04 0.08% 1.15E-07 6E-08 1.24%1.55E+01 1.73E-07 6.E-05 11.98% 6.18E-08 3E-08 23.94%
4.44E-02 4.94E-10 2.E-06 0.00% 1.76E-10 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 5.35E-10 2.E-06 0.37% 1.91E-10 0E+00 0.00%
5.60E+00 6.23E-08 8.E-05 0.06% 2.23E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
7.18E-03 8.00E-11 1.E-01 85.81% 2.86E-11 4E-06 80.31%1.08E-06 1.20E-14 2.E-05 3.55% 4.28E-15 6E-10 0.43%
2.90E+01 7.91E-07 1.E-01 86.45% 2.83E-07 4E-06 85.45%1.55E+01 3.02E-07 3.E-04 69.41% 1.08E-07 7E-08 56.49%
7.16E-01 7.00E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.50E-11 1E-11 0.00%1.01E-03 9.87E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.52E-14 2E-14 0.00%
1.92E+01 1.88E-09 1.E-04 0.09% 6.70E-10 3E-09 0.06%1.16E+01 1.13E-09 8.E-05 15.66% 4.04E-10 2E-09 1.35%
1.66E+01 1.62E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 5.79E-10 3E-10 0.01%4.98E-03 4.87E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.74E-13 8E-14 0.00%
2.90E+01 2.83E-09 3.E-05 0.02% 1.01E-09 8E-08 1.84%1.55E+01 1.52E-09 2.E-05 3.15% 5.42E-10 5E-08 35.31%
4.44E-02 4.34E-12 1.E-08 0.00% 1.55E-12 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 4.70E-12 2.E-08 0.00% 1.68E-12 0E+00 0.00%
5.60E+00 5.47E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.95E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
7.18E-03 7.02E-13 2.E-05 0.01% 2.51E-13 1E-08 0.21%1.08E-06 1.05E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 3.75E-17 1E-12 0.00%
2.90E+01 6.95E-09 2.E-04 0.13% 2.48E-09 1E-07 2.11%1.55E+01 2.65E-09 9.E-05 18.81% 9.48E-10 5E-08 36.66%
2.90E+01 8.30E-07 1.E-01 97.54% 2.97E-07 5E-06 98.14%1.55E+01 3.21E-07 5.E-04 100.00% 1.15E-07 1E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 1.21E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.33E-10 2E-10 0.01%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 2.49E-08 2.E-03 1.25% 8.89E-09 4E-08 0.83%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 7.42E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.65E-08 1E-08 0.26%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 7.76E-08 2.E-03 1.17% 2.77E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 1.28E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 4.58E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 2.59E-12 6.E-05 0.05% 9.25E-13 4E-08 0.76%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.78E-07 3.E-03 2.46% 6.36E-08 9E-08 1.86%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.78E-07 3.E-03 2.46% 6.36E-08 9E-08 1.86%------ 0.00% ---- 0.00%
2.90E+01 1.01E-06 1.E-01 100%3.60E-07 4.6E-06 100%1.55E+01 3.21E-07 5.E-04 100%1.15E-07 1.3E-07 100%
BG
RME
SITE
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-7
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 8 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 4.63E-01 3.34E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.19E-10 2E-10 0.03%3.35E-04 2.42E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 8.64E-14 2E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.51E+01 2.34E-09 8.E-06 0.074% 8.36E-10 1E-09 0.14%6.43E+00 9.95E-10 3.E-06 2.71% 3.55E-10 5E-10 0.82%
Hexachlorobenzene 4.29E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 3.72E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.40E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 7.21E-04 1.11E-13 2.E-04 1.51% 3.98E-14 5E-09 0.57%3.35E-07 5.18E-17 7.E-08 0.06% 1.85E-17 2E-12 0.00%
Dermal Total 3.72E+01 2.67E-09 2.E-04 1.584% 9.55E-10 7E-09 0.73%1.17E+01 9.95E-10 3.E-06 2.77% 3.55E-10 5E-10 0.82%
Ingestion Total PCBs 4.63E-01 8.92E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.19E-10 6E-10 0.07%3.35E-04 6.45E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 2.31E-13 5E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.51E+01 2.91E-08 6.E-05 0.55% 1.04E-08 9E-09 1.03%6.43E+00 1.24E-08 2.E-05 20.26% 4.43E-09 4E-09 6.13%
Hexachlorobenzene 4.29E+00 8.26E-09 1.E-05 0.10% 2.95E-09 5E-09 0.52%1.15E-03 2.22E-12 3.E-09 0.00% 7.91E-13 1E-12 0.00%
Total Chromium 3.72E+01 7.16E-08 2.E-05 0.23% 2.56E-08 1E-08 1.40%1.17E+01 2.25E-08 7.E-06 6.12% 8.02E-09 4E-09 6.18%
Total Mercury 1.40E-02 2.70E-11 9.E-08 0.00% 9.63E-12 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 7.11E-11 2.E-07 0.19% 2.54E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 7.21E-04 1.39E-12 2.E-03 18.81% 4.96E-13 6E-08 7.06%3.35E-07 6.45E-16 9.E-07 0.75% 2.30E-16 3E-11 0.05%
Ingestion Total 3.72E+01 1.10E-07 2.E-03 19.68% 3.93E-08 9E-08 10.08%1.17E+01 3.49E-08 3.E-05 27.33% 1.25E-08 8E-09 12.36%
Inhalation Total PCBs 4.63E-01 7.26E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.59E-11 1E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 5.25E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.88E-14 1E-14 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.51E+01 2.37E-09 2.E-04 1.50% 8.47E-10 4E-09 0.40%6.43E+00 1.01E-09 7.E-05 54.95% 3.60E-10 2E-09 2.38%
Hexachlorobenzene 4.29E+00 6.72E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.40E-10 1E-10 0.01%1.15E-03 1.80E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 6.44E-14 3E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 3.72E+01 5.83E-09 6.E-05 0.55% 2.08E-09 2E-07 19.17%1.17E+01 1.83E-09 2.E-05 14.94% 6.53E-10 5E-08 84.43%
Total Mercury 1.40E-02 2.19E-12 7.E-09 0.00% 7.84E-13 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 5.78E-12 2.E-08 0.02% 2.07E-12 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 7.21E-04 1.13E-13 3.E-06 0.03% 4.03E-14 2E-09 0.17%3.35E-07 5.25E-17 1.E-09 0.00% 1.88E-17 7E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 3.72E+01 8.95E-09 2.E-04 2.08% 3.20E-09 2E-07 19.75%1.17E+01 2.84E-09 9.E-05 69.90% 1.02E-09 6E-08 86.82%
Soil Total 3.72E+01 1.22E-07 2.E-03 23.35% 4.34E-08 3E-07 30.56%1.17E+01 3.88E-08 1.E-04 100.00% 1.38E-08 6E-08 100.00%
Water Dermal Total PCBs 1.47E-04 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.07E-02 1.57E-08 5.E-05 0.50% 5.62E-09 8E-09 0.92%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.24E+01 2.15E-06 2.E-05 0.15% 7.67E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Dibromochloromethane 2.78E-02 4.78E-08 2.E-06 0.023% 1.71E-08 1E-09 0.16%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Nitrate as N 1.36E+00 2.35E-07 1.E-07 0.0014% 8.40E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Perchlorate 7.10E-04 1.23E-10 2.E-07 0.0017% 4.40E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Fluoride 4.33E+01 7.51E-06 2.E-04 1.78% 2.68E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Chloroform 6.80E-03 1.56E-08 2.E-06 0.015% 5.57E-09 2E-10 0.02%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Aluminum 2.18E+01 3.79E-06 4.E-06 0.036% 1.35E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Iron 2.02E+02 3.50E-05 5.E-05 0.47% 1.25E-05 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Molybdenum 4.71E-02 8.18E-09 2.E-06 0.016% 2.92E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Nickel 2.38E-01 8.27E-09 1.E-05 0.098% 2.95E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Barium 1.08E+00 1.88E-07 1.E-05 0.127% 6.71E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Beryllium 2.02E-03 3.50E-10 2.E-05 0.24% 1.25E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Cadmium 2.55E-03 4.43E-10 2.E-05 0.17% 1.58E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Cobalt 1.26E-01 8.72E-09 3.E-05 0.28% 3.11E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Copper 4.83E-02 8.38E-09 2.E-07 0.0020% 2.99E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Vanadium 2.78E-01 4.82E-08 4.E-04 3.51% 1.72E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Bromoform 3.75E-02 6.99E-08 3.E-06 0.033% 2.49E-08 2E-10 0.02%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Bromodichloromethane 1.70E-02 3.05E-08 2.E-06 0.014% 1.09E-08 7E-10 0.07%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Trichloroacetic acid 1.17E+00 7.56E-07 4.E-05 0.36% 2.70E-07 2E-08 2.07%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Dichloroacetic Acid 1.03E+00 4.46E-07 1.E-04 1.06% 1.59E-07 8E-09 0.87%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Zinc 2.20E-01 3.40E-08 1.E-07 0.00% 1.22E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Pentachlorophenol 2.70E-02 2.97E-06 6.E-04 5.63% 1.06E-06 4E-07 46.49%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.08E-08 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Dermal Total 2.02E+02 5.33E-05 2.E-03 14.51% 1.91E-05 5E-07 50.63%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Water Total 2.02E+02 5.33E-05 2.E-03 14.51% 1.91E-05 5E-07 50.63%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 2.42E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 8.65E-10 5E-10 0.05%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 4.98E-08 3.E-03 31.46% 1.78E-08 8E-08 8.38%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 1.48E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 5.30E-08 2E-08 2.67%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 1.55E-07 3.E-03 29.44% 5.54E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 2.56E-10 9.E-07 0.01% 9.16E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 5.18E-12 1.E-04 1.23% 1.85E-12 7E-08 7.71%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 3.56E-07 7.E-03 62.14% 1.27E-07 2E-07 18.81%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 3.56E-07 7.E-03 62.14% 1.27E-07 2E-07 18.81%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 2.02E+02 5.38E-05 1.E-02 100%1.92E-05 9.1E-07 100%1.17E+01 3.88E-08 1.E-04 100%1.38E-08 6.5E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-7
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 8 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Water Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Manganese
Dibromochloromethane
Nitrate as N
Perchlorate
Fluoride
Chloroform
Total Aluminum
Total Iron
Total Molybdenum
Total Nickel
Total Barium
Total Beryllium
Total Cadmium
Total Cobalt
Total Copper
Total Vanadium
Bromoform
Bromodichloromethane
Trichloroacetic acid
Dichloroacetic Acid
Total Zinc
Pentachlorophenol
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Water Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of
LADD (mg/kg-
d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
4.63E-01 1.41E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 5.03E-10 1E-09 0.05%3.35E-04 1.02E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.64E-13 7E-13 0.00%
1.51E+01 9.87E-09 3.E-05 0.12% 3.52E-09 5E-09 0.24%6.43E+00 4.20E-09 1.E-05 4.29% 1.50E-09 2E-09 1.32%
4.29E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
3.72E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.40E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
7.21E-04 4.70E-13 7.E-04 2.47% 1.68E-13 2E-08 1.00%3.35E-07 2.19E-16 3.E-07 0.10% 7.80E-17 1E-11 0.01%
3.72E+01 1.13E-08 7.E-04 2.59% 4.03E-09 3E-08 1.29%1.17E+01 4.20E-09 1.E-05 4.39% 1.50E-09 2E-09 1.33%
4.63E-01 2.38E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 8.49E-10 2E-09 0.08%3.35E-04 1.72E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 6.15E-13 1E-12 0.00%
1.51E+01 7.77E-08 2.E-04 0.57% 2.78E-08 2E-08 1.14%6.43E+00 3.31E-08 7.E-05 20.29% 1.18E-08 1E-08 6.24%
4.29E+00 2.20E-08 3.E-05 0.10% 7.87E-09 1E-08 0.58%1.15E-03 5.91E-12 7.E-09 0.00% 2.11E-12 3E-12 0.00%
3.72E+01 1.91E-07 6.E-05 0.23% 6.82E-08 3E-08 1.56%1.17E+01 5.99E-08 2.E-05 6.13% 2.14E-08 1E-08 6.28%
1.40E-02 7.19E-11 2.E-07 0.00% 2.57E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.90E-10 6.E-07 0.19% 6.77E-11 0E+00 0.00%
7.21E-04 3.70E-12 5.E-03 19.48% 1.32E-12 2E-07 7.87%3.35E-07 1.72E-15 2.E-06 0.75% 6.15E-16 8E-11 0.05%
3.72E+01 2.93E-07 6.E-03 20.39% 1.05E-07 2E-07 11.23%1.17E+01 9.31E-08 9.E-05 27.36% 3.33E-08 2E-08 12.57%
4.63E-01 1.89E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 6.74E-11 4E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 1.37E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 4.88E-14 3E-14 0.00%
1.51E+01 6.17E-09 4.E-04 1.51% 2.20E-09 9E-09 0.43%6.43E+00 2.62E-09 2.E-04 53.65% 9.37E-10 4E-09 2.37%
4.29E+00 1.75E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 6.24E-10 3E-10 0.01%1.15E-03 4.69E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.67E-13 8E-14 0.00%
3.72E+01 1.52E-08 2.E-04 0.56% 5.41E-09 5E-07 20.82%1.17E+01 4.75E-09 5.E-05 14.58% 1.70E-09 1E-07 83.73%
1.40E-02 5.71E-12 2.E-08 0.00% 2.04E-12 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.50E-11 5.E-08 0.02% 5.37E-12 0E+00 0.00%
7.21E-04 2.94E-13 7.E-06 0.03% 1.05E-13 4E-09 0.18%3.35E-07 1.37E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 4.88E-17 2E-12 0.00%
3.72E+01 2.33E-08 6.E-04 2.10% 8.31E-09 5E-07 21.45%1.17E+01 7.39E-09 2.E-04 68.25% 2.64E-09 1E-07 86.10%
3.72E+01 3.28E-07 7.E-03 25.09% 1.17E-07 7E-07 33.97%1.17E+01 1.05E-07 3.E-04 100.00% 3.74E-08 2E-07 100.00%
1.47E-04 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
9.07E-02 3.39E-08 1.E-04 0.42% 1.21E-08 2E-08 0.83%------0.00%----0.00%
1.24E+01 4.63E-06 3.E-05 0.12% 1.65E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.78E-02 1.03E-07 5.E-06 0.02% 3.68E-08 3E-09 0.14%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E+00 5.07E-07 3.E-07 0.00% 1.81E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
7.10E-04 2.66E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 9.48E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
4.33E+01 1.62E-05 4.E-04 1.49% 5.78E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
6.80E-03 3.36E-08 3.E-06 0.01% 1.20E-08 4E-10 0.02%------0.00%----0.00%
2.18E+01 8.16E-06 8.E-06 0.03% 2.92E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.02E+02 7.54E-05 1.E-04 0.40% 2.69E-05 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
4.71E-02 1.76E-08 4.E-06 0.01% 6.30E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.38E-01 1.78E-08 2.E-05 0.08% 6.37E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
1.08E+00 4.05E-07 3.E-05 0.11% 1.45E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.02E-03 7.54E-10 5.E-05 0.20% 2.69E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.55E-03 9.55E-10 4.E-05 0.14% 3.41E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
1.26E-01 1.88E-08 6.E-05 0.23% 6.71E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
4.83E-02 1.81E-08 5.E-07 0.00% 6.45E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.78E-01 1.04E-07 8.E-04 2.94% 3.71E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
3.75E-02 1.51E-07 8.E-06 0.03% 5.38E-08 4E-10 0.02%------0.00%----0.00%
1.70E-02 6.58E-08 3.E-06 0.01% 2.35E-08 1E-09 0.07%------0.00%----0.00%
1.17E+00 1.63E-06 8.E-05 0.30% 5.82E-07 4E-08 1.86%------0.00%----0.00%
1.03E+00 9.61E-07 2.E-04 0.89% 3.43E-07 2E-08 0.79%------0.00%----0.00%
2.20E-01 7.33E-08 2.E-07 0.00% 2.62E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.70E-02 6.40E-06 1.E-03 4.72% 2.29E-06 9E-07 41.87%------0.00%----0.00%
6.08E-08 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.02E+02 1.15E-04 3.E-03 12.15% 4.11E-05 1E-06 45.60%------0.00%----0.00%
2.02E+02 1.15E-04 3.E-03 12.15% 4.11E-05 1E-06 45.60%------0.00%----0.00%
2.12E-07 6.30E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.25E-09 1E-09 0.06%------0.00%----0.00%
4.36E-06 1.29E-07 9.E-03 31.78% 4.62E-08 2E-07 9.10%------0.00%----0.00%
1.30E-05 3.86E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.38E-07 6E-08 2.90%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 4.04E-07 8.E-03 29.74% 1.44E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.25E-08 6.67E-10 2.E-06 0.01% 2.38E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
4.54E-10 1.35E-11 3.E-04 1.24% 4.81E-12 2E-07 8.37%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 9.26E-07 2.E-02 62.77% 3.31E-07 4E-07 20.43%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 9.26E-07 2.E-02 62.77% 3.31E-07 4E-07 20.43%------0.00%----0.00%
2.02E+02 1.16E-04 3.E-02 100%4.15E-05 2.2E-06 100%1.17E+01 1.05E-07 3.E-04 100%3.74E-08 1.7E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-8
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 9 - Smut Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Total PCBs 4.78E-02 2.61E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 9.31E-11 2E-10 0.02% 3.35E-04 1.83E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 6.53E-13 1E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.16E+00 4.86E-09 2.E-05 0.03% 1.74E-09 3E-09 0.23% 6.43E+00 7.52E-09 3.E-05 0.35% 2.68E-09 4E-09 1.24%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.39E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 2.35E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Manganese 2.83E+03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.54E+02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.60E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.57E-05 5.34E-14 8.E-05 0.12% 1.91E-14 2E-09 0.22%3.35E-07 3.91E-16 6.E-07 0.01% 1.40E-16 2E-11 0.01%
Dermal Total 2.83E+03 5.12E-09 9.E-05 0.15% 1.83E-09 5E-09 0.46%4.54E+02 7.52E-09 3.E-05 0.35% 2.69E-09 4E-09 1.25%
Total PCBs 4.78E-02 6.96E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.48E-10 5E-10 0.04%3.35E-04 4.88E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.74E-12 3E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.16E+00 6.06E-08 1.E-04 0.19% 2.16E-08 2E-08 1.70%6.43E+00 9.36E-08 2.E-04 2.58% 3.34E-08 3E-08 9.29%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.39E-01 2.02E-09 3.E-06 0.00% 7.23E-10 1E-09 0.10%1.15E-03 1.67E-11 2.E-08 0.00% 5.98E-12 1E-11 0.00%
Total Chromium 2.35E+01 3.42E-07 1.E-04 0.18% 1.22E-07 6E-08 5.33%1.17E+01 1.70E-07 6.E-05 0.78% 6.06E-08 3E-08 9.36%
Total Manganese 2.83E+03 4.12E-05 3.E-04 0.47% 1.47E-05 0E+00 0.00%4.54E+02 6.60E-06 5.E-05 0.65% 2.36E-06 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.60E-01 2.33E-09 8.E-06 0.01% 8.32E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 5.37E-10 2.E-06 0.02% 1.92E-10 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.57E-05 6.66E-13 1.E-03 1.52% 2.38E-13 3E-08 2.69%3.35E-07 4.88E-15 7.E-06 0.10% 1.74E-15 2E-10 0.07%
Ingestion Total 2.83E+03 4.16E-05 1.E-03 2.39% 1.49E-05 1E-07 9.87%4.54E+02 6.87E-06 3.E-04 4.13% 2.45E-06 6E-08 18.72%
Total PCBs 4.78E-02 3.44E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.23E-11 7E-12 0.00%3.35E-04 2.41E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 8.62E-14 5E-14 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.16E+00 3.00E-09 2.E-04 0.32% 1.07E-09 5E-09 0.40%6.43E+00 4.64E-09 3.E-04 4.26% 1.66E-09 7E-09 2.20%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.39E-01 1.00E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.58E-11 2E-11 0.00%1.15E-03 8.29E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 2.96E-13 1E-13 0.00%
Total Chromium 2.35E+01 1.70E-08 2.E-04 0.27% 6.06E-09 5E-07 44.35%1.17E+01 8.40E-09 8.E-05 1.16% 3.00E-09 3E-07 77.83%
Total Manganese 2.83E+03 2.04E-06 4.E-02 65.36% 7.28E-07 0E+00 0.00%4.54E+02 3.27E-07 7.E-03 90.10% 1.17E-07 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.60E-01 1.15E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 4.12E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 2.66E-11 9.E-08 0.00% 9.50E-12 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.57E-05 3.30E-14 8.E-07 0.00% 1.18E-14 4E-10 0.04%3.35E-07 2.41E-16 6.E-09 0.00% 8.62E-17 3E-12 0.00%
Inhalation Total 2.83E+03 2.06E-06 4.E-02 65.96% 7.36E-07 5E-07 44.79%4.54E+02 3.40E-07 7.E-03 95.52% 1.21E-07 3E-07 80.03%
Soil Total 2.83E+03 4.37E-05 4.E-02 68.49% 1.56E-05 6E-07 55.11%4.54E+02 7.22E-06 7.E-03 100.00% 2.58E-06 3E-07 100.00%
Total PCBs 2.12E-07 7.27E-09 0.E+00 0.00%2.60E-09 1E-09 0.13%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 1.49E-07 1.E-02 15.95% 5.33E-08 2E-07 19.99%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 4.45E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.59E-07 7E-08 6.38%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 4.66E-07 9.E-03 14.93% 1.66E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 7.69E-10 3.E-06 0.00% 2.75E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 1.55E-11 4.E-04 0.62% 5.55E-12 2E-07 18.39%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.07E-06 2.E-02 31.51% 3.82E-07 5E-07 44.89%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.07E-06 2.E-02 31.51% 3.82E-07 5E-07 44.89%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 2.83E+03 4.47E-05 6.E-02 100%1.60E-05 1.1E-06 100%4.54E+02 7.22E-06 7.E-03 100%2.58E-06 3.2E-07 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Inhalation
Ingestion
DermalSoil
InhalationAir (Facility)
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-8
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 9 - Smut Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Inhalation
Ingestion
DermalSoil
InhalationAir (Facility)
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
4.78E-02 3.15E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.13E-09 2E-09 0.04%3.35E-04 2.21E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 7.89E-12 2E-11 0.00%
4.16E+00 5.88E-08 2.E-04 0.07% 2.10E-08 3E-08 0.60%6.43E+00 9.09E-08 3.E-04 0.96% 3.25E-08 5E-08 3.04%
1.39E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
2.35E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
2.83E+03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.54E+02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.60E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
4.57E-05 6.46E-13 9.E-04 0.34% 2.31E-13 3E-08 0.57%3.35E-07 4.73E-15 7.E-06 0.02% 1.69E-15 2E-10 0.01%
2.83E+03 6.20E-08 1.E-03 0.42% 2.21E-08 6E-08 1.21%4.54E+02 9.09E-08 3.E-04 0.98% 3.25E-08 5E-08 3.06%
4.78E-02 5.32E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.90E-09 4E-09 0.07%3.35E-04 3.73E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.33E-11 3E-11 0.00%
4.16E+00 4.63E-07 9.E-04 0.35% 1.65E-07 1E-07 2.84%6.43E+00 7.16E-07 1.E-03 4.51% 2.56E-07 2E-07 14.37%
1.39E-01 1.55E-08 2.E-05 0.01% 5.53E-09 9E-09 0.17%1.15E-03 1.28E-10 2.E-07 0.00% 4.57E-11 7E-11 0.00%
2.35E+01 2.62E-06 9.E-04 0.33% 9.35E-07 5E-07 8.91%1.17E+01 1.30E-06 4.E-04 1.36% 4.63E-07 2E-07 14.47%
2.83E+03 3.15E-04 2.E-03 0.84% 1.12E-04 0E+00 0.00%4.54E+02 5.05E-05 4.E-04 1.14% 1.80E-05 0E+00 0.00%
1.60E-01 1.78E-08 6.E-05 0.02% 6.36E-09 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 4.11E-09 1.E-05 0.04% 1.47E-09 0E+00 0.00%
4.57E-05 5.09E-12 7.E-03 2.71% 1.82E-12 2E-07 4.50%3.35E-07 3.73E-14 5.E-05 0.17% 1.33E-14 2E-09 0.11%
2.83E+03 3.18E-04 1.E-02 4.25% 1.14E-04 9E-07 16.49%4.54E+02 5.25E-05 2.E-03 7.23% 1.88E-05 5E-07 28.96%
4.78E-02 1.45E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 5.17E-11 3E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 1.01E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.62E-13 2E-13 0.00%
4.16E+00 1.26E-08 8.E-04 0.31% 4.50E-09 2E-08 0.37%6.43E+00 1.95E-08 1.E-03 4.09% 6.96E-09 3E-08 1.87%
1.39E-01 4.21E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.50E-10 7E-11 0.00%1.15E-03 3.48E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.24E-12 6E-13 0.00%
2.35E+01 7.12E-08 7.E-04 0.27% 2.54E-08 2E-06 40.70%1.17E+01 3.53E-08 4.E-04 1.11% 1.26E-08 1E-06 66.12%
2.83E+03 8.57E-06 2.E-01 63.93% 3.06E-06 0E+00 0.00%4.54E+02 1.37E-06 3.E-02 86.59% 4.91E-07 0E+00 0.00%
1.60E-01 4.84E-10 2.E-06 0.00% 1.73E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.12E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 3.99E-11 0E+00 0.00%
4.57E-05 1.38E-13 3.E-06 0.00% 4.94E-14 2E-09 0.04%3.35E-07 1.01E-15 3.E-08 0.00% 3.62E-16 1E-11 0.00%
2.83E+03 8.65E-06 2.E-01 64.51% 3.09E-06 2E-06 41.10%4.54E+02 1.43E-06 3.E-02 91.80% 5.10E-07 1E-06 67.98%
2.83E+03 3.27E-04 2.E-01 69.19% 1.17E-04 3E-06 58.81%4.54E+02 5.40E-05 3.E-02 100.00% 1.93E-05 2E-06 100.00%
2.12E-07 3.05E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.09E-08 6E-09 0.12% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 6.27E-07 4.E-02 15.60% 2.24E-07 1E-06 18.34% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 1.87E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 6.68E-07 3E-07 5.85% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.96E-06 4.E-02 14.60% 6.99E-07 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.25E-08 3.23E-09 1.E-05 0.00% 1.15E-09 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.54E-10 6.53E-11 2.E-03 0.61% 2.33E-11 9E-07 16.88% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.49E-06 8.E-02 30.81% 1.60E-06 2E-06 41.19% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.49E-06 8.E-02 30.81% 1.60E-06 2E-06 41.19% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.83E+03 3.31E-04 3.E-01 100%1.18E-04 5.2E-06 100%4.54E+02 5.40E-05 3.E-02 100%1.93E-05 1.6E-06 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-9
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 10 - Barium Sulfate Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 1.76E-03 2.40E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 8.57E-13 2E-12 0.00% 3.35E-04 4.57E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.63E-13 3E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.30E+00 2.72E-09 9.E-06 0.66% 9.71E-10 1E-09 2.22%6.43E+00 1.88E-09 6.E-06 7.67% 6.71E-10 1E-09 4.11%
Total Chromium 1.50E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.08E-06 3.15E-16 4.E-07 0.03% 1.12E-16 1E-11 0.02%3.35E-07 9.79E-17 1.E-07 0.17% 3.49E-17 5E-12 0.02%
Dermal Total 1.50E+01 2.72E-09 1.E-05 0.70% 9.71E-10 1E-09 2.24%1.17E+01 1.88E-09 6.E-06 7.84% 6.71E-10 1E-09 4.13%
Ingestion Total PCBs 1.76E-03 6.40E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.29E-12 5E-12 0.01%3.35E-04 1.22E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.35E-13 9E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.30E+00 3.39E-08 7.E-05 4.96% 1.21E-08 1E-08 16.57%6.43E+00 2.34E-08 5.E-05 57.31% 8.36E-09 8E-09 30.75%
Total Chromium 1.50E+01 5.47E-08 2.E-05 1.34% 1.95E-08 1E-08 14.87%1.17E+01 4.24E-08 1.E-05 17.31% 1.52E-08 8E-09 30.96%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.08E-06 3.92E-15 6.E-06 0.41% 1.40E-15 2E-10 0.28%3.35E-07 1.22E-15 2.E-06 2.13% 4.35E-16 6E-11 0.23%
Ingestion Total 1.50E+01 8.85E-08 9.E-05 6.71% 3.16E-08 2E-08 31.73%1.17E+01 6.58E-08 6.E-05 76.75% 2.35E-08 2E-08 61.94%
Inhalation Total PCBs 1.76E-03 4.06E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.45E-14 8E-15 0.00%3.35E-04 7.74E-15 0.E+00 0.00% 2.76E-15 2E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.30E+00 2.15E-10 1.E-05 1.05% 7.67E-11 3E-10 0.50%6.43E+00 1.49E-10 1.E-05 12.12% 5.31E-11 2E-10 0.93%
Total Chromium 1.50E+01 3.47E-10 3.E-06 0.25% 1.24E-10 1E-08 15.86%1.17E+01 2.69E-10 3.E-06 3.29% 9.61E-11 8E-09 33.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.08E-06 2.49E-17 6.E-10 0.00% 8.89E-18 3E-13 0.00%3.35E-07 7.73E-18 2.E-10 0.00% 2.76E-18 1E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.50E+01 5.62E-10 2.E-05 1.30% 2.01E-10 1E-08 16.36%1.17E+01 4.18E-10 1.E-05 15.42% 1.49E-10 8E-09 33.93%
Soil Total 1.50E+01 9.18E-08 1.E-04 8.71% 3.28E-08 3E-08 50.33%1.17E+01 6.81E-08 8.E-05 100.00% 2.43E-08 2E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 4.60E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.64E-10 9E-11 0.14%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 9.46E-09 6.E-04 46.22% 3.38E-09 1E-08 22.12%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 2.82E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.01E-08 5E-09 7.06%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 2.95E-08 6.E-04 43.25% 1.05E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 4.87E-11 2.E-07 0.01% 1.74E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 9.85E-13 2.E-05 1.80% 3.52E-13 1E-08 20.35%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 6.77E-08 1.E-03 91.29% 2.42E-08 3E-08 49.67%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 6.77E-08 1.E-03 91.29% 2.42E-08 3E-08 49.67%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 1.50E+01 1.59E-07 1.E-03 100%5.70E-08 6.6E-08 100%1.17E+01 6.81E-08 8.E-05 100%2.43E-08 2.4E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
BGSITE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-9
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 10 - Barium Sulfate Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
1.76E-03 2.14E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 7.65E-12 2E-11 0.01%3.35E-04 4.08E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.46E-12 3E-12 0.00%
9.30E+00 2.43E-08 8.E-05 2.13% 8.67E-09 1E-08 5.41%6.43E+00 1.68E-08 6.E-05 12.63% 6.00E-09 9E-09 7.78%
1.50E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.08E-06 2.81E-15 4.E-06 0.11% 1.00E-15 1E-10 0.05%3.35E-07 8.74E-16 1.E-06 0.28% 3.12E-16 4E-11 0.04%
1.50E+01 2.43E-08 8.E-05 2.24% 8.68E-09 1E-08 5.47%1.17E+01 1.68E-08 6.E-05 12.91% 6.00E-09 9E-09 7.82%
1.76E-03 3.62E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.29E-11 3E-11 0.01%3.35E-04 6.88E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.46E-12 5E-12 0.00%
9.30E+00 1.91E-07 4.E-04 10.08% 6.83E-08 6E-08 25.57%6.43E+00 1.32E-07 3.E-04 59.67% 4.72E-08 4E-08 36.75%
1.50E+01 3.09E-07 1.E-04 2.71% 1.10E-07 6E-08 22.95%1.17E+01 2.40E-07 8.E-05 18.02% 8.56E-08 4E-08 37.00%
1.08E-06 2.22E-14 3.E-05 0.83% 7.91E-15 1E-09 0.43%3.35E-07 6.88E-15 1.E-05 2.22% 2.46E-15 3E-10 0.28%
1.50E+01 5.00E-07 5.E-04 13.63% 1.79E-07 1E-07 48.95%1.17E+01 3.72E-07 4.E-04 79.91% 1.33E-07 9E-08 74.04%
1.76E-03 1.03E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 3.67E-14 2E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 1.95E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 6.98E-15 4E-15 0.00%
9.30E+00 5.43E-10 4.E-05 0.95% 1.94E-10 8E-10 0.35%6.43E+00 3.75E-10 3.E-05 5.65% 1.34E-10 6E-10 0.50%
1.50E+01 8.77E-10 9.E-06 0.23% 3.13E-10 3E-08 10.94%1.17E+01 6.80E-10 7.E-06 1.53% 2.43E-10 2E-08 17.65%
1.08E-06 6.29E-17 2.E-09 0.00% 2.25E-17 9E-13 0.00%3.35E-07 1.95E-17 5.E-10 0.00% 6.98E-18 3E-13 0.00%
1.50E+01 1.42E-09 4.E-05 1.19% 5.07E-10 3E-08 11.29%1.17E+01 1.06E-09 3.E-05 7.18% 3.77E-10 2E-08 18.15%
1.50E+01 5.26E-07 6.E-04 17.05% 1.88E-07 2E-07 65.72%1.17E+01 3.90E-07 4.E-04 100.00% 1.39E-07 1E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 1.16E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.15E-10 2E-10 0.10% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 2.39E-08 2.E-03 42.00% 8.53E-09 4E-08 15.27% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 7.12E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.54E-08 1E-08 4.87% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 7.45E-08 1.E-03 39.30% 2.66E-08 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.25E-08 1.23E-10 4.E-07 0.01% 4.40E-11 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.54E-10 2.49E-12 6.E-05 1.64% 8.88E-13 3E-08 14.05% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.71E-07 3.E-03 82.95% 6.10E-08 8E-08 34.28% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.71E-07 3.E-03 82.95% 6.10E-08 8E-08 34.28% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.50E+01 6.97E-07 4.E-03 100%2.49E-07 2.4E-07 100%1.17E+01 3.90E-07 4.E-04 100%1.39E-07 1.2E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-10
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 11 - ATI Titanium Plant and USM Parking Lots
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 6.18E-02 9.51E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.40E-10 7E-10 0.09% 3.35E-04 5.16E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.84E-12 4E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.28E+00 3.06E-08 1.E-04 0.63% 1.09E-08 2E-08 2.06%6.43E+00 2.12E-08 7.E-05 7.24% 7.58E-09 1E-08 3.64%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.70E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.42E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.58E-06 2.17E-14 3.E-05 0.19% 7.76E-15 1E-09 0.13%3.35E-07 1.11E-15 2.E-06 0.16% 3.95E-16 5E-11 0.02%
Dermal Total 1.42E+01 3.16E-08 1.E-04 0.82% 1.13E-08 2E-08 2.27%1.17E+01 2.12E-08 7.E-05 7.40% 7.58E-09 1E-08 3.66%
Ingestion Total PCBs 6.18E-02 2.54E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 9.07E-10 2E-09 0.23%3.35E-04 1.38E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 4.92E-12 1E-11 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.28E+00 3.81E-07 8.E-04 4.72% 1.36E-07 1E-07 15.40%6.43E+00 2.64E-07 5.E-04 54.13% 9.44E-08 8E-08 27.23%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.70E-02 2.75E-09 3.E-06 0.02% 9.83E-10 2E-09 0.20%1.15E-03 4.73E-11 6.E-08 0.01% 1.69E-11 3E-11 0.01%
Total Chromium 1.42E+01 5.82E-07 2.E-04 1.20% 2.08E-07 1E-07 13.05%1.17E+01 4.79E-07 2.E-04 16.35% 1.71E-07 9E-08 27.42%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.58E-06 2.70E-13 4.E-04 2.39% 9.66E-14 1E-08 1.58%3.35E-07 1.38E-14 2.E-05 2.01% 4.92E-15 6E-10 0.20%
Ingestion Total 1.42E+01 9.68E-07 1.E-03 8.33% 3.46E-07 2E-07 30.45%1.17E+01 7.44E-07 7.E-04 72.50% 2.66E-07 2E-07 54.87%
Inhalation Total PCBs 6.18E-02 2.22E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 7.94E-12 5E-12 0.00%3.35E-04 1.21E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 4.31E-14 2E-14 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.28E+00 3.34E-09 2.E-04 1.38% 1.19E-09 5E-09 0.64%6.43E+00 2.31E-09 2.E-04 15.80% 8.27E-10 4E-09 1.14%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.70E-02 2.41E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 8.61E-12 4E-12 0.00%1.15E-03 4.14E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.48E-13 7E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.42E+01 5.09E-09 5.E-05 0.31% 1.82E-09 2E-07 19.19%1.17E+01 4.19E-09 4.E-05 4.29% 1.50E-09 1E-07 40.33%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.58E-06 2.37E-15 6.E-08 0.00% 8.46E-16 3E-11 0.00%3.35E-07 1.21E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 4.30E-17 2E-12 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.42E+01 8.47E-09 3.E-04 1.69% 3.03E-09 2E-07 19.84%1.17E+01 6.51E-09 2.E-04 20.09% 2.32E-09 1E-07 41.47%
Soil Total 1.42E+01 1.01E-06 2.E-03 10.84% 3.60E-07 4E-07 52.56%1.17E+01 7.71E-07 1.E-03 100.00% 2.75E-07 3E-07 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 5.33E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.90E-09 1E-09 0.14%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 1.09E-07 7.E-03 45.14% 3.91E-08 2E-07 21.13%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 3.26E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.17E-07 5E-08 6.74%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 3.42E-07 7.E-03 42.24% 1.22E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 5.64E-10 2.E-06 0.01% 2.01E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 1.14E-11 3.E-04 1.76% 4.07E-12 2E-07 19.44%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 7.83E-07 1.E-02 89.16%2.80E-07 4E-07 47.44%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 7.83E-07 1.E-02 89.16% 2.80E-07 4E-07 47.44%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 1.42E+01 1.79E-06 2.E-02 100%6.40E-07 8.0E-07 100%1.17E+01 7.71E-07 1.E-03 100%2.75E-07 3.1E-07 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
BGSITE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-10
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 11 - ATI Titanium Plant and USM Parking Lots
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
6.18E-02 2.26E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 8.06E-09 2E-08 0.21%3.35E-04 1.22E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 4.37E-11 9E-11 0.00%
9.28E+00 7.26E-07 2.E-03 1.96% 2.59E-07 4E-07 5.04%6.43E+00 5.04E-07 2.E-03 12.27% 1.80E-07 3E-07 7.25%
6.70E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.42E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
6.58E-06 5.15E-13 7.E-04 0.60% 1.84E-13 2E-08 0.31%3.35E-07 2.62E-14 4.E-05 0.27% 9.36E-15 1E-09 0.03%
1.42E+01 7.49E-07 3.E-03 2.56% 2.67E-07 4E-07 5.56%1.17E+01 5.04E-07 2.E-03 12.55% 1.80E-07 3E-07 7.28%
6.18E-02 3.81E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.36E-08 3E-08 0.35%3.35E-04 2.07E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 7.38E-11 1E-10 0.00%
9.28E+00 5.72E-06 1.E-02 9.26% 2.04E-06 2E-06 23.83%6.43E+00 3.97E-06 8.E-03 57.99% 1.42E-06 1E-06 34.25%
6.70E-02 4.13E-08 5.E-05 0.04% 1.48E-08 2E-08 0.31%1.15E-03 7.09E-10 9.E-07 0.01% 2.53E-10 4E-10 0.01%
1.42E+01 8.72E-06 3.E-03 2.35% 3.12E-06 2E-06 20.19%1.17E+01 7.19E-06 2.E-03 17.52% 2.57E-06 1E-06 34.49%
6.58E-06 4.06E-12 6.E-03 4.69% 1.45E-12 2E-07 2.44%3.35E-07 2.07E-13 3.E-04 2.16% 7.38E-14 1E-08 0.26%
1.42E+01 1.45E-05 2.E-02 16.35% 5.19E-06 4E-06 47.12%1.17E+01 1.12E-05 1.E-02 77.67% 3.98E-06 3E-06 69.01%
6.18E-02 1.52E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 5.41E-11 3E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 8.22E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 2.94E-13 2E-13 0.00%
9.28E+00 2.28E-08 2.E-03 1.23% 8.13E-09 3E-08 0.45%6.43E+00 1.58E-08 1.E-03 7.69% 5.64E-09 2E-08 0.65%
6.70E-02 1.64E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 5.87E-11 3E-11 0.00%1.15E-03 2.82E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.01E-12 5E-13 0.00%
1.42E+01 3.47E-08 3.E-04 0.28% 1.24E-08 1E-06 13.50%1.17E+01 2.86E-08 3.E-04 2.09% 1.02E-08 9E-07 23.05%
6.58E-06 1.61E-14 4.E-07 0.00% 5.77E-15 2E-10 0.00%3.35E-07 8.22E-16 2.E-08 0.00% 2.93E-16 1E-11 0.00%
1.42E+01 5.78E-08 2.E-03 1.51% 2.06E-08 1E-06 13.95%1.17E+01 4.44E-08 1.E-03 9.78% 1.59E-08 9E-07 23.71%
1.42E+01 1.53E-05 3.E-02 20.41% 5.47E-06 5E-06 66.63%1.17E+01 1.17E-05 1.E-02 100.00% 4.18E-06 4E-06 100.00%
2.12E-07 3.63E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.30E-08 7E-09 0.10% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 7.47E-07 5.E-02 40.29% 2.67E-07 1E-06 14.86% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 2.23E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 7.95E-07 4E-07 4.74% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 2.33E-06 5.E-02 37.71% 8.32E-07 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.25E-08 3.85E-09 1.E-05 0.01% 1.37E-09 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.54E-10 7.77E-11 2.E-03 1.57% 2.78E-11 1E-06 13.67% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 5.34E-06 1.E-01 79.59% 1.91E-06 3E-06 33.37% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 5.34E-06 1.E-01 79.59% 1.91E-06 3E-06 33.37% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.42E+01 2.07E-05 1.E-01 100%7.38E-06 7.7E-06 100%1.17E+01 1.17E-05 1.E-02 100%4.18E-06 3.7E-06 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-11
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 12 - Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 5.43E-02 3.40E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.21E-10 2E-10 0.06% 3.35E-04 2.10E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 7.48E-13 1E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.18E+00 6.94E-09 2.E-05 0.24% 2.48E-09 4E-09 0.95%6.43E+00 8.62E-09 3.E-05 6.04% 3.08E-09 5E-09 2.60%
Hexachlorobenzene 5.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.08E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.10E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.99E-05 8.03E-14 1.E-04 1.20% 2.87E-14 4E-09 0.96%3.35E-07 4.49E-16 6.E-07 0.13% 1.60E-16 2E-11 0.01%
Dermal Total 9.08E+00 7.28E-09 1.E-04 1.45% 2.60E-09 8E-09 1.97%1.17E+01 8.63E-09 3.E-05 6.18% 3.08E-09 5E-09 2.62%
Ingestion Total PCBs 5.43E-02 9.07E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.24E-10 6E-10 0.17%3.35E-04 5.59E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.00E-12 4E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.18E+00 8.65E-08 2.E-04 1.82% 3.09E-08 3E-08 7.13%6.43E+00 1.07E-07 2.E-04 45.17% 3.84E-08 3E-08 19.47%
Hexachlorobenzene 5.90E-02 9.85E-10 1.E-06 0.01% 3.52E-10 6E-10 0.14%1.15E-03 1.92E-11 2.E-08 0.01% 6.86E-12 1E-11 0.01%
Total Chromium 9.08E+00 1.52E-07 5.E-05 0.53% 5.41E-08 3E-08 6.94%1.17E+01 1.95E-07 6.E-05 13.64% 6.95E-08 3E-08 19.60%
Total Mercury 1.10E-01 1.84E-09 6.E-06 0.06% 6.56E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 6.16E-10 2.E-06 0.43% 2.20E-10 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.99E-05 1.00E-12 1.E-03 15.01% 3.57E-13 5E-08 11.91%3.35E-07 5.59E-15 8.E-06 1.68% 2.00E-15 3E-10 0.15%
Ingestion Total 9.08E+00 2.42E-07 2.E-03 17.43% 8.63E-08 1E-07 26.29%1.17E+01 3.03E-07 3.E-04 60.92% 1.08E-07 7E-08 39.22%
Inhalation Total PCBs 5.43E-02 1.56E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 5.56E-12 3E-12 0.00%3.35E-04 9.61E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.43E-14 2E-14 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.18E+00 1.49E-09 1.E-04 1.04% 5.31E-10 2E-09 0.59%6.43E+00 1.85E-09 1.E-04 25.86% 6.59E-10 3E-09 1.60%
Hexachlorobenzene 5.90E-02 1.69E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 6.04E-12 3E-12 0.00%1.15E-03 3.30E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.18E-13 5E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.08E+00 2.60E-09 3.E-05 0.27% 9.30E-10 8E-08 20.03%1.17E+01 3.34E-09 3.E-05 7.03% 1.19E-09 1E-07 56.56%
Total Mercury 1.10E-01 3.15E-11 1.E-07 0.00% 1.13E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.06E-11 4.E-08 0.01% 3.78E-12 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.99E-05 1.72E-14 4.E-07 0.00% 6.14E-15 2E-10 0.06%3.35E-07 9.61E-17 2.E-09 0.00% 3.43E-17 1E-12 0.00%
Inhalation Total 9.08E+00 4.15E-09 1.E-04 1.32% 1.48E-09 8E-08 20.67%1.17E+01 5.20E-09 2.E-04 32.90% 1.86E-09 1E-07 58.16%
Soil Total 9.08E+00 2.53E-07 2.E-03 20.20% 9.04E-08 2E-07 48.94%1.17E+01 3.17E-07 5.E-04 100.00% 1.13E-07 2E-07 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 2.81E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.00E-09 6E-10 0.15%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 5.77E-08 4.E-03 40.41% 2.06E-08 9E-08 22.74%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 1.72E-07 0.E+00 0.00%6.15E-08 3E-08 7.25%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 1.80E-07 4.E-03 37.81% 6.43E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 2.97E-10 1.E-06 0.01% 1.06E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 6.01E-12 2.E-04 1.58% 2.15E-12 8E-08 20.92%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 4.13E-07 8.E-03 79.80% 1.48E-07 2E-07 51.06%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 4.13E-07 8.E-03 79.80% 1.48E-07 2E-07 51.06%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 9.08E+00 6.66E-07 1.E-02 100%2.38E-07 3.9E-07 100%1.17E+01 3.17E-07 5.E-04 100%1.13E-07 1.8E-07 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-11
Risk Calculations - USM Worker
PRI 12 - Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
5.43E-02 3.58E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.28E-09 3E-09 0.13%3.35E-04 2.21E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 7.89E-12 2E-11 0.00%
5.18E+00 7.32E-08 2.E-04 0.53% 2.61E-08 4E-08 1.99%6.43E+00 9.09E-08 3.E-04 10.39% 3.25E-08 5E-08 5.09%
5.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
9.08E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.10E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
