Figure 3-1 Total Suspended Solids Concentration [TSS ... · PDF fileSource: TAMS/Gradient...
Transcript of Figure 3-1 Total Suspended Solids Concentration [TSS ... · PDF fileSource: TAMS/Gradient...
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-1Total Suspended Solids Concentration [TSS],
Upper Hudson River Water Column Transects
0
100
200
300
400
TSS
(m
g/L
)
1 2 3 4 5 6 34
56
78
Transect Number
StationNumber
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-2Particulate Organic Carbon [POC],
Upper Hudson River Water Column Transects
Note: POC concentration calculated from weight loss on ignition data.
0
5
10
15
20
1 2 3 4 5 6 34
56
78
TSS
(m
g/L
)
Transect Number
StationNumber
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-3Two-Phase Partition Coefficients to Particulate
Matter (KP,a) for Water-Column Transects
Notes:
a. No temperature correction.
b. Plot includes congeners having at least three samples quantitated for both dissolved and particulate phases.
c. For some congeners with skewed sample distributions the median may be below the confidence interval on the mean.
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
KP
,a(L
/kg)
14
6
89
10
1215
16
1819
22
2526
27
2829
31
3740
41
4447
49
5253
56
6670
77
8283
84
8587
91
9295
97
99101
105
107118
119
128136
137
138141
149
151153
170
201
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Uncorrected median value95% confidence interval on mean
Legend:
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-4Two-Phase Partition Coefficients to Particulate Organic
Carbon (KPOC,a) for Water-Column Transects
Notes:
a. No temperature correction.
b. Plot includes congeners having at least three samples quantitated for both dissolved and particulate phases.
KP
OC
,a(L
/kg)
PCB Congener (BZ#)
10,000,000
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
6 10 16 22 27 31 41 49 56 77 84 91 97 105 119 137 149 170
4 9 15 19 26 29 40 47 53 70 83 87 95 101 118 136 141 1531 8 12 18 25 28 37 44 52 66 82 85 92 99 107 128 138 151 201
Uncorrected median value95% confidence interval on mean
Legend:
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-5Observed vs Theoretical Partitioning to Particulate Organic
Carbon for PCB Congeners in the Freshwater Hudson
Note: Theoretical values from Mackay et al. (1992).
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
The
oret
ical
log[
KP
OC
(L/k
g)]
4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
Average Observed log[KPOC (L/kg)]
Line of 100%
Agreement
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-6KPOC,a Estimates vs. Water Temperature for BZ#52,
Hudson River Water-Column Transect Samples
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
Unc
orre
cted
KP
OC
,a(L
/kg)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Temperature (°C)
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-7Variation in log KP,a by Transect for BZ#44
Note: Estimates without temperature correction.
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
Log
[K
p,a
(L/k
g)]
1 2 3 4 5 6 Transect
5 188.5
3 195.8
4 194.4
6 181.3
8 156.6
Station River MileLegend:
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-8Variation in log KPOC,a by Transect for BZ#44
Note: Estimates without temperature correction.
5.2
5.6
6
6.4
6.8
Log
[K
PO
C,a
(L/k
g)]
1 2 3 4 5 6 Transect
5 188.5
3 195.8
4 194.4
6 181.3
8 156.6
Station River MileLegend:
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-9Variation in log KP,a by River Mile for BZ#44
Note: Estimates without temperature correction.
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
log
[KP
,a(L
/kg)
]
200 190 180 170 160 150
River Mile
1234
5
Legend:Transect Event
6
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-10Variation in log KPOC,a by River Mile for BZ#44
Note: Estimates without temperature correction.
5.2
5.6
6.0
6.4
6.8
log
[KP
OC
,a(L
/kg)
]
200 190 180 170 160 150 River Mile
1234
5
Legend:Transect Event
6
Figure 3-11Temperature Correction Slope Estimates for
PCB Capillary Column Peaks
200
600
1000
1400
1800
Slop
e E
stim
ate
for
log
of P
arti
tion
Coe
ffic
ient
on
Tem
pera
ture
(°K
elvi
n)
6c4c
4d 5c 7c 8c 9c 10c12c
13b14a
14c
1a 2a 3a 4a 5a 6a 7a 8a 9a 10a 11a 12a 13a 16a
17a1b 2b 3b 4b 5b1
5b26b 7b 8b 9b 10b 11b 12b 15a18a
19a
Capillary Column Peak
TAMS/ GradientSource: Warren et al. (1987)
Figure 3-12Equilibration KP,a Estimates for PCB Partitioning
in Hudson River Transect Samples
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
Log
[K
P,a
(L/k
g)]
122
2526
2837
4041
4447
5253
6670
8283
8597
118
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Transect MedianEquilibration Median
Legend:
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
Log
[K
P,a
(L/k
g)]
16
12
1516
18
1922
25
2631
40
4144
47
4952
56
6670
83
8485
87
9192
97
99101
107
118136
151
170
PCB Congener (BZ#)
A. Transect 2
B. Transect 6
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Transect MedianEquilibration Median
Legend:
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-13KP,a Estimates for Hudson River Transect 1
Note: Estimates without temperature correction.