5.99E-05 8.47E-13 1.E-03 2.64% 3.03E-13 4E-08 2.00%3.35E-07 4.73E-15 7.E-06 0.23% 1.69E-15 2E-10 0.02%
9.08E+00 7.68E-08 1.E-03 3.17% 2.74E-08 8E-08 4.12%1.17E+01 9.09E-08 3.E-04 10.62% 3.25E-08 5E-08 5.11%
5.43E-02 6.04E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.16E-09 4E-09 0.22%3.35E-04 3.73E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.33E-11 3E-11 0.00%
5.18E+00 5.77E-07 1.E-03 2.52% 2.06E-07 2E-07 9.41%6.43E+00 7.16E-07 1.E-03 49.11% 2.56E-07 2E-07 24.04%
5.90E-02 6.57E-09 8.E-06 0.02% 2.35E-09 4E-09 0.19%1.15E-03 1.28E-10 2.E-07 0.01% 4.57E-11 7E-11 0.01%
9.08E+00 1.01E-06 3.E-04 0.73% 3.61E-07 2E-07 9.16%1.17E+01 1.30E-06 4.E-04 14.83% 4.63E-07 2E-07 24.21%
1.10E-01 1.22E-08 4.E-05 0.09% 4.37E-09 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 4.11E-09 1.E-05 0.47% 1.47E-09 0E+00 0.00%
5.99E-05 6.67E-12 1.E-02 20.79% 2.38E-12 3E-07 15.72%3.35E-07 3.73E-14 5.E-05 1.83% 1.33E-14 2E-09 0.18%
9.08E+00 1.61E-06 1.E-02 24.15% 5.76E-07 7E-07 34.69%1.17E+01 2.02E-06 2.E-03 66.25% 7.21E-07 5E-07 48.44%
5.43E-02 6.71E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.40E-11 1E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 4.14E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.48E-13 8E-14 0.00%
5.18E+00 6.40E-09 4.E-04 0.93% 2.29E-09 1E-08 0.50%6.43E+00 7.95E-09 5.E-04 18.18% 2.84E-09 1E-08 1.28%
5.90E-02 7.29E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.60E-11 1E-11 0.00%1.15E-03 1.42E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 5.08E-13 2E-13 0.00%
9.08E+00 1.12E-08 1.E-04 0.24% 4.01E-09 3E-07 17.08%1.17E+01 1.44E-08 1.E-04 4.94% 5.15E-09 4E-07 45.17%
1.10E-01 1.36E-10 5.E-07 0.00% 4.86E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 4.56E-11 2.E-07 0.01% 1.63E-11 0E+00 0.00%
5.99E-05 7.41E-14 2.E-06 0.00% 2.65E-14 1E-09 0.05%3.35E-07 4.14E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 1.48E-16 6E-12 0.00%
9.08E+00 1.79E-08 5.E-04 1.18% 6.39E-09 3E-07 17.64%1.17E+01 2.24E-08 7.E-04 23.13% 8.00E-09 4E-07 46.44%
9.08E+00 1.71E-06 1.E-02 28.51% 6.09E-07 1E-06 56.44%1.17E+01 2.13E-06 3.E-03 100.00% 7.61E-07 1E-06 100.00%
2.12E-07 1.21E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 4.33E-09 2E-09 0.13% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 2.49E-07 2.E-02 36.20% 8.89E-08 4E-07 19.40% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 7.42E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 2.65E-07 1E-07 6.19% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 7.76E-07 2.E-02 33.87% 2.77E-07 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.25E-08 1.28E-09 4.E-06 0.01% 4.58E-10 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.54E-10 2.59E-11 6.E-04 1.41% 9.25E-12 4E-07 17.85% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.78E-06 3.E-02 71.49% 6.36E-07 9E-07 43.56% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.78E-06 3.E-02 71.49% 6.36E-07 9E-07 43.56% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
9.08E+00 3.49E-06 5.E-02 100%1.25E-06 2E-06 100%1.17E+01 2.13E-06 3.E-03 100%7.61E-07 9.6E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-12
Risk Calculations - Nearby Worker
PRI 11 - ATI Titanium Plant and USM Parking Lots
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 6.18E-02 2.68E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 9.56E-10 2E-09 0.09% 3.35E-04 1.45E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 5.18E-12 1E-11 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.28E+00 8.61E-08 3.E-04 0.71% 3.07E-08 5E-08 2.25%6.43E+00 5.97E-08 2.E-04 7.43% 2.13E-08 3E-08 3.85%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.70E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.42E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.58E-06 6.11E-14 9.E-05 0.22% 2.18E-14 3E-09 0.14%3.35E-07 3.11E-15 4.E-06 0.17% 1.11E-15 1E-10 0.02%
Dermal Total 1.42E+01 8.88E-08 4.E-04 0.93% 3.17E-08 5E-08 2.49%1.17E+01 5.97E-08 2.E-04 7.60% 2.13E-08 3E-08 3.87%
Ingestion Total PCBs 6.18E-02 7.14E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.55E-09 5E-09 0.25%3.35E-04 3.87E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.38E-11 3E-11 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.28E+00 1.07E-06 2.E-03 5.33% 3.83E-07 3E-07 16.84%6.43E+00 7.44E-07 1.E-03 55.55% 2.66E-07 2E-07 28.75%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.70E-02 7.74E-09 1.E-05 0.02% 2.77E-09 4E-09 0.22%1.15E-03 1.33E-10 2.E-07 0.01% 4.75E-11 8E-11 0.01%
Total Chromium 1.42E+01 1.64E-06 5.E-04 1.36% 5.84E-07 3E-07 14.27%1.17E+01 1.35E-06 4.E-04 16.78% 4.81E-07 2E-07 28.95%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.58E-06 7.61E-13 1.E-03 2.70% 2.72E-13 4E-08 1.73%3.35E-07 3.87E-14 6.E-05 2.07% 1.38E-14 2E-09 0.22%
Ingestion Total 1.42E+01 2.72E-06 4.E-03 9.41% 9.72E-07 7E-07 33.30%1.17E+01 2.09E-06 2.E-03 74.41% 7.47E-07 5E-07 57.93%
Inhalation Total PCBs 6.18E-02 5.46E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.95E-11 1E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 2.96E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.06E-13 6E-14 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.28E+00 8.19E-09 5.E-04 1.36% 2.93E-09 1E-08 0.61%6.43E+00 5.68E-09 4.E-04 14.15% 2.03E-09 9E-09 1.05%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.70E-02 5.92E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.11E-11 1E-11 0.00%1.15E-03 1.02E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.63E-13 2E-13 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.42E+01 1.25E-08 1.E-04 0.31% 4.46E-09 4E-07 18.31%1.17E+01 1.03E-08 1.E-04 3.85% 3.68E-09 3E-07 37.16%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.58E-06 5.81E-15 1.E-07 0.00% 2.08E-15 8E-11 0.00%3.35E-07 2.96E-16 7.E-09 0.00% 1.06E-16 4E-12 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.42E+01 2.08E-08 7.E-04 1.67% 7.43E-09 4E-07 18.93%1.17E+01 1.60E-08 5.E-04 17.99% 5.71E-09 3E-07 38.21%
Soil Total 1.42E+01 2.83E-06 5.E-03 12.01% 1.01E-06 1E-06 54.72%1.17E+01 2.17E-06 3.E-03 100.00% 7.74E-07 8E-07 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.31E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 4.67E-09 3E-09 0.13%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 2.69E-07 2.E-02 44.55% 9.60E-08 4E-07 20.16%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 8.01E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 2.86E-07 1E-07 6.43%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 8.38E-07 2.E-02 41.69% 2.99E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 1.38E-09 5.E-06 0.01% 4.95E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 2.80E-11 7.E-04 1.74% 1.00E-11 4E-07 18.56%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.92E-06 4.E-02 87.99% 6.87E-07 9E-07 45.28%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.92E-06 4.E-02 87.99% 6.87E-07 9E-07 45.28%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 1.42E+01 4.76E-06 4.E-02 100%1.70E-06 2E-06 100%1.17E+01 2.17E-06 3.E-03 100%7.74E-07 8.3E-07 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-12
Risk Calculations - Nearby Worker
PRI 11 - ATI Titanium Plant and USM Parking Lots
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or
EC (mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
6.18E-02 1.66E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 5.93E-09 1E-08 0.21%3.35E-04 9.01E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.22E-11 6E-11 0.00%
9.28E+00 5.35E-07 2.E-03 2.03% 1.91E-07 3E-07 5.14%6.43E+00 3.71E-07 1.E-03 12.32% 1.32E-07 2E-07 7.32%
6.70E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.42E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
6.58E-06 3.79E-13 5.E-04 0.62% 1.35E-13 2E-08 0.32%3.35E-07 1.93E-14 3.E-05 0.27% 6.89E-15 9E-10 0.03%
1.42E+01 5.51E-07 2.E-03 2.64% 1.97E-07 3E-07 5.67%1.17E+01 3.71E-07 1.E-03 12.60% 1.32E-07 2E-07 7.35%
6.18E-02 2.80E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.00E-08 2E-08 0.36%3.35E-04 1.52E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 5.43E-11 1E-10 0.00%
9.28E+00 4.21E-06 8.E-03 9.57% 1.50E-06 1E-06 24.29%6.43E+00 2.92E-06 6.E-03 58.22% 1.04E-06 9E-07 34.58%
6.70E-02 3.04E-08 4.E-05 0.04% 1.09E-08 2E-08 0.31%1.15E-03 5.22E-10 7.E-07 0.01% 1.86E-10 3E-10 0.01%
1.42E+01 6.42E-06 2.E-03 2.43% 2.29E-06 1E-06 20.58%1.17E+01 5.29E-06 2.E-03 17.58% 1.89E-06 9E-07 34.82%
6.58E-06 2.99E-12 4.E-03 4.85% 1.07E-12 1E-07 2.49%3.35E-07 1.52E-13 2.E-04 2.17% 5.43E-14 7E-09 0.26%
1.42E+01 1.07E-05 1.E-02 16.90% 3.82E-06 3E-06 48.02%1.17E+01 8.21E-06 8.E-03 77.98% 2.93E-06 2E-06 69.67%
6.18E-02 1.07E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.83E-11 2E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 5.81E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 2.07E-13 1E-13 0.00%
9.28E+00 1.61E-08 1.E-03 1.22% 5.74E-09 2E-08 0.44%6.43E+00 1.12E-08 7.E-04 7.41% 3.98E-09 2E-08 0.63%
6.70E-02 1.16E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 4.15E-11 2E-11 0.00%1.15E-03 1.99E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 7.12E-13 3E-13 0.00%
1.42E+01 2.45E-08 2.E-04 0.28% 8.76E-09 7E-07 13.21%1.17E+01 2.02E-08 2.E-04 2.02% 7.22E-09 6E-07 22.34%
6.58E-06 1.14E-14 3.E-07 0.00% 4.07E-15 2E-10 0.00%3.35E-07 5.81E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 2.07E-16 8E-12 0.00%
1.42E+01 4.08E-08 1.E-03 1.50% 1.46E-08 8E-07 13.65%1.17E+01 3.14E-08 9.E-04 9.43% 1.12E-08 6E-07 22.97%
1.42E+01 1.13E-05 2.E-02 21.04% 4.03E-06 4E-06 67.35%1.17E+01 8.61E-06 1.E-02 100.00% 3.08E-06 3E-06 100.00%
2.12E-07 2.57E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 9.17E-09 5E-09 0.09% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 5.28E-07 4.E-02 39.98% 1.88E-07 8E-07 14.54% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 1.57E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 5.62E-07 3E-07 4.64% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.65E-06 3.E-02 37.41% 5.88E-07 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.25E-08 2.72E-09 9.E-06 0.01% 9.71E-10 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.54E-10 5.49E-11 1.E-03 1.56% 1.96E-11 7E-07 13.38% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 3.77E-06 7.E-02 78.96% 1.35E-06 2E-06 32.65% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 3.77E-06 7.E-02 78.96% 1.35E-06 2E-06 32.65% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.42E+01 1.51E-05 9.E-02 100%5.38E-06 5.6E-06 100%1.17E+01 8.61E-06 1.E-02 100%3.08E-06 2.7E-06 100%
SITE BG
RME
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-13
Risk Calculations - Nearby Worker
PRI 12 - Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 5.43E-02 6.18E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.21E-09 4E-09 0.08% 3.35E-04 3.82E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.36E-11 3E-11 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.18E+00 1.26E-07 4.E-04 0.33% 4.51E-08 7E-08 1.25%6.43E+00 1.57E-07 5.E-04 6.77% 5.61E-08 8E-08 3.22%
Hexachlorobenzene 5.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.08E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.10E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.99E-05 1.46E-12 2.E-03 1.64% 5.22E-13 7E-08 1.25%3.35E-07 8.17E-15 1.E-05 0.15% 2.92E-15 4E-10 0.01%
Dermal Total 9.08E+00 1.33E-07 3.E-03 1.97% 4.73E-08 1E-07 2.58%1.17E+01 1.57E-07 5.E-04 6.92% 5.61E-08 8E-08 3.23%
Ingestion Total PCBs 5.43E-02 1.65E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 5.89E-09 1E-08 0.22%3.35E-04 1.02E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.64E-11 7E-11 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.18E+00 1.57E-06 3.E-03 2.47% 5.62E-07 5E-07 9.32%6.43E+00 1.96E-06 4.E-03 50.62% 6.98E-07 6E-07 24.05%
Hexachlorobenzene 5.90E-02 1.79E-08 2.E-05 0.02% 6.40E-09 1E-08 0.19%1.15E-03 3.50E-10 4.E-07 0.01% 1.25E-10 2E-10 0.01%
Total Chromium 9.08E+00 2.76E-06 9.E-04 0.72% 9.85E-07 5E-07 9.07%1.17E+01 3.54E-06 1.E-03 15.29% 1.27E-06 6E-07 24.21%
Total Mercury 1.10E-01 3.34E-08 1.E-04 0.09% 1.19E-08 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.12E-08 4.E-05 0.48% 4.01E-09 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.99E-05 1.82E-11 3.E-02 20.44% 6.51E-12 8E-07 15.57%3.35E-07 1.02E-13 1.E-04 1.88% 3.64E-14 5E-09 0.18%
Ingestion Total 9.08E+00 4.40E-06 3.E-02 23.74% 1.57E-06 2E-06 34.37%1.17E+01 5.51E-06 5.E-03 68.28% 1.97E-06 1E-06 48.46%
Inhalation Total PCBs 5.43E-02 1.91E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 6.81E-11 4E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 1.18E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.20E-13 2E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.18E+00 1.82E-08 1.E-03 0.95% 6.49E-09 3E-08 0.51%6.43E+00 2.26E-08 2.E-03 19.49% 8.07E-09 3E-08 1.33%
Hexachlorobenzene 5.90E-02 2.07E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 7.40E-11 3E-11 0.00%1.15E-03 4.04E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.44E-12 7E-13 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.08E+00 3.19E-08 3.E-04 0.25% 1.14E-08 1E-06 17.60%1.17E+01 4.09E-08 4.E-04 5.30% 1.46E-08 1E-06 46.98%
Total Mercury 1.10E-01 3.86E-10 1.E-06 0.00% 1.38E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.30E-10 4.E-07 0.01% 4.63E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.99E-05 2.10E-13 5.E-06 0.00% 7.51E-14 3E-09 0.05%3.35E-07 1.18E-15 3.E-08 0.00% 4.20E-16 2E-11 0.00%
Inhalation Total 9.08E+00 5.08E-08 2.E-03 1.21% 1.82E-08 1E-06 18.17%1.17E+01 6.37E-08 2.E-03 24.79% 2.27E-08 1E-06 48.31%
Soil Total 9.08E+00 4.58E-06 3.E-02 26.92% 1.64E-06 3E-06 55.12%1.17E+01 5.73E-06 8.E-03 100.00% 2.05E-06 3E-06 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 3.44E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.23E-08 7E-09 0.13%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 7.07E-07 5.E-02 37.00% 2.52E-07 1E-06 19.99%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 2.11E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 7.53E-07 3E-07 6.37%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 2.20E-06 4.E-02 34.63%7.87E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 3.64E-09 1.E-05 0.01% 1.30E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 7.36E-11 2.E-03 1.44% 2.63E-11 1E-06 18.39%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 5.06E-06 9.E-02 73.08% 1.81E-06 2E-06 44.88%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 5.06E-06 9.E-02 73.08% 1.81E-06 2E-06 44.88%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 9.08E+00 9.64E-06 1.E-01 100%3.44E-06 5.4E-06 100%1.17E+01 5.73E-06 8.E-03 100%2.05E-06 2.6E-06 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
2.E-06
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-13
Risk Calculations - Nearby Worker
PRI 12 - Ancillary Worker Exposure Areas
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
5.43E-02 2.75E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 9.84E-09 2E-08 0.18%3.35E-04 1.70E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 6.07E-11 1E-10 0.00%
5.18E+00 5.63E-07 2.E-03 0.82% 2.01E-07 3E-07 2.82%6.43E+00 6.99E-07 2.E-03 11.69% 2.50E-07 4E-07 6.55%
5.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
9.08E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.10E-01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
5.99E-05 6.52E-12 9.E-03 4.05% 2.33E-12 3E-07 2.83%3.35E-07 3.64E-14 5.E-05 0.26% 1.30E-14 2E-09 0.03%
9.08E+00 5.91E-07 1.E-02 4.87% 2.11E-07 6E-07 5.83%1.17E+01 7.00E-07 2.E-03 11.95% 2.50E-07 4E-07 6.58%
5.43E-02 4.65E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.66E-08 3E-08 0.31%3.35E-04 2.87E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.02E-10 2E-10 0.00%
5.18E+00 4.43E-06 9.E-03 3.86% 1.58E-06 1E-06 13.32%6.43E+00 5.51E-06 1.E-02 55.24% 1.97E-06 2E-06 30.94%
5.90E-02 5.05E-08 6.E-05 0.03% 1.80E-08 3E-08 0.27%1.15E-03 9.85E-10 1.E-06 0.01% 3.52E-10 6E-10 0.01%
9.08E+00 7.77E-06 3.E-03 1.13% 2.78E-06 1E-06 12.97%1.17E+01 9.98E-06 3.E-03 16.69% 3.57E-06 2E-06 31.15%
1.10E-01 9.42E-08 3.E-04 0.14% 3.36E-08 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 3.16E-08 1.E-04 0.53% 1.13E-08 0E+00 0.00%
5.99E-05 5.13E-11 7.E-02 31.93% 1.83E-11 2E-06 22.26%3.35E-07 2.87E-13 4.E-04 2.05% 1.02E-13 1E-08 0.23%
9.08E+00 1.24E-05 9.E-02 37.09% 4.43E-06 5E-06 49.12%1.17E+01 1.55E-05 1.E-02 74.52% 5.54E-06 4E-06 62.34%
5.43E-02 2.68E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 9.59E-11 5E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 1.66E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 5.92E-13 3E-13 0.00%
5.18E+00 2.56E-08 2.E-03 0.74% 9.15E-09 4E-08 0.37%6.43E+00 3.18E-08 2.E-03 10.63% 1.14E-08 5E-08 0.85%
5.90E-02 2.92E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.04E-10 5E-11 0.00%1.15E-03 5.69E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.03E-12 9E-13 0.00%
9.08E+00 4.49E-08 4.E-04 0.20% 1.60E-08 1E-06 12.58%1.17E+01 5.76E-08 6.E-04 2.89% 2.06E-08 2E-06 30.22%
1.10E-01 5.44E-10 2.E-06 0.00% 1.94E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.82E-10 6.E-07 0.00% 6.52E-11 0E+00 0.00%
5.99E-05 2.96E-13 7.E-06 0.00% 1.06E-13 4E-09 0.04%3.35E-07 1.66E-15 4.E-08 0.00% 5.92E-16 2E-11 0.00%
9.08E+00 7.16E-08 2.E-03 0.94% 2.56E-08 1E-06 12.98%1.17E+01 8.97E-08 3.E-03 13.53% 3.20E-08 2E-06 31.08%
9.08E+00 1.31E-05 1.E-01 42.91% 4.66E-06 7E-06 67.93%1.17E+01 1.63E-05 2.E-02 100.00% 5.83E-06 6E-06 100.00%
2.12E-07 4.84E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.73E-08 1E-08 0.09% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 9.95E-07 7.E-02 28.91% 3.56E-07 2E-06 14.28% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 2.97E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 1.06E-06 5E-07 4.55% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 3.11E-06 6.E-02 27.05% 1.11E-06 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.25E-08 5.13E-09 2.E-05 0.01% 1.83E-09 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.54E-10 1.04E-10 3.E-03 1.13% 3.70E-11 1E-06 13.14% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 7.12E-06 1.E-01 57.09% 2.54E-06 3E-06 32.07% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 7.12E-06 1.E-01 57.09% 2.54E-06 3E-06 32.07% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
9.08E+00 2.02E-05 2.E-01 100%7.21E-06 1.1E-05 100%1.17E+01 1.63E-05 2.E-02 100%5.83E-06 5.7E-06 100%
4.E-06
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-14
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 8 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 4.63E-01 1.17E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.19E-10 8E-10 0.13% 3.35E-04 8.50E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 3.04E-13 6E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.51E+01 8.22E-09 3.E-05 0.54% 2.94E-09 4E-09 0.71% 6.43E+00 3.50E-09 1.E-05 20.23% 1.25E-09 2E-09 11.40%
Hexachlorobenzene 4.29E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 3.72E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.40E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 7.21E-04 3.92E-13 6.E-04 10.97% 1.40E-13 2E-08 2.92%3.35E-07 1.82E-16 3.E-07 0.45% 6.50E-17 8E-12 0.05%
Dermal Total 3.72E+01 9.40E-09 6.E-04 11.51% 3.36E-09 2E-08 3.76%1.17E+01 3.50E-09 1.E-05 20.68% 1.25E-09 2E-09 11.45%
Ingestion Total PCBs 4.63E-01 9.91E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.54E-10 7E-10 0.11%3.35E-04 7.17E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 2.56E-13 5E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.51E+01 3.24E-08 6.E-05 1.27% 1.16E-08 1E-08 1.67%6.43E+00 1.38E-08 3.E-05 47.80% 4.92E-09 4E-09 26.93%
Hexachlorobenzene 4.29E+00 9.18E-09 1.E-05 0.22% 3.28E-09 5E-09 0.84%1.15E-03 2.46E-12 3.E-09 0.01% 8.79E-13 1E-12 0.01%
Total Chromium 3.72E+01 7.96E-08 3.E-05 0.52% 2.84E-08 1E-08 2.28%1.17E+01 2.50E-08 8.E-06 14.44% 8.91E-09 4E-09 27.11%
Total Mercury 1.40E-02 3.00E-11 1.E-07 0.00% 1.07E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 7.90E-11 3.E-07 0.46% 2.82E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 7.21E-04 1.54E-12 2.E-03 43.20% 5.51E-13 7E-08 11.50%3.35E-07 7.17E-16 1.E-06 1.78% 2.56E-16 3E-11 0.20%
Ingestion Total 3.72E+01 1.22E-07 2.E-03 45.22% 4.36E-08 1E-07 16.41%1.17E+01 3.88E-08 4.E-05 64.47% 1.39E-08 9E-09 54.25%
Inhalation Total PCBs 4.63E-01 7.26E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.59E-12 1E-12 0.00%3.35E-04 5.25E-15 0.E+00 0.00% 1.88E-15 1E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.51E+01 2.37E-10 2.E-05 0.31% 8.47E-11 4E-10 0.06%6.43E+00 1.01E-10 7.E-06 11.67% 3.60E-11 2E-10 0.94%
Hexachlorobenzene 4.29E+00 6.72E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.40E-11 1E-11 0.00%1.15E-03 1.80E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 6.44E-15 3E-15 0.00%
Total Chromium 3.72E+01 5.83E-10 6.E-06 0.11% 2.08E-10 2E-08 2.81%1.17E+01 1.83E-10 2.E-06 3.17% 6.53E-11 5E-09 33.35%
Total Mercury 1.40E-02 2.19E-13 7.E-10 0.00% 7.84E-14 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 5.78E-13 2.E-09 0.00% 2.07E-13 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 7.21E-04 1.13E-14 3.E-07 0.01% 4.03E-15 2E-10 0.02%3.35E-07 5.25E-18 1.E-10 0.00% 1.88E-18 7E-14 0.00%
Inhalation Total 3.72E+01 8.95E-10 2.E-05 0.43% 3.20E-10 2E-08 2.89%1.17E+01 2.84E-10 9.E-06 14.84% 1.02E-10 6E-09 34.30%
Soil Total 3.72E+01 1.32E-07 3.E-03 57.16% 4.73E-08 1E-07 23.06%1.17E+01 4.26E-08 6.E-05 100.00% 1.52E-08 2E-08 100.00%
Water Dermal Total PCBs 1.47E-04 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.07E-02 1.57E-08 5.E-05 1.03% 5.62E-09 8E-09 1.35%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.24E+01 2.15E-06 2.E-05 0.30%7.67E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Dibromochloromethane 2.78E-02 4.78E-08 2.E-06 0.05% 1.71E-08 1E-09 0.23%------0.00%----0.00%
Nitrate as N 1.36E+00 2.35E-07 1.E-07 0.00% 8.40E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Perchlorate 7.10E-04 1.23E-10 2.E-07 0.00% 4.40E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Fluoride 4.33E+01 7.51E-06 2.E-04 3.68% 2.68E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Chloroform 6.80E-03 1.56E-08 2.E-06 0.03%5.57E-09 2E-10 0.03%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Aluminum 2.18E+01 3.79E-06 4.E-06 0.07% 1.35E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Iron 2.02E+02 3.50E-05 5.E-05 0.98%1.25E-05 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Molybdenum 4.71E-02 8.18E-09 2.E-06 0.03% 2.92E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Nickel 2.38E-01 8.27E-09 1.E-05 0.20% 2.95E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Barium 1.08E+00 1.88E-07 1.E-05 0.26% 6.71E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Beryllium 2.02E-03 3.50E-10 2.E-05 0.49% 1.25E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Cadmium 2.55E-03 4.43E-10 2.E-05 0.35% 1.58E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Cobalt 1.26E-01 8.72E-09 3.E-05 0.57% 3.11E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Copper 4.83E-02 8.38E-09 2.E-07 0.00%2.99E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Vanadium 2.78E-01 4.82E-08 4.E-04 7.27% 1.72E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Bromoform 3.75E-02 6.99E-08 3.E-06 0.07%2.49E-08 2E-10 0.03%------0.00%----0.00%
Bromodichloromethane 1.70E-02 3.05E-08 2.E-06 0.03% 1.09E-08 7E-10 0.11%------0.00%----0.00%
Trichloroacetic acid 1.17E+00 7.56E-07 4.E-05 0.74% 2.70E-07 2E-08 3.03%------0.00%----0.00%
Dichloroacetic Acid 1.03E+00 4.46E-07 1.E-04 2.19% 1.59E-07 8E-09 1.28%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Zinc 2.20E-01 3.40E-08 1.E-07 0.00%1.22E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Pentachlorophenol 2.70E-02 2.97E-06 6.E-04 11.64% 1.06E-06 4E-07 68.12%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.08E-08 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Dermal Total 2.02E+02 5.33E-05 2.E-03 30.00% 1.91E-05 5E-07 74.18%------0.00%----0.00%
Water Total 2.02E+02 5.33E-05 2.E-03 30.00% 1.91E-05 5E-07 74.18%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 2.42E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 8.65E-11 5E-11 0.01%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 4.98E-09 3.E-04 6.50% 1.78E-09 8E-09 1.23%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 1.48E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 5.30E-09 2E-09 0.39%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 1.55E-08 3.E-04 6.09% 5.54E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 2.56E-11 9.E-08 0.00% 9.16E-12 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 5.18E-13 1.E-05 0.25% 1.85E-13 7E-09 1.13%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 3.56E-08 7.E-04 12.85% 1.27E-08 2E-08 2.76%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 3.56E-08 7.E-04 12.85% 1.27E-08 2E-08 2.76%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 2.02E+02 5.35E-05 5.E-03 100%1.91E-05 6.2E-07 100%1.17E+01 4.26E-08 6.E-05 100%1.52E-08 1.6E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
CTE
Matrix Pathway Analyte
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-14
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 8 - Northwest Ponded Waste Lagoon Overflow
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Water Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Manganese
Dibromochloromethane
Nitrate as N
Perchlorate
Fluoride
Chloroform
Total Aluminum
Total Iron
Total Molybdenum
Total Nickel
Total Barium
Total Beryllium
Total Cadmium
Total Cobalt
Total Copper
Total Vanadium
Bromoform
Bromodichloromethane
Trichloroacetic acid
Dichloroacetic Acid
Total Zinc
Pentachlorophenol
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Water Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
4.63E-01 3.29E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.17E-09 2E-09 0.14%3.35E-04 2.38E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 8.50E-13 2E-12 0.00%
1.51E+01 2.30E-08 8.E-05 0.39% 8.22E-09 1E-08 0.71%6.43E+00 9.79E-09 3.E-05 12.30% 3.50E-09 5E-09 7.39%
4.29E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
3.72E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.40E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
7.21E-04 1.10E-12 2.E-03 7.93% 3.92E-13 5E-08 2.94%3.35E-07 5.10E-16 7.E-07 0.27% 1.82E-16 2E-11 0.03%
3.72E+01 2.63E-08 2.E-03 8.32% 9.40E-09 7E-08 3.79%1.17E+01 9.79E-09 3.E-05 12.57% 3.50E-09 5E-09 7.42%
4.63E-01 5.55E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.98E-09 4E-09 0.23%3.35E-04 4.02E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.43E-12 3E-12 0.00%
1.51E+01 1.81E-07 4.E-04 1.84% 6.48E-08 6E-08 3.37% 6.43E+00 7.71E-08 2.E-04 58.12% 2.75E-08 2E-08 34.91%
4.29E+00 5.14E-08 6.E-05 0.33% 1.84E-08 3E-08 1.70%1.15E-03 1.38E-11 2.E-08 0.01% 4.92E-12 8E-12 0.01%
3.72E+01 4.46E-07 1.E-04 0.75% 1.59E-07 8E-08 4.60% 1.17E+01 1.40E-07 5.E-05 17.56% 4.99E-08 2E-08 35.15%
1.40E-02 1.68E-10 6.E-07 0.00% 5.99E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 4.42E-10 1.E-06 0.56% 1.58E-10 0E+00 0.00%
7.21E-04 8.64E-12 1.E-02 62.47% 3.09E-12 4E-07 23.15%3.35E-07 4.02E-15 6.E-06 2.16% 1.43E-15 2E-10 0.26%
3.72E+01 6.84E-07 1.E-02 65.39% 2.44E-07 6E-07 33.04% 1.17E+01 2.17E-07 2.E-04 78.40% 7.76E-08 5E-08 70.34%
4.63E-01 2.03E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 7.26E-12 4E-12 0.00%3.35E-04 1.47E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 5.25E-15 3E-15 0.00%
1.51E+01 6.64E-10 4.E-05 0.22% 2.37E-10 1E-09 0.06%6.43E+00 2.82E-10 2.E-05 7.09% 1.01E-10 4E-10 0.61%
4.29E+00 1.88E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 6.72E-11 3E-11 0.00%1.15E-03 5.05E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.80E-14 8E-15 0.00%
3.72E+01 1.63E-09 2.E-05 0.08% 5.83E-10 5E-08 2.83% 1.17E+01 5.12E-10 5.E-06 1.93% 1.83E-10 2E-08 21.62%
1.40E-02 6.14E-13 2.E-09 0.00% 2.19E-13 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.62E-12 5.E-09 0.00% 5.78E-13 0E+00 0.00%
7.21E-04 3.16E-14 8.E-07 0.00% 1.13E-14 4E-10 0.02%3.35E-07 1.47E-17 4.E-10 0.00% 5.25E-18 2E-13 0.00%
3.72E+01 2.51E-09 6.E-05 0.31% 8.95E-10 5E-08 2.91%1.17E+01 7.96E-10 2.E-05 9.02% 2.84E-10 2E-08 22.23%
3.72E+01 7.13E-07 1.E-02 74.02% 2.55E-07 7E-07 39.74%1.17E+01 2.28E-07 3.E-04 100.00% 8.14E-08 7E-08 100.00%
1.47E-04 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
9.07E-02 3.39E-08 1.E-04 0.57% 1.21E-08 2E-08 1.05%------0.00%----0.00%
1.24E+01 4.63E-06 3.E-05 0.17% 1.65E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.78E-02 1.03E-07 5.E-06 0.03% 3.68E-08 3E-09 0.18%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E+00 5.07E-07 3.E-07 0.00% 1.81E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
7.10E-04 2.66E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 9.48E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
4.33E+01 1.62E-05 4.E-04 2.05% 5.78E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
6.80E-03 3.36E-08 3.E-06 0.02% 1.20E-08 4E-10 0.02%------0.00%----0.00%
2.18E+01 8.16E-06 8.E-06 0.04% 2.92E-06 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.02E+02 7.54E-05 1.E-04 0.55% 2.69E-05 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
4.71E-02 1.76E-08 4.E-06 0.02% 6.30E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.38E-01 1.78E-08 2.E-05 0.11% 6.37E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
1.08E+00 4.05E-07 3.E-05 0.15% 1.45E-07 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.02E-03 7.54E-10 5.E-05 0.27% 2.69E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.55E-03 9.55E-10 4.E-05 0.19% 3.41E-10 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
1.26E-01 1.88E-08 6.E-05 0.32% 6.71E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
4.83E-02 1.81E-08 5.E-07 0.00% 6.45E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.78E-01 1.04E-07 8.E-04 4.04% 3.71E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
3.75E-02 1.51E-07 8.E-06 0.04% 5.38E-08 4E-10 0.02%------0.00%----0.00%
1.70E-02 6.58E-08 3.E-06 0.02% 2.35E-08 1E-09 0.08%------0.00%----0.00%
1.17E+00 1.63E-06 8.E-05 0.41% 5.82E-07 4E-08 2.35%------0.00%----0.00%
1.03E+00 9.61E-07 2.E-04 1.22% 3.43E-07 2E-08 0.99%------0.00%----0.00%
2.20E-01 7.33E-08 2.E-07 0.00% 2.62E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.70E-02 6.40E-06 1.E-03 6.48% 2.29E-06 9E-07 52.79%------0.00%----0.00%
6.08E-08 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.02E+02 1.15E-04 3.E-03 16.69% 4.11E-05 1E-06 57.49%------0.00%----0.00%
2.02E+02 1.15E-04 3.E-03 16.69% 4.11E-05 1E-06 57.49%------0.00%----0.00%
2.12E-07 6.78E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.42E-10 1E-10 0.01%------0.00%----0.00%
4.36E-06 1.39E-08 9.E-04 4.70% 4.98E-09 2E-08 1.24%------0.00%----0.00%
1.30E-05 4.16E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.48E-08 7E-09 0.39%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 4.35E-08 9.E-04 4.40% 1.55E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.25E-08 7.18E-11 2.E-07 0.00% 2.56E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
4.54E-10 1.45E-12 4.E-05 0.18% 5.18E-13 2E-08 1.14%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 9.97E-08 2.E-03 9.29% 3.56E-08 5E-08 2.77%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 9.97E-08 2.E-03 9.29% 3.56E-08 5E-08 2.77%------0.00%----0.00%
2.02E+02 1.16E-04 2.E-02 100%4.13E-05 1.7E-06 100%1.17E+01 2.28E-07 3.E-04 100%8.14E-08 7.1E-08 100%
BG
RME
SITE
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-15
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 11 - ATI Titanium Plant and USM Parking Lots
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 6.18E-02 1.88E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 6.72E-11 1E-10 0.28% 3.35E-04 1.02E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.64E-13 7E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.28E+00 6.05E-09 2.E-05 2.21% 2.16E-09 3E-09 6.76% 6.43E+00 4.20E-09 1.E-05 20.19% 1.50E-09 2E-09 11.23%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.70E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.42E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.58E-06 4.29E-15 6.E-06 0.67% 1.53E-15 2E-10 0.42%3.35E-07 2.19E-16 3.E-07 0.45% 7.80E-17 1E-11 0.05%
Dermal Total 1.42E+01 6.24E-09 3.E-05 2.88% 2.23E-09 4E-09 7.46%1.17E+01 4.20E-09 1.E-05 20.64% 1.50E-09 2E-09 11.28%
Ingestion Total PCBs 6.18E-02 1.59E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 5.67E-11 1E-10 0.24%3.35E-04 8.61E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 3.07E-13 6E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.28E+00 2.38E-08 5.E-05 5.23% 8.51E-09 8E-09 15.98%6.43E+00 1.65E-08 3.E-05 47.71% 5.90E-09 5E-09 26.53%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.70E-02 1.72E-10 2.E-07 0.02% 6.15E-11 1E-10 0.21%1.15E-03 2.95E-12 4.E-09 0.01% 1.05E-12 2E-12 0.01%
Total Chromium 1.42E+01 3.63E-08 1.E-05 1.33% 1.30E-08 6E-09 13.54%1.17E+01 2.99E-08 1.E-05 14.41% 1.07E-08 5E-09 26.71%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.58E-06 1.69E-14 2.E-05 2.65% 6.04E-15 8E-10 1.64%3.35E-07 8.60E-16 1.E-06 1.77% 3.07E-16 4E-11 0.20%
Ingestion Total 1.42E+01 6.05E-08 8.E-05 9.23% 2.16E-08 2E-08 31.60%1.17E+01 4.65E-08 4.E-05 63.90% 1.66E-08 1E-08 53.46%
Inhalation Total PCBs 6.18E-02 1.21E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.33E-13 2E-13 0.00%3.35E-04 6.57E-15 0.E+00 0.00% 2.35E-15 1E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 9.28E+00 1.82E-10 1.E-05 1.33% 6.50E-11 3E-10 0.58%6.43E+00 1.26E-10 8.E-06 12.15% 4.51E-11 2E-10 0.97%
Hexachlorobenzene 6.70E-02 1.31E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.70E-13 2E-13 0.00%1.15E-03 2.26E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 8.06E-15 4E-15 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.42E+01 2.78E-10 3.E-06 0.30% 9.92E-11 8E-09 17.38%1.17E+01 2.29E-10 2.E-06 3.30% 8.17E-11 7E-09 34.29%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.58E-06 1.29E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 4.61E-17 2E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 6.57E-18 2.E-10 0.00% 2.35E-18 9E-14 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.42E+01 4.62E-10 1.E-05 1.64% 1.65E-10 9E-09 17.97%1.17E+01 3.55E-10 1.E-05 15.45% 1.27E-10 7E-09 35.26%
Soil Total 1.42E+01 6.72E-08 1.E-04 13.75% 2.40E-08 3E-08 57.03%1.17E+01 5.10E-08 7.E-05 100.00% 1.82E-08 2E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 2.91E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.04E-10 6E-11 0.12%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 5.97E-09 4.E-04 43.67% 2.13E-09 9E-09 19.14%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 1.78E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 6.36E-09 3E-09 6.10%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 1.86E-08 4.E-04 40.86%6.65E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 3.08E-11 1.E-07 0.01% 1.10E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 6.22E-13 2.E-05 1.71%2.22E-13 8E-09 17.61%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 4.27E-08 8.E-04 86.25%1.53E-08 2E-08 42.97%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 4.27E-08 8.E-04 86.25% 1.53E-08 2E-08 42.97%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 1.42E+01 1.10E-07 9.E-04 100%3.93E-08 4.8E-08 100%1.17E+01 5.10E-08 7.E-05 100%1.82E-08 2.0E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-15
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 11 - ATI Titanium Plant and USM Parking Lots
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
6.18E-02 4.70E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.68E-10 3E-10 0.21%3.35E-04 2.55E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 9.11E-13 2E-12 0.00%
9.28E+00 1.51E-08 5.E-05 2.03% 5.40E-09 8E-09 5.14%6.43E+00 1.05E-08 3.E-05 12.32% 3.75E-09 6E-09 7.32%
6.70E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.42E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
6.58E-06 1.07E-14 2.E-05 0.62% 3.83E-15 5E-10 0.32%3.35E-07 5.46E-16 8.E-07 0.27% 1.95E-16 3E-11 0.03%
1.42E+01 1.56E-08 7.E-05 2.64% 5.57E-09 9E-09 5.67%1.17E+01 1.05E-08 4.E-05 12.60% 3.75E-09 6E-09 7.35%
6.18E-02 7.94E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.83E-10 6E-10 0.36%3.35E-04 4.30E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.54E-12 3E-12 0.00%
9.28E+00 1.19E-07 2.E-04 9.57% 4.26E-08 4E-08 24.29%6.43E+00 8.26E-08 2.E-04 58.22% 2.95E-08 3E-08 34.58%
6.70E-02 8.60E-10 1.E-06 0.04% 3.07E-10 5E-10 0.31%1.15E-03 1.48E-11 2.E-08 0.01% 5.27E-12 8E-12 0.01%
1.42E+01 1.82E-07 6.E-05 2.43% 6.49E-08 3E-08 20.58%1.17E+01 1.50E-07 5.E-05 17.58% 5.35E-08 3E-08 34.82%
6.58E-06 8.45E-14 1.E-04 4.85% 3.02E-14 4E-09 2.49%3.35E-07 4.30E-15 6.E-06 2.17% 1.54E-15 2E-10 0.26%
1.42E+01 3.03E-07 4.E-04 16.90% 1.08E-07 8E-08 48.02%1.17E+01 2.32E-07 2.E-04 77.98% 8.30E-08 5E-08 69.67%
6.18E-02 3.03E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.08E-12 6E-13 0.00%3.35E-04 1.64E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 5.87E-15 3E-15 0.00%
9.28E+00 4.55E-10 3.E-05 1.22% 1.63E-10 7E-10 0.44%6.43E+00 3.16E-10 2.E-05 7.41% 1.13E-10 5E-10 0.63%
6.70E-02 3.29E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.17E-12 5E-13 0.00%1.15E-03 5.64E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 2.01E-14 9E-15 0.00%
1.42E+01 6.94E-10 7.E-06 0.28% 2.48E-10 2E-08 13.21%1.17E+01 5.72E-10 6.E-06 2.02% 2.04E-10 2E-08 22.34%
6.58E-06 3.23E-16 8.E-09 0.00% 1.15E-16 4E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 1.64E-17 4.E-10 0.00% 5.87E-18 2E-13 0.00%
1.42E+01 1.16E-09 4.E-05 1.50% 4.13E-10 2E-08 13.65%1.17E+01 8.88E-10 3.E-05 9.43% 3.17E-10 2E-08 22.97%
1.42E+01 3.19E-07 5.E-04 21.04% 1.14E-07 1E-07 67.35%1.17E+01 2.44E-07 3.E-04 100.00% 8.71E-08 8E-08 100.00%
2.12E-07 7.27E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.60E-10 1E-10 0.09% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 1.49E-08 1.E-03 39.98% 5.33E-09 2E-08 14.54% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 4.45E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.59E-08 7E-09 4.64% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.66E-08 9.E-04 37.41% 1.66E-08 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.25E-08 7.69E-11 3.E-07 0.01% 2.75E-11 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.54E-10 1.55E-12 4.E-05 1.56% 5.55E-13 2E-08 13.38% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.07E-07 2.E-03 78.96% 3.82E-08 5E-08 32.65% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.07E-07 2.E-03 78.96% 3.82E-08 5E-08 32.65% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.42E+01 4.26E-07 2.E-03 100%1.52E-07 1.6E-07 100%1.17E+01 2.44E-07 3.E-04 100%8.71E-08 7.7E-08 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-16
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3;
mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3;
mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 4.73E-03 1.20E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 4.28E-12 9E-12 0.02%1.01E-03 2.56E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 9.15E-13 2E-12 0.01%
Total Arsenic 1.20E+01 6.53E-09 2.E-05 2.75% 2.33E-09 3E-09 7.51% 1.16E+01 6.29E-09 2.E-05 18.19% 2.25E-09 3E-09 10.26%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.20E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.21E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.64E-06 3.61E-15 5.E-06 0.65% 1.29E-15 2E-10 0.36%1.08E-06 5.85E-16 8.E-07 0.72% 2.09E-16 3E-11 0.08%
Dermal Total 1.21E+01 6.54E-09 3.E-05 3.40% 2.34E-09 4E-09 7.89% 1.55E+01 6.29E-09 2.E-05 18.91% 2.25E-09 3E-09 10.35%
Ingestion Total PCBs 4.73E-03 1.01E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.62E-12 7E-12 0.02%1.01E-03 2.16E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 7.72E-13 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.20E+01 2.57E-08 5.E-05 6.49% 9.18E-09 8E-09 17.75% 1.16E+01 2.48E-08 5.E-05 42.97% 8.84E-09 8E-09 24.24%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.20E-02 6.85E-11 9.E-08 0.01% 2.45E-11 4E-11 0.08%4.98E-03 1.07E-11 1.E-08 0.01% 3.81E-12 6E-12 0.02%
Total Chromium 1.21E+01 2.58E-08 9.E-06 1.09% 9.23E-09 5E-09 9.91% 1.55E+01 3.33E-08 1.E-05 9.62% 1.19E-08 6E-09 18.09%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.64E-06 1.42E-14 2.E-05 2.56% 5.08E-15 7E-10 1.42%1.08E-06 2.30E-15 3.E-06 2.85% 8.23E-16 1E-10 0.33%
Ingestion Total 1.21E+01 5.16E-08 8.E-05 10.15% 1.84E-08 1E-08 29.18% 1.55E+01 5.80E-08 6.E-05 55.46% 2.07E-08 1E-08 42.67%
Inhalation Total PCBs 4.73E-03 1.51E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 5.38E-14 3E-14 0.00%1.01E-03 3.22E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.15E-14 7E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.20E+01 3.83E-10 3.E-05 3.22% 1.37E-10 6E-10 1.26% 1.16E+01 3.69E-10 2.E-05 21.33% 1.32E-10 6E-10 1.72%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.20E-02 1.02E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.64E-13 2E-13 0.00%4.98E-03 1.59E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 5.67E-14 3E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.21E+01 3.85E-10 4.E-06 0.49% 1.37E-10 1E-08 24.79% 1.55E+01 4.95E-10 5.E-06 4.30% 1.77E-10 1E-08 45.25%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.64E-06 2.12E-16 5.E-09 0.00% 7.56E-17 3E-12 0.01%1.08E-06 3.43E-17 9.E-10 0.00% 1.23E-17 5E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.21E+01 7.69E-10 3.E-05 3.71% 2.75E-10 1E-08 26.06% 1.55E+01 8.64E-10 3.E-05 25.63% 3.09E-10 2E-08 46.98%
Soil Total 1.21E+01 5.89E-08 1.E-04 17.26% 2.10E-08 3E-08 63.13% 1.55E+01 6.52E-08 1.E-04 100.00% 2.33E-08 3E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 2.42E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 8.65E-11 5E-11 0.11%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 4.98E-09 3.E-04 41.89% 1.78E-09 8E-09 16.42%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 1.48E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 5.30E-09 2E-09 5.24%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 1.55E-08 3.E-04 39.20% 5.54E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 2.56E-11 9.E-08 0.01% 9.16E-12 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 5.18E-13 1.E-05 1.64% 1.85E-13 7E-09 15.11%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 3.56E-08 7.E-04 82.74% 1.27E-08 2E-08 36.87%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 3.56E-08 7.E-04 82.74% 1.27E-08 2E-08 36.87%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.21E+01 9.45E-08 8.E-04 100%3.38E-08 4.7E-08 100%1.55E+01 6.52E-08 1.E-04 100%2.33E-08 3.3E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
BGSITE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-16
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3;
mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3;
mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
4.73E-03 3.12E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.11E-11 2E-11 0.01%1.01E-03 6.66E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.38E-12 5E-12 0.00%
1.20E+01 1.70E-08 6.E-05 2.49% 6.06E-09 9E-09 5.82% 1.16E+01 1.64E-08 5.E-05 11.70% 5.84E-09 9E-09 7.19%
3.20E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.21E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
6.64E-06 9.39E-15 1.E-05 0.59% 3.35E-15 4E-10 0.28%1.08E-06 1.52E-15 2.E-06 0.47% 5.43E-16 7E-11 0.06%
1.21E+01 1.70E-08 7.E-05 3.09% 6.07E-09 1E-08 6.11% 1.55E+01 1.64E-08 6.E-05 12.17% 5.84E-09 9E-09 7.25%
4.73E-03 5.26E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.88E-11 4E-11 0.02%1.01E-03 1.12E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 4.01E-12 8E-12 0.01%
1.20E+01 1.34E-07 3.E-04 11.79% 4.77E-08 4E-08 27.48% 1.16E+01 1.29E-07 3.E-04 55.28% 4.60E-08 4E-08 33.98%
3.20E-02 3.56E-10 4.E-07 0.02% 1.27E-10 2E-10 0.13%4.98E-03 5.54E-11 7.E-08 0.01% 1.98E-11 3E-11 0.03%
1.21E+01 1.34E-07 4.E-05 1.97% 4.80E-08 2E-08 15.34% 1.55E+01 1.73E-07 6.E-05 12.38% 6.18E-08 3E-08 25.35%
6.64E-06 7.39E-14 1.E-04 4.66% 2.64E-14 3E-09 2.20%1.08E-06 1.20E-14 2.E-05 3.67% 4.28E-15 6E-10 0.46%
1.21E+01 2.68E-07 4.E-04 18.44% 9.59E-08 7E-08 45.17% 1.55E+01 3.02E-07 3.E-04 71.35% 1.08E-07 7E-08 59.82%
4.73E-03 3.92E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.40E-13 8E-14 0.00%1.01E-03 8.37E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 2.99E-14 2E-14 0.00%
1.20E+01 9.95E-10 7.E-05 2.93% 3.56E-10 2E-09 0.98% 1.16E+01 9.59E-10 6.E-05 13.72% 3.42E-10 1E-09 1.21%
3.20E-02 2.65E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 9.47E-13 4E-13 0.00%4.98E-03 4.13E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.47E-13 7E-14 0.00%
1.21E+01 1.00E-09 1.E-05 0.44% 3.57E-10 3E-08 19.19% 1.55E+01 1.29E-09 1.E-05 2.76% 4.60E-10 4E-08 31.72%
6.64E-06 5.51E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 1.97E-16 7E-12 0.00%1.08E-06 8.92E-17 2.E-09 0.00% 3.19E-17 1E-12 0.00%
1.21E+01 2.00E-09 8.E-05 3.37% 7.14E-10 3E-08 20.18% 1.55E+01 2.25E-09 8.E-05 16.49% 8.03E-10 4E-08 32.93%
1.21E+01 2.87E-07 6.E-04 24.89% 1.03E-07 1E-07 71.46% 1.55E+01 3.20E-07 5.E-04 100.00% 1.14E-07 1E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 6.30E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.25E-10 1E-10 0.08%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 1.29E-08 9.E-04 38.03% 4.62E-09 2E-08 12.71%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 3.86E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.38E-08 6E-09 4.05%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.04E-08 8.E-04 35.59% 1.44E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 6.67E-11 2.E-07 0.01% 2.38E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 1.35E-12 3.E-05 1.48% 4.81E-13 2E-08 11.70%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 9.26E-08 2.E-03 75.11% 3.31E-08 4E-08 28.54%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 9.26E-08 2.E-03 75.11% 3.31E-08 4E-08 28.54%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.21E+01 3.80E-07 2.E-03 100%1.36E-07 1.6E-07 100%1.55E+01 3.20E-07 5.E-04 100%1.14E-07 1.2E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-17
CTE Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 13 Buffer - Area North and East
80% Shoreline - 20% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
GSLIC EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
20% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506 3.9E-11 5.8E-13 3.3E-10 6.2E-11 2.6E-13 5.2E-10 5.9E-10 1.2E-10
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291 2.2E-10 3.3E-12 2.6E-10 4.4E-10 1.9E-12 5.3E-10 9.7E-10 1.9E-10
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395 4.3E-09 1.1E-10 1.8E-09 6.5E-09 4.6E-10 2.7E-09 9.7E-09 1.9E-09
Chromium mg/kg 10.71 2.0E-10 1.2E-10 6.9E-08 1.0E-10 1.0E-08 3.5E-08 4.5E-08 9.0E-09
Mercury mg/kg 0.026 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5 6.9E-13 1.0E-14 1.7E-13 8.9E-08 3.9E-10 2.3E-08 1.1E-07 2.2E-08
Sum of ILCR/HI 1E-07 1E-08 6E-08 2E-07 3E-08
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 20%)2E-08 2E-09 1E-08
Shoreline EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
80% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032 2.4E-11 3.6E-13 2.1E-10 3.9E-11 1.7E-13 3.3E-10 3.7E-10 3.0E-10
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473 3.6E-12 5.4E-14 4.3E-12 7.2E-12 3.1E-14 8.6E-12 1.6E-11 1.3E-11
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01 5.5E-09 1.4E-10 2.3E-09 5.0E-09 5.9E-10 3.5E-09 9.0E-09 7.2E-09
Chromium mg/kg 12.07 2.3E-10 1.4E-10 7.8E-08 2.9E-12 1.2E-08 3.9E-08 5.1E-08 4.0E-08
Mercury mg/kg ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644 5.1E-15 7.6E-17 1.3E-15 6.6E-10 2.9E-12 1.7E-10 8.3E-10 6.6E-10
Sum of ILCR/HI 6E-09 1E-08 4E-08 6E-08 5E-08
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 80%)5E-09 1E-08 3E-08
80% Shoreline/20% Canal Exposure Scenario
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
Solids Ing
ILCR %
Solids Inh
ILCR %
Solids
Derm ILCR
%
Solids Ing
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Derm
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg -------- 4.4E-11 1.9E-13 3.7E-10 4.1E-10 0.2% 0.00% 1% 0.04% 0.00% 0.4%
PCBs, Total mg/kg -------- 9.5E-11 4.0E-13 1.1E-10 2.1E-10 0.4% 0.0% 0% 0.10% 0.000% 0.11%
Arsenic mg/kg -------- 5.3E-09 5.6E-10 3.3E-09 9.2E-09 22% 5% 7%5%1%3%
Chromium mg/kg -------- 2.3E-11 1.1E-08 3.8E-08 4.9E-08 0.0958% 94.6099% 81.8121% 0.0229% 11.3378% 38.3577%
Mercury mg/kg -------- NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g -------- 1.8E-08 8.0E-11 4.7E-09 2.3E-08 77% 1% 10% 18%0.1%5%
Sum of Solids ILCR/HI 2E-08 1E-08 5E-08 8E-08
Solids % of Total ILCR/HI 24% 12% 47% 83%
Ambient Air ILCR/HI 2E-08
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR/HI 17%
Total ILCR/HI 1E-07
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
ERN Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-17
CTE Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 13 Buffer - Area North and East
80% Shoreline - 20% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC
Tooele County, Utah
GSLIC EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395
Chromium mg/kg 10.71
Mercury mg/kg 0.026
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5
Sum of ILCR/HI
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 20%)
Shoreline EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01
Chromium mg/kg 12.07
Mercury mg/kg ND
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644
Sum of ILCR/HI
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 80%)
80% Shoreline/20% Canal Exposure Scenario
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg --
PCBs, Total mg/kg --
Arsenic mg/kg --
Chromium mg/kg --
Mercury mg/kg --
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g --
Sum of Solids ILCR/HI
Solids % of Total ILCR/HI
Ambient Air ILCR/HI
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR/HI
Total ILCR/HI
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Hazard Index
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
20% HI
Solids
1E-10 2E-12 9E-10 1E-07 NA 1E-06 1E-06 3E-07
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
1E-08 3E-10 5E-09 4E-05 2E-05 2E-05 8E-05 2E-05
6E-10 3E-10 2E-07 2E-07 3E-06 6E-05 7E-05 1E-05
4E-12 8E-13 5E-10 1E-08 3E-09 2E-06 2E-06 3E-07
2E-12 3E-14 5E-13 3E-03 7E-07 7E-04 3E-03 7E-04
3E-03 2E-05 8E-04 4E-03 7E-04
6E-04 5E-06 2E-04
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
80% HI
Solids
7E-11 1E-12 6E-10 9E-08 NA 7E-07 8E-07 6E-07
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
2E-08 4E-10 7E-09 5E-05 3E-05 2E-05 1E-04 8E-05
6E-10 4E-10 2E-07 2E-07 4E-06 7E-05 8E-05 6E-05
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
1E-14 2E-16 4E-15 2E-05 5E-09 5E-06 3E-05 2E-05
7E-05 3E-05 1E-04 2E-04 2E-04
6E-05 2E-05 8E-05
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
Solids Ing HI
%
Solids Inh HI
%
Solids Derm HI
%
Solids Ing HI %
of Total HI
Solids Inh HI %
of Total HI
Solids
Derm HI
% of
Total HI
8E-11 1E-12 6E-10 1E-07 NA 8E-07 9E-07 0.02% NA 0.3% 0.01% NA 0.05%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
1E-08 4E-10 6E-09 5E-05 2E-05 2E-05 9E-05 8% 86% 9% 3% 2% 1.4%
6E-10 4E-10 2E-07 2E-07 4E-06 7E-05 8E-05 0.03427% 13.3% 30.16% 0.01372% 0.2452% 4.645%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
4E-13 6E-15 1E-13 6E-04 1E-07 1E-04 7E-04 92% 0.52% 61% 37% 0.01% 9%
6E-04 3E-05 2E-04 9E-04
40% 2% 15% 57%
7E-04
43%
2E-03
ERN Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-18
RME Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 13 Buffer - Area North and East
80% Shoreline - 20% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
GSLIC EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
20% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506 2.0E-10 1.5E-12 8.5E-10 3.2E-10 6.9E-13 1.4E-09 1.7E-09 3.4E-10
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291 1.2E-09 8.6E-12 6.9E-10 2.3E-09 4.9E-12 1.4E-09 3.7E-09 7.4E-10
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395 2.2E-08 2.8E-10 4.7E-09 3.4E-08 1.2E-09 7.1E-09 4.2E-08 8.4E-09
Chromium mg/kg 10.71 1.1E-09 3.2E-10 1.8E-07 5.3E-10 2.7E-08 9.0E-08 1.2E-07 2.3E-08
Mercury mg/kg 0.026 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5 3.6E-12 2.7E-14 4.5E-13 4.6E-07 1.0E-09 5.9E-08 5.2E-07 1.0E-07
Sum of ILCR/HI 5E-07 3E-08 2E-07 7E-07 1E-07
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 20%)1E-07 6E-09 3E-08
Shoreline EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
80% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032 1.3E-10 9.5E-13 5.4E-10 2.0E-10 4.4E-13 8.6E-10 1.1E-09 8.5E-10
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473 1.9E-11 1.4E-13 1.1E-11 3.8E-11 8.0E-14 2.2E-11 6.0E-11 4.8E-11
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01 2.9E-08 3.6E-10 6.1E-09 2.6E-08 1.5E-09 9.1E-09 3.6E-08 2.9E-08
Chromium mg/kg 12.07 1.2E-09 3.6E-10 2.0E-07 1.5E-11 3.0E-08 1.0E-07 1.3E-07 1.1E-07
Mercury mg/kg ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644 2.6E-14 2.0E-16 3.4E-15 3.4E-09 7.5E-12 4.4E-10 3.9E-09 3.1E-09
Sum of ILCR/HI 3E-08 3E-08 1E-07 2E-07 1E-07
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 80%)2E-08 3E-08 9E-08
80% Shoreline/20% Canal Exposure Scenario
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
Solids Ing
ILCR %
Solids Inh
ILCR %
Solids
Derm ILCR
%
Solids Ing
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Derm
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg -------- 2.3E-10 4.9E-13 9.6E-10 1.2E-09 0.2% 0.00% 1% 0.07% 0.00% 0.3%
PCBs, Total mg/kg -------- 4.9E-10 1.0E-12 2.9E-10 7.9E-10 0.4% 0.0% 0% 0.15% 0.000% 0.09%
Arsenic mg/kg -------- 2.7E-08 1.5E-09 8.7E-09 3.8E-08 22% 5% 7%9%0%3%
Chromium mg/kg -------- 1.2E-10 2.9E-08 9.9E-08 1.3E-07 0.10% 94.61% 81.81% 0.04% 9.15% 30.96%
Mercury mg/kg -------- NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g -------- 9.5E-08 2.1E-10 1.2E-08 1.1E-07 77% 1% 10% 30%0.1%4%
Sum of Solids ILCR/HI 1E-07 3E-08 1E-07 3E-07
Solids % of Total ILCR/HI 39% 10% 38% 86%
Ambient Air ILCR/HI 4E-08
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR/HI 14%
Total ILCR/HI 3E-07
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
ERN Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-18
RME Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 13 Buffer - Area North and East
80% Shoreline - 20% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC
Tooele County, Utah
GSLIC EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395
Chromium mg/kg 10.71
Mercury mg/kg 0.026
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5
Sum of ILCR/HI
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 20%)
Shoreline EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01
Chromium mg/kg 12.07
Mercury mg/kg ND
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644
Sum of ILCR/HI
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 80%)
80% Shoreline/20% Canal Exposure Scenario
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg --
PCBs, Total mg/kg --
Arsenic mg/kg --
Chromium mg/kg --
Mercury mg/kg --
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g --
Sum of Solids ILCR/HI
Solids % of Total ILCR/HI
Ambient Air ILCR/HI
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR/HI
Total ILCR/HI
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Hazard Index
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
20% HI
Solids
6E-10 4E-12 2E-09 7E-07 NA 3E-06 4E-06 7E-07
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
6E-08 8E-10 1E-08 2E-04 5E-05 4E-05 3E-04 6E-05
3E-09 9E-10 5E-07 1E-06 9E-06 2E-04 2E-04 4E-05
2E-11 2E-12 1E-09 7E-08 7E-09 4E-06 4E-06 8E-07
1E-11 7E-14 1E-12 1E-02 2E-06 2E-03 2E-02 3E-03
1E-02 6E-05 2E-03 2E-02 3E-03
3E-03 1E-05 4E-04
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
80% HI
Solids
4E-10 3E-12 2E-09 4E-07 NA 2E-06 2E-06 2E-06
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
8E-08 1E-09 2E-08 3E-04 7E-05 6E-05 4E-04 3E-04
3E-09 1E-09 6E-07 1E-06 1E-05 2E-04 2E-04 2E-04
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
7E-14 6E-16 9E-15 1E-04 1E-08 1E-05 1E-04 1E-04
4E-04 8E-05 3E-04 7E-04 6E-04
3E-04 6E-05 2E-04
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
Solids Ing HI
%
Solids Inh HI
%
Solids Derm HI
%
Solids Ing HI %
of Total HI
Solids Inh HI %
of Total HI
Solids
Derm HI
% of
Total HI
4E-10 3E-12 2E-09 5E-07 NA 2E-06 3E-06 0.02% NA 0.3% 0.01% NA 0.04%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
8E-08 1E-09 2E-08 3E-04 6E-05 5E-05 4E-04 8% 86% 9% 5% 1% 1.0%
3E-09 1E-09 6E-07 1E-06 1E-05 2E-04 2E-04 0.03427% 13.3% 30.16% 0.01960% 0.1751% 3.317%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
2E-12 2E-14 3E-13 3E-03 4E-07 4E-04 3E-03 92% 0.52% 61% 53% 0.01% 7%
3E-03 7E-05 6E-04 4E-03
57% 1% 11% 69%
2E-03
31%
6E-03
ERN Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-19
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 2.46E-01 5.62E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.01E-10 4E-10 0.72% 1.01E-03 2.31E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 8.23E-13 2E-12 0.01%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 5.50E-09 2.E-05 1.46% 1.97E-09 3E-09 5.26%1.16E+01 5.66E-09 2.E-05 19.33% 2.02E-09 3E-09 11.58%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 8.23E-14 1.E-04 9.33% 2.94E-14 4E-09 6.82%1.08E-06 5.26E-16 8.E-07 0.77% 1.88E-16 2E-11 0.09%
Dermal Total 1.13E+01 6.07E-09 1.E-04 10.79% 2.17E-09 7E-09 12.80%1.55E+01 5.66E-09 2.E-05 20.10% 2.02E-09 3E-09 11.68%
Ingestion Total PCBs 2.46E-01 4.74E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.69E-10 3E-10 0.60%1.01E-03 1.95E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 6.95E-13 1E-12 0.01%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 2.17E-08 4.E-05 3.44% 7.74E-09 7E-09 12.44%1.16E+01 2.23E-08 4.E-05 45.68% 7.96E-09 7E-09 27.37%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 2.82E-09 4.E-06 0.28% 1.01E-09 2E-09 2.88%4.98E-03 9.59E-12 1.E-08 0.01% 3.43E-12 5E-12 0.02%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 1.74E-08 6.E-06 0.46% 6.22E-09 3E-09 5.55%1.55E+01 2.99E-08 1.E-05 10.23% 1.07E-08 5E-09 20.42%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 5.59E-11 2.E-07 0.01% 2.00E-11 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 9.27E-11 3.E-07 0.32% 3.31E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 3.24E-13 5.E-04 36.74% 1.16E-13 2E-08 26.86%1.08E-06 2.07E-15 3.E-06 3.03% 7.40E-16 1E-10 0.37%
Ingestion Total 1.13E+01 4.24E-08 5.E-04 40.94% 1.52E-08 3E-08 48.33%1.55E+01 5.23E-08 6.E-05 59.27% 1.87E-08 1E-08 48.18%
Inhalation Total PCBs 2.46E-01 5.34E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.91E-12 1E-12 0.00%1.01E-03 2.19E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 7.83E-15 4E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 2.44E-10 2.E-05 1.29% 8.72E-11 4E-10 0.67%1.16E+01 2.51E-10 2.E-05 17.16% 8.97E-11 4E-10 1.47%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 3.18E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.14E-11 5E-12 0.01%4.98E-03 1.08E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 3.86E-14 2E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 1.96E-10 2.E-06 0.16% 7.01E-11 6E-09 10.52%1.55E+01 3.37E-10 3.E-06 3.46% 1.21E-10 1E-08 38.66%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 6.30E-13 2.E-09 0.00% 2.25E-13 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 1.04E-12 3.E-09 0.00% 3.73E-13 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 3.65E-15 9.E-08 0.01% 1.30E-15 5E-11 0.09%1.08E-06 2.34E-17 6.E-10 0.00% 8.34E-18 3E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.13E+01 4.78E-10 2.E-05 1.46% 1.71E-10 6E-09 11.29%1.55E+01 5.90E-10 2.E-05 20.62% 2.11E-10 1E-08 40.14%
Soil Total 1.13E+01 4.90E-08 7.E-04 53.18% 1.75E-08 4E-08 72.42%1.55E+01 5.86E-08 1.E-04 100.00% 2.09E-08 3E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 2.18E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 7.79E-11 4E-11 0.08%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 4.48E-09 3.E-04 23.70% 1.60E-09 7E-09 12.28%------0.00%----0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 1.34E-08 0.E+00 0.00%4.77E-09 2E-09 3.92%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 1.40E-08 3.E-04 22.18% 4.99E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 2.31E-11 8.E-08 0.01% 8.24E-12 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 4.66E-13 1.E-05 0.93% 1.67E-13 6E-09 11.30%------0.00%----0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 3.20E-08 6.E-04 46.82% 1.14E-08 2E-08 27.58%------0.00%----0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 3.20E-08 6.E-04 46.82% 1.14E-08 2E-08 27.58%------0.00%----0.00%
Grand Total 1.13E+01 8.10E-08 1.E-03 100%2.89E-08 5.6E-08 100%1.55E+01 5.86E-08 1.E-04 100%2.09E-08 2.6E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-19
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
2.46E-01 1.25E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.46E-10 9E-10 0.48%1.01E-03 5.12E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.83E-12 4E-12 0.00%
1.13E+01 1.22E-08 4.E-05 1.03% 4.37E-09 7E-09 3.55%1.16E+01 1.26E-08 4.E-05 12.14% 4.49E-09 7E-09 7.82%
1.47E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
9.04E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
2.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 1.83E-13 3.E-04 6.62% 6.53E-14 8E-09 4.60%1.08E-06 1.17E-15 2.E-06 0.48% 4.18E-16 5E-11 0.06%
1.13E+01 1.35E-08 3.E-04 7.65% 4.81E-09 2E-08 8.63%1.55E+01 1.26E-08 4.E-05 12.62% 4.49E-09 7E-09 7.88%
2.46E-01 2.11E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 7.52E-10 2E-09 0.81%1.01E-03 8.65E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.09E-12 6E-12 0.01%
1.13E+01 9.63E-08 2.E-04 4.88% 3.44E-08 3E-08 16.77% 1.16E+01 9.91E-08 2.E-04 57.36% 3.54E-08 3E-08 36.94%
1.47E+00 1.26E-08 2.E-05 0.40% 4.48E-09 7E-09 3.88%4.98E-03 4.26E-11 5.E-08 0.02% 1.52E-11 2E-11 0.03%
9.04E+00 7.74E-08 3.E-05 0.65% 2.77E-08 1E-08 7.49% 1.55E+01 1.33E-07 4.E-05 12.84% 4.75E-08 2E-08 27.56%
2.90E-02 2.48E-10 8.E-07 0.02% 8.87E-11 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 4.12E-10 1.E-06 0.40% 1.47E-10 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 1.44E-12 2.E-03 52.14% 5.14E-13 7E-08 36.21%1.08E-06 9.21E-15 1.E-05 3.81% 3.29E-15 4E-10 0.50%
1.13E+01 1.89E-07 2.E-03 58.09% 6.74E-08 1E-07 65.17% 1.55E+01 2.33E-07 3.E-04 74.43% 8.31E-08 6E-08 65.03%
2.46E-01 1.19E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 4.24E-12 2E-12 0.00%1.01E-03 4.87E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.74E-14 1E-14 0.00%
1.13E+01 5.43E-10 4.E-05 0.92% 1.94E-10 8E-10 0.45%1.16E+01 5.58E-10 4.E-05 10.78% 1.99E-10 9E-10 0.99%
1.47E+00 7.07E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.53E-11 1E-11 0.01%4.98E-03 2.40E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 8.58E-14 4E-14 0.00%
9.04E+00 4.36E-10 4.E-06 0.11% 1.56E-10 1E-08 7.09% 1.55E+01 7.50E-10 7.E-06 2.17% 2.68E-10 2E-08 26.09%
2.90E-02 1.40E-12 5.E-09 0.00% 5.00E-13 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 2.32E-12 8.E-09 0.00% 8.29E-13 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 8.12E-15 2.E-07 0.01% 2.90E-15 1E-10 0.06%1.08E-06 5.19E-17 1.E-09 0.00% 1.85E-17 7E-13 0.00%
1.13E+01 1.06E-09 4.E-05 1.03% 3.80E-10 1E-08 7.61%1.55E+01 1.31E-09 4.E-05 12.95% 4.68E-10 2E-08 27.09%
1.13E+01 2.03E-07 3.E-03 66.78% 7.26E-08 2E-07 81.41%1.55E+01 2.46E-07 3.E-04 100.00% 8.80E-08 9E-08 100.00%
2.12E-07 4.84E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.73E-10 1E-10 0.05%------0.00%----0.00%
4.36E-06 9.95E-09 7.E-04 16.82% 3.56E-09 2E-08 8.28%------0.00%----0.00%
1.30E-05 2.97E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.06E-08 5E-09 2.64%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 3.11E-08 6.E-04 15.74% 1.11E-08 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
2.25E-08 5.13E-11 2.E-07 0.00% 1.83E-11 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%----0.00%
4.54E-10 1.04E-12 3.E-05 0.66% 3.70E-13 1E-08 7.62%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 7.12E-08 1.E-03 33.22% 2.54E-08 3E-08 18.59%------0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 7.12E-08 1.E-03 33.22% 2.54E-08 3E-08 18.59%------0.00%----0.00%
1.13E+01 2.74E-07 4.E-03 100%9.80E-08 1.8E-07 100%1.55E+01 2.46E-07 3.E-04 100%8.80E-08 8.6E-08 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-20
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 6.74E-03 5.47E-11 0.0E+00 0.00% 1.95E-11 4E-11 0.03% 3.35E-04 2.72E-12 0.0E+00 0.00% 9.71E-13 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 8.63E-09 2.9E-05 1.26% 3.08E-09 5E-09 3.90% 6.43E+00 1.12E-08 3.7E-05 18.41% 4.00E-09 6E-09 9.27%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 2.45E-15 3.5E-06 0.15% 8.74E-16 1E-10 0.10%3.35E-07 5.83E-16 8.3E-07 0.41% 2.08E-16 3E-11 0.04%
Dermal Total 1.25E+01 8.69E-09 3.2E-05 1.42% 3.10E-09 5E-09 4.02%1.17E+01 1.12E-08 3.8E-05 18.82% 4.00E-09 6E-09 9.32%
Ingestion Total PCBs 6.74E-03 4.62E-11 0.0E+00 0.00% 1.65E-11 3E-11 0.03%3.35E-04 2.29E-12 0.0E+00 0.00% 8.20E-13 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 3.40E-08 6.8E-05 2.98% 1.21E-08 1E-08 9.21%6.43E+00 4.41E-08 8.8E-05 43.49% 1.57E-08 1E-08 21.91%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 2.40E-10 3.0E-07 0.01% 8.56E-11 1E-10 0.12%1.15E-03 7.88E-12 9.8E-09 0.00% 2.81E-12 5E-12 0.01%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 8.59E-08 2.9E-05 1.26% 3.07E-08 2E-08 12.92%1.17E+01 7.99E-08 2.7E-05 13.14% 2.85E-08 1E-08 22.06%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 1.14E-10 3.8E-07 0.02% 4.06E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 2.53E-10 8.4E-07 0.42% 9.03E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 9.64E-15 1.4E-05 0.60% 3.44E-15 4E-10 0.38%3.35E-07 2.29E-15 3.3E-06 1.62% 8.19E-16 1E-10 0.16%
Ingestion Total 1.25E+01 1.20E-07 1.1E-04 4.87% 4.30E-08 3E-08 22.65%1.17E+01 1.24E-07 1.2E-04 58.66% 4.44E-08 3E-08 44.14%
Inhalation Total PCBs 6.74E-03 5.64E-13 0.0E+00 0.00% 2.01E-13 1E-13 0.00%3.35E-04 2.80E-14 0.0E+00 0.00% 1.00E-14 6E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 4.15E-10 2.8E-05 1.21% 1.48E-10 6E-10 0.54%6.43E+00 5.38E-10 3.6E-05 17.70% 1.92E-10 8E-10 1.28%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 2.93E-12 0.0E+00 0.00% 1.05E-12 5E-13 0.00%1.15E-03 9.62E-14 0.0E+00 0.00% 3.44E-14 2E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 1.05E-09 1.0E-05 0.46% 3.75E-10 3E-08 26.51%1.17E+01 9.75E-10 9.8E-06 4.81% 3.48E-10 3E-08 45.26%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 1.39E-12 4.6E-09 0.00% 4.96E-13 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 3.09E-12 1.0E-08 0.01% 1.10E-12 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 1.18E-16 2.9E-09 0.00% 4.20E-17 2E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 2.80E-17 7.0E-10 0.00% 1.00E-17 4E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.25E+01 1.47E-09 3.8E-05 1.68% 5.25E-10 3E-08 27.05%1.17E+01 1.52E-09 4.6E-05 22.52% 5.42E-10 3E-08 46.54%
Soil Total 1.25E+01 1.30E-07 1.8E-04 7.97% 4.66E-08 6E-08 53.72%1.17E+01 1.37E-07 2.0E-04 100.00% 4.89E-08 6E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 7.75E-10 0.0E+00 0.00% 2.77E-10 2E-10 0.13%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 1.59E-08 1.1E-03 46.60% 5.69E-09 2E-08 20.61%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 4.75E-08 0.0E+00 0.00%1.70E-08 8E-09 6.57%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 4.97E-08 9.9E-04 43.61% 1.77E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 8.21E-11 2.7E-07 0.01% 2.93E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 1.66E-12 4.1E-05 1.82% 5.92E-13 2E-08 18.96%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.14E-07 2.1E-03 92.03% 4.07E-08 5E-08 46.28%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.14E-07 2.1E-03 92.03% 4.07E-08 5E-08 46.28%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.25E+01 2.44E-07 2.3E-03 100%8.73E-08 1.2E-07 100%1.17E+01 1.37E-07 2.0E-04 100%4.89E-08 6.5E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-20
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
6.74E-03 4.79E-10 0.0E+00 0.00% 1.71E-10 3E-10 0.03%3.35E-04 2.38E-11 0.0E+00 0.00% 8.50E-12 2E-11 0.00%
4.96E+00 7.55E-08 2.5E-04 1.20% 2.70E-08 4E-08 3.18%6.43E+00 9.79E-08 3.3E-04 11.60% 3.50E-08 5E-08 6.43%
3.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.25E+01 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.66E-02 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 2.14E-14 3.1E-05 0.15% 7.65E-15 1E-09 0.08%3.35E-07 5.10E-15 7.3E-06 0.26% 1.82E-15 2E-10 0.03%
1.25E+01 7.60E-08 2.8E-04 1.35% 2.71E-08 4E-08 3.28%1.17E+01 9.79E-08 3.3E-04 11.86% 3.50E-08 5E-08 6.46%
6.74E-03 8.08E-10 0.0E+00 0.00% 2.89E-10 6E-10 0.05%3.35E-04 4.02E-11 0.0E+00 0.00% 1.43E-11 3E-11 0.00%
4.96E+00 5.95E-07 1.2E-03 5.69% 2.12E-07 2E-07 15.01%6.43E+00 7.71E-07 1.5E-03 54.82% 2.75E-07 2E-07 30.40%
3.50E-02 4.20E-09 5.2E-06 0.03% 1.50E-09 2E-09 0.19%1.15E-03 1.38E-10 1.7E-07 0.01% 4.92E-11 8E-11 0.01%
1.25E+01 1.50E-06 5.0E-04 2.40% 5.37E-07 3E-07 21.07%1.17E+01 1.40E-06 4.7E-04 16.56% 4.99E-07 2E-07 30.61%
1.66E-02 1.99E-09 6.6E-06 0.03% 7.11E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 4.42E-09 1.5E-05 0.52% 1.58E-09 0E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 1.69E-13 2.4E-04 1.15% 6.02E-14 8E-09 0.61%3.35E-07 4.02E-14 5.7E-05 2.04% 1.43E-14 2E-09 0.23%
1.25E+01 2.10E-06 1.9E-03 9.30% 7.52E-07 5E-07 36.93%1.17E+01 2.17E-06 2.1E-03 73.94% 7.76E-07 5E-07 61.25%
6.74E-03 4.93E-12 0.0E+00 0.00% 1.76E-12 1E-12 0.00%3.35E-04 2.45E-13 0.0E+00 0.00% 8.76E-14 5E-14 0.00%
4.96E+00 3.63E-09 2.4E-04 1.16% 1.30E-09 6E-09 0.44%6.43E+00 4.71E-09 3.1E-04 11.16% 1.68E-09 7E-09 0.89%
3.50E-02 2.56E-11 0.0E+00 0.00% 9.15E-12 4E-12 0.00%1.15E-03 8.42E-13 0.0E+00 0.00% 3.01E-13 1E-13 0.00%
1.25E+01 9.18E-09 9.2E-05 0.44% 3.28E-09 3E-07 21.62%1.17E+01 8.53E-09 8.5E-05 3.03% 3.05E-09 3E-07 31.40%
1.66E-02 1.22E-11 4.1E-08 0.00% 4.34E-12 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 2.70E-11 9.0E-08 0.00% 9.65E-12 0E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 1.03E-15 2.6E-08 0.00% 3.68E-16 1E-11 0.00%3.35E-07 2.45E-16 6.1E-09 0.00% 8.76E-17 3E-12 0.00%
1.25E+01 1.29E-08 3.3E-04 1.60% 4.59E-09 3E-07 22.06%1.17E+01 1.33E-08 4.0E-04 14.20% 4.74E-09 3E-07 32.29%
1.25E+01 2.19E-06 2.6E-03 12.24% 7.84E-07 8E-07 62.27% 1.17E+01 2.28E-06 2.8E-03 100.00% 8.16E-07 8E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 6.78E-09 0.0E+00 0.00% 2.42E-09 1E-09 0.11%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 1.39E-07 9.3E-03 44.43% 4.98E-08 2E-07 16.80%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 4.16E-07 0.0E+00 0.00% 1.48E-07 7E-08 5.36%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.35E-07 8.7E-03 41.58% 1.55E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 7.18E-10 2.4E-06 0.01% 2.56E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 1.45E-11 3.6E-04 1.73% 5.18E-12 2E-07 15.46%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 9.97E-07 1.8E-02 87.76% 3.56E-07 5E-07 37.73%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 9.97E-07 1.8E-02 87.76% 3.56E-07 5E-07 37.73%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.25E+01 3.19E-06 2.1E-02 100%1.14E-06 1.3E-06 100%1.17E+01 2.28E-06 2.8E-03 100%8.16E-07 8.2E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-21
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 7.37E-04 6.73E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.40E-12 5E-12 0.00% 3.35E-04 3.06E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.09E-12 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 1.15E-08 4.E-05 1.49% 4.10E-09 6E-09 4.58% 6.43E+00 1.26E-08 4.E-05 18.74% 4.50E-09 7E-09 9.54%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 9.94E-16 1.E-06 0.06% 3.55E-16 5E-11 0.03% 3.35E-07 6.56E-16 9.E-07 0.42% 2.34E-16 3E-11 0.04%
Dermal Total 1.27E+01 1.15E-08 4.E-05 1.54% 4.10E-09 6E-09 4.61%1.17E+01 1.26E-08 4.E-05 19.16% 4.50E-09 7E-09 9.59%
Ingestion Total PCBs 7.37E-04 5.68E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.03E-12 4E-12 0.00%3.35E-04 2.58E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 9.22E-13 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 4.52E-08 9.E-05 3.52% 1.62E-08 1E-08 10.81% 6.43E+00 4.96E-08 1.E-04 44.28% 1.77E-08 2E-08 22.54%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 9.75E-08 3.E-05 1.26% 3.48E-08 2E-08 12.94% 1.17E+01 8.98E-08 3.E-05 13.37% 3.21E-08 2E-08 22.69%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 3.91E-15 6.E-06 0.22% 1.40E-15 2E-10 0.14%3.35E-07 2.58E-15 4.E-06 1.65% 9.22E-16 1E-10 0.17%
Ingestion Total 1.27E+01 1.43E-07 1.E-04 5.00% 5.10E-08 3E-08 23.89% 1.17E+01 1.39E-07 1.E-04 59.30% 4.98E-08 3E-08 45.41%
Inhalation Total PCBs 7.37E-04 6.52E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 2.33E-14 1E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 2.96E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.06E-14 6E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 5.19E-10 3.E-05 1.35% 1.85E-10 8E-10 0.59%6.43E+00 5.69E-10 4.E-05 16.94% 2.03E-10 9E-10 1.24%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 1.12E-09 1.E-05 0.43% 4.00E-10 3E-08 24.96% 1.17E+01 1.03E-09 1.E-05 4.61% 3.68E-10 3E-08 43.77%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 4.49E-17 1.E-09 0.00% 1.60E-17 6E-13 0.00%3.35E-07 2.96E-17 7.E-10 0.00% 1.06E-17 4E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.27E+01 1.64E-09 5.E-05 1.78% 5.85E-10 3E-08 25.55% 1.17E+01 1.60E-09 5.E-05 21.55% 5.72E-10 3E-08 45.01%
Soil Total 1.27E+01 1.56E-07 2.E-04 8.32% 5.57E-08 7E-08 54.06%1.17E+01 1.54E-07 2.E-04 100.00% 5.49E-08 7E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 8.72E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.11E-10 2E-10 0.13%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 1.79E-08 1.E-03 46.42% 6.40E-09 3E-08 20.46%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 5.59E-08 1.E-03 43.44% 2.00E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 9.23E-11 3.E-07 0.01% 3.30E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 5.34E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.91E-08 9E-09 6.53%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 1.87E-12 5.E-05 1.81% 6.66E-13 3E-08 18.83%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.28E-07 2.E-03 91.68% 4.58E-08 6E-08 45.94%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.28E-07 2.E-03 91.68% 4.58E-08 6E-08 45.94%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.27E+01 2.84E-07 3.E-03 100%1.01E-07 1.3E-07 100%1.17E+01 1.54E-07 2.E-04 100%5.49E-08 7.1E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-21
Risk Calculations - Resource Manager
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Hexachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
7.37E-04 5.23E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.87E-11 4E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 2.38E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 8.50E-12 2E-11 0.00%
5.87E+00 8.93E-08 3.E-04 1.42% 3.19E-08 5E-08 3.69%6.43E+00 9.79E-08 3.E-04 11.76% 3.50E-08 5E-08 6.56%
1.27E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
5.08E-07 7.73E-15 1.E-05 0.05% 2.76E-15 4E-10 0.03%3.35E-07 5.10E-15 7.E-06 0.26% 1.82E-15 2E-10 0.03%
1.27E+01 8.94E-08 3.E-04 1.47% 3.19E-08 5E-08 3.72%1.17E+01 9.79E-08 3.E-04 12.03% 3.50E-08 5E-08 6.59%
7.37E-04 8.83E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.15E-11 6E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 4.02E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.43E-11 3E-11 0.00%
5.87E+00 7.04E-07 1.E-03 6.70% 2.51E-07 2E-07 17.45% 6.43E+00 7.71E-07 2.E-03 55.59% 2.75E-07 2E-07 31.00%
1.27E+01 1.52E-06 5.E-04 2.41% 5.42E-07 3E-07 20.89% 1.17E+01 1.40E-06 5.E-04 16.79% 4.99E-07 2E-07 31.22%
5.08E-07 6.09E-14 9.E-05 0.41% 2.17E-14 3E-09 0.22%3.35E-07 4.02E-14 6.E-05 2.07% 1.43E-14 2E-09 0.23%
1.27E+01 2.22E-06 2.E-03 9.52% 7.93E-07 5E-07 38.57% 1.17E+01 2.17E-06 2.E-03 74.45% 7.75E-07 5E-07 62.46%
7.37E-04 5.07E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.81E-13 1E-13 0.00%3.35E-04 2.31E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 8.23E-14 5E-14 0.00%
5.87E+00 4.04E-09 3.E-04 1.28% 1.44E-09 6E-09 0.48%6.43E+00 4.43E-09 3.E-04 10.64% 1.58E-09 7E-09 0.85%
1.27E+01 8.70E-09 9.E-05 0.41% 3.11E-09 3E-07 20.15% 1.17E+01 8.02E-09 8.E-05 2.89% 2.86E-09 2E-07 30.10%
5.08E-07 3.49E-16 9.E-09 0.00% 1.25E-16 5E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 2.30E-16 6.E-09 0.00% 8.23E-17 3E-12 0.00%
1.27E+01 1.27E-08 4.E-04 1.70% 4.55E-09 3E-07 20.63% 1.17E+01 1.24E-08 4.E-04 13.53% 4.45E-09 2E-07 30.95%
1.27E+01 2.32E-06 3.E-03 12.68% 8.29E-07 8E-07 62.92%1.17E+01 2.28E-06 3.E-03 100.00% 8.14E-07 8E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 6.78E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.42E-09 1E-09 0.11%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 1.39E-07 9.E-03 44.21% 4.98E-08 2E-07 16.51%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.35E-07 9.E-03 41.37% 1.55E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 7.18E-10 2.E-06 0.01% 2.56E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 4.16E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.48E-07 7E-08 5.27%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 1.45E-11 4.E-04 1.73% 5.18E-12 2E-07 15.20%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 9.97E-07 2.E-02 87.32% 3.56E-07 5E-07 37.08%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 9.97E-07 2.E-02 87.32% 3.56E-07 5E-07 37.08%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.27E+01 3.32E-06 2.E-02 100%1.19E-06 1.3E-06 100%1.17E+01 2.28E-06 3.E-03 100%8.14E-07 8.0E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-22
Risk Calculations - Brine Shrimp Worker
PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 4.73E-03 5.10E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.82E-10 4E-10 0.00% 1.01E-03 1.09E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.89E-11 8E-11 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.20E+01 2.77E-07 9.E-04 0.42% 9.91E-08 1E-07 1.29% 1.16E+01 2.67E-07 9.E-04 4.01% 9.54E-08 1E-07 1.92%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.20E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.21E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.64E-06 1.53E-13 2.E-04 0.10% 5.48E-14 7E-09 0.06% 1.08E-06 2.49E-14 4.E-05 0.16% 8.88E-15 1E-09 0.02%
Dermal Total 1.21E+01 2.78E-07 1.E-03 0.52% 9.92E-08 2E-07 1.36% 1.55E+01 2.67E-07 9.E-04 4.17% 9.55E-08 1E-07 1.94%
Ingestion Total PCBs 4.73E-03 1.99E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 7.12E-10 1E-09 0.01% 1.01E-03 4.25E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.52E-10 3E-10 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.20E+01 5.06E-06 1.E-02 4.62% 1.81E-06 2E-06 14.17% 1.16E+01 4.87E-06 1.E-02 43.85% 1.74E-06 2E-06 21.01%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.20E-02 1.35E-08 2.E-05 0.01% 4.81E-09 8E-09 0.07% 4.98E-03 2.10E-09 3.E-06 0.01% 7.49E-10 1E-09 0.02%
Total Chromium 1.21E+01 5.08E-06 2.E-03 0.77% 1.82E-06 9E-07 7.91% 1.55E+01 6.55E-06 2.E-03 9.82% 2.34E-06 1E-06 15.68%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.64E-06 2.80E-12 4.E-03 1.82% 1.00E-12 1E-07 1.13% 1.08E-06 4.53E-13 6.E-04 2.91% 1.62E-13 2E-08 0.28%
Ingestion Total 1.21E+01 1.02E-05 2.E-02 7.22% 3.63E-06 3E-06 23.29% 1.55E+01 1.14E-05 1.E-02 56.60% 4.08E-06 3E-06 36.99%
Inhalation Total PCBs 4.73E-03 4.45E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.59E-11 9E-12 0.00% 1.01E-03 9.50E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.39E-12 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.20E+01 1.13E-07 8.E-03 3.44% 4.04E-08 2E-07 1.51% 1.16E+01 1.09E-07 7.E-03 32.66% 3.89E-08 2E-07 2.24%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.20E-02 3.01E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.08E-10 5E-11 0.00% 4.98E-03 4.69E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.67E-11 8E-12 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.21E+01 1.14E-07 1.E-03 0.52% 4.06E-08 3E-06 29.69% 1.55E+01 1.46E-07 1.E-03 6.58% 5.22E-08 4E-06 58.83%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.64E-06 6.25E-14 2.E-06 0.00% 2.23E-14 8E-10 0.01% 1.08E-06 1.01E-14 3.E-07 0.00% 3.62E-15 1E-10 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.21E+01 2.27E-07 9.E-03 3.96% 8.11E-08 4E-06 31.21% 1.55E+01 2.55E-07 9.E-03 39.24% 9.11E-08 5E-06 61.08%
Soil Total 1.21E+01 1.07E-05 3.E-02 11.70% 3.81E-06 6E-06 55.86% 1.55E+01 1.19E-05 2.E-02 100.00% 4.27E-06 7E-06 100.00%
Air (Facility) Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 7.15E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.55E-08 1E-08 0.13% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 1.47E-06 1.E-01 44.71% 5.25E-07 2E-06 19.66% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 4.38E-06 0.E+00 0.00% 1.56E-06 7E-07 6.27% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 4.58E-06 9.E-02 41.83% 1.64E-06 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 7.57E-09 3.E-05 0.01% 2.70E-09 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 1.53E-10 4.E-03 1.75% 5.46E-11 2E-06 18.09% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.05E-05 2.E-01 88.30% 3.75E-06 5E-06 44.14% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.05E-05 2.E-01 88.30% 3.75E-06 5E-06 44.14% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.21E+01 2.12E-05 2.E-01 100%7.56E-06 1.1E-05 100%1.55E+01 1.19E-05 2.E-02 100%4.27E-06 7.5E-06 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-23
Risk Calculations - Brine Shrimp Worker
PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
90% Shoreline - 10% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC - Tooele County, Utah
Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
GSLIC EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
10% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506 7.5E-09 1.7E-10 1.4E-08 1.2E-08 7.7E-11 2.2E-08 3.4E-08 3.4E-09
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291 4.3E-08 9.7E-10 1.1E-08 8.7E-08 5.5E-10 2.2E-08 1.1E-07 1.1E-08
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395 8.4E-07 3.1E-08 7.7E-08 1.3E-06 1.3E-07 1.1E-07 1.5E-06 1.5E-07
Chromium mg/kg 10.71 4.0E-08 3.6E-08 2.9E-06 2.0E-08 3.0E-06 1.5E-06 4.5E-06 4.5E-07
Mercury mg/kg 0.026 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5 1.3E-10 3.0E-12 7.3E-12 1.7E-05 1.1E-07 9.5E-07 1.8E-05 1.8E-06
Sum of ILCR or HI 2E-05 3E-06 3E-06 2E-05 2E-06
Sum of ILCR or HI (Weighted 10%)2E-06 3E-07 3E-07
Shoreline EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
90% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032 4.8E-09 1.1E-10 8.7E-09 7.6E-09 4.9E-11 1.4E-08 2.2E-08 1.9E-08
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473 7.0E-10 1.6E-11 1.8E-10 1.4E-09 9.0E-12 3.6E-10 1.8E-09 1.6E-09
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01 1.1E-06 4.0E-08 9.8E-08 9.7E-07 1.7E-07 1.5E-07 1.3E-06 1.2E-06
Chromium mg/kg 12.07 4.5E-08 4.0E-08 3.3E-06 5.6E-10 3.4E-06 1.6E-06 5.0E-06 4.5E-06
Mercury mg/kg ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644 9.9E-13 2.2E-14 5.4E-14 1.3E-07 8.4E-10 7.0E-09 1.4E-07 1.2E-07
Sum of ILCR or HI 1E-06 4E-06 2E-06 6E-06 6E-06
Sum of ILCR or HI (Weighted 90%)1E-06 3E-06 2E-06
90% Shoreline/10% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
Solids Ing
ILCR %
Solids Inh
ILCR %
Solids Derm
ILCR %
Solids Ing
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Derm
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg -------- 8.1E-09 5.2E-11 1.5E-08 2.3E-08 0.3% 0.00% 1% 0.06% 0.00% 0.1%
PCBs, Total mg/kg -------- 9.9E-09 6.3E-11 2.5E-09 1.3E-08 0.3% 0.0% 0% 0.07% 0.000% 0.02%
Arsenic mg/kg -------- 9.9E-07 1.7E-07 1.4E-07 1.3E-06 35% 5% 8% 7% 1% 1%
Chromium mg/kg -------- 2.5E-09 3.3E-06 1.6E-06 5.0E-06 0.09% 94.87% 86.08% 0.02% 25.00% 12.17%
Mercury mg/kg -------- NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g -------- 1.8E-06 1.2E-08 1.0E-07 2.0E-06 65% 0% 5% 14% 0.1% 1%
Sum of Solids ILCR or HI 3E-06 4E-06 2E-06 8E-06
Solids % of Total ILCR or HI 21% 26% 14% 62%
Ambient Air ILCR or HI 5E-06
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR or HI 38%
Total ILCR or HI 1E-05
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-23
Risk Calculations - Brine Shrimp Worker
PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
90% Shoreline - 10% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC - Tooele County, Utah
GSLIC EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395
Chromium mg/kg 10.71
Mercury mg/kg 0.026
TEQ (ND=1/2) pg/g 896.5
Sum of ILCR or HI
Sum of ILCR or HI (Weighted 10%)
Shoreline EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01
Chromium mg/kg 12.07
Mercury mg/kg ND
TEQ (ND=1/2) pg/g 6.644
Sum of ILCR or HI
Sum of ILCR or HI (Weighted 90%)
90% Shoreline/10% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg --
PCBs, Total mg/kg --
Arsenic mg/kg --
Chromium mg/kg --
Mercury mg/kg --
TEQ (ND=1/2) pg/g --
Sum of Solids ILCR or HI
Solids % of Total ILCR or HI
Ambient Air ILCR or HI
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR or HI
Total ILCR or HI
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Hazard Index
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
10% HI
Solids
2E-08 5E-10 4E-08 3E-05 NA 5E-05 7E-05 7E-06
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
2E-06 9E-08 2E-07 8E-03 6E-03 7E-04 1E-02 1E-03
1E-07 1E-07 8E-06 4E-05 1E-03 3E-03 4E-03 4E-04
8E-10 2E-10 2E-08 3E-06 8E-07 7E-05 7E-05 7E-06
4E-10 8E-12 2E-11 5E-01 2E-04 3E-02 6E-01 6E-02
5E-01 7E-03 3E-02 6E-01 6E-02
5E-02 7E-04 3E-03
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
90% HI
Solids
1E-08 3E-10 2E-08 2E-05 NA 3E-05 5E-05 4E-05
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
3E-06 1E-07 3E-07 1E-02 7E-03 9E-04 2E-02 2E-02
1E-07 1E-07 9E-06 4E-05 1E-03 3E-03 4E-03 4E-03
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
3E-12 6E-14 2E-13 4E-03 2E-06 2E-04 4E-03 4E-03
1E-02 9E-03 4E-03 3E-02 2E-02
1E-02 8E-03 4E-03
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
Solids Ing
HI %
Solids Inh
HI %
Solids
Derm HI %
Solids Ing
HI % of
Total HI
Solids Inh