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
KP
,a(L
/kg)
200 180 160 140 120 100
River Mile
BZ#1
BZ#28
BZ#52
BZ#70
BZ#101
Legend:
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-14KP,a Estimates for Hudson River Transect 4
Note: Estimates without temperature correction.
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
KP
,a(L
/kg)
200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 River Mile
BZ#1
BZ#28
BZ#52
BZ#70
BZ#101
Legend:
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-15KP,a Estimates for Hudson River Transect 6
Note: Estimates without temperature correction.
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
KP
,a(L
/kg)
200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60
River Mile
BZ#28
BZ#52
BZ#70
BZ#101
Legend:
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-16Percent Deviations in log KPOC,a Estimates for PCB
Congeners by River Mile
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60
Ave
rage
Per
cent
Dev
iati
on f
rom
Mea
n
River Mile
Mono-TrichlorinatedCongeners
Tetra-OctachlorinatedCongeners
Legend:
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-19Median Values of log KPOC,a Corrected to 20 °C
4
5
6
7
Log
[K
PO
C,a
(L/k
g)]
14
6
78
9
1012
15
1618
19
2225
26
2728
29
3137
40
4144
47
4952
53
5666
70
7782
83
8485
87
9192
95
9799101
105107
118
119122
128
136137
138
141149
151
153170
171
177180
183
187191
194
201
PCB Congener (BZ #)
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-20PCB Congener KPOC,a Estimates for
Hudson River Flow-Averaged vs. Transect Samples
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
log
[KP
OC
,a(L
/kg)
] F
low
-Ave
rage
d Sa
mpl
es
5 5.5 6 6.5 7
log [KPOC,a (L/kg)], Transect Estimates at 20°°C
Line of 100%
Agreement
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-21Relationship of Dissolved and Particulate Organic Carbon Concentrations in Upper Hudson River Transect Samples
Note: [POC] calculated from weight-loss-on-ignition data.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
[DO
C]
(mg/
L)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
[POC] (mg/L)
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-22Estimated Average Percent Distribution of PCB Congeners
among Dissolved, POC, and DOC Phasesin Upper Hudson River Water-Column Transect Data
Note: Percentages calculated at mean concentrations observed in Upper Hudson River of DOC = 4.79 mg/L and POC = 1.40 mg/L.
Dissolved (40%)
Dissolved (44%)POC (28%)
DOC (28%)
BZ #1
POC (9%)
DOC (51%)
BZ #4
Dissolved (49%)POC (46%)
DOC (5%)
BZ#52
DOC (7%)
Dissolved (20%)
POC (73%)
BZ#138
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
10/1 10/27 11/22 12/18 1/13 2/8 3/5 3/31
Flow Reported by the USGS for October 1, 1991 through March 31, 1992
Ft. Edward
Stillwater
Waterford
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date of Measurement (Water Year 1992)
Legend:
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
4/1 4/27 5/23 6/18 7/14 8/9 9/4 9/30
Flow Reported by the USGS for April 1, 1992 through September 30, 1992
Ft. Edward
Stillwater
Waterford
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date of M easurement (W ater Year 1992)
Legend:
Figure 3-23Comparison of USGS Measured Flows at Fort Edward,
Stillwater and W aterford for Water Year 1992
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000
Per
cent
Res
idua
l Err
or
Stillwater Flow (cfs)
Source: NYS Thruway Authority, Office of Canals (1994)
For Stillwater Flow < 4,000 cfs:97.5% Quantile = 12.2%2.5% Quantile = -18.5%
For 4,000 cfs < Stillwater Flow < 6,000 cfs:97.5% Quantile = 13.5%2.5% Quantile = -10.8%
For Stillwater Flow > 6,000 cfs:97.5% Quantile = 11.2%2.5% Quantile = -8.5%
Figure 3-24Stillwater Low-Flow Model C Prediction Uncertainty
as a Function of Stillwater Flow
TAMS/Gradient
a.
b.
c.