HI % of
Total HI
Solids
Derm HI %
of Total HI
1E-08 3E-10 3E-08 2E-05 NA 3E-05 5E-05 0.03% NA 0.5% 0.01% NA 0.01%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
3E-06 1E-07 3E-07 1E-02 7E-03 9E-04 2E-02 15% 100% 13% 4% 3% 0.3%
1E-07 1E-07 9E-06 4E-05 NA 3E-03 3E-03 0.06206% NA 42.80% 0.01509% NA 1.103%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
4E-11 9E-13 2E-12 6E-02 2E-05 3E-03 6E-02 85% 0.30% 44% 21% 0.01% 1%
7E-02 7E-03 7E-03 0.08
24% 3% 3% 0.3
0.19
70%
0.3
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-24
Risk Calculations - Brine Shrimp Worker
PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
80% Shoreline - 20% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC - Tooele County, Utah
Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
GSLIC EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
20% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506 7.5E-09 1.7E-10 1.4E-08 1.2E-08 7.7E-11 2.2E-08 3.4E-08 6.8E-09
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291 4.3E-08 9.7E-10 1.1E-08 8.7E-08 5.5E-10 2.2E-08 1.1E-07 2.2E-08
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395 8.4E-07 3.1E-08 7.7E-08 1.3E-06 1.3E-07 1.1E-07 1.5E-06 3.0E-07
Chromium mg/kg 10.71 4.0E-08 3.6E-08 2.9E-06 2.0E-08 3.0E-06 1.5E-06 4.5E-06 8.9E-07
Mercury mg/kg 0.026 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5 1.3E-10 3.0E-12 7.3E-12 1.7E-05 1.1E-07 9.5E-07 1.8E-05 3.7E-06
Sum of ILCR or HI 2E-05 3E-06 3E-06 2E-05 5E-06
Sum of ILCR or HI (Weighted 20%)4E-06 6E-07 5E-07
Shoreline EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
80% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032 4.8E-09 1.1E-10 8.7E-09 7.6E-09 4.9E-11 1.4E-08 2.2E-08 1.7E-08
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473 7.0E-10 1.6E-11 1.8E-10 1.4E-09 9.0E-12 3.6E-10 1.8E-09 1.4E-09
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01 1.1E-06 4.0E-08 9.8E-08 9.7E-07 1.7E-07 1.5E-07 1.3E-06 1.0E-06
Chromium mg/kg 12.07 4.5E-08 4.0E-08 3.3E-06 5.6E-10 3.4E-06 1.6E-06 5.0E-06 4.0E-06
Mercury mg/kg ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644 9.9E-13 2.2E-14 5.4E-14 1.3E-07 8.4E-10 7.0E-09 1.4E-07 1.1E-07
Sum of ILCR or HI 1E-06 4E-06 2E-06 6E-06 5E-06
Sum of ILCR or HI (Weighted 80%)9E-07 3E-06 1E-06
80% Shoreline/20% GSLIC
Exposure Scenario
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
Solids Ing
ILCR %
Solids Inh
ILCR %
Solids
Derm ILCR
%
Solids Ing
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Derm
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg -------- 8.5E-09 5.5E-11 1.6E-08 2.4E-08 0.2% 0.00% 1% 0.06% 0.00% 0.1%
PCBs, Total mg/kg -------- 1.8E-08 1.2E-10 4.7E-09 2.3E-08 0.4% 0.0% 0% 0.12% 0.001% 0.03%
Arsenic mg/kg -------- 1.0E-06 1.6E-07 1.4E-07 1.3E-06 22% 5% 7%7%1%1%
Chromium mg/kg -------- 4.4E-09 3.3E-06 1.6E-06 4.9E-06 0.1% 71.2% 34.7% 0.029% 22%11%
Mercury mg/kg -------- NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g --------3.6E-06 2.3E-08 2.0E-07 3.8E-06 77% 1% 10% 24%0.2%1%
Sum of Solids ILCR or HI 5E-06 3E-06 2E-06 1E-05
Solids % of Total ILCR or HI 31% 23% 13% 67%
Ambient Air ILCR or HI 5E-06
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR or HI 33%
Total ILCR or HI 2E-05
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-24
Risk Calculations - Brine Shrimp Worker
PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
80% Shoreline - 20% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC - Tooele County, Utah
GSLIC EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395
Chromium mg/kg 10.71
Mercury mg/kg 0.026
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5
Sum of ILCR or HI
Sum of ILCR or HI (Weighted 20%)
Shoreline EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01
Chromium mg/kg 12.07
Mercury mg/kg ND
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644
Sum of ILCR or HI
Sum of ILCR or HI (Weighted 80%)
80% Shoreline/20% GSLIC
Exposure Scenario
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg --
PCBs, Total mg/kg --
Arsenic mg/kg --
Chromium mg/kg --
Mercury mg/kg --
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g --
Sum of Solids ILCR or HI
Solids % of Total ILCR or HI
Ambient Air ILCR or HI
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR or HI
Total ILCR or HI
Hazard Index
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
20% HI
Solids
2E-08 5E-10 4E-08 3E-05 NA 5E-05 7E-05 1E-05
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
2E-06 9E-08 2E-07 8E-03 6E-03 7E-04 1E-02 3E-03
1E-07 1E-07 8E-06 4E-05 1E-03 3E-03 4E-03 8E-04
8E-10 2E-10 2E-08 3E-06 8E-07 7E-05 7E-05 1E-05
4E-10 8E-12 2E-11 5E-01 2E-04 3E-02 6E-01 1E-01
5E-01 7E-03 3E-02 6E-01 1E-01
1E-01 1E-03 7E-03
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
80% HI
Solids
1E-08 3E-10 2E-08 2E-05 NA 3E-05 5E-05 4E-05
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
3E-06 1E-07 3E-07 1E-02 7E-03 9E-04 2E-02 1E-02
1E-07 1E-07 9E-06 4E-05 1E-03 3E-03 4E-03 3E-03
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
3E-12 6E-14 2E-13 4E-03 2E-06 2E-04 4E-03 3E-03
1E-02 9E-03 4E-03 3E-02 2E-02
1E-02 7E-03 3E-03
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
Solids Ing HI
%
Solids Inh HI
%
Solids Derm HI
%
Solids Ing HI %
of Total HI
Solids Inh HI %
of Total HI
Solids
Derm HI
% of
Total HI
1E-08 3E-10 3E-08 2E-05 NA 3E-05 5E-05 0.02% NA 0.3% 0.01% NA 0.01%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
3E-06 1E-07 3E-07 1E-02 7E-03 9E-04 2E-02 8% 99% 9% 3% 2% 0.3%
1E-07 1E-07 9E-06 4E-05 NA 3E-03 3E-03 0.03427% NA 30.16% 0.01241% NA 0.907%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
8E-11 2E-12 4E-12 1E-01 4E-05 6E-03 1E-01 92% 0.60% 61% 33% 0.01% 2%
1E-01 7E-03 1E-02 0.1
36% 2% 3% 41%
0.2
59%
0.3
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-25
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 4.73E-03 7.19E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.03E-11 2E-11 0.03% 1.01E-03 1.54E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.19E-12 4E-12 0.01%
Total Arsenic 1.20E+01 3.91E-08 1.E-04 4.59% 5.59E-09 8E-09 12.17% 1.16E+01 3.77E-08 1.E-04 27.42% 5.38E-09 8E-09 16.34%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.20E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.21E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.64E-06 2.16E-14 3.E-05 1.09% 3.09E-15 4E-10 0.58% 1.08E-06 3.50E-15 5.E-06 1.09% 5.01E-16 7E-11 0.13%
Dermal Total 1.21E+01 3.92E-08 2.E-04 5.68% 5.60E-09 9E-09 12.78% 1.55E+01 3.77E-08 1.E-04 28.51% 5.39E-09 8E-09 16.48%
Ingestion Total PCBs 4.73E-03 3.55E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 5.07E-12 1E-11 0.01% 1.01E-03 7.58E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.08E-12 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.20E+01 9.01E-08 2.E-04 6.34% 1.29E-08 1E-08 16.81% 1.16E+01 8.68E-08 2.E-04 37.88% 1.24E-08 1E-08 22.58%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.20E-02 2.40E-10 3.E-07 0.01% 3.43E-11 5E-11 0.08% 4.98E-03 3.74E-11 5.E-08 0.01% 5.34E-12 9E-12 0.02%
Total Chromium 1.21E+01 9.05E-08 3.E-05 1.06% 1.29E-08 6E-09 9.38% 1.55E+01 1.17E-07 4.E-05 8.48% 1.67E-08 8E-09 16.85%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.64E-06 4.98E-14 7.E-05 2.50% 7.12E-15 9E-10 1.34% 1.08E-06 8.07E-15 1.E-05 2.52% 1.15E-15 1E-10 0.30%
Ingestion Total 1.21E+01 1.81E-07 3.E-04 9.91% 2.58E-08 2E-08 27.63% 1.55E+01 2.03E-07 2.E-04 48.89% 2.91E-08 2E-08 39.75%
Inhalation Total PCBs 4.73E-03 5.28E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 7.55E-14 4E-14 0.00% 1.01E-03 1.13E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.61E-14 9E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.20E+01 1.34E-09 9.E-05 3.15% 1.92E-10 8E-10 1.20% 1.16E+01 1.29E-09 9.E-05 18.81% 1.85E-10 8E-10 1.61%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.20E-02 3.57E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 5.11E-13 2E-13 0.00% 4.98E-03 5.56E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 7.95E-14 4E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.21E+01 1.35E-09 1.E-05 0.47% 1.93E-10 2E-08 23.48% 1.55E+01 1.74E-09 2.E-05 3.79% 2.48E-10 2E-08 42.16%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.64E-06 7.42E-16 2.E-08 0.00% 1.06E-16 4E-12 0.01% 1.08E-06 1.20E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 1.72E-17 7E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.21E+01 2.69E-09 1.E-04 3.62% 3.85E-10 2E-08 24.68% 1.55E+01 3.03E-09 1.E-04 22.60% 4.33E-10 2E-08 43.76%
Soil Total 1.21E+01 2.23E-07 5.E-04 19.21% 3.18E-08 4E-08 65.09% 1.55E+01 2.44E-07 5.E-04 100.00% 3.49E-08 5E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility) Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 8.49E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.21E-10 7E-11 0.10% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 1.74E-08 1.E-03 40.90% 2.49E-09 1E-08 15.55% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 5.20E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 7.43E-09 3E-09 4.96% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 5.44E-08 1.E-03 38.28% 7.77E-09 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 8.99E-11 3.E-07 0.01% 1.28E-11 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 1.82E-12 5.E-05 1.60% 2.59E-13 1E-08 14.31% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.25E-07 2.E-03 80.79% 1.78E-08 2E-08 34.91% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.25E-07 2.E-03 80.79% 1.78E-08 2E-08 34.91% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.21E+01 3.48E-07 3.E-03 100%4.96E-08 6.9E-08 100%1.55E+01 2.44E-07 5.E-04 100%3.49E-08 4.9E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
BG
Matrix Pathway Analyte
SITE
CTE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-25
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 13 - Buffer Area North and East
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
4.73E-03 2.46E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.51E-11 7E-11 0.02% 1.01E-03 5.25E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 7.49E-12 1E-11 0.01%
1.20E+01 1.34E-07 4.E-04 4.17% 1.91E-08 3E-08 9.53% 1.16E+01 1.29E-07 4.E-04 18.42% 1.84E-08 3E-08 11.69%
3.20E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.21E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
6.64E-06 7.39E-14 1.E-04 0.99% 1.06E-14 1E-09 0.46% 1.08E-06 1.20E-14 2.E-05 0.73% 1.71E-15 2E-10 0.09%
1.21E+01 1.34E-07 6.E-04 5.16% 1.91E-08 3E-08 10.01% 1.55E+01 1.29E-07 4.E-04 19.15% 1.84E-08 3E-08 11.80%
4.73E-03 2.42E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.46E-11 7E-11 0.02% 1.01E-03 5.18E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 7.39E-12 1E-11 0.01%
1.20E+01 6.16E-07 1.E-03 11.53% 8.79E-08 8E-08 26.34% 1.16E+01 5.93E-07 1.E-03 50.89% 8.47E-08 8E-08 32.31%
3.20E-02 1.64E-09 2.E-06 0.02% 2.34E-10 4E-10 0.12% 4.98E-03 2.55E-10 3.E-07 0.01% 3.65E-11 6E-11 0.02%
1.21E+01 6.19E-07 2.E-04 1.93% 8.84E-08 4E-08 14.70% 1.55E+01 7.96E-07 3.E-04 11.39% 1.14E-07 6E-08 24.11%
6.64E-06 3.41E-13 5.E-04 4.56% 4.86E-14 6E-09 2.10% 1.08E-06 5.51E-14 8.E-05 3.38% 7.88E-15 1E-09 0.43%
1.21E+01 1.24E-06 2.E-03 18.04% 1.77E-07 1E-07 43.29% 1.55E+01 1.39E-06 2.E-03 65.67% 1.99E-07 1E-07 56.89%
4.73E-03 1.81E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.58E-13 1E-13 0.00% 1.01E-03 3.85E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 5.51E-14 3E-14 0.00%
1.20E+01 4.58E-09 3.E-04 2.86% 6.55E-10 3E-09 0.94% 1.16E+01 4.42E-09 3.E-04 12.63% 6.31E-10 3E-09 1.15%
3.20E-02 1.22E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.74E-12 8E-13 0.00% 4.98E-03 1.90E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.72E-13 1E-13 0.00%
1.21E+01 4.61E-09 5.E-05 0.43% 6.58E-10 6E-08 18.40% 1.55E+01 5.93E-09 6.E-05 2.54% 8.47E-10 7E-08 30.16%
6.64E-06 2.54E-15 6.E-08 0.00% 3.62E-16 1E-11 0.00% 1.08E-06 4.11E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 5.87E-17 2E-12 0.00%
1.21E+01 9.20E-09 4.E-04 3.29% 1.31E-09 6E-08 19.34% 1.55E+01 1.03E-08 4.E-04 15.18% 1.48E-09 7E-08 31.31%
1.21E+01 1.38E-06 3.E-03 26.50% 1.97E-07 2E-07 72.64% 1.55E+01 1.53E-06 2.E-03 100.00% 2.18E-07 2E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 2.90E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.14E-10 2E-10 0.08% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 5.96E-08 4.E-03 37.21% 8.51E-09 4E-08 12.18% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 1.78E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 2.54E-08 1E-08 3.89% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.86E-07 4.E-03 34.82% 2.66E-08 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.25E-08 3.07E-10 1.E-06 0.01% 4.39E-11 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.54E-10 6.20E-12 2.E-04 1.45% 8.86E-13 3E-08 11.21% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.26E-07 8.E-03 73.50% 6.09E-08 8E-08 27.36% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.26E-07 8.E-03 73.50% 6.09E-08 8E-08 27.36% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.21E+01 1.81E-06 1.E-02 100%2.58E-07 3.0E-07 100%1.55E+01 1.53E-06 2.E-03 100%2.18E-07 2.4E-07 100%
SITE BG
RME
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-26
CTE Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 13 Buffer - Area North and East
80% Shoreline - 20% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
GSLIC EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
20% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506 5.4E-11 8.1E-13 7.8E-10 8.7E-11 3.7E-13 1.3E-09 1.3E-09 2.7E-10
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291 3.1E-10 4.6E-12 6.3E-10 6.2E-10 2.6E-12 1.3E-09 1.9E-09 3.8E-10
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395 6.0E-09 1.5E-10 4.4E-09 9.1E-09 6.4E-10 6.6E-09 1.6E-08 3.3E-09
Chromium mg/kg 10.71 2.9E-10 1.7E-10 1.7E-07 1.4E-10 1.4E-08 8.3E-08 9.8E-08 2.0E-08
Mercury mg/kg 0.026 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5 9.6E-13 1.4E-14 4.2E-13 1.2E-07 5.4E-10 5.4E-08 1.8E-07 3.6E-08
Sum of ILCR/HI 1E-07 2E-08 1E-07 3E-07 6E-08
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 20%)3E-08 3E-09 3E-08
Shoreline EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
80% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032 3.4E-11 5.1E-13 5.0E-10 5.5E-11 2.3E-13 7.9E-10 8.5E-10 6.8E-10
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473 5.1E-12 7.5E-14 1.0E-11 1.0E-11 4.3E-14 2.1E-11 3.1E-11 2.5E-11
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01 7.7E-09 1.9E-10 5.6E-09 6.9E-09 8.2E-10 8.4E-09 1.6E-08 1.3E-08
Chromium mg/kg 12.07 3.2E-10 1.9E-10 1.9E-07 4.0E-12 1.6E-08 9.4E-08 1.1E-07 8.8E-08
Mercury mg/kg ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644 7.1E-15 1.1E-16 3.1E-15 9.3E-10 4.0E-12 4.0E-10 1.3E-09 1.1E-09
Sum of ILCR/HI 8E-09 2E-08 1E-07 1E-07 1E-07
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 80%)6E-09 1E-08 8E-08
80% Shoreline/20% Canal Exposure Scenario
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
Solids Ing
ILCR %
Solids Inh
ILCR %
Solids
Derm ILCR
%
Solids Ing
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Derm
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg -------- 6.1E-11 2.6E-13 8.9E-10 9.5E-10 0.2% 0.00% 1% 0.03% 0.00% 0.5%
PCBs, Total mg/kg -------- 1.3E-10 5.6E-13 2.7E-10 4.0E-10 0.4% 0.0% 0% 0.07% 0.000% 0.14%
Arsenic mg/kg -------- 7.4E-09 7.9E-10 8.0E-09 1.6E-08 22% 5% 7%4%0%4%
Chromium mg/kg -------- 3.2E-11 1.6E-08 9.1E-08 1.1E-07 0.10% 94.61% 81.81% 0.02% 8.51% 49.21%
Mercury mg/kg -------- NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g -------- 2.6E-08 1.1E-10 1.1E-08 3.7E-08 77% 1% 10% 14%0.1%6%
Sum of Solids ILCR/HI 3E-08 2E-08 1E-07 2E-07
Solids % of Total ILCR/HI 18% 9% 60% 87%
Ambient Air ILCR/HI 2E-08
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR/HI 13%
Total ILCR/HI 2E-07
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
ERN Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-26
CTE Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 13 Buffer - Area North and East
80% Shoreline - 20% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC
Tooele County, Utah
GSLIC EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395
Chromium mg/kg 10.71
Mercury mg/kg 0.026
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5
Sum of ILCR/HI
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 20%)
Shoreline EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01
Chromium mg/kg 12.07
Mercury mg/kg ND
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644
Sum of ILCR/HI
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 80%)
80% Shoreline/20% Canal Exposure Scenario
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg --
PCBs, Total mg/kg --
Arsenic mg/kg --
Chromium mg/kg --
Mercury mg/kg --
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g --
Sum of Solids ILCR/HI
Solids % of Total ILCR/HI
Ambient Air ILCR/HI
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR/HI
Total ILCR/HI
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Hazard Index
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
20% HI
Solids
4E-10 6E-12 5E-09 5E-07 NA 7E-06 7E-06 1E-06
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
4E-08 1E-09 3E-08 1E-04 7E-05 1E-04 3E-04 6E-05
2E-09 1E-09 1E-06 7E-07 1E-05 4E-04 4E-04 8E-05
1E-11 3E-12 3E-09 5E-08 1E-08 9E-06 9E-06 2E-06
7E-12 1E-13 3E-12 1E-02 3E-06 4E-03 1E-02 3E-03
1E-02 8E-05 5E-03 1E-02 3E-03
2E-03 2E-05 9E-04
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
80% HI
Solids
2E-10 4E-12 3E-09 3E-07 NA 4E-06 5E-06 4E-06
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
5E-08 1E-09 4E-08 2E-04 9E-05 1E-04 4E-04 3E-04
2E-09 1E-09 1E-06 8E-07 1E-05 4E-04 5E-04 4E-04
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
5E-14 7E-16 2E-14 7E-05 2E-08 3E-05 1E-04 8E-05
3E-04 1E-04 6E-04 1E-03 8E-04
2E-04 8E-05 5E-04
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
Solids Ing HI
%
Solids Inh HI
%
Solids Derm HI
%
Solids Ing HI %
of Total HI
Solids Inh HI %
of Total HI
Solids
Derm HI
% of
Total HI
3E-10 4E-12 4E-09 3E-07 NA 5E-06 5E-06 0.02% NA 0.3% 0.01% NA 0.08%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
5E-08 1E-09 4E-08 2E-04 9E-05 1E-04 4E-04 8% 86% 9% 3% 1% 2.1%
2E-09 1E-09 1E-06 7E-07 1E-05 4E-04 4E-04 0.03427% 13.3% 30.16% 0.01237% 0.2210% 7.161%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
1E-12 2E-14 6E-13 2E-03 5E-07 9E-04 3E-03 92% 0.52% 61% 33% 0.01% 14%
2E-03 1E-04 1E-03 4E-03
36% 2% 24% 61%
2E-03
39%
6E-03
ERN Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-27
RME Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 13 Buffer - Area North and East
80% Shoreline - 20% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
GSLIC EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
20% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506 3.7E-10 2.8E-12 2.7E-09 5.9E-10 1.3E-12 4.3E-09 4.9E-09 9.8E-10
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291 2.1E-09 1.6E-11 2.2E-09 4.3E-09 9.0E-12 4.3E-09 8.6E-09 1.7E-09
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395 4.1E-08 5.1E-10 1.5E-08 6.2E-08 2.2E-09 2.2E-08 8.7E-08 1.7E-08
Chromium mg/kg 10.71 2.0E-09 5.8E-10 5.7E-07 9.8E-10 4.9E-08 2.8E-07 3.3E-07 6.7E-08
Mercury mg/kg 0.026 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5 6.6E-12 4.9E-14 1.4E-12 8.5E-07 1.9E-09 1.9E-07 1.0E-06 2.1E-07
Sum of ILCR/HI 9E-07 5E-08 5E-07 1E-06 3E-07
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 20%)2E-07 1E-08 1E-07
Shoreline EPC
Solids Ing
LADD
Solids Inh
LADD
Solids
Derm LADD
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
80% ILCR
Solids
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032 2.3E-10 1.7E-12 1.7E-09 3.7E-10 8.0E-13 2.7E-09 3.1E-09 2.5E-09
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473 3.5E-11 2.6E-13 3.5E-11 6.9E-11 1.5E-13 7.0E-11 1.4E-10 1.1E-10
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01 5.3E-08 6.5E-10 1.9E-08 4.7E-08 2.8E-09 2.9E-08 7.9E-08 6.3E-08
Chromium mg/kg 12.07 2.2E-09 6.6E-10 6.4E-07 2.8E-11 5.5E-08 3.2E-07 3.8E-07 3.0E-07
Mercury mg/kg ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644 4.9E-14 3.6E-16 1.1E-14 6.3E-09 1.4E-11 1.4E-09 7.7E-09 6.2E-09
Sum of ILCR/HI 5E-08 6E-08 4E-07 5E-07 4E-07
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 80%)4E-08 5E-08 3E-07
80% Shoreline/20% Canal Exposure Scenario
Solids Ing
ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR
Solids
Derm ILCR ILCR Sum
Solids Ing
ILCR %
Solids Inh
ILCR %
Solids
Derm ILCR
%
Solids Ing
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Inh
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Solids Derm
ILCR % of
Total ILCR
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg -------- 4.2E-10 9.0E-13 3.0E-09 3.4E-09 0.2% 0.00% 1% 0.06% 0.00% 0.4%
PCBs, Total mg/kg -------- 9.1E-10 1.9E-12 9.2E-10 1.8E-09 0.4% 0.0% 0% 0.12% 0.000% 0.12%
Arsenic mg/kg -------- 5.0E-08 2.7E-09 2.7E-08 8.0E-08 22% 5% 7% 7%0%4%
Chromium mg/kg -------- 2.2E-10 5.4E-08 3.1E-07 3.7E-07 0.10% 94.61% 81.81% 0.03% 7.21% 41.74%
Mercury mg/kg -------- NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g -------- 1.8E-07 3.8E-10 3.8E-08 2.1E-07 77% 1% 10% 23% 0.1%5%
Sum of Solids ILCR/HI 2E-07 6E-08 4E-07 7E-07
Solids % of Total ILCR/HI 30% 8% 51% 89%
Ambient Air ILCR/HI 8E-08
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR/HI 11%
Total ILCR/HI 7E-07
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
ERN Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-27
RME Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 13 Buffer - Area North and East
80% Shoreline - 20% GSLIC Exposure Scenario
US Magnesium, LLC
Tooele County, Utah
GSLIC EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.0506
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.291
Arsenic mg/kg 9.395
Chromium mg/kg 10.71
Mercury mg/kg 0.026
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 896.5
Sum of ILCR/HI
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 20%)
Shoreline EPC
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg 0.032
PCBs, Total mg/kg 0.00473
Arsenic mg/kg 12.01
Chromium mg/kg 12.07
Mercury mg/kg ND
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g 6.644
Sum of ILCR/HI
Sum of ILCR/HI (Weighted 80%)
80% Shoreline/20% Canal Exposure Scenario
Hexachlorobenzene mg/kg --
PCBs, Total mg/kg --
Arsenic mg/kg --
Chromium mg/kg --
Mercury mg/kg --
TEQ (ND=1/2)pg/g --
Sum of Solids ILCR/HI
Solids % of Total ILCR/HI
Ambient Air ILCR/HI
Ambient Air % of Total ILCR/HI
Total ILCR/HI
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Hazard Index
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
20% HI
Solids
3E-09 2E-11 2E-08 3E-06 NA 2E-05 3E-05 5E-06
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
3E-07 4E-09 1E-07 1E-03 2E-04 3E-04 2E-03 3E-04
1E-08 4E-09 4E-06 5E-06 4E-05 1E-03 1E-03 3E-04
9E-11 1E-11 1E-08 3E-07 3E-08 3E-05 3E-05 6E-06
5E-11 3E-13 1E-11 7E-02 9E-06 1E-02 8E-02 2E-02
7E-02 3E-04 2E-02 8E-02 2E-02
1E-02 6E-05 3E-03
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
80% HI
Solids
2E-09 1E-11 1E-08 2E-06 NA 1E-05 2E-05 1E-05
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
4E-07 5E-09 1E-07 1E-03 3E-04 4E-04 2E-03 2E-03
2E-08 5E-09 4E-06 5E-06 5E-05 1E-03 2E-03 1E-03
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
3E-13 3E-15 7E-14 5E-04 6E-08 1E-04 6E-04 5E-04
2E-03 4E-04 2E-03 4E-03 3E-03
1E-03 3E-04 2E-03
Solids Ing
ADD
Solids Inh
ADD
Solids
Derm ADD
Solids Ing
HQ
Solids Inh
HQ
Solids
Derm HQ HI
Solids Ing HI
%
Solids Inh HI
%
Solids Derm HI
%
Solids Ing HI %
of Total HI
Solids Inh HI %
of Total HI
Solids
Derm HI
% of
Total HI
2E-09 1E-11 1E-08 2E-06 NA 2E-05 2E-05 0.02% NA 0.3%0.01%NA 0.06%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
4E-07 4E-09 1E-07 1E-03 3E-04 4E-04 2E-03 8% 86%9%4%1% 1.5%
2E-08 5E-09 4E-06 5E-06 5E-05 1E-03 2E-03 0.03427% 13.3% 30.16% 0.01818% 0.1624% 5.262%
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
9E-12 7E-14 2E-12 1E-02 2E-06 3E-03 2E-02 92% 0.52% 61%49%0.01% 11%
1E-02 3E-04 5E-03 2E-02
53% 1% 17% 72%
8E-03
28%
3E-02
ERN Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-28
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 2.46E-01 4.67E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 6.68E-10 1E-09 1.12% 1.01E-03 1.92E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.74E-12 5E-12 0.01%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 4.58E-08 2.E-04 2.31% 6.54E-09 1E-08 8.25% 1.16E+01 4.71E-08 2.E-04 28.93% 6.73E-09 1E-08 18.29%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 6.85E-13 1.E-03 14.82% 9.78E-14 1E-08 10.69% 1.08E-06 4.38E-15 6.E-06 1.15% 6.26E-16 8E-11 0.15%
Dermal Total 1.13E+01 5.05E-08 1.E-03 17.14% 7.21E-09 2E-08 20.07% 1.55E+01 4.71E-08 2.E-04 30.09% 6.73E-09 1E-08 18.45%
Ingestion Total PCBs 2.46E-01 2.31E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 3.29E-10 7E-10 0.55% 1.01E-03 9.47E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.35E-12 3E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 1.05E-07 2.E-04 3.20% 1.51E-08 1E-08 11.40% 1.16E+01 1.08E-07 2.E-04 39.97% 1.55E-08 1E-08 25.27%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 1.37E-08 2.E-05 0.26% 1.96E-09 3E-09 2.64% 4.98E-03 4.67E-11 6.E-08 0.01% 6.67E-12 1E-11 0.02%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 8.48E-08 3.E-05 0.43% 1.21E-08 6E-09 5.09% 1.55E+01 1.46E-07 5.E-05 8.95% 2.08E-08 1E-08 18.86%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 2.72E-10 9.E-07 0.01% 3.88E-11 0E+00 0.00% 4.81E-02 4.51E-10 2.E-06 0.28% 6.44E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 1.58E-12 2.E-03 34.13% 2.25E-13 3E-08 24.62% 1.08E-06 1.01E-14 1.E-05 2.66% 1.44E-15 2E-10 0.34%
Ingestion Total 1.13E+01 2.07E-07 3.E-03 38.03% 2.95E-08 5E-08 44.31% 1.55E+01 2.55E-07 3.E-04 51.86% 3.64E-08 2E-08 44.49%
Inhalation Total PCBs 2.46E-01 2.60E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.71E-12 2E-12 0.00% 1.01E-03 1.07E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.52E-14 9E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 1.19E-09 8.E-05 1.20% 1.70E-10 7E-10 0.61% 1.16E+01 1.22E-09 8.E-05 15.02% 1.75E-10 8E-10 1.36%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 1.55E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.21E-11 1E-11 0.01% 4.98E-03 5.26E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 7.52E-14 3E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 9.56E-10 1.E-05 0.14% 1.37E-10 1E-08 9.64% 1.55E+01 1.64E-09 2.E-05 3.03% 2.35E-10 2E-08 35.70%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 3.06E-12 1.E-08 0.00% 4.38E-13 0E+00 0.00% 4.81E-02 5.08E-12 2.E-08 0.00% 7.26E-13 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 1.78E-14 4.E-07 0.01% 2.54E-15 1E-10 0.08% 1.08E-06 1.14E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 1.62E-17 6E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.13E+01 2.33E-09 9.E-05 1.35% 3.33E-10 1E-08 10.35% 1.55E+01 2.87E-09 1.E-04 18.05% 4.10E-10 2E-08 37.06%
Soil Total 1.13E+01 2.59E-07 4.E-03 56.51% 3.71E-08 9E-08 74.72% 1.55E+01 3.05E-07 5.E-04 100.00% 4.35E-08 6E-08 100.00%
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Ingestion Total ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Deer Total ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Ingestion Total ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Chukar Total ------ 0.00%---- 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.06E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.52E-10 9E-11 0.07%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 2.18E-08 1.E-03 22.02% 3.11E-09 1E-08 11.26%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 6.50E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 9.29E-09 4E-09 3.59%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 6.80E-08 1.E-03 20.60% 9.71E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 1.12E-10 4.E-07 0.01% 1.60E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 2.27E-12 6.E-05 0.86% 3.24E-13 1E-08 10.36%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.56E-07 3.E-03 43.49% 2.23E-08 3E-08 25.28%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.56E-07 3.E-03 43.49% 2.23E-08 3E-08 25.28%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.13E+01 4.15E-07 7.E-03 100%5.93E-08 1.2E-07 100%1.55E+01 3.05E-07 5.E-04 100%4.35E-08 5.5E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-28
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Deer Total
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Chukar Total
Air (Facility) Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
2.46E-01 1.71E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.45E-09 5E-09 0.68% 1.01E-03 7.04E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.01E-11 2E-11 0.01%
1.13E+01 1.68E-07 6.E-04 1.12% 2.40E-08 4E-08 5.02% 1.16E+01 1.73E-07 6.E-04 4.15% 2.47E-08 4E-08 12.57%
1.47E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
9.04E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
2.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 2.51E-12 4.E-03 7.19% 3.59E-13 5E-08 6.51% 1.08E-06 1.61E-14 2.E-05 0.17% 2.29E-15 3E-10 0.10%
1.13E+01 1.85E-07 4.E-03 8.32% 2.64E-08 9E-08 12.21% 1.55E+01 1.73E-07 6.E-04 4.31% 2.47E-08 4E-08 12.68%
2.46E-01 1.69E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.42E-09 5E-09 0.67% 1.01E-03 6.94E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 9.92E-12 2E-11 0.01%
1.13E+01 7.73E-07 2.E-03 3.10% 1.10E-07 1E-07 13.88% 1.16E+01 7.95E-07 2.E-03 11.46% 1.14E-07 1E-07 34.73%
1.47E+00 1.01E-07 1.E-04 0.25% 1.44E-08 2E-08 3.22% 4.98E-03 3.42E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 4.89E-11 8E-11 0.03%
9.04E+00 6.22E-07 2.E-04 0.42% 8.88E-08 4E-08 6.20% 1.55E+01 1.07E-06 4.E-04 2.56% 1.53E-07 8E-08 25.92%
2.90E-02 1.99E-09 7.E-06 0.01% 2.85E-10 0E+00 0.00% 4.81E-02 3.31E-09 1.E-05 0.08% 4.72E-10 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 1.16E-11 2.E-02 33.13% 1.65E-12 2E-07 29.97% 1.08E-06 7.40E-14 1.E-04 0.76% 1.06E-14 1E-09 0.47%
1.13E+01 1.51E-06 2.E-02 36.92% 2.16E-07 4E-07 53.94% 1.55E+01 1.87E-06 2.E-03 14.86% 2.67E-07 2E-07 61.15%
2.46E-01 9.53E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.36E-11 8E-12 0.00% 1.01E-03 3.91E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 5.59E-14 3E-14 0.00%
1.13E+01 4.36E-09 3.E-04 0.58% 6.23E-10 3E-09 0.37% 1.16E+01 4.48E-09 3.E-04 2.15% 6.40E-10 3E-09 0.94%
1.47E+00 5.68E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 8.11E-11 4E-11 0.01% 4.98E-03 1.93E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.76E-13 1E-13 0.00%
9.04E+00 3.50E-09 4.E-05 0.07% 5.01E-10 4E-08 5.87% 1.55E+01 6.02E-09 6.E-05 0.43% 8.60E-10 7E-08 24.54%
2.90E-02 1.12E-11 4.E-08 0.00% 1.61E-12 0E+00 0.00% 4.81E-02 1.86E-11 6.E-08 0.00% 2.66E-12 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 6.52E-14 2.E-06 0.00% 9.31E-15 4E-10 0.05% 1.08E-06 4.17E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 5.96E-17 2E-12 0.00%
1.13E+01 8.54E-09 3.E-04 0.66% 1.22E-09 5E-08 6.30% 1.55E+01 1.05E-08 4.E-04 2.59% 1.50E-09 8E-08 25.47%
1.13E+01 1.71E-06 2.E-02 45.89% 2.44E-07 5E-07 72.45% 1.55E+01 2.05E-06 3.E-03 21.76% 2.93E-07 3E-07 99.31%
6.94E-05 4.04E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 5.78E-10 1E-09 0.16% 3.02E-07 1.76E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.51E-12 5E-12 0.00%
7.78E-04 4.53E-08 6.E-05 0.11% 6.48E-09 1E-08 1.45% 3.28E-06 1.91E-10 2.E-07 0.00% 2.73E-11 4E-11 0.01%
2.76E-02 1.61E-06 5.E-03 10.74% 2.30E-07 0E+00 0.00% 2.76E-02 1.61E-06 5.E-03 38.66% 2.30E-07 0E+00 0.00%
5.94E-08 3.46E-12 5.E-03 9.92% 4.94E-13 6E-08 8.97% 1.18E-09 6.89E-14 1.E-04 0.71% 9.85E-15 1E-09 0.43%
2.76E-02 1.66E-06 1.E-02 20.77% 2.37E-07 8E-08 10.58% 2.76E-02 1.61E-06 5.E-03 39.37% 2.30E-07 1E-09 0.45%
2.76E-02 1.66E-06 1.E-02 20.77% 2.37E-07 8E-08 10.58% 2.76E-02 1.61E-06 5.E-03 39.37% 2.30E-07 1E-09 0.45%
9.92E-06 5.78E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 8.26E-11 2E-10 0.02% 5.32E-08 3.10E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.43E-13 9E-13 0.00%
1.11E-04 6.50E-09 8.E-06 0.02% 9.28E-10 1E-09 0.21% 8.47E-07 4.94E-11 6.E-08 0.00% 7.05E-12 1E-11 0.00%
2.75E-02 1.60E-06 5.E-03 10.71% 2.29E-07 0E+00 0.00% 2.75E-02 1.60E-06 5.E-03 38.48% 2.29E-07 0E+00 0.00%
8.97E-09 5.22E-13 7.E-04 1.50% 7.46E-14 1E-08 1.35% 6.49E-10 3.78E-14 5.E-05 0.39% 5.40E-15 7E-10 0.24%
2.75E-02 1.61E-06 6.E-03 12.23% 2.30E-07 1E-08 1.58% 2.75E-02 1.60E-06 5.E-03 38.87% 2.29E-07 7E-10 0.24%
2.75E-02 1.61E-06 6.E-03 12.23% 2.30E-07 1E-08 1.58% 2.75E-02 1.60E-06 5.E-03 38.87% 2.29E-07 7E-10 0.24%
2.12E-07 3.89E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 5.56E-10 3E-10 0.04% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 7.99E-08 5.E-03 10.69% 1.14E-08 5E-08 6.85% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 2.38E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 3.40E-08 2E-08 2.19% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 2.49E-07 5.E-03 10.00% 3.56E-08 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.25E-08 4.12E-10 1.E-06 0.00% 5.88E-11 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.54E-10 8.32E-12 2.E-04 0.42% 1.19E-12 5E-08 6.31% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 5.72E-07 1.E-02 21.11% 8.17E-08 1E-07 15.39% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 5.72E-07 1.E-02 21.11% 8.17E-08 1E-07 15.39% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.13E+01 5.55E-06 5.E-02 100%7.92E-07 7.2E-07 100%1.55E+01 5.26E-06 1.E-02 100%7.52E-07 2.9E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-29
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 6.74E-03 3.07E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 4.39E-11 9.E-11 0.05% 3.35E-04 1.53E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.18E-12 4E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 4.85E-08 2.E-04 0.99% 6.93E-09 1.E-08 6.40%6.43E+00 6.29E-08 2.E-04 2.19% 8.98E-09 1E-08 14.65%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 1.37E-14 2.E-05 0.12% 1.96E-15 3.E-10 0.16%3.35E-07 3.27E-15 5.E-06 0.05% 4.68E-16 6E-11 0.07%
Dermal Total 1.25E+01 4.88E-08 2.E-04 1.11% 6.97E-09 1.E-08 6.61%1.17E+01 6.29E-08 2.E-04 2.24% 8.98E-09 1E-08 14.72%
Ingestion Total PCBs 6.74E-03 1.52E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.17E-11 4.E-11 0.03%3.35E-04 7.54E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.08E-12 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 1.12E-07 2.E-04 1.36% 1.60E-08 1.E-08 8.84%6.43E+00 1.45E-07 3.E-04 3.03% 2.07E-08 2E-08 20.24%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 7.88E-10 1.E-06 0.01% 1.13E-10 2.E-10 0.11%1.15E-03 2.59E-11 3.E-08 0.00% 3.70E-12 6E-12 0.01%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 2.82E-07 9.E-05 0.57% 4.03E-08 2.E-08 12.41%1.17E+01 2.62E-07 9.E-05 0.91% 3.75E-08 2E-08 20.38%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 3.74E-10 1.E-06 0.01% 5.34E-11 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 8.30E-10 3.E-06 0.03% 1.19E-10 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 3.17E-14 5.E-05 0.28% 4.52E-15 6.E-10 0.36%3.35E-07 7.54E-15 1.E-05 0.11% 1.08E-15 1E-10 0.15%
Ingestion Total 1.25E+01 3.95E-07 4.E-04 2.23% 5.64E-08 4.E-08 21.75%1.17E+01 4.08E-07 4.E-04 4.08% 5.83E-08 4E-08 40.78%
Inhalation Total PCBs 6.74E-03 1.85E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.65E-13 2.E-13 0.00%3.35E-04 9.21E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.32E-14 7E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 1.36E-09 9.E-05 0.55% 1.95E-10 8.E-10 0.52%6.43E+00 1.77E-09 1.E-04 1.23% 2.53E-10 1E-09 1.18%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 9.62E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.37E-12 6.E-13 0.00%1.15E-03 3.16E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 4.51E-14 2E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 3.45E-09 3.E-05 0.21% 4.92E-10 4.E-08 25.46%1.17E+01 3.20E-09 3.E-05 0.33% 4.58E-10 4E-08 41.82%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 4.56E-12 2.E-08 0.00% 6.52E-13 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.01E-11 3.E-08 0.00% 1.45E-12 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 3.87E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 5.52E-17 2.E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 9.21E-17 2.E-09 0.00% 1.32E-17 5E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.25E+01 4.83E-09 1.E-04 0.77% 6.89E-10 4.E-08 25.98%1.17E+01 4.98E-09 1.E-04 1.57% 7.12E-10 4E-08 43.00%
Soil Total 1.25E+01 4.49E-07 7.E-04 4.10% 6.41E-08 9.E-08 54.33%1.17E+01 4.76E-07 8.E-04 7.89% 6.80E-08 9E-08 98.51%
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs 1.92E-06 9.09E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.30E-11 3.E-11 0.02%1.11E-07 5.28E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 7.54E-13 2E-12 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.92E-05 9.10E-10 1.E-06 0.01% 1.30E-10 2.E-10 0.13%1.25E-06 5.91E-11 7.E-08 0.00% 8.45E-12 1E-11 0.01%
Total Mercury 2.75E-02 1.31E-06 4.E-03 26.54% 1.86E-07 0.E+00 0.00%2.76E-02 1.31E-06 4.E-03 45.59% 1.87E-07 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.30E-09 6.15E-14 9.E-05 0.54% 8.79E-15 1.E-09 0.70%9.25E-10 4.38E-14 6.E-05 0.65% 6.26E-15 8E-10 0.89%
Ingestion Total 2.75E-02 1.31E-06 4.E-03 27.09% 1.87E-07 1.E-09 0.85%2.76E-02 1.31E-06 4.E-03 46.25% 1.87E-07 8E-10 0.90%
Deer Total 2.75E-02 1.31E-06 4.E-03 27.09% 1.87E-07 1.E-09 0.85%2.76E-02 1.31E-06 4.E-03 46.25% 1.87E-07 8E-10 0.90%
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs 2.84E-07 1.35E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.92E-12 4.E-12 0.00%2.60E-08 1.23E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.76E-13 4E-13 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.12E-06 1.48E-10 2.E-07 0.00% 2.11E-11 3.E-11 0.02%5.57E-07 2.64E-11 3.E-08 0.00% 3.77E-12 6E-12 0.01%
Total Mercury 2.75E-02 1.30E-06 4.E-03 26.50% 1.86E-07 0.E+00 0.00%2.75E-02 1.30E-06 4.E-03 45.43% 1.86E-07 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.66E-10 3.15E-14 5.E-05 0.27% 4.51E-15 6.E-10 0.36%6.12E-10 2.90E-14 4.E-05 0.43% 4.15E-15 5E-10 0.59%
Ingestion Total 2.75E-02 1.30E-06 4.E-03 26.78% 1.86E-07 6.E-10 0.38%2.75E-02 1.30E-06 4.E-03 45.86% 1.86E-07 5E-10 0.59%
Chukar Total 2.75E-02 1.30E-06 4.E-03 26.78% 1.86E-07 6.E-10 0.38%2.75E-02 1.30E-06 4.E-03 45.86% 1.86E-07 5E-10 0.59%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 2.55E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 3.64E-10 2.E-10 0.13%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 5.23E-08 3.E-03 21.28% 7.47E-09 3.E-08 19.79%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 1.56E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 2.23E-08 1.E-08 6.31%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 1.63E-07 3.E-03 19.92%2.33E-08 0.E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 2.70E-10 9.E-07 0.01% 3.85E-11 0.E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 5.45E-12 1.E-04 0.83%7.78E-13 3.E-08 18.21%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 3.74E-07 7.E-03 42.04% 5.35E-08 7.E-08 44.44%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 3.74E-07 7.E-03 42.04% 5.35E-08 7.E-08 44.44%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.25E+01 3.43E-06 2.E-02 100%4.90E-07 2.E-07 100%1.17E+01 3.09E-06 1.E-02 100%4.41E-07 9.2E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-29
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Deer Total
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Chukar Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
6.74E-03 1.88E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.68E-10 5E-10 0.04%3.35E-04 9.34E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.33E-11 3E-11 0.00%
4.96E+00 2.96E-07 1.E-03 1.41% 4.23E-08 6E-08 5.29%6.43E+00 3.84E-07 1.E-03 4.47% 5.49E-08 8E-08 10.47%
3.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.25E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.66E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 8.40E-14 1.E-04 0.17% 1.20E-14 2E-09 0.13%3.35E-07 2.00E-14 3.E-05 0.10% 2.86E-15 4E-10 0.05%
1.25E+01 2.98E-07 1.E-03 1.58% 4.26E-08 7E-08 5.46%1.17E+01 3.84E-07 1.E-03 4.57% 5.49E-08 8E-08 10.52%
6.74E-03 1.85E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.65E-10 5E-10 0.04%3.35E-04 9.21E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.32E-11 3E-11 0.00%
4.96E+00 1.36E-06 3.E-03 3.89% 1.95E-07 2E-07 14.61%6.43E+00 1.77E-06 4.E-03 12.35% 2.53E-07 2E-07 28.94%
3.50E-02 9.63E-09 1.E-05 0.02% 1.38E-09 2E-09 0.18%1.15E-03 3.16E-10 4.E-07 0.00% 4.52E-11 7E-11 0.01%
1.25E+01 3.45E-06 1.E-03 1.64% 4.93E-07 2E-07 20.51%1.17E+01 3.21E-06 1.E-03 3.73% 4.58E-07 2E-07 29.14%
1.66E-02 4.57E-09 2.E-05 0.02% 6.52E-10 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.01E-08 3.E-05 0.12% 1.45E-09 0E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 3.87E-13 6.E-04 0.79% 5.53E-14 7E-09 0.60%3.35E-07 9.21E-14 1.E-04 0.46% 1.32E-14 2E-09 0.22%
1.25E+01 4.83E-06 4.E-03 6.36% 6.90E-07 4E-07 35.94%1.17E+01 4.99E-06 5.E-03 16.65% 7.12E-07 5E-07 58.31%
6.74E-03 1.13E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.62E-12 9E-13 0.00%3.35E-04 5.63E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 8.04E-14 5E-14 0.00%
4.96E+00 8.33E-09 6.E-04 0.79% 1.19E-09 5E-09 0.43%6.43E+00 1.08E-08 7.E-04 2.51% 1.54E-09 7E-09 0.84%
3.50E-02 5.88E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 8.40E-12 4E-12 0.00%1.15E-03 1.93E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.76E-13 1E-13 0.00%
1.25E+01 2.11E-08 2.E-04 0.30% 3.01E-09 3E-07 21.04%1.17E+01 1.96E-08 2.E-04 0.68% 2.80E-09 2E-07 29.89%
1.66E-02 2.79E-11 9.E-08 0.00% 3.98E-12 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 6.20E-11 2.E-07 0.00% 8.85E-12 0E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 2.36E-15 6.E-08 0.00% 3.38E-16 1E-11 0.00%3.35E-07 5.63E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 8.04E-17 3E-12 0.00%
1.25E+01 2.95E-08 8.E-04 1.09% 4.21E-09 3E-07 21.47%1.17E+01 3.05E-08 9.E-04 3.20% 4.35E-09 2E-07 30.74%
1.25E+01 5.16E-06 6.E-03 9.03% 7.37E-07 8E-07 62.87%1.17E+01 5.40E-06 7.E-03 24.42% 7.72E-07 8E-07 99.57%
1.92E-06 2.23E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.19E-11 6E-11 0.01%1.11E-07 1.30E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.86E-12 4E-12 0.00%
1.92E-05 2.24E-09 3.E-06 0.00% 3.20E-10 5E-10 0.04%1.25E-06 1.45E-10 2.E-07 0.00% 2.08E-11 3E-11 0.00%
2.75E-02 3.21E-06 1.E-02 15.25% 4.58E-07 0E+00 0.00%2.76E-02 3.22E-06 1.E-02 37.41% 4.60E-07 0E+00 0.00%
1.30E-09 1.51E-13 2.E-04 0.31% 2.16E-14 3E-09 0.23%9.25E-10 1.08E-13 2.E-04 0.54% 1.54E-14 2E-09 0.25%
2.75E-02 3.21E-06 1.E-02 15.56% 4.59E-07 3E-09 0.28%2.76E-02 3.22E-06 1.E-02 37.95% 4.60E-07 2E-09 0.26%
2.75E-02 3.21E-06 1.E-02 15.56% 4.59E-07 3E-09 0.28%2.76E-02 3.22E-06 1.E-02 37.95% 4.60E-07 2E-09 0.26%
2.84E-07 3.31E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 4.73E-12 9E-12 0.00%2.60E-08 3.03E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.33E-13 9E-13 0.00%