Notes:
3 ,0 0 0
8 ,0 0 0
1 3 ,0 0 0
1 8 ,0 0 0
2 3 ,0 0 0
2 8 ,0 0 0
1 / 1 1 / 1 8 2 /5 2 / 2 3 3 / 1 3 3 /31
J a n u a r y 1 , 1 9 9 3 t o M a r c h 3 1 , 1993
M o d e l B
M o d e l D
Flo
w (
cfs)
D a te
L e g e n d :
3 ,0 0 0
5 ,0 0 0
7 ,0 0 0
9 ,0 0 0
1 1 ,0 0 0
1 3 ,0 0 0
1 5 ,0 0 0
4 / 1 4 / 1 9 5 / 7 5 / 2 5 6 /12 6 /30
A p r il 1 , 1 9 9 3 t o J u n e 3 0 , 1 9 9 3
M o d e l A
M o d e l B
M o d e l C
M o d e l D
Flo
w (
cfs)
D a t e
L e g e n d :
3 , 5 0 0
4 , 0 0 0
4 , 5 0 0
5 , 0 0 0
5 , 5 0 0
6 , 0 0 0
6 , 5 0 0
7 , 0 0 0
7 /1 7 / 1 9 8 /6 8 / 2 4 9 / 1 1 9 / 3 0
J u ly 1 , 1 9 9 3 t o S e p t e m b e r 3 0 , 1 9 9 3
M o d e l A
M o d e l B
M o d e l C
M o d e l D
Flo
w (
cfs
)
D a t e
L e g e n d :
F i g u r e 3 - 2 5C o m p a r i s o n o f F l o w s P r e d i c t e d b y S t i l lw a t e r
L o w F lo w M o d e l s ( F o r t E d w a r d F l o w < 8 ,0 0 0 c f s )
S o u r c e : TA M S /G rad ien t D atab ase T A M S / G r a d ie n t
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
1/1 1/13 1/26 2/8 2/20 3/5 3/18 3/31
January 1, 1993 to March 31, 1993
Model E
Model F
Model G
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date
Legend:
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
4/1 4/9 4/18 4/26 5/5 5/13 5/22 5/31
April 1, 1993 to May 31, 1993
Model E
Model F
Model G
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date
Legend:
Figure 3-26Comparison of Flows Predicted by Stillwater
High-Flow (Fort Edward Flow > 8,000 cfs) Models
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
3/1 3/6 3/12 3/18 3/24 3/29
March 1993
Model B (Low-Flow)
Model F (High-Flow)
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date
High FlowLow Flow
Legend:
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
5/1 5/6 5/12 5/18 5/24 5/29
May 1993
Model A (Low-Flow)
Model B (Low-Flow)
Model C (Low-Flow)
Model D (Low-Flow)
Model E (High-Flow)
Model F (High-Flow)
Model G (High-Flow)
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date
High Flow Low Flow
Legend:
Figure 3-27Comparison of Flows Predicted by Stillwater
Low-Flow (Fort Edward Flow < 8,000 cfs) andStillwater High-Flow (Fort Edward Flow > 8,000 cfs) Models
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
1/1 1/12 1/24 2/4 2/16 2/27 3/11 3/23
January 1, 1993 to March 31, 1993
Model H
Model I
Model J
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date
Legend:
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
4/1 4/12 4/24 5/5 5/17 5/28 6/9 6/21
April 1, 1993 to June 30, 1993
Model H
Model I
Model J
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date
Legend:
4 ,000
5 ,000
6 ,000
7 ,000
8 ,000
9 ,000
10,000
7/1 7/12 7/24 8 /4 8/16 8/27 9/8 9/20
July 1, 1993 to September 30, 1993
Model H
Model I
Model J
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date
Legend:
Figure 3-28Comparison of Flows Predicted by Waterford
Low-Flow (Fort Edward Flow < 8,000 cfs) Models
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
1 5 , 0 0 0
1 6 , 0 0 0
1 7 , 0 0 0
1 8 , 0 0 0
1 9 , 0 0 0
2 0 , 0 0 0
2 1 , 0 0 0
1 / 1 1 /1 2 1 / 2 4 2 / 4 2 / 1 6 2 /2 7 3 /1 1 3 / 2 3
J a n u a r y 1 , 1 9 9 3 t o M a r c h 3 1 , 1 9 9 3
M o d e l K
M o d e l L
M o d e l M
M o d e l N
Flo
w (
cfs
)
D a t e
L e g e n d :
1 0 , 0 0 0
2 0 , 0 0 0
3 0 , 0 0 0
4 0 , 0 0 0
5 0 , 0 0 0
4 / 1 4 /1 2 4 /2 4 5 / 5 5 /1 7 5 / 2 8
A p r i l 1 , 1 9 9 3 t o M a y 3 1 , 1 9 9 3
M o d e l K
M o d e l L
M o d e l M
M o d e l N
Flo
w (
cfs
)
D a t e
L e g e n d :
F i g u r e 3 - 2 9C o m p a r i s o n o f F l o w s P r e d i c t e d b y W a t e r f o r d
H ig h - F lo w ( F o r t E d w a r d F l o w > 8 , 0 0 0 c f s ) M o d e l s
S o u r c e : T A M S /G ra d i e n t D a t a b a s e T A M S / G r a d ie n t
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
5/1 5/6 5/12 5/18 5/24 5/29
May 1993
Model H (Low-Flow)
Model I (Low-Flow)
Model J (Low-Flow)
Model K (High-Flow)
Model L (High-Flow)
Model M (High-Flow)
Model N (High-Flow)
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date
High Flow
Low Flow
Legend:
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
3/1 3/6 3/12 3/18 3/24 3/29
March 1993
Model J (Low-Flow)
Model N (High-Flow)
Flo
w (
cfs)
Date
Low Flow High Flow
Legend:
Figure 3-30Comparison of Flows Predicted by Waterford
Low-Flow (Fort Edward Flow • 8,000 cfs) Models and WaterfordHigh-Flow (Fort Edward Flow > 8,000 cfs) Models
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/Gradient
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Total Measured Main-Stem Hudson River Suspended-Matter Load
Batten Kill Contributiona
Fish Creek Contributiona,b
Hoosic River Contributiona
Mohawk River Contributiona
15
0
15
2
15
4
15
6
15
8
16
0
16
2
16
4
16
6
16
8
17
0
17
2
17
4
17
6
17
8
18
0
18
2
18
4
18
6
18
8
19
0
19
2
19
4
19
6
19
8
20
0
20
2
Su
spen
ded
Sol
ids
Loa
din
g (k
g/s)
River Mile
Figure 3-32Suspended-Matter Loading in the Upper Hudson River - Transect 1 Low-Flow Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database, USGS (1993a, 1993b), and NYS Thruway Authority, Office of Canals (1994a, 1993) TAMS/ Gradient
Legend:
Note: a) T ributary river m ile designations correspond to poin t of confluence with the Hudson River. b) Fish Creek suspended matter load is estimated using the suspended solids value for the Batten Kill and a flow estim ate based on drainage basin area.
0
100
200
300
400
500
Total Measured Main-Stem Hudson RiverSuspended Matter Load
Batten Kill Contributiona
Fish Creek Contributiona,b
Hoosic River Contributiona
15
0
15
2
15
4
15
6
15
8
16
0
16
2
16
4
16
6
16
8
17
0
17
2
17
4
17
6
17
8
18
0
18
2
18
4
18
6
18
8
19
0
19
2
19
4
19
6
19
8
20
0
20
2
Su
spen
ded
Sol
ids
Loa
din
g (k
g/s)
R iver M ile
Figure 3-33Suspended-Matter Loading in the Upper Hudson River
Transect 3 - Transition between Low-Flow and High-Flow Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database, USGS (1993a, 1993b), and NYS Thruway Authority, Office of Canals (1994a, 1993) TAMS/ Gradient
Legend:
Note: a) T ributary river m ile designation s correspond to poin t of confluence with the Hudson River. b) Fish Creek suspended m atter load is estimated using the suspended solids value for the Batten Kill and a flow estim ate based on drainage basin area.
c) Scour Event due to on set of spring flood event in lower part of the Upper River.