3.12E-06 3.64E-10 5.E-07 0.00% 5.19E-11 8E-11 0.01%5.57E-07 6.49E-11 8.E-08 0.00% 9.27E-12 1E-11 0.00%
2.75E-02 3.20E-06 1.E-02 15.23% 4.58E-07 0E+00 0.00%2.75E-02 3.21E-06 1.E-02 37.28% 4.58E-07 0E+00 0.00%
6.66E-10 7.76E-14 1.E-04 0.16% 1.11E-14 1E-09 0.12%6.12E-10 7.14E-14 1.E-04 0.36% 1.02E-14 1E-09 0.17%
2.75E-02 3.20E-06 1.E-02 15.38% 4.58E-07 2E-09 0.13%2.75E-02 3.21E-06 1.E-02 37.63% 4.58E-07 1E-09 0.17%
2.75E-02 3.20E-06 1.E-02 15.38% 4.58E-07 2E-09 0.13%2.75E-02 3.21E-06 1.E-02 37.63% 4.58E-07 1E-09 0.17%
2.12E-07 1.56E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.22E-09 1E-09 0.11% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 3.20E-07 2.E-02 30.39% 4.57E-08 2E-07 16.35% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 9.53E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.36E-07 6E-08 5.22%------ 0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 9.97E-07 2.E-02 28.44% 1.42E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 1.65E-09 5.E-06 0.01% 2.35E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 3.33E-11 8.E-04 1.19% 4.76E-12 2E-07 15.05%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 2.29E-06 4.E-02 60.02% 3.27E-07 4E-07 36.72%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 2.29E-06 4.E-02 60.02% 3.27E-07 4E-07 36.72%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.25E+01 1.39E-05 7.E-02 100%1.98E-06 1.2E-06 100%1.17E+01 1.18E-05 3.E-02 100%1.69E-06 7.9E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-30
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 7.37E-04 2.61E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.73E-12 7E-12 0.01% 3.35E-04 1.19E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.70E-12 3E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 4.46E-08 1.E-04 2.47% 6.37E-09 1E-08 7.49% 6.43E+00 4.89E-08 2.E-04 23.70% 6.99E-09 1E-08 14.96%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 3.86E-15 6.E-06 0.09% 5.52E-16 7E-11 0.06% 3.35E-07 2.55E-15 4.E-06 0.53% 3.64E-16 5E-11 0.07%
Dermal Total 1.27E+01 4.46E-08 2.E-04 2.56% 6.38E-09 1E-08 7.55%1.17E+01 4.89E-08 2.E-04 24.23% 6.99E-09 1E-08 15.04%
Ingestion Total PCBs 7.37E-04 1.29E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.84E-12 4E-12 0.00% 3.35E-04 5.86E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 8.38E-13 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 1.03E-07 2.E-04 3.41% 1.47E-08 1E-08 10.34% 6.43E+00 1.13E-07 2.E-04 32.74% 1.61E-08 1E-08 20.67%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 2.21E-07 7.E-05 1.23% 3.16E-08 2E-08 12.38% 1.17E+01 2.04E-07 7.E-05 9.89% 2.92E-08 1E-08 20.81%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 8.89E-15 1.E-05 0.21% 1.27E-15 2E-10 0.13%3.35E-07 5.86E-15 8.E-06 1.22% 8.38E-16 1E-10 0.16%
Ingestion Total 1.27E+01 3.24E-07 3.E-04 4.85% 4.63E-08 3E-08 22.86% 1.17E+01 3.17E-07 3.E-04 43.85% 4.52E-08 3E-08 41.64%
Inhalation Total PCBs 7.37E-04 1.48E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 2.11E-14 1E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 6.73E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 9.62E-15 5E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 1.18E-09 8.E-05 1.31% 1.68E-10 7E-10 0.57%6.43E+00 1.29E-09 9.E-05 12.53% 1.85E-10 8E-10 1.13%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 2.54E-09 3.E-05 0.42% 3.63E-10 3E-08 23.88% 1.17E+01 2.34E-09 2.E-05 3.41% 3.35E-10 3E-08 40.14%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 1.02E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 1.46E-17 6E-13 0.00%3.35E-07 6.73E-17 2.E-09 0.00% 9.61E-18 4E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.27E+01 3.72E-09 1.E-04 1.73% 5.32E-10 3E-08 24.45% 1.17E+01 3.63E-09 1.E-04 15.93% 5.19E-10 3E-08 41.27%
Soil Total 1.27E+01 3.72E-07 6.E-04 9.13% 5.32E-08 7E-08 54.86% 1.17E+01 3.69E-07 6.E-04 84.01% 5.27E-08 7E-08 97.96%
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs 2.25E-07 1.13E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.61E-12 3E-12 0.00%1.11E-07 5.58E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 7.97E-13 2E-12 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 9.86E-10 4.93E-14 7.E-05 1.17% 7.05E-15 9E-10 0.72%9.25E-10 4.63E-14 7.E-05 9.62% 6.62E-15 9E-10 1.23%
Ingestion Total 2.25E-07 1.13E-11 7.E-05 1.17% 1.61E-12 9E-10 0.72%1.11E-07 5.63E-12 7.E-05 9.62% 8.04E-13 9E-10 1.23%
Deer Total 2.25E-07 1.13E-11 7.E-05 1.17% 1.61E-12 9E-10 0.72%1.11E-07 5.63E-12 7.E-05 9.62% 8.04E-13 9E-10 1.23%
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs 4.22E-08 2.11E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.02E-13 6E-13 0.00%2.60E-08 1.30E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.86E-13 4E-13 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.21E-10 3.11E-14 4.E-05 0.74% 4.44E-15 6E-10 0.45%6.12E-10 3.07E-14 4.E-05 6.37% 4.38E-15 6E-10 0.81%
Ingestion Total 4.22E-08 2.14E-12 4.E-05 0.74% 3.06E-13 6E-10 0.45%2.60E-08 1.33E-12 4.E-05 6.37% 1.90E-13 6E-10 0.81%
Chukar Total 4.22E-08 2.14E-12 4.E-05 0.74% 3.06E-13 6E-10 0.45%2.60E-08 1.33E-12 4.E-05 6.37% 1.90E-13 6E-10 0.81%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.98E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.83E-10 2E-10 0.13%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 4.07E-08 3.E-03 45.04%5.81E-09 2E-08 19.58%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 1.27E-07 3.E-03 42.15% 1.81E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 2.10E-10 7.E-07 0.01% 3.00E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 1.21E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.73E-08 8E-09 6.24%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 4.24E-12 1.E-04 1.76% 6.05E-13 2E-08 18.02%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 2.91E-07 5.E-03 88.96% 4.16E-08 6E-08 43.96%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 2.91E-07 5.E-03 88.96% 4.16E-08 6E-08 43.96%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.27E+01 6.64E-07 6.E-03 100%9.48E-08 1.3E-07 100%1.17E+01 3.69E-07 7.E-04 100%5.27E-08 7.0E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-30
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Adult)
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Deer Total
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Chukar Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Hexachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
7.37E-04 2.05E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.93E-11 6E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 9.34E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.33E-11 3E-11 0.00%
5.87E+00 3.51E-07 1.E-03 2.39% 5.01E-08 8E-08 6.14%6.43E+00 3.84E-07 1.E-03 17.87% 5.49E-08 8E-08 10.67%
1.27E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
5.08E-07 3.03E-14 4.E-05 0.09% 4.33E-15 6E-10 0.05%3.35E-07 2.00E-14 3.E-05 0.40% 2.86E-15 4E-10 0.05%
1.27E+01 3.51E-07 1.E-03 2.47% 5.01E-08 8E-08 6.19%1.17E+01 3.84E-07 1.E-03 18.27% 5.49E-08 8E-08 10.72%
7.37E-04 2.03E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.89E-11 6E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 9.21E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.32E-11 3E-11 0.00%
5.87E+00 1.61E-06 3.E-03 6.59% 2.31E-07 2E-07 16.95% 6.43E+00 1.77E-06 4.E-03 49.39% 2.53E-07 2E-07 29.49%
1.27E+01 3.48E-06 1.E-03 2.37% 4.97E-07 2E-07 20.30% 1.17E+01 3.21E-06 1.E-03 14.92% 4.58E-07 2E-07 29.69%
5.08E-07 1.40E-13 2.E-04 0.41% 2.00E-14 3E-09 0.21%3.35E-07 9.21E-14 1.E-04 1.84% 1.32E-14 2E-09 0.22%
1.27E+01 5.09E-06 5.E-03 9.37% 7.28E-07 5E-07 37.47% 1.17E+01 4.98E-06 5.E-03 66.14% 7.11E-07 5E-07 59.40%
7.37E-04 1.16E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.66E-13 9E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 5.29E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 7.56E-14 4E-14 0.00%
5.87E+00 9.27E-09 6.E-04 1.26% 1.32E-09 6E-09 0.46%6.43E+00 1.02E-08 7.E-04 9.45% 1.45E-09 6E-09 0.81%
1.27E+01 2.00E-08 2.E-04 0.41% 2.85E-09 2E-07 19.57% 1.17E+01 1.84E-08 2.E-04 2.57% 2.63E-09 2E-07 28.63%
5.08E-07 8.02E-16 2.E-08 0.00% 1.15E-16 4E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 5.29E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 7.55E-17 3E-12 0.00%
1.27E+01 2.92E-08 8.E-04 1.67% 4.18E-09 2E-07 20.04% 1.17E+01 2.86E-08 9.E-04 12.02% 4.08E-09 2E-07 29.44%
1.27E+01 5.47E-06 7.E-03 13.51% 7.82E-07 8E-07 63.69% 1.17E+01 5.39E-06 7.E-03 96.43% 7.70E-07 8E-07 99.57%
2.25E-07 2.62E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.74E-12 7E-12 0.00%1.11E-07 1.30E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.86E-12 4E-12 0.00%
9.86E-10 1.15E-13 2.E-04 0.33% 1.64E-14 2E-09 0.17%9.25E-10 1.08E-13 2.E-04 2.15% 1.54E-14 2E-09 0.26%
2.25E-07 2.63E-11 2.E-04 0.33% 3.76E-12 2E-09 0.17%1.11E-07 1.31E-11 2.E-04 2.15% 1.87E-12 2E-09 0.26%
2.25E-07 2.63E-11 2.E-04 0.33% 3.76E-12 2E-09 0.17%1.11E-07 1.31E-11 2.E-04 2.15% 1.87E-12 2E-09 0.26%
4.22E-08 4.91E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 7.02E-13 1E-12 0.00%2.60E-08 3.03E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.33E-13 9E-13 0.00%
6.21E-10 7.24E-14 1.E-04 0.21% 1.03E-14 1E-09 0.11%6.12E-10 7.14E-14 1.E-04 1.42% 1.02E-14 1E-09 0.17%
4.22E-08 4.99E-12 1.E-04 0.21% 7.12E-13 1E-09 0.11%2.60E-08 3.10E-12 1.E-04 1.42% 4.43E-13 1E-09 0.17%
4.22E-08 4.99E-12 1.E-04 0.21% 7.12E-13 1E-09 0.11%2.60E-08 3.10E-12 1.E-04 1.42% 4.43E-13 1E-09 0.17%
2.12E-07 1.56E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.22E-09 1E-09 0.10%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 3.20E-07 2.E-02 43.52% 4.57E-08 2E-07 16.04%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 9.97E-07 2.E-02 40.72% 1.42E-07 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 1.65E-09 5.E-06 0.01% 2.35E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 9.53E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 1.36E-07 6E-08 5.12%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 3.33E-11 8.E-04 1.70% 4.76E-12 2E-07 14.76%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 2.29E-06 4.E-02 85.95% 3.27E-07 4E-07 36.03%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 2.29E-06 4.E-02 85.95% 3.27E-07 4E-07 36.03%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.27E+01 7.76E-06 5.E-02 100%1.11E-06 1.2E-06 100%1.17E+01 5.39E-06 7.E-03 100%7.70E-07 7.7E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-31
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 0-6)
PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 2.46E-01 4.13E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 3.54E-10 7E-10 0.49% 1.01E-03 1.70E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.45E-12 3E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 4.05E-08 1.E-04 1.13% 3.47E-09 5E-09 3.57% 1.16E+01 4.16E-08 1.E-04 10.84% 3.57E-09 5E-09 7.93%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 6.05E-13 9.E-04 7.27% 5.19E-14 7E-09 4.63%1.08E-06 3.87E-15 6.E-06 0.43% 3.32E-16 4E-11 0.06%
Dermal Total 1.13E+01 4.46E-08 1.E-03 8.40% 3.83E-09 1E-08 8.69%1.55E+01 4.17E-08 1.E-04 11.27% 3.57E-09 5E-09 8.00%
Ingestion Total PCBs 2.46E-01 9.02E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 7.73E-10 2E-09 1.06%1.01E-03 3.70E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.17E-12 6E-12 0.01%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 4.13E-07 8.E-04 6.93% 3.54E-08 3E-08 21.85% 1.16E+01 4.24E-07 8.E-04 66.23% 3.64E-08 3E-08 48.47%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 5.38E-08 7.E-05 0.56% 4.61E-09 7E-09 5.06%4.98E-03 1.83E-10 2.E-07 0.02% 1.57E-11 3E-11 0.04%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 3.32E-07 1.E-04 0.93% 2.84E-08 1E-08 9.76%1.55E+01 5.70E-07 2.E-04 14.83% 4.88E-08 2E-08 36.17%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 1.06E-09 4.E-06 0.03% 9.11E-11 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 1.76E-09 6.E-06 0.46% 1.51E-10 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 6.17E-12 9.E-03 74.03% 5.29E-13 7E-08 47.18%1.08E-06 3.95E-14 6.E-05 4.40% 3.38E-15 4E-10 0.65%
Ingestion Total 1.13E+01 8.08E-07 1.E-02 82.48% 6.93E-08 1E-07 84.91% 1.55E+01 9.96E-07 1.E-03 85.93% 8.54E-08 6E-08 85.34%
Inhalation Total PCBs 2.46E-01 9.53E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 8.17E-13 5E-13 0.00%1.01E-03 3.91E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.35E-15 2E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 4.36E-10 3.E-05 0.24% 3.74E-11 2E-10 0.11%1.16E+01 4.48E-10 3.E-05 2.33% 3.84E-11 2E-10 0.24%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 5.68E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 4.87E-12 2E-12 0.00%4.98E-03 1.93E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.65E-14 8E-15 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 3.50E-10 4.E-06 0.03% 3.00E-11 3E-09 1.73%1.55E+01 6.02E-10 6.E-06 0.47% 5.16E-11 4E-09 6.42%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 1.12E-12 4.E-09 0.00% 9.63E-14 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 1.86E-12 6.E-09 0.00% 1.60E-13 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 6.52E-15 2.E-07 0.00% 5.59E-16 2E-11 0.01%1.08E-06 4.17E-17 1.E-09 0.00% 3.57E-18 1E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.13E+01 8.54E-10 3.E-05 0.27% 7.32E-11 3E-09 1.86%1.55E+01 1.05E-09 4.E-05 2.80% 9.02E-11 5E-09 6.67%
Soil Total 1.13E+01 8.53E-07 1.E-02 91.16% 7.31E-08 1E-07 95.46% 1.55E+01 1.04E-06 1.E-03 100.00% 8.90E-08 7E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 3.89E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.33E-11 2E-11 0.01%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 7.99E-09 5.E-04 4.48% 6.85E-10 3E-09 2.02%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 2.38E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.04E-09 9E-10 0.65%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 2.49E-08 5.E-04 4.19%2.14E-09 0E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 4.12E-11 1.E-07 0.00% 3.53E-12 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 8.32E-13 2.E-05 0.17% 7.13E-14 3E-09 1.86%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 5.72E-08 1.E-03 8.84% 4.90E-09 7E-09 4.54%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 5.72E-08 1.E-03 8.84% 4.90E-09 7E-09 4.54%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.13E+01 9.11E-07 1.E-02 100%7.81E-08 1.5E-07 100%1.55E+01 1.04E-06 1.E-03 100%8.90E-08 6.8E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-31
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 0-6)
PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
2.46E-01 1.05E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 9.02E-10 2E-09 0.26%1.01E-03 4.32E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.70E-12 7E-12 0.00%
1.13E+01 1.03E-07 3.E-04 0.62% 8.84E-09 1E-08 1.93%1.16E+01 1.06E-07 4.E-04 5.83% 9.09E-09 1E-08 4.28%
1.47E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
9.04E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
2.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 1.54E-12 2.E-03 3.98% 1.32E-13 2E-08 2.50%1.08E-06 9.86E-15 1.E-05 0.23% 8.45E-16 1E-10 0.03%
1.13E+01 1.14E-07 3.E-03 4.60% 9.74E-09 3E-08 4.70%1.55E+01 1.06E-07 4.E-04 6.06% 9.09E-09 1E-08 4.32%
2.46E-01 4.59E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 3.94E-09 8E-09 1.15%1.01E-03 1.89E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.62E-11 3E-11 0.01%
1.13E+01 2.10E-06 4.E-03 7.60% 1.80E-07 2E-07 23.63% 1.16E+01 2.16E-06 4.E-03 71.24% 1.85E-07 2E-07 52.31%
1.47E+00 2.74E-07 3.E-04 0.62% 2.35E-08 4E-08 5.47%4.98E-03 9.30E-10 1.E-06 0.02% 7.97E-11 1E-10 0.04%
9.04E+00 1.69E-06 6.E-04 1.02% 1.45E-07 7E-08 10.55% 1.55E+01 2.90E-06 1.E-03 15.95% 2.49E-07 1E-07 39.03%
2.90E-02 5.41E-09 2.E-05 0.03% 4.64E-10 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 8.98E-09 3.E-05 0.49% 7.70E-10 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 3.14E-11 4.E-02 81.13% 2.69E-12 3E-07 51.03%1.08E-06 2.01E-13 3.E-04 4.73% 1.72E-14 2E-09 0.70%
1.13E+01 4.11E-06 5.E-02 90.40% 3.53E-07 6E-07 91.84% 1.55E+01 5.07E-06 6.E-03 92.43% 4.35E-07 3E-07 92.09%
2.46E-01 2.43E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.08E-12 1E-12 0.00%1.01E-03 9.96E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 8.54E-15 5E-15 0.00%
1.13E+01 1.11E-09 7.E-05 0.13% 9.51E-11 4E-10 0.06%1.16E+01 1.14E-09 8.E-05 1.25% 9.78E-11 4E-10 0.13%
1.47E+00 1.45E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.24E-11 6E-12 0.00%4.98E-03 4.91E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 4.21E-14 2E-14 0.00%
9.04E+00 8.92E-10 9.E-06 0.02% 7.64E-11 6E-09 0.94%1.55E+01 1.53E-09 2.E-05 0.25% 1.31E-10 1E-08 3.46%
2.90E-02 2.86E-12 1.E-08 0.00% 2.45E-13 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 4.74E-12 2.E-08 0.00% 4.07E-13 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 1.66E-14 4.E-07 0.00% 1.42E-15 5E-11 0.01%1.08E-06 1.06E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 9.10E-18 3E-13 0.00%
1.13E+01 2.17E-09 8.E-05 0.15% 1.86E-10 7E-09 1.01%1.55E+01 2.68E-09 9.E-05 1.51% 2.30E-10 1E-08 3.60%
1.13E+01 4.23E-06 5.E-02 95.15% 3.62E-07 7E-07 97.54% 1.55E+01 5.18E-06 6.E-03 100.00% 4.44E-07 3E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 9.90E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 8.49E-11 5E-11 0.01%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 2.03E-08 1.E-03 2.45% 1.74E-09 7E-09 1.09%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 6.07E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 5.20E-09 2E-09 0.35%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 6.35E-08 1.E-03 2.30% 5.44E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 1.05E-10 3.E-07 0.00% 8.99E-12 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 2.12E-12 5.E-05 0.10% 1.82E-13 7E-09 1.01%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.46E-07 3.E-03 4.85% 1.25E-08 2E-08 2.46%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.46E-07 3.E-03 4.85% 1.25E-08 2E-08 2.46%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.13E+01 4.37E-06 6.E-02 100%3.75E-07 6.9E-07 100%1.55E+01 5.18E-06 6.E-03 100%4.44E-07 3.2E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-32
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 0-6)
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 6.74E-03 1.34E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.15E-11 2E-11 0.04% 3.35E-04 6.65E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 5.70E-13 1.E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 2.11E-08 7.E-05 3.44% 1.81E-09 3E-09 4.85% 6.43E+00 2.74E-08 9.E-05 10.46% 2.35E-09 4.E-09 6.88%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 5.99E-15 9.E-06 0.42% 5.13E-16 7E-11 0.12%3.35E-07 1.43E-15 2.E-06 0.23% 1.22E-16 2.E-11 0.03%
Dermal Total 1.25E+01 2.12E-08 8.E-05 3.85% 1.82E-09 3E-09 5.01%1.17E+01 2.74E-08 9.E-05 10.69% 2.35E-09 4.E-09 6.91%
Ingestion Total PCBs 6.74E-03 2.92E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.50E-11 5E-11 0.09%3.35E-04 1.45E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.24E-12 2.E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 2.15E-07 4.E-04 21.00% 1.84E-08 2E-08 29.62%6.43E+00 2.79E-07 6.E-04 63.91% 2.39E-08 2.E-08 42.05%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 1.52E-09 2.E-06 0.09% 1.30E-10 2E-10 0.37%1.15E-03 4.98E-11 6.E-08 0.01% 4.27E-12 7.E-12 0.01%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 5.43E-07 2.E-04 8.84% 4.66E-08 2E-08 41.58%1.17E+01 5.05E-07 2.E-04 19.30% 4.33E-08 2.E-08 42.33%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 7.19E-10 2.E-06 0.12% 6.17E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.60E-09 5.E-06 0.61% 1.37E-10 0.E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 6.10E-14 9.E-05 4.25% 5.23E-15 7E-10 1.21%3.35E-07 1.45E-14 2.E-05 2.38% 1.24E-15 2.E-10 0.32%
Ingestion Total 1.25E+01 7.61E-07 7.E-04 34.31% 6.52E-08 4E-08 72.87%1.17E+01 7.86E-07 8.E-04 86.21% 6.73E-08 4.E-08 84.71%
Inhalation Total PCBs 6.74E-03 3.34E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 2.87E-14 2E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 1.66E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.42E-15 8.E-16 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 2.46E-10 2.E-05 0.80% 2.11E-11 9E-11 0.16%6.43E+00 3.19E-10 2.E-05 2.44% 2.74E-11 1.E-10 0.23%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 1.74E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.49E-13 7E-14 0.00%1.15E-03 5.71E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 4.89E-15 2.E-15 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 6.22E-10 6.E-06 0.30% 5.33E-11 4E-09 8.00%1.17E+01 5.79E-10 6.E-06 0.66% 4.96E-11 4.E-09 8.14%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 8.24E-13 3.E-09 0.00% 7.06E-14 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.83E-12 6.E-09 0.00% 1.57E-13 0.E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 6.98E-17 2.E-09 0.00% 5.98E-18 2E-13 0.00%3.35E-07 1.66E-17 4.E-10 0.00% 1.42E-18 5.E-14 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.25E+01 8.71E-10 2.E-05 1.11% 7.47E-11 5E-09 8.16%1.17E+01 9.00E-10 3.E-05 3.10% 7.71E-11 4.E-09 8.37%
Soil Total 1.25E+01 7.83E-07 8.E-04 39.27% 6.71E-08 5E-08 86.04%1.17E+01 8.14E-07 9.E-04 100.00% 6.98E-08 5.E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 4.60E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.94E-11 2E-11 0.04%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 9.45E-09 6.E-04 30.75% 8.10E-10 3E-09 6.22%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 2.82E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.41E-09 1E-09 1.98%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 2.95E-08 6.E-04 28.77%2.53E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 4.87E-11 2.E-07 0.01% 4.17E-12 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 9.84E-13 2.E-05 1.20%8.43E-14 3E-09 5.72%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 6.76E-08 1.E-03 60.73% 5.79E-09 8E-09 13.96%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 6.76E-08 1.E-03 60.73% 5.79E-09 8E-09 13.96%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.25E+01 8.51E-07 2.E-03 100%7.29E-08 5.6E-08 100%1.17E+01 8.14E-07 9.E-04 100%6.98E-08 5.E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-32
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 0-6)
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
6.74E-03 2.88E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.47E-11 5.E-11 0.02%3.35E-04 1.43E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.23E-12 2.E-12 0.00%
4.96E+00 4.55E-08 2.E-04 2.56% 3.90E-09 6.E-09 2.80%6.43E+00 5.90E-08 2.E-04 5.62% 5.05E-09 8.E-09 3.72%
3.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
1.25E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
1.66E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 1.29E-14 2.E-05 0.31% 1.11E-15 1.E-10 0.07%3.35E-07 3.07E-15 4.E-06 0.13% 2.63E-16 3.E-11 0.02%
1.25E+01 4.58E-08 2.E-04 2.87% 3.92E-09 6.E-09 2.90%1.17E+01 5.90E-08 2.E-04 5.74% 5.05E-09 8.E-09 3.74%
6.74E-03 1.26E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.08E-10 2.E-10 0.10%3.35E-04 6.25E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 5.36E-12 1.E-11 0.01%
4.96E+00 9.26E-07 2.E-03 31.27% 7.94E-08 7.E-08 34.27%6.43E+00 1.20E-06 2.E-03 68.64% 1.03E-07 9.E-08 45.53%
3.50E-02 6.53E-09 8.E-06 0.14% 5.60E-10 9.E-10 0.43%1.15E-03 2.15E-10 3.E-07 0.01% 1.84E-11 3.E-11 0.01%
1.25E+01 2.34E-06 8.E-04 13.17% 2.01E-07 1.E-07 48.10%1.17E+01 2.18E-06 7.E-04 20.73% 1.87E-07 9.E-08 45.84%
1.66E-02 3.10E-09 1.E-05 0.17% 2.66E-10 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 6.89E-09 2.E-05 0.66% 5.90E-10 0.E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 2.63E-13 4.E-04 6.33% 2.25E-14 3.E-09 1.40%3.35E-07 6.25E-14 9.E-05 2.55% 5.36E-15 7.E-10 0.34%
1.25E+01 3.28E-06 3.E-03 51.09% 2.81E-07 2.E-07 84.31%1.17E+01 3.38E-06 3.E-03 92.59% 2.90E-07 2.E-07 91.72%
6.74E-03 7.20E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 6.17E-14 4.E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 3.58E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.07E-15 2.E-15 0.00%
4.96E+00 5.30E-10 4.E-05 0.60% 4.55E-11 2.E-10 0.09%6.43E+00 6.88E-10 5.E-05 1.31% 5.89E-11 3.E-10 0.12%
3.50E-02 3.74E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.21E-13 1.E-13 0.00%1.15E-03 1.23E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.05E-14 5.E-15 0.00%
1.25E+01 1.34E-09 1.E-05 0.23% 1.15E-10 1.E-08 4.63%1.17E+01 1.25E-09 1.E-05 0.36% 1.07E-10 9.E-09 4.41%
1.66E-02 1.77E-12 6.E-09 0.00% 1.52E-13 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 3.94E-12 1.E-08 0.00% 3.38E-13 0.E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 1.50E-16 4.E-09 0.00% 1.29E-17 5.E-13 0.00%3.35E-07 3.58E-17 9.E-10 0.00% 3.07E-18 1.E-13 0.00%
1.25E+01 1.88E-09 5.E-05 0.82% 1.61E-10 1.E-08 4.72%1.17E+01 1.94E-09 6.E-05 1.67% 1.66E-10 9.E-09 4.53%
1.25E+01 3.33E-06 3.E-03 54.78% 2.85E-07 2.E-07 91.93% 1.17E+01 3.45E-06 3.E-03 100.0% 2.95E-07 2.E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 9.90E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 8.49E-11 5.E-11 0.02%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 2.03E-08 1.E-03 22.89% 1.74E-09 7.E-09 3.60%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 6.07E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 5.20E-09 2.E-09 1.15%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 6.35E-08 1.E-03 21.42% 5.44E-09 0.E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 1.05E-10 3.E-07 0.01% 8.99E-12 0.E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 2.12E-12 5.E-05 0.89% 1.82E-13 7.E-09 3.31%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.46E-07 3.E-03 45.22% 1.25E-08 2.E-08 8.07%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.46E-07 3.E-03 45.22% 1.25E-08 2.E-08 8.07%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.25E+01 3.47E-06 6.E-03 100%2.98E-07 2.E-07 100%1.17E+01 3.45E-06 3.E-03 100%2.95E-07 2.E-07 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-33
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 0-6)
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 7.37E-04 4.05E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.47E-12 7E-12 0.00% 3.35E-04 1.84E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.58E-12 3E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 6.92E-08 2.E-04 4.01% 5.93E-09 9E-09 5.46%6.43E+00 7.58E-08 3.E-04 10.54% 6.50E-09 1E-08 6.92%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 5.98E-15 9.E-06 0.15% 5.13E-16 7E-11 0.04%3.35E-07 3.95E-15 6.E-06 0.24% 3.38E-16 4E-11 0.03%
Dermal Total 1.27E+01 6.92E-08 2.E-04 4.16% 5.93E-09 9E-09 5.51%1.17E+01 7.58E-08 3.E-04 10.78% 6.50E-09 1E-08 6.95%
Ingestion Total PCBs 7.37E-04 8.84E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 7.58E-12 2E-11 0.01%3.35E-04 4.02E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.45E-12 7E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 7.04E-07 1.E-03 24.49% 6.04E-08 5E-08 33.39%6.43E+00 7.72E-07 2.E-03 64.43% 6.62E-08 6E-08 42.26%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 1.52E-06 5.E-04 8.80% 1.30E-07 7E-08 39.97%1.17E+01 1.40E-06 5.E-04 19.46% 1.20E-07 6E-08 42.55%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 6.10E-14 9.E-05 1.51% 5.23E-15 7E-10 0.42%3.35E-07 4.02E-14 6.E-05 2.40% 3.45E-15 4E-10 0.32%
Ingestion Total 1.27E+01 2.22E-06 2.E-03 34.80% 1.90E-07 1E-07 73.79%1.17E+01 2.17E-06 2.E-03 86.28% 1.86E-07 1E-07 85.14%
Inhalation Total PCBs 7.37E-04 9.52E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 8.16E-15 5E-15 0.00%3.35E-04 4.33E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.71E-15 2E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 7.58E-10 5.E-05 0.88% 6.50E-11 3E-10 0.17%6.43E+00 8.31E-10 6.E-05 2.31% 7.12E-11 3E-10 0.22%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 1.63E-09 2.E-05 0.28% 1.40E-10 1E-08 7.23%1.17E+01 1.51E-09 2.E-05 0.63% 1.29E-10 1E-08 7.69%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 6.56E-17 2.E-09 0.00% 5.62E-18 2E-13 0.00%3.35E-07 4.33E-17 1.E-09 0.00% 3.71E-18 1E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.27E+01 2.39E-09 7.E-05 1.16% 2.05E-10 1E-08 7.40%1.17E+01 2.34E-09 7.E-05 2.94% 2.00E-10 1E-08 7.91%
Soil Total 1.27E+01 2.29E-06 2.E-03 40.12% 1.97E-07 1E-07 86.70%1.17E+01 2.25E-06 2.E-03 100.00% 1.93E-07 1E-07 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.27E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.09E-10 6E-11 0.04%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 2.62E-08 2.E-03 30.32% 2.24E-09 1E-08 5.92%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 8.16E-08 2.E-03 28.37% 6.99E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 1.35E-10 4.E-07 0.01% 1.16E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 7.80E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 6.69E-09 3E-09 1.89%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 2.72E-12 7.E-05 1.18% 2.33E-13 9E-09 5.45%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.87E-07 3.E-03 59.88% 1.60E-08 2E-08 13.30%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.87E-07 3.E-03 59.88% 1.60E-08 2E-08 13.30%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.27E+01 2.48E-06 6.E-03 100%2.13E-07 1.6E-07 100%1.17E+01 2.25E-06 2.E-03 100%1.93E-07 1.4E-07 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-33
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 0-6)
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Hexachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
7.37E-04 2.70E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.31E-11 5E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 1.23E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.05E-11 2E-11 0.00%
5.87E+00 4.61E-07 2.E-03 2.97% 3.95E-08 6E-08 3.14%6.43E+00 5.05E-07 2.E-03 5.66% 4.33E-08 6E-08 3.74%
1.27E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
5.08E-07 3.99E-14 6.E-05 0.11% 3.42E-15 4E-10 0.02%3.35E-07 2.63E-14 4.E-05 0.13% 2.26E-15 3E-10 0.02%
1.27E+01 4.61E-07 2.E-03 3.08% 3.95E-08 6E-08 3.17%1.17E+01 5.05E-07 2.E-03 5.79% 4.33E-08 7E-08 3.75%
7.37E-04 1.18E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.01E-10 2E-10 0.01%3.35E-04 5.36E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 4.60E-11 9E-11 0.01%
5.87E+00 9.39E-06 2.E-02 36.34% 8.05E-07 7E-07 38.42% 6.43E+00 1.03E-05 2.E-02 69.17% 8.82E-07 8E-07 45.66%
1.27E+01 2.02E-05 7.E-03 13.05% 1.73E-06 9E-07 46.00% 1.17E+01 1.87E-05 6.E-03 20.89% 1.60E-06 8E-07 45.97%
5.08E-07 8.13E-13 1.E-03 2.25% 6.97E-14 9E-09 0.48%3.35E-07 5.36E-13 8.E-04 2.57% 4.59E-14 6E-09 0.34%
1.27E+01 2.96E-05 3.E-02 51.63% 2.54E-06 2E-06 84.92% 1.17E+01 2.90E-05 3.E-02 92.64% 2.48E-06 2E-06 91.97%
7.37E-04 6.34E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 5.44E-14 3E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 2.88E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 2.47E-14 1E-14 0.00%
5.87E+00 5.05E-09 3.E-04 0.65% 4.33E-10 2E-09 0.10%6.43E+00 5.54E-09 4.E-04 1.24% 4.75E-10 2E-09 0.12%
1.27E+01 1.09E-08 1.E-04 0.21% 9.34E-10 8E-08 4.16%1.17E+01 1.00E-08 1.E-04 0.34% 8.60E-10 7E-08 4.16%
5.08E-07 4.37E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 3.75E-17 1E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 2.88E-16 7.E-09 0.00% 2.47E-17 9E-13 0.00%
1.27E+01 1.59E-08 4.E-04 0.86% 1.37E-09 8E-08 4.26%1.17E+01 1.56E-08 5.E-04 1.58% 1.34E-09 7E-08 4.27%
1.27E+01 3.01E-05 3.E-02 55.58% 2.58E-06 2E-06 92.34% 1.17E+01 2.95E-05 3.E-02 100.00% 2.53E-06 2E-06 100.00%
2.12E-07 8.49E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 7.28E-10 4E-10 0.02% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 1.74E-07 1.E-02 22.49% 1.49E-08 6E-08 3.41% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 5.44E-07 1.E-02 21.05% 4.66E-08 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
2.25E-08 8.99E-10 3.E-06 0.01% 7.70E-11 0E+00 0.00% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 5.20E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 4.46E-08 2E-08 1.09% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.54E-10 1.82E-11 5.E-04 0.88% 1.56E-12 6E-08 3.14% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.25E-06 2.E-02 44.42% 1.07E-07 1E-07 7.66% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.25E-06 2.E-02 44.42% 1.07E-07 1E-07 7.66% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.27E+01 3.14E-05 5.E-02 100%2.69E-06 1.9E-06 100%1.17E+01 2.95E-05 3.E-02 100%2.53E-06 1.7E-06 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-34
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 6-16)
PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 2.46E-01 1.49E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.12E-10 4E-10 0.43% 1.01E-03 6.10E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 8.72E-13 2E-12 0.01%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 1.46E-08 5.E-05 0.35% 2.08E-09 3E-09 3.14% 1.16E+01 1.50E-08 5.E-05 0.61% 2.14E-09 3E-09 18.22%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 2.18E-13 3.E-04 2.21% 3.11E-14 4E-09 4.07%1.08E-06 1.39E-15 2.E-06 0.02% 1.99E-16 3E-11 0.15%
Dermal Total 1.13E+01 1.61E-08 4.E-04 2.56% 2.29E-09 8E-09 7.63%1.55E+01 1.50E-08 5.E-05 0.63% 2.14E-09 3E-09 18.38%
Ingestion Total PCBs 2.46E-01 8.11E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.16E-10 2E-10 0.23%1.01E-03 3.33E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.76E-13 1E-12 0.01%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 3.71E-08 7.E-05 0.53% 5.30E-09 5E-09 4.80%1.16E+01 3.82E-08 8.E-05 0.93% 5.45E-09 5E-09 27.85%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 4.83E-09 6.E-06 0.04% 6.91E-10 1E-09 1.11%4.98E-03 1.64E-11 2.E-08 0.00% 2.35E-12 4E-12 0.02%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 2.98E-08 1.E-05 0.07% 4.26E-09 2E-09 2.14%1.55E+01 5.12E-08 2.E-05 0.21% 7.32E-09 4E-09 20.78%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 9.56E-11 3.E-07 0.00% 1.37E-11 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 1.59E-10 5.E-07 0.01% 2.27E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 5.55E-13 8.E-04 5.64% 7.92E-14 1E-08 10.36%1.08E-06 3.55E-15 5.E-06 0.06% 5.07E-16 7E-11 0.37%
Ingestion Total 1.13E+01 7.27E-08 9.E-04 6.29% 1.04E-08 2E-08 18.64% 1.55E+01 8.96E-08 1.E-04 1.20% 1.28E-08 9E-09 49.03%
Inhalation Total PCBs 2.46E-01 5.37E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 7.67E-13 4E-13 0.00%1.01E-03 2.21E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.15E-15 2E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 1.13E+01 2.46E-10 2.E-05 0.12% 3.51E-11 2E-10 0.15%1.16E+01 2.53E-10 2.E-05 0.20% 3.61E-11 2E-10 0.88%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.47E+00 3.20E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 4.57E-12 2E-12 0.00%4.98E-03 1.09E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.55E-14 7E-15 0.00%
Total Chromium 9.04E+00 1.97E-10 2.E-06 0.01% 2.82E-11 2E-09 2.38%1.55E+01 3.39E-10 3.E-06 0.04% 4.85E-11 4E-09 23.12%
Total Mercury 2.90E-02 6.33E-13 2.E-09 0.00% 9.05E-14 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 1.05E-12 4.E-09 0.00% 1.50E-13 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.68E-04 3.67E-15 9.E-08 0.00% 5.25E-16 2E-11 0.02%1.08E-06 2.35E-17 6.E-10 0.00% 3.36E-18 1E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.13E+01 4.81E-10 2.E-05 0.13% 6.87E-11 3E-09 2.56%1.55E+01 5.93E-10 2.E-05 0.25% 8.47E-11 4E-09 24.00%
Soil Total 1.13E+01 8.92E-08 1.E-03 8.98% 1.27E-08 3E-08 28.83% 1.55E+01 1.05E-07 2.E-04 2.08% 1.50E-08 2E-08 91.40%
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs 6.94E-05 3.00E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.28E-10 9E-10 0.86%3.02E-07 1.30E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.86E-12 4E-12 0.02%
Hexachlorobenzene 7.78E-04 3.36E-08 4.E-05 0.30% 4.80E-09 8E-09 7.72%3.28E-06 1.42E-10 2.E-07 0.00% 2.02E-11 3E-11 0.18%
Total Mercury 2.76E-02 1.19E-06 4.E-03 28.26% 1.70E-07 0E+00 0.00%2.76E-02 1.19E-06 4.E-03 48.38% 1.71E-07 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.94E-08 2.57E-12 4.E-03 26.09% 3.66E-13 5E-08 47.89%1.18E-09 5.11E-14 7.E-05 0.89% 7.30E-15 9E-10 5.39%
Ingestion Total 2.76E-02 1.23E-06 8.E-03 54.64% 1.75E-07 6E-08 56.47%2.76E-02 1.19E-06 4.E-03 49.27% 1.71E-07 1E-09 5.59%
Deer Total 2.76E-02 1.23E-06 8.E-03 54.64% 1.75E-07 6E-08 56.47%2.76E-02 1.19E-06 4.E-03 49.27% 1.71E-07 1E-09 5.59%
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs 9.92E-06 4.28E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 6.12E-11 1E-10 0.12%5.32E-08 2.30E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.28E-13 7E-13 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.11E-04 4.81E-09 6.E-06 0.04% 6.88E-10 1E-09 1.11%8.47E-07 3.66E-11 5.E-08 0.00% 5.23E-12 8E-12 0.05%
Total Mercury 2.75E-02 1.19E-06 4.E-03 28.18% 1.70E-07 0E+00 0.00%2.75E-02 1.19E-06 4.E-03 48.16% 1.70E-07 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 8.97E-09 3.87E-13 6.E-04 3.94% 5.53E-14 7E-09 7.23%6.49E-10 2.80E-14 4.E-05 0.49% 4.00E-15 5E-10 2.96%
Ingestion Total 2.75E-02 1.19E-06 5.E-03 32.16% 1.70E-07 8E-09 8.46%2.75E-02 1.19E-06 4.E-03 48.64% 1.70E-07 5E-10 3.01%
Chukar Total 2.75E-02 1.19E-06 5.E-03 32.16% 1.70E-07 8E-09 8.46%2.75E-02 1.19E-06 4.E-03 48.64% 1.70E-07 5E-10 3.01%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 2.19E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.13E-11 2E-11 0.02%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 4.51E-09 3.E-04 2.14% 6.44E-10 3E-09 2.78%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 1.34E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.92E-09 9E-10 0.89%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 1.41E-08 3.E-04 2.00% 2.01E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 2.32E-11 8.E-08 0.00% 3.32E-12 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 4.69E-13 1.E-05 0.08% 6.70E-14 3E-09 2.56%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 3.22E-08 6.E-04 4.22% 4.60E-09 6E-09 6.25%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 3.22E-08 6.E-04 4.22% 4.60E-09 6E-09 6.25%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.13E+01 2.54E-06 1.E-02 100%3.63E-07 9.9E-08 100%1.55E+01 2.49E-06 8.E-03 100%3.55E-07 1.8E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
CTE
BGSITE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-34
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 6-16)
PRI 14 - Buffer Area South
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Deer Total
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Chukar Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
2.46E-01 1.63E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.33E-10 5E-10 0.30%1.01E-03 6.69E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 9.56E-13 2E-12 0.01%
1.13E+01 1.60E-08 5.E-05 0.25% 2.28E-09 3E-09 2.20% 1.16E+01 1.64E-08 5.E-05 0.44% 2.35E-09 4E-09 11.97%
1.47E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.98E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
9.04E+00 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.55E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
2.90E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 4.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 2.39E-13 3.E-04 1.60% 3.41E-14 4E-09 2.85%1.08E-06 1.53E-15 2.E-06 0.02% 2.18E-16 3E-11 0.10%
1.13E+01 1.76E-08 4.E-04 1.85% 2.52E-09 8E-09 5.36% 1.55E+01 1.64E-08 6.E-05 0.46% 2.35E-09 4E-09 12.08%
2.46E-01 1.78E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.54E-10 5E-10 0.33%1.01E-03 7.31E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.04E-12 2E-12 0.01%
1.13E+01 8.14E-08 2.E-04 0.76% 1.16E-08 1E-08 6.73% 1.16E+01 8.37E-08 2.E-04 1.35% 1.20E-08 1E-08 36.60%
1.47E+00 1.06E-08 1.E-05 0.06% 1.52E-09 2E-09 1.56%4.98E-03 3.60E-11 5.E-08 0.00% 5.15E-12 8E-12 0.03%
9.04E+00 6.54E-08 2.E-05 0.10% 9.35E-09 5E-09 3.01% 1.55E+01 1.12E-07 4.E-05 0.30% 1.61E-08 8E-09 27.31%
2.90E-02 2.10E-10 7.E-07 0.00% 3.00E-11 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 3.48E-10 1.E-06 0.01% 4.97E-11 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 1.22E-12 2.E-03 8.16% 1.74E-13 2E-08 14.53%1.08E-06 7.78E-15 1.E-05 0.09% 1.11E-15 1E-10 0.49%
1.13E+01 1.59E-07 2.E-03 9.10% 2.28E-08 4E-08 26.16% 1.55E+01 1.97E-07 2.E-04 1.76% 2.81E-08 2E-08 64.43%
2.46E-01 5.89E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 8.42E-13 5E-13 0.00%1.01E-03 2.42E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.46E-15 2E-15 0.00%
1.13E+01 2.69E-10 2.E-05 0.08% 3.85E-11 2E-10 0.11%1.16E+01 2.77E-10 2.E-05 0.15% 3.96E-11 2E-10 0.58%
1.47E+00 3.51E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 5.02E-12 2E-12 0.00%4.98E-03 1.19E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.70E-14 8E-15 0.00%
9.04E+00 2.17E-10 2.E-06 0.01% 3.09E-11 3E-09 1.67% 1.55E+01 3.72E-10 4.E-06 0.03% 5.32E-11 4E-09 15.19%
2.90E-02 6.95E-13 2.E-09 0.00% 9.92E-14 0E+00 0.00%4.81E-02 1.15E-12 4.E-09 0.00% 1.65E-13 0E+00 0.00%
1.68E-04 4.03E-15 1.E-07 0.00% 5.76E-16 2E-11 0.01%1.08E-06 2.58E-17 6.E-10 0.00% 3.68E-18 1E-13 0.00%
1.13E+01 5.28E-10 2.E-05 0.10% 7.54E-11 3E-09 1.79% 1.55E+01 6.51E-10 2.E-05 0.18% 9.29E-11 5E-09 15.77%
1.13E+01 1.78E-07 2.E-03 11.04% 2.54E-08 5E-08 33.31% 1.55E+01 2.14E-07 3.E-04 2.39% 3.05E-08 3E-08 92.27%
6.94E-05 4.49E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 6.42E-10 1E-09 0.83%3.02E-07 1.95E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.79E-12 6E-12 0.02%
7.78E-04 5.04E-08 6.E-05 0.30% 7.20E-09 1E-08 7.41%3.28E-06 2.12E-10 3.E-07 0.00% 3.03E-11 5E-11 0.17%
2.76E-02 1.79E-06 6.E-03 27.96% 2.55E-07 0E+00 0.00%2.76E-02 1.79E-06 6.E-03 48.23% 2.56E-07 0E+00 0.00%
5.94E-08 3.85E-12 5.E-03 25.82% 5.50E-13 7E-08 45.96%1.18E-09 7.66E-14 1.E-04 0.88% 1.09E-14 1E-09 4.84%
2.76E-02 1.84E-06 1.E-02 54.08% 2.63E-07 8E-08 54.19%2.76E-02 1.79E-06 6.E-03 49.12% 2.56E-07 1E-09 5.02%
2.76E-02 1.84E-06 1.E-02 54.08% 2.63E-07 8E-08 54.19%2.76E-02 1.79E-06 6.E-03 49.12% 2.56E-07 1E-09 5.02%
9.92E-06 6.42E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 9.18E-11 2E-10 0.12%5.32E-08 3.44E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.92E-13 1E-12 0.00%
1.11E-04 7.22E-09 9.E-06 0.04% 1.03E-09 2E-09 1.06%8.47E-07 5.49E-11 7.E-08 0.00% 7.84E-12 1E-11 0.04%
2.75E-02 1.78E-06 6.E-03 27.89% 2.54E-07 0E+00 0.00%2.75E-02 1.78E-06 6.E-03 48.00% 2.55E-07 0E+00 0.00%
8.97E-09 5.81E-13 8.E-04 3.90% 8.29E-14 1E-08 6.94%6.49E-10 4.20E-14 6.E-05 0.49% 6.01E-15 8E-10 2.66%
2.75E-02 1.79E-06 7.E-03 31.82% 2.56E-07 1E-08 8.11%2.75E-02 1.78E-06 6.E-03 48.49% 2.55E-07 8E-10 2.70%
2.75E-02 1.79E-06 7.E-03 31.82% 2.56E-07 1E-08 8.11%2.75E-02 1.78E-06 6.E-03 48.49% 2.55E-07 8E-10 2.70%
2.12E-07 2.40E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.44E-11 2E-11 0.01% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 4.94E-09 3.E-04 1.55% 7.06E-10 3E-09 1.95% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 1.47E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.10E-09 1E-09 0.62%------ 0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 1.54E-08 3.E-04 1.45% 2.20E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 2.55E-11 8.E-08 0.00% 3.64E-12 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 5.15E-13 1.E-05 0.06% 7.35E-14 3E-09 1.80%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 3.54E-08 7.E-04 3.06% 5.05E-09 7E-09 4.38%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 3.54E-08 7.E-04 3.06% 5.05E-09 7E-09 4.38%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.13E+01 3.84E-06 2.E-02 100%5.49E-07 1.6E-07 100%1.55E+01 3.79E-06 1.E-02 100%5.41E-07 2.9E-08 100%
RME
SITE BG
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-35
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 6-16)
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 6.74E-03 7.62E-11 0.0E+00 0.00% 1.09E-11 2E-11 0.07% 3.35E-04 3.79E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 5.41E-13 1E-12 0.01%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 1.20E-08 4.0E-05 0.36% 1.72E-09 3E-09 7.81% 6.43E+00 1.56E-08 5.E-05 0.52% 2.23E-09 3E-09 15.51%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 0.00E+00 0.0E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 3.41E-15 4.9E-06 0.04% 4.87E-16 6E-11 0.19% 3.35E-07 8.12E-16 1.E-06 0.01% 1.16E-16 2E-11 0.07%
Dermal Total 1.25E+01 1.21E-08 4.5E-05 0.41% 1.73E-09 3E-09 8.07%1.17E+01 1.56E-08 5.E-05 0.53% 2.23E-09 3E-09 15.58%
Ingestion Total PCBs 6.74E-03 4.16E-11 0.0E+00 0.00% 5.94E-12 1E-11 0.04% 3.35E-04 2.07E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.95E-13 6E-13 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 3.06E-08 6.1E-05 0.55% 4.37E-09 4E-09 11.93% 6.43E+00 3.97E-08 8.E-05 0.80% 5.67E-09 5E-09 23.70%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 2.16E-10 2.7E-07 0.00% 3.09E-11 5E-11 0.15% 1.15E-03 7.10E-12 9.E-09 0.00% 1.01E-12 2E-12 0.01%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 7.74E-08 2.6E-05 0.23% 1.11E-08 6E-09 16.75% 1.17E+01 7.19E-08 2.E-05 0.24% 1.03E-08 5E-09 23.86%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 1.02E-10 3.4E-07 0.00% 1.46E-11 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 2.28E-10 8.E-07 0.01% 3.25E-11 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 8.68E-15 1.2E-05 0.11% 1.24E-15 2E-10 0.49% 3.35E-07 2.07E-15 3.E-06 0.03% 2.95E-16 4E-11 0.18%
Ingestion Total 1.25E+01 1.08E-07 1.0E-04 0.90% 1.55E-08 1E-08 29.36%1.17E+01 1.12E-07 1.E-04 1.07% 1.60E-08 1E-08 47.75%
Inhalation Total PCBs 6.74E-03 2.98E-13 0.0E+00 0.00% 4.26E-14 2E-14 0.00% 3.35E-04 1.48E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 2.12E-15 1E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 2.20E-10 1.5E-05 0.13% 3.14E-11 1E-10 0.41% 6.43E+00 2.85E-10 2.E-05 0.19% 4.07E-11 2E-10 0.81%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 1.55E-12 0.0E+00 0.00% 2.21E-13 1E-13 0.00% 1.15E-03 5.09E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 7.27E-15 3E-15 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 5.55E-10 5.6E-06 0.05% 7.93E-11 7E-09 20.19% 1.17E+01 5.16E-10 5.E-06 0.05% 7.37E-11 6E-09 28.76%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 7.35E-13 2.4E-09 0.00% 1.05E-13 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 1.63E-12 5.E-09 0.00% 2.33E-13 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 6.23E-17 1.6E-09 0.00% 8.90E-18 3E-13 0.00% 3.35E-07 1.48E-17 4.E-10 0.00% 2.12E-18 8E-14 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.25E+01 7.78E-10 2.0E-05 0.18% 1.11E-10 7E-09 20.60%1.17E+01 8.03E-10 2.E-05 0.24% 1.15E-10 6E-09 29.57%
Soil Total 1.25E+01 1.21E-07 1.7E-04 1.49% 1.73E-08 2E-08 58.02%1.17E+01 1.28E-07 2.E-04 1.85% 1.83E-08 2E-08 92.91%
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs 1.92E-06 1.01E-10 0.0E+00 0.00% 1.44E-11 3E-11 0.09% 1.11E-07 5.87E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 8.39E-13 2E-12 0.01%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.92E-05 1.01E-09 1.3E-06 0.01% 1.44E-10 2E-10 0.70% 1.25E-06 6.57E-11 8.E-08 0.00% 9.39E-12 2E-11 0.07%
Total Mercury 2.75E-02 1.45E-06 4.8E-03 43.61% 2.07E-07 0E+00 0.00%2.76E-02 1.45E-06 5.E-03 48.58% 2.08E-07 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.30E-09 6.84E-14 9.8E-05 0.88% 9.77E-15 1E-09 3.85%9.25E-10 4.87E-14 7.E-05 0.70% 6.96E-15 9E-10 4.20%
Ingestion Total 2.75E-02 1.45E-06 4.9E-03 44.50% 2.07E-07 2E-09 4.64%2.76E-02 1.45E-06 5.E-03 49.28% 2.08E-07 9E-10 4.28%
Deer Total 2.75E-02 1.45E-06 4.9E-03 44.50% 2.07E-07 2E-09 4.64%2.76E-02 1.45E-06 5.E-03 49.28% 2.08E-07 9E-10 4.28%
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs 2.84E-07 1.50E-11 0.0E+00 0.00% 2.14E-12 4E-12 0.01%2.60E-08 1.37E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.96E-13 4E-13 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.12E-06 1.64E-10 2.1E-07 0.00% 2.35E-11 4E-11 0.11%5.57E-07 2.93E-11 4.E-08 0.00% 4.19E-12 7E-12 0.03%
Total Mercury 2.75E-02 1.45E-06 4.8E-03 43.54% 2.07E-07 0E+00 0.00%2.75E-02 1.45E-06 5.E-03 48.41% 2.07E-07 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.66E-10 3.51E-14 5.0E-05 0.45% 5.01E-15 7E-10 1.97%6.12E-10 3.23E-14 5.E-05 0.46% 4.61E-15 6E-10 2.78%
Ingestion Total 2.75E-02 1.45E-06 4.9E-03 43.99% 2.07E-07 7E-10 2.10%2.75E-02 1.45E-06 5.E-03 48.87% 2.07E-07 6E-10 2.81%
Chukar Total 2.75E-02 1.45E-06 4.9E-03 43.99% 2.07E-07 7E-10 2.10%2.75E-02 1.45E-06 5.E-03 48.87% 2.07E-07 6E-10 2.81%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 4.10E-10 0.0E+00 0.00% 5.86E-11 3E-11 0.10%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 8.43E-09 5.6E-04 5.07% 1.20E-09 5E-09 15.69%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 2.51E-08 0.0E+00 0.00% 3.59E-09 2E-09 5.01%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 2.63E-08 5.3E-04 4.74% 3.76E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 4.34E-11 1.4E-07 0.00% 6.20E-12 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 8.78E-13 2.2E-05 0.20% 1.25E-13 5E-09 14.44%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 6.03E-08 1.1E-03 10.01% 8.62E-09 1E-08 35.24%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 6.03E-08 1.1E-03 10.01% 8.62E-09 1E-08 35.24%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.25E+01 3.08E-06 1.1E-02 100%4.40E-07 3.3E-08 100%1.17E+01 3.03E-06 1.E-02 100%4.33E-07 2.2E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
CTE
Matrix Pathway Analyte
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-35
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 6-16)
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Deer Total
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Chukar Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
6.74E-03 1.31E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.88E-11 4E-11 0.05%3.35E-04 6.53E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 9.33E-13 2E-12 0.00%
4.96E+00 2.07E-08 7.E-05 0.26% 2.96E-09 4E-09 5.91%6.43E+00 2.69E-08 9.E-05 0.36% 3.84E-09 6E-09 10.29%
3.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.25E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.66E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 5.88E-15 8.E-06 0.03% 8.40E-16 1E-10 0.15%3.35E-07 1.40E-15 2.E-06 0.01% 2.00E-16 3E-11 0.05%
1.25E+01 2.09E-08 8.E-05 0.29% 2.98E-09 5E-09 6.10%1.17E+01 2.69E-08 9.E-05 0.37% 3.84E-09 6E-09 10.34%
6.74E-03 1.43E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.05E-11 4E-11 0.05%3.35E-04 7.13E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.02E-12 2E-12 0.00%
4.96E+00 1.06E-07 2.E-04 0.80% 1.51E-08 1E-08 18.05%6.43E+00 1.37E-07 3.E-04 1.11% 1.96E-08 2E-08 31.44%
3.50E-02 7.45E-10 9.E-07 0.00% 1.06E-10 2E-10 0.23%1.15E-03 2.45E-11 3.E-08 0.00% 3.50E-12 6E-12 0.01%
1.25E+01 2.67E-07 9.E-05 0.34% 3.81E-08 2E-08 25.33%1.17E+01 2.48E-07 8.E-05 0.34% 3.54E-08 2E-08 31.65%
1.66E-02 3.53E-10 1.E-06 0.00% 5.05E-11 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 7.85E-10 3.E-06 0.01% 1.12E-10 0E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 2.99E-14 4.E-05 0.16% 4.28E-15 6E-10 0.74%3.35E-07 7.13E-15 1.E-05 0.04% 1.02E-15 1E-10 0.24%
1.25E+01 3.74E-07 3.E-04 1.30% 5.34E-08 3E-08 44.40%1.17E+01 3.86E-07 4.E-04 1.50% 5.51E-08 4E-08 63.34%
6.74E-03 5.14E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 7.35E-14 4E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 2.56E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.65E-15 2E-15 0.00%
4.96E+00 3.79E-10 3.E-05 0.10% 5.41E-11 2E-10 0.31%6.43E+00 4.91E-10 3.E-05 0.13% 7.02E-11 3E-10 0.54%
3.50E-02 2.67E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.82E-13 2E-13 0.00%1.15E-03 8.78E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.25E-14 6E-15 0.00%
1.25E+01 9.57E-10 1.E-05 0.04% 1.37E-10 1E-08 15.27%1.17E+01 8.90E-10 9.E-06 0.04% 1.27E-10 1E-08 19.08%
1.66E-02 1.27E-12 4.E-09 0.00% 1.81E-13 0E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 2.82E-12 9.E-09 0.00% 4.02E-13 0E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 1.07E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 1.53E-17 6E-13 0.00%3.35E-07 2.56E-17 6.E-10 0.00% 3.65E-18 1E-13 0.00%
1.25E+01 1.34E-09 3.E-05 0.13% 1.92E-10 1E-08 15.58%1.17E+01 1.38E-09 4.E-05 0.17% 1.98E-10 1E-08 19.62%
1.25E+01 3.96E-07 5.E-04 1.73% 5.65E-08 5E-08 66.08%1.17E+01 4.14E-07 5.E-04 2.04% 5.92E-08 5E-08 93.29%
1.92E-06 2.48E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 3.55E-11 7E-11 0.09%1.11E-07 1.44E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.06E-12 4E-12 0.01%
1.92E-05 2.49E-09 3.E-06 0.01% 3.55E-10 6E-10 0.76%1.25E-06 1.62E-10 2.E-07 0.00% 2.31E-11 4E-11 0.07%
2.75E-02 3.57E-06 1.E-02 44.87% 5.10E-07 0E+00 0.00%2.76E-02 3.58E-06 1.E-02 48.49% 5.11E-07 0E+00 0.00%
1.30E-09 1.68E-13 2.E-04 0.91% 2.40E-14 3E-09 4.15%9.25E-10 1.20E-13 2.E-04 0.70% 1.71E-14 2E-09 3.98%
2.75E-02 3.57E-06 1.E-02 45.79% 5.10E-07 4E-09 5.00%2.76E-02 3.58E-06 1.E-02 49.18% 5.11E-07 2E-09 4.05%
2.75E-02 3.57E-06 1.E-02 45.79% 5.10E-07 4E-09 5.00%2.76E-02 3.58E-06 1.E-02 49.18% 5.11E-07 2E-09 4.05%
2.84E-07 3.68E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 5.25E-12 1E-11 0.01%2.60E-08 3.37E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.81E-13 1E-12 0.00%
3.12E-06 4.04E-10 5.E-07 0.00% 5.77E-11 9E-11 0.12%5.57E-07 7.22E-11 9.E-08 0.00% 1.03E-11 2E-11 0.03%
2.75E-02 3.56E-06 1.E-02 44.80% 5.09E-07 0E+00 0.00%2.75E-02 3.56E-06 1.E-02 48.31% 5.09E-07 0E+00 0.00%
6.66E-10 8.62E-14 1.E-04 0.46% 1.23E-14 2E-09 2.13%6.12E-10 7.93E-14 1.E-04 0.46% 1.13E-14 1E-09 2.63%
2.75E-02 3.56E-06 1.E-02 45.26% 5.09E-07 2E-09 2.27%2.75E-02 3.56E-06 1.E-02 48.77% 5.09E-07 1E-09 2.66%
2.75E-02 3.56E-06 1.E-02 45.26% 5.09E-07 2E-09 2.27%2.75E-02 3.56E-06 1.E-02 48.77% 5.09E-07 1E-09 2.66%
2.12E-07 7.07E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.01E-10 6E-11 0.08% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
4.36E-06 1.45E-08 1.E-03 3.66% 2.08E-09 9E-09 11.87% -- -- -- 0.00% -- -- 0.00%
1.30E-05 4.33E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 6.19E-09 3E-09 3.79%------ 0.00%----0.00%
1.36E-05 4.53E-08 9.E-04 3.42% 6.48E-09 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 7.49E-11 2.E-07 0.00% 1.07E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 1.51E-12 4.E-05 0.14% 2.16E-13 8E-09 10.92%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.04E-07 2.E-03 7.22% 1.49E-08 2E-08 26.65%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.04E-07 2.E-03 7.22% 1.49E-08 2E-08 26.65%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.25E+01 7.63E-06 3.E-02 100%1.09E-06 7.5E-08 100%1.17E+01 7.55E-06 2.E-02 100%1.08E-06 5.6E-08 100%
BG
RME
SITE
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-36
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 6-16)
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 7.37E-04 2.87E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 4.10E-12 8E-12 0.01% 3.35E-04 1.31E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.87E-12 4E-12 0.01%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 4.90E-08 2.E-04 3.59% 7.01E-09 1E-08 9.54%6.43E+00 5.38E-08 2.E-04 23.88% 7.68E-09 1E-08 16.63%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 4.24E-15 6.E-06 0.13% 6.06E-16 8E-11 0.07%3.35E-07 2.80E-15 4.E-06 0.53% 4.00E-16 5E-11 0.08%
Dermal Total 1.27E+01 4.91E-08 2.E-04 3.72% 7.01E-09 1E-08 9.62%1.17E+01 5.38E-08 2.E-04 24.41% 7.68E-09 1E-08 16.71%
Ingestion Total PCBs 7.37E-04 1.57E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.24E-12 4E-12 0.00%3.35E-04 7.13E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.02E-12 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 1.25E-07 2.E-04 5.49% 1.78E-08 2E-08 14.58% 6.43E+00 1.37E-07 3.E-04 36.49% 1.96E-08 2E-08 25.41%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 2.69E-07 9.E-05 1.97% 3.84E-08 2E-08 17.45% 1.17E+01 2.48E-07 8.E-05 11.02% 3.54E-08 2E-08 25.58%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 1.08E-14 2.E-05 0.34% 1.54E-15 2E-10 0.18%3.35E-07 7.13E-15 1.E-05 1.36% 1.02E-15 1E-10 0.19%
Ingestion Total 1.27E+01 3.94E-07 4.E-04 7.79% 5.63E-08 4E-08 32.22% 1.17E+01 3.85E-07 4.E-04 48.87% 5.50E-08 4E-08 51.19%
Inhalation Total PCBs 7.37E-04 1.06E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.51E-14 9E-15 0.00%3.35E-04 4.81E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 6.87E-15 4E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 8.42E-10 6.E-05 1.23% 1.20E-10 5E-10 0.47%6.43E+00 9.23E-10 6.E-05 8.20% 1.32E-10 6E-10 0.82%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 1.82E-09 2.E-05 0.40% 2.59E-10 2E-08 19.78% 1.17E+01 1.67E-09 2.E-05 2.23% 2.39E-10 2E-08 28.99%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 7.29E-17 2.E-09 0.00% 1.04E-17 4E-13 0.00%3.35E-07 4.81E-17 1.E-09 0.00% 6.87E-18 3E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.27E+01 2.66E-09 7.E-05 1.63% 3.80E-10 2E-08 20.25% 1.17E+01 2.60E-09 8.E-05 10.43% 3.71E-10 2E-08 29.81%
Soil Total 1.27E+01 4.46E-07 6.E-04 13.15% 6.37E-08 7E-08 62.09% 1.17E+01 4.41E-07 6.E-04 83.71% 6.30E-08 7E-08 97.70%
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs 2.25E-07 1.25E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.79E-12 4E-12 0.00%1.11E-07 6.20E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 8.86E-13 2E-12 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 9.86E-10 5.48E-14 8.E-05 1.72% 7.83E-15 1E-09 0.92%9.25E-10 5.15E-14 7.E-05 9.80% 7.36E-15 1E-09 1.38%
Ingestion Total 2.25E-07 1.26E-11 8.E-05 1.72% 1.79E-12 1E-09 0.93%1.11E-07 6.25E-12 7.E-05 9.80% 8.93E-13 1E-09 1.38%
Deer Total 2.25E-07 1.26E-11 8.E-05 1.72% 1.79E-12 1E-09 0.93%1.11E-07 6.25E-12 7.E-05 9.80% 8.93E-13 1E-09 1.38%
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs 4.22E-08 2.35E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.35E-13 7E-13 0.00%2.60E-08 1.45E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.07E-13 4E-13 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 6.21E-10 3.46E-14 5.E-05 1.08% 4.94E-15 6E-10 0.58%6.12E-10 3.41E-14 5.E-05 6.49% 4.87E-15 6E-10 0.91%
Ingestion Total 4.22E-08 2.38E-12 5.E-05 1.08% 3.40E-13 6E-10 0.58%2.60E-08 1.48E-12 5.E-05 6.49% 2.11E-13 6E-10 0.91%
Chukar Total 4.22E-08 2.38E-12 5.E-05 1.08% 3.40E-13 6E-10 0.58%2.60E-08 1.48E-12 5.E-05 6.49% 2.11E-13 6E-10 0.91%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.41E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 2.02E-10 1E-10 0.10%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 2.91E-08 2.E-03 42.55% 4.15E-09 2E-08 16.21%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 9.07E-08 2.E-03 39.82% 1.30E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 1.50E-10 5.E-07 0.01% 2.14E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 8.67E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 1.24E-08 6E-09 5.17%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 3.03E-12 8.E-05 1.66% 4.32E-13 2E-08 14.92%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 2.08E-07 4.E-03 84.05% 2.97E-08 4E-08 36.40%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 2.08E-07 4.E-03 84.05% 2.97E-08 4E-08 36.40%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.27E+01 6.54E-07 5.E-03 100%9.34E-08 1.1E-07 100%1.17E+01 4.41E-07 8.E-04 100%6.31E-08 6.9E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
CTE
Matrix Pathway Analyte
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-36
Risk Calculations - Recreational Visitor (Child 6-16)
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Deer Ingestion Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Deer Total
Chukar Ingestion Total PCBs
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Chukar Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Hexachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
7.37E-04 1.72E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.46E-11 5E-11 0.01%3.35E-04 7.84E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.12E-11 2E-11 0.00%
5.87E+00 2.94E-07 1.E-03 3.38% 4.20E-08 6E-08 7.27%6.43E+00 3.23E-07 1.E-03 17.19% 4.61E-08 7E-08 11.10%
1.27E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
5.08E-07 2.55E-14 4.E-05 0.13% 3.64E-15 5E-10 0.05%3.35E-07 1.68E-14 2.E-05 0.38% 2.40E-15 3E-10 0.05%
1.27E+01 2.94E-07 1.E-03 3.51% 4.21E-08 6E-08 7.33%1.17E+01 3.23E-07 1.E-03 17.58% 4.61E-08 7E-08 11.16%
7.37E-04 1.88E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 2.69E-11 5E-11 0.01%3.35E-04 8.55E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.22E-11 2E-11 0.00%
5.87E+00 1.50E-06 3.E-03 10.34% 2.14E-07 2E-07 22.21% 6.43E+00 1.64E-06 3.E-03 52.54% 2.35E-07 2E-07 33.93%
1.27E+01 3.23E-06 1.E-03 3.71% 4.61E-07 2E-07 26.59% 1.17E+01 2.98E-06 1.E-03 15.87% 4.25E-07 2E-07 34.16%
5.08E-07 1.30E-13 2.E-04 0.64% 1.85E-14 2E-09 0.28%3.35E-07 8.55E-14 1.E-04 1.95% 1.22E-14 2E-09 0.26%
1.27E+01 4.73E-06 4.E-03 14.70% 6.76E-07 4E-07 49.08% 1.17E+01 4.62E-06 4.E-03 70.36% 6.60E-07 4E-07 68.35%
7.37E-04 6.34E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 9.06E-14 5E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 2.88E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 4.12E-14 2E-14 0.00%
5.87E+00 5.05E-09 3.E-04 1.16% 7.22E-10 3E-09 0.36%6.43E+00 5.54E-09 4.E-04 5.91% 7.91E-10 3E-09 0.55%
1.27E+01 1.09E-08 1.E-04 0.38% 1.56E-09 1E-07 15.06% 1.17E+01 1.00E-08 1.E-04 1.61% 1.43E-09 1E-07 19.35%
5.08E-07 4.37E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 6.25E-17 2E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 2.88E-16 7.E-09 0.00% 4.12E-17 2E-12 0.00%
1.27E+01 1.59E-08 4.E-04 1.54% 2.28E-09 1E-07 15.42% 1.17E+01 1.56E-08 5.E-04 7.51% 2.23E-09 1E-07 19.90%
1.27E+01 5.04E-06 6.E-03 19.74% 7.20E-07 6E-07 71.83% 1.17E+01 4.96E-06 6.E-03 95.45% 7.08E-07 6E-07 99.40%
2.25E-07 2.91E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 4.16E-12 8E-12 0.00%1.11E-07 1.44E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.06E-12 4E-12 0.00%
9.86E-10 1.28E-13 2.E-04 0.63% 1.82E-14 2E-09 0.27%9.25E-10 1.20E-13 2.E-04 2.74% 1.71E-14 2E-09 0.36%
2.25E-07 2.92E-11 2.E-04 0.63% 4.18E-12 2E-09 0.27%1.11E-07 1.46E-11 2.E-04 2.74% 2.08E-12 2E-09 0.36%
2.25E-07 2.92E-11 2.E-04 0.63% 4.18E-12 2E-09 0.27%1.11E-07 1.46E-11 2.E-04 2.74% 2.08E-12 2E-09 0.36%
4.22E-08 5.46E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 7.80E-13 2E-12 0.00%2.60E-08 3.37E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 4.81E-13 1E-12 0.00%
6.21E-10 8.04E-14 1.E-04 0.40% 1.15E-14 1E-09 0.17%6.12E-10 7.93E-14 1.E-04 1.81% 1.13E-14 1E-09 0.24%
4.22E-08 5.54E-12 1.E-04 0.40% 7.92E-13 1E-09 0.17%2.60E-08 3.45E-12 1.E-04 1.81% 4.92E-13 1E-09 0.24%
4.22E-08 5.54E-12 1.E-04 0.40% 7.92E-13 1E-09 0.17%2.60E-08 3.45E-12 1.E-04 1.81% 4.92E-13 1E-09 0.24%
2.12E-07 8.49E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.21E-09 7E-10 0.08%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 1.74E-07 1.E-02 40.12% 2.49E-08 1E-07 12.35%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 5.44E-07 1.E-02 37.54% 7.77E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 8.99E-10 3.E-06 0.01% 1.28E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 5.20E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 7.43E-08 3E-08 3.94%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 1.82E-11 5.E-04 1.57% 2.59E-12 1E-07 11.36%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.25E-06 2.E-02 79.23% 1.78E-07 2E-07 27.73%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.25E-06 2.E-02 79.23% 1.78E-07 2E-07 27.73%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.27E+01 6.29E-06 3.E-02 100%8.98E-07 8.7E-07 100%1.17E+01 4.96E-06 6.E-03 100%7.08E-07 6.2E-07 100%
BG
RME
SITE
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-37
Risk Calculations - Rancher
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 6.74E-03 8.07E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.88E-11 6.E-11 0.03%3.35E-04 4.01E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.43E-12 3.E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 1.27E-08 4.E-05 1.24% 4.55E-09 7.E-09 3.84%6.43E+00 1.65E-08 6.E-05 18.16% 5.90E-09 9.E-09 9.14%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 3.61E-15 5.E-06 0.15% 1.29E-15 2.E-10 0.09%3.35E-07 8.60E-16 1.E-06 0.41% 3.07E-16 4.E-11 0.04%
Dermal Total 1.25E+01 1.28E-08 5.E-05 1.39% 4.58E-09 7.E-09 3.96%1.17E+01 1.65E-08 6.E-05 18.57% 5.90E-09 9.E-09 9.18%
Ingestion Total PCBs 6.74E-03 6.92E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 2.47E-11 5.E-11 0.03%3.35E-04 3.44E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.23E-12 2.E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 5.10E-08 1.E-04 2.98% 1.82E-08 2.E-08 9.21%6.43E+00 6.61E-08 1.E-04 43.62% 2.36E-08 2.E-08 21.94%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 3.60E-10 4.E-07 0.01% 1.28E-10 2.E-10 0.12%1.15E-03 1.18E-11 1.E-08 0.00% 4.22E-12 7.E-12 0.01%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 1.29E-07 4.E-05 1.26% 4.60E-08 2.E-08 12.93% 1.17E+01 1.20E-07 4.E-05 13.18% 4.28E-08 2.E-08 22.09%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 1.71E-10 6.E-07 0.02% 6.09E-11 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 3.79E-10 1.E-06 0.42% 1.35E-10 0.E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 1.45E-14 2.E-05 0.60% 5.16E-15 7.E-10 0.38%3.35E-07 3.44E-15 5.E-06 1.62% 1.23E-15 2.E-10 0.17%
Ingestion Total 1.25E+01 1.80E-07 2.E-04 4.88% 6.44E-08 4.E-08 22.66% 1.17E+01 1.86E-07 2.E-04 58.84% 6.65E-08 4.E-08 44.21%
Inhalation Total PCBs 6.74E-03 8.46E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 3.02E-13 2.E-13 0.00%3.35E-04 4.20E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.50E-14 9.E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.96E+00 6.23E-10 4.E-05 1.21% 2.22E-10 1.E-09 0.54%6.43E+00 8.07E-10 5.E-05 17.76% 2.88E-10 1.E-09 1.28%
Hexachlorobenzene 3.50E-02 4.39E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.57E-12 7.E-13 0.00%1.15E-03 1.44E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 5.15E-14 2.E-14 0.00%
Total Chromium 1.25E+01 1.57E-09 2.E-05 0.46% 5.62E-10 5.E-08 26.53% 1.17E+01 1.46E-09 1.E-05 4.83% 5.23E-10 4.E-08 45.33%
Total Mercury 1.66E-02 2.08E-12 7.E-09 0.00% 7.44E-13 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 4.63E-12 2.E-08 0.01% 1.65E-12 0.E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 1.41E-06 1.77E-16 4.E-09 0.00% 6.31E-17 2.E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 4.20E-17 1.E-09 0.00% 1.50E-17 6.E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.25E+01 2.20E-09 6.E-05 1.68% 7.87E-10 5.E-08 27.07% 1.17E+01 2.28E-09 7.E-05 22.59% 8.13E-10 5.E-08 46.61%
Soil Total 1.25E+01 1.95E-07 3.E-04 7.94% 6.98E-08 1.E-07 53.69% 1.17E+01 2.05E-07 3.E-04 100.00% 7.32E-08 1.E-07 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.16E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.15E-10 2.E-10 0.13%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 2.39E-08 2.E-03 46.61% 8.53E-09 4.E-08 20.62%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 7.12E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.54E-08 1.E-08 6.58%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 7.45E-08 1.E-03 43.62%2.66E-08 0.E+00 0.00%------0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 1.23E-10 4.E-07 0.01% 4.40E-11 0.E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 2.49E-12 6.E-05 1.82%8.88E-13 3.E-08 18.97%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.71E-07 3.E-03 92.06% 6.10E-08 8.E-08 46.31%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.71E-07 3.E-03 92.06% 6.10E-08 8.E-08 46.31%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.25E+01 3.66E-07 3.E-03 100%1.31E-07 2.E-07 100%1.17E+01 2.05E-07 3.E-04 100%7.32E-08 1.E-07 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
CTE
Matrix Pathway Analyte
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-37
Risk Calculations - Rancher
PRI 15 - Buffer Area West
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Chromium
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Hexachlorobenzene
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
6.74E-03 2.02E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 7.21E-11 1.E-10 0.03%3.35E-04 1.00E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.58E-12 7.E-12 0.00%
4.96E+00 3.18E-08 1.E-04 1.18% 1.14E-08 2.E-08 3.13%6.43E+00 4.13E-08 1.E-04 11.44% 1.47E-08 2.E-08 6.34%
3.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%1.15E-03 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
1.25E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
1.66E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 9.03E-15 1.E-05 0.14% 3.22E-15 4.E-10 0.08%3.35E-07 2.15E-15 3.E-06 0.26% 7.68E-16 1.E-10 0.03%
1.25E+01 3.21E-08 1.E-04 1.33% 1.14E-08 2.E-08 3.23%1.17E+01 4.13E-08 1.E-04 11.69% 1.47E-08 2.E-08 6.37%
6.74E-03 3.46E-10 0.E+00 0.00% 1.24E-10 2.E-10 0.05%3.35E-04 1.72E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 6.15E-12 1.E-11 0.00%
4.96E+00 2.55E-07 5.E-04 5.69% 9.11E-08 8.E-08 15.02% 6.43E+00 3.31E-07 7.E-04 54.92% 1.18E-07 1.E-07 30.43%
3.50E-02 1.80E-09 2.E-06 0.03% 6.42E-10 1.E-09 0.19%1.15E-03 5.91E-11 7.E-08 0.01% 2.11E-11 3.E-11 0.01%
1.25E+01 6.44E-07 2.E-04 2.40% 2.30E-07 1.E-07 21.08% 1.17E+01 5.99E-07 2.E-04 16.59% 2.14E-07 1.E-07 30.64%
1.66E-02 8.53E-10 3.E-06 0.03% 3.05E-10 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.90E-09 6.E-06 0.52% 6.77E-10 0.E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 7.23E-14 1.E-04 1.15% 2.58E-14 3.E-09 0.62%3.35E-07 1.72E-14 2.E-05 2.04% 6.15E-15 8.E-10 0.23%
1.25E+01 9.02E-07 8.E-04 9.30% 3.22E-07 2.E-07 36.95% 1.17E+01 9.31E-07 9.E-04 74.09% 3.33E-07 2.E-07 61.31%
6.74E-03 2.11E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 7.55E-13 4.E-13 0.00%3.35E-04 1.05E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 3.75E-14 2.E-14 0.00%
4.96E+00 1.56E-09 1.E-04 1.16% 5.56E-10 2.E-09 0.44%6.43E+00 2.02E-09 1.E-04 11.18% 7.21E-10 3.E-09 0.89%
3.50E-02 1.10E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.92E-12 2.E-12 0.00%1.15E-03 3.61E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 1.29E-13 6.E-14 0.00%
1.25E+01 3.93E-09 4.E-05 0.44% 1.40E-09 1.E-07 21.63% 1.17E+01 3.66E-09 4.E-05 3.04% 1.31E-09 1.E-07 31.43%
1.66E-02 5.21E-12 2.E-08 0.00% 1.86E-12 0.E+00 0.00%3.69E-02 1.16E-11 4.E-08 0.00% 4.13E-12 0.E+00 0.00%
1.41E-06 4.41E-16 1.E-08 0.00% 1.58E-16 6.E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 1.05E-16 3.E-09 0.00% 3.75E-17 1.E-12 0.00%
1.25E+01 5.51E-09 1.E-04 1.60% 1.97E-09 1.E-07 22.07% 1.17E+01 5.69E-09 2.E-04 14.22% 2.03E-09 1.E-07 32.32%
1.25E+01 9.40E-07 1.E-03 12.22% 3.36E-07 3.E-07 62.25% 1.17E+01 9.78E-07 1.E-03 100.00% 3.49E-07 3.E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 2.91E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.04E-09 6.E-10 0.11%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 5.97E-08 4.E-03 44.44% 2.13E-08 9.E-08 16.81%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 1.78E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 6.36E-08 3.E-08 5.36%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.86E-07 4.E-03 41.59% 6.65E-08 0.E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 3.08E-10 1.E-06 0.01% 1.10E-10 0.E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 6.22E-12 2.E-04 1.74% 2.22E-12 8.E-08 15.47%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.27E-07 8.E-03 87.78% 1.53E-07 2.E-07 37.75%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.27E-07 8.E-03 87.78% 1.53E-07 2.E-07 37.75%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.25E+01 1.37E-06 9.E-03 100%4.88E-07 5.E-07 100%1.17E+01 9.78E-07 1.E-03 100%3.49E-07 3.E-07 100%
BG
RME
SITE
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-38
Risk Calculations - Rancher
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Soil Dermal Total PCBs 7.37E-04 8.83E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 3.15E-12 6E-12 0.00% 3.35E-04 4.01E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.43E-12 3E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 1.51E-08 5.E-05 1.46% 5.38E-09 8E-09 4.50% 6.43E+00 1.65E-08 6.E-05 18.49% 5.90E-09 9E-09 9.40%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 1.30E-15 2.E-06 0.05% 4.66E-16 6E-11 0.03% 3.35E-07 8.60E-16 1.E-06 0.41% 3.07E-16 4E-11 0.04%
Dermal Total 1.27E+01 1.51E-08 5.E-05 1.52% 5.38E-09 8E-09 4.54%1.17E+01 1.65E-08 6.E-05 18.91% 5.90E-09 9E-09 9.45%
Ingestion Total PCBs 7.37E-04 7.57E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 2.70E-12 5E-12 0.00%3.35E-04 3.44E-12 0.E+00 0.00% 1.23E-12 2E-12 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 6.03E-08 1.E-04 3.52% 2.15E-08 2E-08 10.82% 6.43E+00 6.61E-08 1.E-04 44.41% 2.36E-08 2E-08 22.58%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 1.30E-07 4.E-05 1.26% 4.64E-08 2E-08 12.95% 1.17E+01 1.20E-07 4.E-05 13.41% 4.28E-08 2E-08 22.73%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 5.22E-15 7.E-06 0.22% 1.86E-15 2E-10 0.14%3.35E-07 3.44E-15 5.E-06 1.65% 1.23E-15 2E-10 0.17%
Ingestion Total 1.27E+01 1.90E-07 2.E-04 5.00% 6.80E-08 4E-08 23.91% 1.17E+01 1.86E-07 2.E-04 59.48% 6.64E-08 4E-08 45.48%
Inhalation Total PCBs 7.37E-04 8.69E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.10E-14 2E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 3.95E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 1.41E-14 8E-15 0.00%
Total Arsenic 5.87E+00 6.92E-10 5.E-05 1.35% 2.47E-10 1E-09 0.59%6.43E+00 7.59E-10 5.E-05 16.99% 2.71E-10 1E-09 1.24%
Total Chromium 1.27E+01 1.49E-09 1.E-05 0.43% 5.33E-10 4E-08 24.98% 1.17E+01 1.38E-09 1.E-05 4.62% 4.91E-10 4E-08 43.84%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 5.08E-07 5.99E-17 1.E-09 0.00% 2.14E-17 8E-13 0.00%3.35E-07 3.95E-17 1.E-09 0.00% 1.41E-17 5E-13 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.27E+01 2.18E-09 6.E-05 1.78% 7.80E-10 5E-08 25.57% 1.17E+01 2.13E-09 6.E-05 21.61% 7.62E-10 4E-08 45.07%
Soil Total 1.27E+01 2.08E-07 3.E-04 8.30% 7.41E-08 1E-07 54.02%1.17E+01 2.05E-07 3.E-04 100.00% 7.31E-08 9E-08 100.00%
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs 2.12E-07 1.16E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 4.15E-10 2E-10 0.13%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Arsenic 4.36E-06 2.39E-08 2.E-03 46.43% 8.53E-09 4E-08 20.47%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Manganese 1.36E-05 7.45E-08 1.E-03 43.45% 2.66E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Total Mercury 2.25E-08 1.23E-10 4.E-07 0.01% 4.40E-11 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Hexachlorobenzene 1.30E-05 7.12E-08 0.E+00 0.00% 2.54E-08 1E-08 6.53%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian 4.54E-10 2.49E-12 6.E-05 1.81% 8.88E-13 3E-08 18.84%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Inhalation Total 1.36E-05 1.71E-07 3.E-03 91.70% 6.10E-08 8E-08 45.98%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Air (Facility) Total 1.36E-05 1.71E-07 3.E-03 91.70% 6.10E-08 8E-08 45.98%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
Grand Total 1.27E+01 3.78E-07 3.E-03 100%1.35E-07 1.8E-07 100%1.17E+01 2.05E-07 3.E-04 100%7.31E-08 9.4E-08 100%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
CTE
Matrix Pathway Analyte
SITE BG
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-38
Risk Calculations - Rancher
PRI 16 - Lakeside Mountains Buffer Area
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Soil Dermal Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Dermal Total
Ingestion Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Ingestion Total
Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Chromium
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Soil Total
Air (Facility)Inhalation Total PCBs
Total Arsenic
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Hexachlorobenzene
Calculated TEQ (ND=1/2 DL), Mammalian
Inhalation Total
Air (Facility) Total
Grand Total
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
Matrix Pathway Analyte
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
Matrix Exposure
Concentration
(mg/kg; mg/m3; mg/L)
Sum of ADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) HQ
HQ
(% of Total)
Sum of LADD
(mg/kg-d) or EC
(mg/m3) ILCR
ILCR
(% of Total)
7.37E-04 2.21E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 7.88E-12 2E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 1.00E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 3.58E-12 7E-12 0.00%
5.87E+00 3.77E-08 1.E-04 1.39% 1.35E-08 2E-08 3.64%6.43E+00 4.13E-08 1.E-04 11.60% 1.47E-08 2E-08 6.46%
1.27E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00% 1.17E+01 0.00E+00 0.E+00 0.00% 0.00E+00 0E+00 0.00%
5.08E-07 3.26E-15 5.E-06 0.05% 1.16E-15 2E-10 0.03%3.35E-07 2.15E-15 3.E-06 0.26% 7.68E-16 1E-10 0.03%
1.27E+01 3.77E-08 1.E-04 1.45% 1.35E-08 2E-08 3.67%1.17E+01 4.13E-08 1.E-04 11.85% 1.47E-08 2E-08 6.49%
7.37E-04 3.79E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 1.35E-11 3E-11 0.00%3.35E-04 1.72E-11 0.E+00 0.00% 6.15E-12 1E-11 0.00%
5.87E+00 3.02E-07 6.E-04 6.70% 1.08E-07 1E-07 17.46% 6.43E+00 3.31E-07 7.E-04 55.70% 1.18E-07 1E-07 31.04%
1.27E+01 6.50E-07 2.E-04 2.41% 2.32E-07 1E-07 20.91% 1.17E+01 5.99E-07 2.E-04 16.82% 2.14E-07 1E-07 31.25%
5.08E-07 2.61E-14 4.E-05 0.41% 9.32E-15 1E-09 0.22%3.35E-07 1.72E-14 2.E-05 2.07% 6.15E-15 8E-10 0.23%
1.27E+01 9.51E-07 9.E-04 9.52% 3.40E-07 2E-07 38.59% 1.17E+01 9.30E-07 9.E-04 74.59% 3.32E-07 2E-07 62.52%
7.37E-04 2.17E-13 0.E+00 0.00% 7.76E-14 4E-14 0.00%3.35E-04 9.88E-14 0.E+00 0.00% 3.53E-14 2E-14 0.00%
5.87E+00 1.73E-09 1.E-04 1.28% 6.18E-10 3E-09 0.48%6.43E+00 1.90E-09 1.E-04 10.66% 6.78E-10 3E-09 0.85%
1.27E+01 3.73E-09 4.E-05 0.41% 1.33E-09 1E-07 20.16% 1.17E+01 3.44E-09 3.E-05 2.90% 1.23E-09 1E-07 30.13%
5.08E-07 1.50E-16 4.E-09 0.00% 5.35E-17 2E-12 0.00%3.35E-07 9.88E-17 2.E-09 0.00% 3.53E-17 1E-12 0.00%
1.27E+01 5.46E-09 2.E-04 1.70% 1.95E-09 1E-07 20.64% 1.17E+01 5.34E-09 2.E-04 13.55% 1.91E-09 1E-07 30.98%
1.27E+01 9.95E-07 1.E-03 12.66% 3.55E-07 3E-07 62.89%1.17E+01 9.76E-07 1.E-03 100.00% 3.49E-07 3E-07 100.00%
2.12E-07 2.91E-09 0.E+00 0.00% 1.04E-09 6E-10 0.11%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.36E-06 5.97E-08 4.E-03 44.22% 2.13E-08 9E-08 16.52%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 1.86E-07 4.E-03 41.38% 6.65E-08 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
2.25E-08 3.08E-10 1.E-06 0.01% 1.10E-10 0E+00 0.00%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.30E-05 1.78E-07 0.E+00 0.00% 6.36E-08 3E-08 5.27%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
4.54E-10 6.22E-12 2.E-04 1.73% 2.22E-12 8E-08 15.21%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.27E-07 8.E-03 87.34% 1.53E-07 2E-07 37.11%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.36E-05 4.27E-07 8.E-03 87.34% 1.53E-07 2E-07 37.11%------ 0.00%---- 0.00%
1.27E+01 1.42E-06 9.E-03 100%5.08E-07 5.6E-07 100%1.17E+01 9.76E-07 1.E-03 100%3.49E-07 3.4E-07 100%
BG
RME
SITE
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-39
Cumulative Risk Calculations - USM Worker
OU-1 BHHRA
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
HI ILCR
CTE CTE RME RME CTE CTE RME RME
SITE BG SITE BG SITE BG SITE BG
PRI 2 8E-02 4E-04 6E-01 2E-03 3E-06 2E-07 2E-05 9E-07
PRI 3 4E-03 -1E-02 -1E-07 -3E-07 -
PRI 4 6E-02 3E-04 3E-01 1E-03 2E-06 2E-07 9E-06 6E-07
PRI 5 5E-02 2E-04 1E-01 4E-04 4E-06 4E-08 7E-06 1E-07
PRI 6 5E-02 1E-04 1E-01 4E-04 5E-06 6E-08 9E-06 2E-07
PRI 7 5E-02 2E-04 1E-01 5E-04 2E-06 8E-08 5E-06 1E-07
PRI 8 1E-02 1E-04 3E-02 3E-04 9E-07 6E-08 2E-06 2E-07
PRI 9 6E-02 7E-03 3E-01 3E-02 1E-06 3E-07 5E-06 2E-06
PRI 10 1E-03 8E-05 4E-03 4E-04 7E-08 2E-08 2E-07 1E-07
PRI 11 2E-02 1E-03 1E-01 1E-02 8E-07 3E-07 8E-06 4E-06
PRI 12 1E-02 5E-04 5E-02 3E-03 4E-07 2E-07 2E-06 1E-06
HI SITE HI BG ILCR SITE ILCR BG
CTE-1 2E-01 9E-03 8E-06 1E-06
CTE-2 4E-01 1E-02 2E-05 1E-06
HI SITE HI BG ILCR SITE ILCR BG
RME-1 9E-01 1E-02 3.E-05 2E-06
RME-2 1E+00 1E-02 5.E-05 2E-06
Notes:
Bolded values exceed 1 (HI) or 10 -6 (ILCR)
BHHRA = Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
CTE-1: The sum of the CTE HI/ILCR in PRIs 2, 4, 9, 11, and 12*
CTE-2: The sum of the CTE HI/ILCR across all PRIs
RME-1: The RME risks from the two PRIs that have the highest risk values (2 and 4), plus the CTE risks from each of the other three
most heavily used PRIs (9, 11, and 12)
RME-2: The RME risks from the two PRIs that have the highest risk values (2 and 4), plus the CTE risks from all other PRIs
* CTE-1 includes the five most heavily occupied PRIs after RCRA closure of PRI 1, adjusted from the Revised Final OU-1 BHHRA TM.
BG = Background
CTE = Central Tendency Exposure
HI = Hazard Index
ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
PRI
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-40
Cumulative Risk Calculations - USM Worker - 38% TEQ Bioavailability
OU-1 BHHRA
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
HI ILCR
CTE CTE RME RME CTE CTE RME RME
SITE BG SITE BG SITE BG SITE BG
PRI 2 4E-02 4E-04 3E-01 2E-03 2E-06 2E-07 1E-05 9E-07
PRI 3 4E-03 -1E-02 -1E-07 -3E-07 -
PRI 4 4E-02 3E-04 2E-01 1E-03 2E-06 2E-07 6E-06 6E-07
PRI 5 3E-02 2E-04 6E-02 4E-04 3E-06 4E-08 5E-06 1E-07
PRI 6 4E-02 1E-04 8E-02 4E-04 5E-06 6E-08 8E-06 2E-07
PRI 7 2E-02 2E-04 6E-02 5E-04 9E-07 8E-08 2E-06 1E-07
PRI 8 9E-03 1E-04 2E-02 3E-04 9E-07 6E-08 2E-06 2E-07
PRI 9 6E-02 7E-03 3E-01 3E-02 1E-06 3E-07 5E-06 2E-06
PRI 10 1E-03 8E-05 4E-03 4E-04 7E-08 2E-08 2E-07 1E-07
PRI 11 2E-02 1E-03 1E-01 1E-02 8E-07 3E-07 8E-06 4E-06
PRI 12 9E-03 5E-04 4E-02 3E-03 4E-07 2E-07 2E-06 1E-06
HI SITE HI BG ILCR SITE ILCR BG
CTE-1 2E-01 9E-03 6E-06 1E-06
CTE-2 3E-01 1E-02 2E-05 1E-06
HI SITE HI BG ILCR SITE ILCR BG
RME-1 5E-01 1E-02 2E-05 2E-06
RME-2 6E-01 1E-02 3E-05 2E-06
Notes:
Bolded values exceed 1 (HI) or 10 -6 (ILCR)
BHHRA = Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment
CTE-1: The sum of the CTE HI/ILCR in PRIs 2, 4, 9, 11, and 12*
CTE-2: The sum of the CTE HI/ILCR across all PRIs
RME-1: The RME risks from the two PRIs that have the highest risk values (2 and 4), plus the CTE risks from each of the other three
most heavily used PRIs (9, 11, and 12)
RME-2: The RME risks from the two PRIs that have the highest risk values (2 and 4), plus the CTE risks from all other PRIs
* CTE-1 includes the five most heavily occupied PRIs after RCRA closure of PRI 1, adjusted from the Revised Final OU-1 BHHRA TM.
BG = Background
CTE = Central Tendency Exposure
HI = Hazard Index
ILCR = Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RME = Reasonable Maximum Exposure
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin Toxic Equivalence
PRI
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-41
Site and Background ILCR Comparison
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%
PRI 2 3E-06 2E-07 6%2E-05 9E-07 4%-- -- -- -- -- -- --
PRI 3 1E-07 -3E-07 - -- ------------
PRI 4 2E-06 2E-07 8% 9E-06 6E-07 6%-- -- -- -- -- -- --
PRI 5 4E-06 4E-08 1% 7E-06 1E-07 1%-- -- -- -- -- -- --
PRI 6 5E-06 6E-08 1% 9E-06 2E-07 2%-- -- -- -- -- -- --
PRI 7 2E-06 8E-08 4% 5E-06 1E-07 3%-- -- -- -- -- -- --
PRI 8 9E-07 6E-08 7% 2E-06 2E-07 8%-- --6E-07 2E-08 3% 2E-06 7E-08 4%-- -- --
PRI 9 1E-06 3E-07 28% 5E-06 2E-06 31%-- -- -- -- -- -- --
PRI 10 7E-08 2E-08 37%2E-07 1E-07 48%-- -- -- -- -- -- --
PRI 11 8E-07 3E-07 39%8E-06 4E-06 48%2E-06 8E-07 41%6E-06 3E-06 49%5E-08 2E-08 42%2E-07 8E-08 49%-- -- --
PRI 12 4E-07 2E-07 45%2E-06 1E-06 49%5E-06 3E-06 48% 1E-05 6E-06 53%-- -- -- -- --
PRI 13 -- - - -- --5E-08 3E-08 71%2E-07 1E-07 78% 1E-05 7E-06 65%7E-08 5E-08 72%3E-07 2E-07 79%
PRI 14 -- - - -- --6E-08 3E-08 47%2E-07 9E-08 47% - -1E-07 6E-08 46%7E-07 3E-07 41%
PRI 15 -- - - -- --1E-07 6E-08 54%1E-06 8E-07 64% - -2E-07 9E-08 57%1E-06 8E-07 65%
PRI 16 -- - - -- --1E-07 7E-08 53%1E-06 8E-07 62% - -1E-07 7E-08 55%1E-06 8E-07 63%
RMECTE
Recreational Visitor (Adult) ILCRBrine Shrimp Worker ILCRResource Manager ILCRUSM Worker ILCR Nearby Worker ILCR
Location
RMERMECTERMECTERMECTE
ERM Page 1 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-41
Site and Background ILCR Comparison
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
PRI 2
PRI 3
PRI 4
PRI 5
PRI 6
PRI 7
PRI 8
PRI 9
PRI 10
PRI 11
PRI 12
PRI 13
PRI 14
PRI 15
PRI 16
Location Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%Site Background
Background
%
----------------
----------------
----------------
----------------
----------------
----------------
----------------
----------------
----------------
----------------
----------------
----------------
1E-07 7E-08 46%7E-07 3E-07 46%1E-07 2E-08 18% 2E-07 3E-08 19% 4E-07 1E-07 39% 2E-06 6E-07 41%----
6E-08 5E-08 91%2E-07 2E-07 98%3E-08 2E-08 65%8E-08 6E-08 74%3E-07 2E-07 65%1E-06 1E-06 70%2E-07 1E-07 54%5E-07 3E-07 64%
2E-07 1E-07 87%2E-06 2E-06 92%1E-07 7E-08 63%9E-07 6E-07 72%4E-07 3E-07 70% 4E-06 3E-06 79%2E-07 9E-08 53%6E-07 3E-07 62%
Notes and Abbreviations presented on Table G-42.
RMERMECTECTE
Rancher ILCRRecreational Visitor (All Ages) ILCRRecreational Visitor (Child 6-16) ILCRRecreational Visitor (Child 0-6) ILCR
RMECTERMECTE
ERM Page 2 of 2 PN0508502 - April 2022
Table G-42
Notes and Abbreviations
US Magnesium LLC
Tooele County, Utah
ADD = Average daily dose
BG = Background
COPC = Constituent of potential concern
CTE = Central tendency exposure
Derm = Dermal exposure pathway
DL = Detection limit
EPC = Exposure point concentration
GSLIC = Great Salt Lake Inlet Canal
HQ = Hazard quotient
HI = Hazard index
ILCR = Incremental lifetime cancer risk
Ing = Ingestion exposure pathway
Inh = Inhalation exposure pathway
LADD = Lifetime average daily dose
mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram
mg/kg-d = Milligrams per kilogram per day
mg/L = Milligrams per liter
mg/m3 = Milligrams per cubic meter
NA = Not applicable
ND = Nondetect
pg/g = Picograms per gram
PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyl
PRI = Preliminary Remedial Investigation
RME = Reasonable maximum exposure
TCDD = Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
TEQ = 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalence
USM = US Magnesium LLC
ERM Page 1 of 1 PN0508502 - April 2022
FINAL OU-1 BASELINE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0508502 Client: US Magnesium LLC April 2022
APPENDIX H RESPONSES TO AGENCY COMMENTS
02/25/2022
1

AGENCY EVALUATION OF ERM RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT OU1 HHRA

EPA has reviewed the document titled “Response to the Agencies’ Technical Comments on the Draft OU-
1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment (10 November 2021, 20 November 2021, and 28 December
2021)” submitted by ERM on 02/21/2022. All of the responses to Agency comments are acceptable
except as noted in BLUE TEXT below.

PART 1. Consolidated Agency Comments on Draft OU-1 BHHRA (10 November 2021)

GENERAL COMMENTS:
EPA places a high emphasis on effective risk communication. The draft BHHRA falls short of this
goal in a number of ways. Consequently, Agency comments provided on the draft include
numerous recommendations for improving the clarity and effectiveness of the document, as well
as comments on technical issues.

SUMMARY OF MAJOR TECHNICAL COMMENTS THAT MAY ALTER RISK RESULTS
1. Calculations of risk from TEQ presented in Section 6 must be based on TEQ(ND=1/2), not
TEQ(ND=0)

ERM RESPONSE: Calculations have been updated using TEQ(ND=1/2). However, please
note that using one-half the detection limit for non-detected congeners adds significant
uncertainty in the sample concentration and we believe is a poor risk assessment practice.
The difference in the TEQ based on substitution of 0 or one-half the detection limit is most
pronounced in air and water.

EPA Evaluation. EPA does not agree that assuming ND=1/2 adds uncertainty to the risk
assessment. The source of the uncertainty is the occurrence of congeners below the
detection limit. Assuming ND=1/2 minimizes bias in the estimated TEQ concentration, and is
superior to assuming ND=0, since the latter is nearly certain to induce a negative bias (i.e., an
underestimate of true concentration). The magnitude of the uncertainty can be estimated by
comparing results for ND=0 and ND=1/2. The results clearly demonstrate that in areas of
significant TEQ contamination there is essentially no difference, and the strategy for dealing
with NDs is not a significant source of uncertainty. While the difference becomes larger in
locations where contamination is low or similar to background, these are areas where the
level of human health concern is least, and the difference does not influence risk
management decision-making. If ERM chooses to discuss the treatment of NDs in the
uncertainty section, the proper conclusion is that the strategy choice is NOT an important
source of uncertainty.
2. Calculations of risk from total chromium presented in Section 6 must be based on the
assumption that 100% of total chromium is Cr(VI), not Cr(III).

ERM RESPONSE: Speciation of chromium in soil is not common at sites where hexavalent
chromium is not identified as a significant contaminant. The agencies conducted extensive
review of sampling and analysis plans (SAPs) and lab methodology for all phases of the
Remedial Investigation (RI). Chromium was speciated in surface water and groundwater
samples and could have been speciated in solids samples to establish whether it is present,
but this was not requested by the agencies. While there is no basis for assuming that 100%
of the chromium detected in solids is in the hexavalent form, the calculations have been
updated as requested and discussed in the context of a facility that does not use hexavalent
chromium in its operations, nor is it a significant by-product of USM processes.
3. Exposure calculations for PRI-5 should not include 3 samples from the un-capped portion of
PRI-1. Rather than omitting an evaluation of PRI-1, add a new section that discusses the
02/25/2022
2

potential for current exposure from the portion of the main ditch that remains uncapped, and
the potential for future exposures if buried sediments from the capped portion of PRI-1 were
exposed in the future.

ERM RESPONSE: Although this was agreed to with the agencies prior to conducting the
BHHRA, the remainder of PRI 1 affects the overall PRI 5 results disproportionately. As
requested, PRI 5 is evaluated without including the PRI 1 solids and surface water samples,
and a short discussion of PRI 1 current exposure has been added. Potential future exposure
scenarios at the Site were not included in the BHHRA Technical Memo and are not
discussed in the OU-1 BHHRA.

EPA Evaluation. Granted that evaluation of potential future exposure scenarios was not
included in the BHHRA Technical Memo, EPA feels strongly that it is important to include a
reminder to readers that risk results presented in the document are based on current
exposure conditions and that if exposure patterns changed in the future, a re-evaluation
might be needed. EPA recommends addition of the following text as the final paragraph
under Section 8.3:

“These risk findings are based on the assumption that land use will remain industrial into
the foreseeable future and that human exposure patterns will remain similar to those
under current conditions. If land use or human exposure patterns were to change in the
future, then a re-evaluation of risks may be needed.”

4. Exposure calculations for PRI-13 should not use a 95UCL based on the combined data from
Phase 1A and from the GSLIC collected in later efforts because this is not statistically
appropriate. Calculation of risks to people exposed in both areas should utilize a time-
weighted average approach.

ERM RESPONSE: See Part 3 for additional exchange on this topic. PRI 13 exposure
concentrations are based on two or three potential exposure scenarios:

- Resource Managers and Adult Recreational Visitors are evaluated using 1) 100 percent
exposure to Shoreline area and 2) 80 percent Shoreline and 20 percent Great Salt Lake
Intake Canal (GSLIC) exposures

- Brine Shrimp Workers are evaluated using 1) 100 percent exposure to Shoreline area, 2)
90 percent Shoreline and 10 percent GSLIC, and 3) 80 percent Shoreline and 20 percent
GSLIC exposures

TEXT

5. Recommended edits/revisions/corrections on the draft are provided in Attachment A,
which is a Word document in red-line strike-out format. This attachment was prepared by
conversion from the pdf version provided. As a consequence, page breaks and section
numbers are no longer automatic, and footnote links are lost. Please be attentive to this
when making revisions.
The next version of this document that incorporates these comments should be labeled and
referred to as the “Public Review Draft”. EPA will compile and respond to comments
received from the public, and will make any changes that may be needed based on the
comments received.

ERM RESPONSE: The majority of the comments provided in Attachment A have been
02/25/2022
3

incorporated into the revised document. In order to be consistent with the RIFS Statement of
Work and per a conversation between Ken Wangerud and David Abranovic, the revised
document will be titled the Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment.

TABLES

Tables 3-1 thru 3-18. These detailed COPC selection tables would be better presented in an
appendix, with only summary tables in the main text showing final COPC lists. The Agencies
suggest one table per medium (air, solids, surface water), using a format similar to Table 3-17
and 3-18 (COPC list down the left, PRIs across the top).

ERM RESPONSE: Agreed. Tables 3-1 through 3-18 have been moved to Appendix D. COPCs for air
and surface water are listed in the text. A summary table for solids by PRI Area and Lakebed and
Upland background datasets will be provided in the Final OU-1 BHHRA as Table 3-1.
Tables 3-17 and 3-18. The use of the table entry “changed” in these tables is ambiguous. Revise
the explanation to say “Changed = dataset adjusted due to blank comparison; one or more
samples previously ranked as detects have been ranked as non-detects. However, the analyte is
still retained as a COPC.”

ERM RESPONSE: Agreed. Requested changes have been made.
Table 4-5. The exposure frequency for shrimpers is calculated as 365 days/yr * 4 mo./12 mo. =
121.7 days/yr. However, the exposure frequency assumed for chlorine/HCl is from Oct 1 thru Jan
31 (inclusive) = 123 days/yr, and 123 is the value used in the risk assessment for chlorine and
HCl. The difference is so small that it obviously will not impact risks significantly. However, for
consistency, and because risks need to be recalculated in response to other comments, this
parameter should be revised from 121.7 to 123.

ERM RESPONSE: Agreed. Requested changes have been made.
Table 4-5. Only an RME scenario is evaluated for shrimpers. No explanation for this was located
in either the text or table footnotes. Provide a rationale for this strategy in a footnote and/or in the
text (Section 4.4).

ERM RESPONSE: Agreed. Requested changes have been made. Based on information from Utah
Department of Wildlife Resources (Commercial Harvesting of Brine Shrimp and Brine Shrimp Eggs, 2006),
the Brine Shrimp Worker is at or near the Site during an approximately 4-month period in the winter and
are reported to camp there for the shrimping season. Two USM workers who had previously worked as
shrimp harvesters for two seasons confirmed that harvesters camped near the lake and only left
occasionally to replenish supplies. No information indicating that workers only stayed for a portion of the
season or less than 24 hours per day was obtained, and a CTE scenario was not developed. It was also
assumed that a harvester would spend 25 years doing the job, similar to assumptions for other types of
workers evaluated. The physical demands of the work and the seasonal limitations might reduce the
duration that a worker is willing to continue. A shorter exposure duration is evaluated in the uncertainty
section.
Table 4-6. Revise the title to indicate what receptor this table is characterizing.

ERM RESPONSE: Agreed.
Table 4-13. Express EPC values in scientific format to 2 significant figures (as is done in all other
EPC tables).

02/25/2022
4

ERM RESPONSE: Agreed.
Section 6 Tables. As noted above, all HQ and ILCR results in Section 6 are based on
TEQ(ND=0). This is unacceptable. All tabular results presented in Section 6 must be based on
TEQ(ND=1/2). If you wish to discuss results based on TEQ(ND=0), do so in the uncertainty
section.

ERM RESPONSE: Agreed; see response to Comment #1.
Section 6 Tables. As noted above, all HQ and ILCR results in Section 6 are based on the assumption
that 100% of total chromium is Cr(III). This is unacceptable. All tabular results presented in Section 6 for
media where chromium is identified as a COPC must be based on the assumption that 100% of total
chromium is Cr(VI). If you wish, Section 7 may include a discussion of why the assumption of 100%
Cr(VI) is likely to be conservative, and how the risks would change if total chromium is assumed to be
100% Cr(III).

ERM RESPONSE: Agreed; see response to Comment #2.
Table 6-4. Modify the title to identify the receptor being evaluated.

ERM RESPONSE: The original Table 6-4 table is no longer included. A new Table 6-4 shows the pathway
and COPC drivers for the Nearby Worker in PRI 12.

FIGURES
Figure 3-1. Eliminate the right-going “Yes” arrow between the upper box labeled “Is the FOD < 5%?” and
the upper box with the label “Not detected at high concentration or in other media and not expected to
be site-related 2?”

ERM RESPONSE: This revision has been made.

APPENDICES
Appendix G. As noted above, all calculations in Appendix G are based on TEQ(ND=0) and on Cr(III). No
results are shown for TEQ(ND=1/2) or Cr(VI). Calculations based on TEQ(ND=1/2) and Cr(VI) must be
presented, either in place of, or in addition to, the results based on TEQ(ND=0) and Cr(III).

ERM RESPONSE: Calculations have been updated using TEQ (ND=1/2) in place of TEQ (ND=0) and Cr(VI)
in place of Cr(III). Refer to ERM Response to Comment #2 above for a description of the unsupported,
over-conservative risk estimates generated by this comment and revision.

PART 2. Supplemental Agency Comments on Draft OU-1 BHHRA (20 November 2021)
In response to several questions raised by ERM regarding the selection of background data to be used
in the ecological risk assessment for OU1, EPA performed a more detailed review of Section 2.4.5 in
the HHRA text and of HHRA Tables 4-32 and 4-33. Supplemental comments are provided below.
General
The background data selected for use should be the same in the HHRA and the BERA. The ERM
human health and ecological risk assessment teams should coordinate to ensure that this is achieved.
After consultation with ERM, it is agreed that:
1. The background data sets should consist of the lakebed and upland background samples collected
during Phase 1A-B, except for sample LBSE-07, which is a clear outlier for organic contaminants.
02/25/2022
5

Although this sample appears to be typical of background for inorganics, all results (not just the
organics) should be excluded for this one sample.
2. Samples from Bear River and Phase 2A should not be included.
3. Section 2.4.5. This section should include a brief summary of the evaluations that were performed on
the data to ensure the data were representative of background. The following text is recommended:
In order to ensure that the samples collected from upland and lakebed areas that were judged to be
suitable for background had not been significantly impacted by site-related releases, an outlier analysis
and a “fingerprint” analysis were performed. The outlier analysis identified one sample (LBSE-07) that
appeared to be clearly higher than others for levels of several organic contaminants (TEQ, HCB,
PCBs). Consequently, all results from this sample were excluded. In the fingerprint analysis, the
congener pattern of dioxins, furans, and PCBs in candidate background samples was compared to Site
samples (add citation to ERM report). This analysis revealed the presence of elevated levels of
octachlorodibenzofuran (OCDF) and PCB-109, which are chemical markers of Site-related releases.
However, the magnitude of the impact on TEQ and total PCBs was small, so it was determined that any
potential overestimation of background levels would not significantly influence risk characterization and
that the samples could be used in the risk assessment (add citation to USEPA memo from
10/14/2019)).
Table 4-32 (Upland background Samples)
EPA agrees with the counts of total samples and detects, but cannot replicate many of the EPC values
(see table below). While these differences will not affect the risk characterization, the basis for these
discrepancies should be investigated and resolved.

COPC Number
of
Sample
s
Number
of
Detects
ERM Results EPA Results
EPC EPC Basis EPC EPC Basis
TEQ (ND=0), Mammalian 18 18 7.2E-07 95% Student's-t UCL 2.3E-07 95% Student's-t UCL
TEQ (ND=1/2 DL),
M li
18 18 7.7E-07 95% Adjusted Gamma
UCL
3.4E-07 95% Adjusted Gamma
UCL
Total PCBs 18 18 5.0E-04 95% Student's-t UCL 3.4E-04 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Arsenic 30 30 6.6E+00 95% Modified-t UCL 6.4E+00 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 30 30 1.3E+01 95% Student's-t UCL 1.2E+01 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Iron 30 30 1.4E+04 95% Modified-t UCL 1.3E+04 or 95% Modified-t UCL
Total Manganese 30 30 5.4E+02 95% Student's-t UCL 4.5E+02 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Mercury 30 30 4.1E-02 95% Adjusted Gamma
UCL
3.7E-02 95% Adjusted Gamma
UCL
Total Thallium 30 30 1.8E-01 95% Student's-t UCL 1.8E-01 95% Student's-t UCL
Hexachlorobenzene 18 0 5.0E-03 Median 1.2E-03 Median

Table 4-33 (Lakebed background samples)
EPA is not able to replicate the counts for organics or inorganics in Table 4-33 (Lakebed).
• For organics, ERM shows a count of 15 or 16 samples, while EPA finds a value of 17 (after exclusion of
LBSE-07). If ERM has identified a reason why any additional lakebed samples should be excluded in
addition to LBSE-07, EPA requests that ERM provide that rationale to ensure there is agreement.
• For inorganics, ERM reports a count of 30 samples, which indicates that sample LBSE- 07 has not been
excluded. As noted above, this sample should be excluded for all analytes, not just the organics.
02/25/2022
6

The basis for theses discrepancies in count should be investigated and resolved, and EPCs
recalculated as may be needed. Draft EPA results are shown below.

COPC
ERM Values EPA Values
Number
of
Sample

Number
of
Detect

EPC EPC Basis Number
of
Samples
Number
of
Detect

EPC EPC Basis
TEQ (ND=0),
Mammalian
15 15 1.1E-06 95% Student's-t UCL 17 17 1.2E-06 95% Adjusted Gamma
UCL
TEQ (ND=1/2
DL),

15 15 6.5E-07 95% Student's-t UCL 17 17 1.1E-06 95% Student's-t UCL
Total PCBs 15 15 7.9E-04 95% Student's-t UCL 17 17 1.0E-03 95% Adjusted Gamma
UCL Total Arsenic 30 30 1.2E+0 95% Student's-t UCL 29 29 1.2E+0 95% Student's-t UCL
Total Chromium 30 30 1.7E+0 95% Chebyshev (Mean,
Sd)
29 29 1.6E+0 95% Chebyshev (Mean,
Sd) Total Mercury 30 29 7.9E-02 95% KM (Chebyshev)
UCL
29 28 5.1E-02 95% KM Adjusted
G Hexachlorobenze

16 1 5.7E-03 Median 17 2 1.4E-03 Median
NOTE: The basis for ERM’s median value for HCB in both tables is not clear. EPA values are the median
of all samples, evaluating NDs at ½ the DL. If ERM is using a different strategy, that should be discussed
with EPA.

ERM RESPONSE:

Updates to the datasets have been made and most EPCs changed very little. Subsequent
correspondence in December 2021 confirmed the selection of background values for hexachlorobenzene
(HCB). ERM questions are in green font, and Agencies’ responses provided on 28 December 2021 are
shown in blue font below.

Background datasets will be consistent with those used in the BERA and the comments.

a. Most COPCs are detected in the majority of samples, and 95UCLs can be derived, except HCB. For
Upland BG, the maximum DL (=MDL or reporting detection limit/RDL in the database) will be used for the
EPC. For Lakebed BG, a 95UCL can be derived and will be the same as what is used in the BERA. We
can provide additional details if needed.
From EPA: Based on an EQuIS soil database download performed about 1 year ago, EPA believes the
detection frequency for HCB in Phase 1A-B Lakebed background samples is 3/18, but this becomes
2/17 after exclusion of LBSE-07. ProUCL will generally not attempt to estimate a UCL based on only 2
detects. For Upland soils, EPA agrees that the detection frequency is 0/18. Thus, the question is, what
is the best value to assign to background for an analyte that is rarely or never detected in a background
data set?
EPA does not agree that using the maximum ND value is appropriate, since this is very likely to
substantially overestimate the true background level, especially if the maximum ND value is
substantially higher than the majority of other ND samples. [Note that a tendency to overestimate the
true mean value is a conservative strategy for Site samples, but is anti-conservative for background
samples.] In the draft HHRA, the text indicated that the median value was being used (although the
median of what was not clear). EPA recommends that background for HCB be based on either the
mean or median of the available samples, treating NDs at ½ the DL.

In a follow-up email to Wendy O’Brien, Brian Sanchez, and Bill Brattin on 3 January 2022, ERM provided
this information to the Agencies regarding HCB in background datasets:

The upland background dataset has 0 detects, and the lakebed background dataset has 2 detects out of
02/25/2022
7

17 samples. The table (included below) summarizes the datasets, the mean and median values for both
datasets, and the ProUCL-derived 95UCL for the lakebed dataset.

For the upland background dataset, the mean and median are the same: 0.00115 mg/kg, based on
½ DL for each sample. This is the proposed EPC to use for Upland background HCB dataset.

For the lakebed background dataset, the mean (0.0019 mg/kg) is slightly higher than the median (0.0014
mg/kg). ProUCL provides a 95 UCL (95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL) of 0.00498 mg/kg. Use of the 95 UCL
value as the EPC for datasets where ProUCL will derive one is consistent with EPCs for other
COPCs/COPECs datasets. Based on this, ERM proposes to use the 95 UCL of 0.00498 mg/kg for the
Lakebed background HCB concentration.

4 January 2022 Response via email from Wendy O’Brien: Brian [Sanchez], Bill [Brattin], and I have
discussed your proposal and are in agreement with using the approach you’ve outlined [below] for
deriving HCB background values.

UPLAND BACKGROUND DATA

sys_sample_code

chemical_name
report_result
_text
report_result
_value
report_result
_unit
1/2 DL for
NDs
UPS-6-SS-01-101315 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
UPS-8-SS-01-101315 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0022 0.0022 mg/kg 0.0011
UPS-9-SS-01-101315 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
UPN-2-SS-01-101415 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
UPN-4-SS-01-101415 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0024 0.0024 mg/kg 0.0012
UPN-6-SS-01-101415 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0024 0.0024 mg/kg 0.0012
UPN-7-SS-01-101415 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
UPN-9-SS-01-101415 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
UPN-10-SS-01-101415 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0025 0.0025 mg/kg 0.00125
UPS-1-SS-01-101215 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
UPS-4-SS-01-101215 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
UPS-2-SS-01-101215 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
UPSE-8-SS-01-093015 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0022 0.0022 mg/kg 0.0011
UPSE-6-SS-01-093015 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
UPSE-5-SS-01-100115 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0022 0.0022 mg/kg 0.0011
UPSE-3-SS-01-100115 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0022 0.0022 mg/kg 0.0011
UPSE-1-SS-01-100115 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
UPSE-10-SS-01-093015 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0022 0.0022 mg/kg 0.0011
Mean 0.00115
Median 0.00115
02/25/2022
8

LAKEBED BACKGROUND DATA

sys_sample_code

chemical_name
report_result
_text
report_result
_value
report_result
_unit
1/2 DL
for NDs
LBB-7-SS-01-100815 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0024 0.0024 mg/kg 0.0012
LBB-5-SS-01-100915 Hexachlorobenzene 0.0032 0.0032 mg/kg 0.0032
LBB-3-SS-01-100915 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
LBB-1-SS-01-100915 Hexachlorobenzene 0.0087 0.0087 mg/kg 0.0087
LBSE-5-SS-01-100615 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0029 0.0029 mg/kg 0.00145
LBSE-9-SS-01-100715 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0028 0.0028 mg/kg 0.0014
LBSE-10-SS-01-100715 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0030 0.003 mg/kg 0.0015
LBB-10-SS-01-100815 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0028 0.0028 mg/kg 0.0014
LBB-9-SS-01-100815 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0028 0.0028 mg/kg 0.0014
LBN-4-SS-01-100215 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0027 0.0027 mg/kg 0.00135
LBN-6-SS-01-100515 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0029 0.0029 mg/kg 0.00145
LBN-8-SS-01-100515 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0027 0.0027 mg/kg 0.00135
LBN-9-SS-01-100515 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0027 0.0027 mg/kg 0.00135
LBN-10-SS-01-100515 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0028 0.0028 mg/kg 0.0014
LBSE-1-SS-01-100615 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
LBSE-3-SS-01-100615 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0023 0.0023 mg/kg 0.00115
LBN-2-SS-01-100215 Hexachlorobenzene < 0.0032 0.0032 mg/kg 0.0016
Mean 0.0019
Median 0.0014
95% KM
(Chebyshev)
UCL

0.00498

PART 3. 28 December 2021 EPA Responses to ERM Questions (sent 9 December 2021) on
Agency Comments
ERM questions are provided below in black font, EPA responses are provided in blue font, and ERM
responses to the exchange are provided in green font.
1. COPC Selection discussion in Section 3:
a. The suggested revisions by the Agencies remove the description of how the SLRA
COPC selection differed from the BHHRA COPC selection. It was not EPA’s intent to
remove a description of how the methods differed, just the results.
b. We recommend referencing the SLRA and summarizing the conclusions, which were
that constituents were identified in solids, water, and air that require further evaluation
in the BHHRA, without additional detail. SLRA COPCs lists not included/discussed.
Agree.
c. Then describe the BHHRA COPC selection. The summary statistics in the COPC
tables in Section 3 are based on the BHHRA datasets, not the SLRA datasets. These
tables can be moved to Appendix D. Agree.
d. Only the final, post-refinement COPC lists will be shown in Section 3. Constituents with
02/25/2022
9

0 detects in a PRI will not be carried through the risk tables. Agree.
e. Surface water COPC selection: We need to clarify/confirm whether the one PRI 1 SW
sample should be retained in the COPC selection and in PRI 5 SW datasets
(comments in Section 2.4.4 and elsewhere).
EPA recommends that all COPCs in surface water that are identified in samples from
PRI-1 be retained. This recommendation is based on the logic that surface water from
the ditches continues to flow into the active ponds, even though most of the ditches are
now covered. If concentrations in the ponds are so low that an analyte would not have
been selected as a COPC without the PRI-1 data, then the risk calculations will show a
very low risk.
For consistency with the strategy recommended for sediment samples from the un-
covered section of PRI-1, EPA suggests that the one sample of surface water from the
un-covered section of PRI-1 should not be combined with water samples from PRI-5
when calculating exposure values, since it might result in an inappropriate bias high for
PRI-5. As with sediment, the document should state that risks to humans from
exposure to un-covered PRI-1 media (sediment and water) are not quantified in the
HHRA because human exposure is not expected.
2. Chromium in solids:
a. Please provide us with the policy that says that USEPA requires unspeciated
chromium in soil to be evaluated as 100% hexavalent chromium.
Region 8 does not believe there is any formal Agency guidance which states that un-
speciated chromium in soil or other solids must be assumed to be 100% Cr(VI) in the
baseline assessment. The issue is whether or not there is a proper basis for using
some number lower than 100%. In the absence of a valid basis for some lower
number, use of 100% as a screening calculation is appropriate.
ERM RESPONSE: ERM agrees that a valid basis for selecting a specific percentage (i.e.
0, 100, or a value in between) of chromium in the hexavalent form in solids is lacking.
Therefore the risk calculations have been updated using 100 percent for a screening
version. As noted in Section 6, this assumption significantly increases the contribution of
chromium to overall risk and increases some receptor ILCRs to greater than 1 x 10-5.
b. The stated concern is that Cr(III) may be oxidized to Cr(VI) by Cl2 in air (in stack
emissions) and water. Cr(VI) was detected in only a few surface water samples, which
may indicate that there is not extensive oxidation occurring in water that would affect
underlying soil, or conditions that promote oxidation of chromium in the soil itself. In
addition, this does not apply to PRI areas where wastewater has not been transported
or stored (buffer zone areas). It seems reasonable to exclude these buffer zone areas
from the 100% Cr(VI) assumption. This is supported by a comparison of PRI EPCs to
background EPCs, which indicates chromium concentrations are similar to background
in these PRIs.
EPA’s mention of the potential that Cr(III) might be oxidized to Cr(VI) by chlorine was
intended simply as an additional reason why an assumption of 0% Cr(VI) in the
baseline calculations is not appropriate.

02/25/2022
10

EPA agrees that the speciation data for surface water 1 indicate that oxidation of Cr(III)
to Cr(VI) is not extensive in that medium. EPA also agrees that total chromium in the
buffer areas is very similar to background. However, it is not entirely obvious how
these observations can be used to derive a defensible quantitative Site-specific
estimate of Cr(VI) levels in soil or sediment. Please see additional discussion below.
c. For our reference/example, could you provide links to HHRAs for sites without
significant/known Cr(VI) releases where soil or sediment total chromium
concentrations were assumed to be 100 percent Cr(VI)? This will help us make the
USM BHHRA consistent with other similar evaluations.
EPA Region 8 does not always utilize screening results for total chromium in the
baseline assessment. For example, the human health risk assessment for the Bonita
Peak site (https://semspub.epa.gov/work/08/100006501.pdf) assumed a value of 10%
Cr(VI), based on professional judgement. However, at another site in Region 8 (not yet
released for public review), screening calculations based on 100% Cr(VI) are
presented in the baseline section, and uncertainty due to the use of the conservative
assumption is discussed in the uncertainty section.
DISCUSSION. To clarify, EPA Region 8 does not consider it realistic to think that
chromium in Site soil or sediment is actually 100% Cr(VI), and agrees that any risk
calculations based on this intentionally conservative assumption will almost certainly
overestimate the true risk from that COPC. The concern is that there are no Site-
specific speciation data for soil or sediment. If there were, EPA would certainly support
risk calculations based on those data. Choosing a value of zero % Cr(VI) without any
speciation data is not acceptable.
If ERM wishes to propose a strategy for the baseline calculations that is based on a value for
Cr(VI) that is less than 100% but greater than zero %, EPA is willing to consider that strategy.
In this regard, EPA will require that ERM sent draft text presenting the basis of the values for
review before committing to that strategy.
• If EPA determines that the basis is adequate, the baseline calculations may be performed
using those values. In this case, the uncertainty section should present calculations based
on the assumption of 100% Cr(VI) to demonstrate that even if the value selected were too
low, it does not significantly alter the risk findings.
• If EPA does not feel the basis for a proposed lower value for Cr(VI) is adequate, then the
baseline calculations must be based on the conservative assumption of 100% Cr(VI), and
the uncertainty section should discuss why this value is likely to be too high and present
the results based on a lower value.
EPA would like to reiterate that, because the results in the draft HHRA (see Table 7-12) indicate
that chromium is a minor contributor to total risk and there is no important difference in outcome
between assuming 100% and 0% Cr(VI), choosing to perform calculations based on a value for
Cr(VI) that is not easily defensible may be counter- productive. Calculations based on
questionable values and assumptions could engender confusion, doubts and distrust, and EPA
sees very little reason to create the opportunity for such negative reactions when the outcome of
the assessment at this Site is virtually independent of the strategy.
In the future, if calculations based on the conservative screening approach are not

1 There are 18 (not “a few”) paired samples with detects for both Cr(VI) and Cr(total).
02/25/2022
11

considered to be adequate, clearly the best strategy is to collect adequate speciation
data to avoid this issue altogether.
EPA also noted errors in Table 7-12.
ERM RESPONSE: See response to Comment 2 in Part 1 regarding chromium speciation of
solids in the USM RI.
ERM notes that the Bonita Peak HHRA does not provide any basis for using 10 percent
hexavalent/90 percent trivalent chromium to assess chromium risk. Requiring a basis for the
USM Site BHHRA is inconsistent with this precedent. Nonetheless, to avoid unnecessary
effort and delays, 100 percent Cr(VI) is assumed in the updated calculations and results
presented in Section 6. Risks were also calculated for selected PRI Areas assuming 10
percent Cr(VI) and 90 percent Cr(III). These results are discussed in the uncertainty section.
The errors in Table 7-12 were transcription errors; the replacement table (now Table) has
been revised using the 10/90 assumption noted.
3. PRI 13 comment in Section 2.4.2.12: “As noted below, it is not statistically appropriate to
combine the PRI-13 samples and the GSLIC samples into one dataset. A revised strategy
is presented below in Section 6.4.” ERM question: Section 6.4 applies to the Brine Shrimp
Workers. Other receptors (Adult Recreational Visitor and Resource Manager) visit PRI 13.
Should we also change the EPCs for them with the assumption that they do not spend time
in the GSLIC? Currently, the EPCs used for these receptors are based on the combined
shoreline and GSLIC dataset.
EPA suggests using the same approach for Resource Managers and Recreational
Visitors as for Brine Shrimpers. That is, assume that risk to these populations depends
on the fraction of time each population spends in contact with the GSLIC, and provide
results assuming 0%, 10% and 20%. Alternatively, if risks based on the 20% assumption
are below a level of concern, for simplicity you may present that result only and note that
risks would be lower if contact with the GSLIC was less frequent.
4. Supplemental Comments on background values
ERM RESPONSE: Item 4 comments and resolution are included in Part 2 to keep the
discussion of background datasets and EPCs together.

ERM 7272 E. Indian School Road
Suite 108
Scottsdale, AZ
85251
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
www.erm.com
Page 1 of 7
22 April 2022
Via Electronic Mail
Mr. Ken Wangerud
Remedial Project Manager
Superfund Remedial Program
USEPA Region 8 – EPR-SR
1595 Wynkoop Street
Denver, CO 80202-1129
Subject: Response to the Agencies’ Technical Comments on the Final OU-1 Baseline Human
Health Risk Assessment
Dear Mr. Wangerud:
The Final OU-1 Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment was submitted via email to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) on 25 March 2022. Consolidated Agency
Comments were provided on behalf of the USEPA and Utah Department of Environmental Quality
(collectively “the Agencies”) via e-mail on 15 April 2022.
This letter presents ERM’s responses to the Agencies’ comments, which were provided within the
text of the report. Each of the Agencies’ comments is shown below and numbered in the order
provided. Recommended text from the Agencies is shown in italic font, followed by ERM’s
response in green font.
1. Section 2.1: EPA made a recommendation to add text that emphasized that most samples
were analyzed for a very wide range of contaminants. Add the following sentence after the
text in yellow: Most samples were analyzed for a very wide range of potential
contaminants, including volatile organics, semi-volatile organics (including dioxins, furans,
and PCBs), metals, and other inorganics.
ERM RESPONSE: Done
2. Section 3.1: This section omits the original description of how the initial screen was
performed. EPA did not recommend that deletion and thinks it should be added back in by
inserting the text below (taken in large part from the preceding draft) after the first
sentence.
The initial COPC identification was performed by comparing the maximum detected
concentration of an analyte in a given medium against its respective RBSL. For this
screening step, maximum detected concentrations in solids were “corrected” to account
for differences between bulk and fine in accordance with the Bulk vs Fine Technical Memo
for OU-1 RI Phase 1A (Appendix J to ERM 2016a). If the corrected maximum detected
concentration exceeded the RBSL (Max Detect / RBSL ratio > 1), the constituent was
identified as a COPC. Exceptions to this were:
ERM 22 April 2022
Page 2 of 7
-Bioaccumulative compounds (mercury, hexachlorobutadiene, hexachlorobenzene,
pentachlorobenzene, 1,2,4,5- tetrachlorobenzene, PCBs, TCDD and other
polychlorinated dioxins and furans) were carried through as COPCs in all PRI Areas
even if the maximum detected concentration was less than the RBSL
-Essential nutrients, which were excluded from consideration as COPCs.
RBSLs used in the SLRA TM were taken from the November 2020 RSL tables distributed
by USEPA (2020a). RBSL values were based on the lesser of the hazard quotient = 0.1
and cancer risk level of 10-6 for the following:
-Ambient air – USEPA Industrial Air Regional Screening Levels (RSLs)
-Solid media (soil/sediment) – USEPA Industrial Soil RSLs
-Aqueous media (surface water and groundwater) – USEPA Residential Tap Water
RSLs
ERM RESPONSE: Text was moved from the main OU-1 BHHRA text to Appendix D as agreed to
in the Response to Comments on the Draft OU-1 BHHRA (see Comment 1 in Part 3 of Appendix
H). For clarification: 1) Initial COPC Selection refers to selection in the OU-1 and OU-2 SLRA
reports using most recent RSLs at the time. 2) Datasets for solids, surface water, and groundwater
are different in the BHHRA from those in the OU-1 SLRA, and COPC selection was redone in the
BHHRA using these updated datasets and most recent RSLs at the time. 3) COPC selection was
then refined as described in Section 3.2. ERM has provided a revised Section 3.1 at the end of
this letter that includes text requested in this comment.
3. Section 5.3: Replace [the following] text: “At this Site, analysis of Cr(VI) in solid media was
not included as it was not assumed to be present in significant amounts during RI
planning. Solids samples were analyzed and reported as total chromium. Because Cr(VI)
is more toxic than Cr(III), an agreement was made with USEPA to evaluate chromium risk
assuming that 100 percent of the total chromium is Cr(VI) even though it is certainly
significantly less.” with the following: At this Site, samples of solids (soils, sediments,
waste piles) were analyzed for total chromium, which includes both Cr(III) and Cr(VI), but
does not provide information on the relative amount of each. Because Cr(VI) is more toxic
than Cr(III), risk calculations for exposures to solids conservatively assumed that 100% of
total chromium was Cr(VI), even though it is likely that much of the total chromium is
Cr(III).
ERM RESPONSE: Done. ERM notes that the Phase 1A SAP, written by USEPA, did not include
speciation of solids for Cr(III) and Cr(VI). If it had, site data would be available for this evaluation.
4. Section 6.0: Move this sentence underneath heading 6.1: “All risks calculated for each receptor scenario are
presented in Appendix G. The results are summarized in Table 6-1.”
ERM RESPONSE: Done.
ERM 22 April 2022
Page 3 of 7
5. Table 6-1: In addition, EPA has spot checked Table 6-1 vs Appendix G and found several
issues that need correction, as follows:
a. Tables G-16, G-22, and G-25. The bottom 3 lines of each of these Appendix G
tables (both CTE and RME) appear to have some sort of double counting of the
risk from Air (facility), and this results in two different “Grand Totals”. In all cases,
Table 6-1 shows the first “Grand Total” value, not the second, and this appears to
be correct. It appears to EPA that the last 3 lines of these 3 Appendix G tables are
incorrect and should be deleted. Check and correct as needed.
b. In Table 6-1 beginning with “PRI-14/Recreational Visitor – Adult” through the end
of the table, the Appendix G Table that is listed is incorrect. “PRI-14/Recreational
Visitor – Adult” has “G-27” listed but the results for this PRI/receptor are in “G-28”
and so on. Double check and correct the Appendix G table references in Table 6-
1 as needed.
ERM RESPONSE: a) The last three rows in Tables G-16, G-22, and G-25 are not in the source files,
and they have been deleted. b) Done.
6. Section 6.2.4.3 Discussion of Hypothetical Future Risk from Groundwater Ingestion. [First
sentence] is inconsistent with the first sentence in Section 6.2.4.1. EPA believes the text
should read, "noncancer hazards are above an HI of 1 in all wells..." AND [First bullet]
revise to read as follows: HIs in background wells and LAZ wells (assumed to be
unimpacted by Site operations) are influenced mainly by arsenic and fluoride. All values
are at or below an HI of 1.
ERM RESPONSE: First revision done; second revision made as follows: HIs in background wells
and LAZ wells (assumed to be unimpacted by Site operations) are influenced mainly by arsenic and
fluoride concentrations; all HI values are at or above 1 in wells without sample dilution issues
7. Section 6.8.2 last sentence. Revise as follows: This practice tends to result in an
overestimate of risk.
ERM RESPONSE: Done.
8. Section 7.2. EPA comments stressed that COPC selection is NOT a source of uncertainty.
Risk at a Site is due to all chemicals that are present. The practice of excluding minor
contributors from the calculations is a way to simplify the risk assessment, but does not
imply that the true risk is that due only to the retained COPCs. Accordingly, if the COPC
strategy were to be discussed in the uncertainty section, the focus should be on the
question "Are risks significantly underestimated due to exclusion of non-COPCs?". ERM
has ignored this comment and continues to discuss inclusion of low level COPCs as a
source of overestimation of risk. This discussion is invalid and inappropriate. Delete all of
Section 7.2.
ERM RESPONSE: Done. Deletion of Section 7.2 results in an associated change to Section 2.2.1,
second to last paragraph, to include only part of the first sentence: “Constituents that were never
ERM 22 April 2022
Page 4 of 7
detected, but with MDLs exceeding the RBSLs, were not carried through the risk assessment.” In
addition, subsequent Section 7 subsections are renumbered accordingly. Tables 7-1 through 7-6
have also been removed, and Tables 7-7 through 7-10 have been renumbered to 7-1 through
7-4.
9. Section 7.4.1.1. Delete the last sentence.
ERM RESPONSE: Done. New section number is 7.3.1.1.
10. Section 7.4.1.2. Revise the last sentence of the first paragraph by deleting “which is
unlikely and results in an overestimation of exposure.”
ERM RESPONSE: Done. New section number is 7.3.1.2.
11. Section 7.4.2.2. Delete this text from the first paragraph: “This substitution does not have
any basis in analytical or environmental chemistry, and may overestimate the TEQ value.
No TEQ components were detected in plant tissue samples, and TEQs were not
calculated.” Substituting 1/2 the DL is a well-established procedure for deriving the
minimally biased result. Treating ND = 0 is highly likely to result in an underestimation of
true risk. This approach has uncertainty but cannot be identified as a likely source of
overestimation. The statement that TEQ was not calculated for plant tissue is inconsistent
with the next statement.
ERM RESPONSE: Although the ½ DL substitution was used for a long time, better methods for
treating non-detects are available and generally used. Even so, the Agencies persist in requiring this
practice for calculation of TEQ values. These statements have been deleted as requested. New
section number is 7.3.2.2.
12.Section 7.4.2.3 Bioavailability of COPCs. Regarding the Finley et al. study (2009): “This
study meets most of the experimental design requirements developed later by USEPA
(USEPA 2015c), the main exception being measurement of dioxins only in the liver and
not additional tissues such as adipose in the test animals.” Agency comment: The criteria
call for tests in both species [rats and swine]. Revise this sentence as follows: This study
meets most of the experimental design requirements developed later by USEPA (USEPA
2015c), the main exceptions being 1) TEQ was measured only in the liver and not
additional tissues such as adipose, and 2) results are available only for rats and not for
swine.
ERM RESPONSE: ERM’s review of USEPA 2015c failed to find a requirement to run the study using
both rats and swine. Requirement 5, Selection of Animal Model for Predicting RBA in Humans,
states: “There is no general consensus on the preferred animal model for estimating RBA for
PCDD/F. RBA assays for congener mixtures in soil have been conducted in rats and swine, and
these two assay yield different estimates of RBATEQ.” ERM believes the statement in the Final OU-1
BHHRA is correct and does not require revision. New section number is 7.3.2.3.
13. Section 7.4.2.3 Bioavailability of COPCs. Regarding this sentence: “The RBA range for
TEQ in the Finley study using soil from the Site is consistent with or higher than ranges
seen in swine studies.” This is irrelevant. There have been no studies of TEQ RBA for US
ERM 22 April 2022
Page 5 of 7
Mag soils in swine. You can't compare RBA in US Mag soils measured in rats to RBA for
soils from other sites measured in swine. Delete this sentence.
ERM RESPONSE: ERM notes that the Draft OU-1 BHHRA provided additional information on other
RBA studies that supported the conclusion that 100 percent RBA is not realistic, and that this
information was removed per the agencies’ comments. The Budinsky study and others provide
additional context for the selection of the RBA value used in the uncertainty evaluation. Had that text
been retained, this statement would be more easily understood. The sentence has been deleted as
requested.
14. Section 7.4.2.3 Bioavailability of COPCs. Regarding this sentence: “Using the median
TEQ RBA of 38 percent from the Site-specific Finley et al. study is a more realistic
assumption than the default of 100 percent, which results in an overestimate of risk from
soil ingestion.” [This] sentence is too strong, especially when viewed in light of the data of
Table 7-8. Revise this sentence to read as follows: Using the median TEQ RBA of 38
percent from the Site-specific Finley et al. study may be a more realistic assumption than
the default of 100 percent, which likely tends to result in an overestimate of TEQ risk from
soil ingestion.
ERM RESPONSE: Done.
15. Section 7.4.2.3 Bioavailability of COPCs. Regarding this sentence in the last paragraph:
“As shown [in Table 7-8], using a TEQ RBA of 38 percent reduces risk by up to 45 percent
in most PRI Areas and cumulative scenarios with the highest ILCRs.” This statement
substantially overstates the difference between the two strategies. Replace this sentence
with the following: As shown, in most cases, use of an RBA of 38% results in no change or
only a small change (<= 2 x 10-6) in ILCR from TEQ, although the difference may be up to
2 x 10-5 in a few cases. These differences are all sufficiently small that this is not an
important source of uncertainty for risk management decision making at this site.
ERM RESPONSE: It is true that in PRIs 2 and 4, which have the highest RME ILCRs (2 x 10-5 and 9
x 10-6, respectively), applying an RBA of 38 percent reduces the RME ILCR by 45 percent in PRI 2
and 34 percent in PRI 4. Some PRIs with relatively high ILCRs (such as PRIs 6 and 11) are not
driven by TEQ and so the difference is not as significant. PRIs with somewhat lower RME ILCRs,
such as PRIs 5 and 7 show 27 and 50 percent reduction in the RME ILCR using 38 percent RBA.
ERM has deleted the text as requested and made the following revision: “As shown, in most cases,
use of an RBA of 38 percent results in an average change in ILCR of approximately 2 x 10-6,
although the difference is higher for PRIs with the highest ILCRs (at least 1 x 10-5 in PRI 2 and for
cumulative scenarios RME-1 and RME-2). Cancer risks estimated using this site-specific RBA
underscore that ILCRs are well within the lower end of the risk management range.”
16. Section 7.5.3, last paragraph. “These calculations show that when all chromium is
assumed to be Cr(VI), it can be a significant contributor to the ILCR. When a more realistic
proportion of Cr(VI) is assumed, it can result in ILCRs that are noticeably lower and likely
more representative of actual risk.” Revise this text to read as follows: These calculations
show that the difference in ILCR between the assumption of 100% Cr(VI) vs. 10% Cr(VI) is
about 1 x 10-6 to 5 x 10-6, depending on the exposure scenario. While this may
occasionally constitute a significant difference in the total ILCR for some scenarios, the
ERM 22 April 2022
Page 6 of 7
absolute difference is relatively small and is not a significant source of uncertainty in risk-
management decision-making.
ERM RESPONSE: Done. New section number is 7.4.3.
A revised Section 3.1 is attached for review, and corresponding revisions have been made to the
text for Appendix D. Upon approval of these responses and revisions, ERM will finalize the Final
OU-1 BHHRA and submit to USEPA and the State of Utah.
Please contact me at [phone] if you have questions regarding these responses.
Sincerely,
David J. Abranovic, P.E.
Project Coordinator
DJA/JN/_____
cc: Rob Hartman, US Magnesium
ERM 22 April 2022
Page 7 of 7
Section 3.1 Revised Text
3.1 Initial COPC Selection
Initial COPCs for solids, surface water, and groundwater were selected in the OU-1 SLRA (ERM
2017b), and COPCs in air were selected in the OU-2 SLRA (ERM 2017d) using data collected in
Phase 1A and Phase 1A-B for air, solids (surface and subsurface samples), surface water, and
groundwater. Air, surface water, and groundwater COPCs were selected on a Site-wide basis, and
solids COPCs were selected on a PRI Area basis. COPCs were identified by comparing the
maximum detected concentration of an analyte in a given medium against its respective RBSL.
For this screening step, maximum detected concentrations in solids were “corrected” to account
for differences in concentration between bulk and fine fractions in accordance with the Bulk vs.
Fine Technical Memo for OU-1 RI Phase 1A (Appendix J to ERM 2016a). If the corrected
maximum detected concentration exceeded the RBSL (Max Detect / RBSL ratio > 1), the
constituent was identified as a COPC. Exceptions to this were:
Bioaccumulative compounds (mercury, hexachlorobutadiene, hexachlorobenzene,
pentachlorobenzene, 1,2,4,5- tetrachlorobenzene, PCBs, TCDD and other polychlorinated
dioxins and furans) were carried through as COPCs in all PRI Areas even if the maximum
detected concentration was less than the RBSL
Essential nutrients, which were excluded from consideration as COPCs
RBSLs used in the OU-1 SLRA were taken from the May 2016 RSL tables distributed by USEPA
(2016b) and RBSLs used in the OU-2 SLRA were taken from the June 2017 RSL tables (USEPA
2017). RBSL values were based on the lesser of the hazard quotient = 0.1 and cancer risk level of
10-6 for the following:
Ambient air – USEPA Industrial Air RSLs
Solid media (soil/sediment) – USEPA Industrial Soil RSLs
Aqueous media (surface water and groundwater) – USEPA Residential Tap Water RSLs
Additional solids, surface water, and groundwater data were collected after the SLRA was
conducted, and applicable data were incorporated into the BHHRA datasets as described in
Section 2.4. A complete matrix of data collection by PRI Area and phase is found in Appendix D,
Table D-1. The BHHRA datasets described in Section 2.4 were compiled into summary statistics
tables, and these tables were used for COPC selection. COPCs were selected using the updated
BHHRA datasets using the method described above, with RBSLs updated as needed using the
RSLs distributed by USEPA in November 2020 (USEPA 2020a). These pre-refinement COPC
tables (Tables D-2 through D-17) for air, solids, and surface water are found in Appendix D.
Groundwater COPC selection and refinement are included in Appendix B.