Hoosic River Load Measured on 3/30/93
Hoosic River LoadMeasured on 3/27/93
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Total Measured Main-Stem Hudson RiverSuspended Matter Load
Batten Kill Contributiona
Fish Creek Contributiona,b
Hoosic River Contributiona
Mohawk River Contributiona
15
0
15
2
15
4
15
6
15
8
16
0
16
2
16
4
16
6
16
8
17
0
17
2
17
4
17
6
17
8
18
0
18
2
18
4
18
6
18
8
19
0
19
2
19
4
19
6
19
8
20
0
20
2
Su
spen
ded
Sol
ids
Loa
din
g (k
g/s)
R iver M ile
Figure 3-34Suspended-Matter Loading in the Upper Hudson River - Transect 4 High-Flow Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database, USGS (1993a, 1993b), and NYS Thruway Authority, O ffice of Canals (1994a, 1993) TAMS/ Gradient
Legend:
Note: a) T ributary river m ile designations correspond to poin t of confluence with the Hudson River. b) Fish Creek suspended matter load is estimated using the suspended solids value for the Batten Kill and a flow estim ate based on drainage basin area.
c) Sample is believed to over-represent dilution by the Moses Kill due to proximity of sampling location to Moses Kill confluence.d) Sample is believed to over-represen t upstream Main-Stem Hudson River loading due to incomplete mixing of the Mohawk River.
c
d
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Total Measured Main-Stem Hudson River Suspended-Matter Load
Batten Kill Contributiona
Estimated Fish Creek Contributiona,b
Hoosic River Contributiona
Mohawk River Contributiona
15
0
15
2
15
4
15
6
15
8
16
0
16
2
16
4
16
6
16
8
17
0
17
2
17
4
17
6
17
8
18
0
18
2
18
4
18
6
18
8
19
0
19
2
19
4
19
6
19
8
20
0
20
2
Su
spen
ded
Sol
ids
Loa
din
g (k
g/s)
River Mile
Figure 3-35Suspended-Matter Loading in the Upper Hudson River - Transect 6 Low-Flow Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database, USGS (1993a, 1993b), and NYS Thruway Authority, Office of Canals (1994a, 1993) TAMS/ Gradient
Legend:
Note: a) T ributary river m ile designations correspond to poin t of confluence with the Hudson River. b) Fish Creek suspended matter load is estimated using the suspended solids value for the Batten Kill and a flow estim ate based on drainage basin area.
Figure 3-36Sediment Homologue Distributions in the Thompson Island Pool
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAM S/Cadmus/ Gradient
0
0.1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pent
a
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 189 0-2 cm
A
0
0.1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pent
a
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 189 6-8 cm
C
0
0.1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pent
a
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 195.5 0-2 cm
B
0
0.1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pent
a
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 188.5 6-8 cm
F
0
0.1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pent
a
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 188.5 0-2 cm
E
0
0.1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pent
a
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 190 0-2 cm
D
Note:The level of dechlorination shown in the sediment distribution patterns increases from graph A through F.
Figure 3-37Estimated Porewater Homologue Distributions in Sediments
from the Thompson Island Pool
Source: TAM S/Gradient Database TAMS/Cadmus/ Gradient
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Mo
no
Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pe
nta
He
xa
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 189 0-2 cm
A
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Mo
no
Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pe
nta
He
xa
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 189 6-8 cm
C
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Mo
no
Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pe
nta
He
xa
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 195.5 0-2 cm
B
0
0 .1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
0 .6
0 .7
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pe
nta
He
xa
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 188.5 6-8 cm
F
0
0 .1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
0 .6
0 .7
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pe
nta
He
xa
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 188.5 0-2 cm
E
0
0 .1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
0 .6
0 .7
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pe
nta
He
xa
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
RM 190 0-2 cm
D
Note:a. M ass fractions are calculated using the homologue distributions shown in Figure 3-36 and the two phase water colum n partition coefficients developed in Section 3.1.
b. For congeners with out partition coefficients, the median value of the homologue group was used. For Nona and Deca congeners, the m edian Octa value was used.
0
0 .1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
0 .6
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Dissolved-P hase PCBs
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
Figure 3-39Typical Homologue Distributions of the Batten Kill and Hoosic River PC B W ater-Column Loads
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Batten K ill (Transect 1)
Hoosic River (Transect 6)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Suspended-Phase PCBs
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Mo
no
Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
D issolved-Phase PCBs
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
0
0 .1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
0 .6
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Whole-Water PC B s
Ma
ss F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
0
0 .1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
0 .6
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Susp ended-Phase PCBs
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
0
0 .1
0 .2
0 .3
0 .4
0 .5
0 .6
Mo
no
Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Whole-Water PCBs
Ma
ss F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
Figure 3-41Homologue Distributions of Surficial Sediments (0 to 2 cm)
in the Batten Kill and the Hoosic River
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database GradientTAMS/
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
Non
a
Dec
a
Batten Kill
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
Non
a
Dec
a
Hoosic River
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Homologue
Figure 3-44Upper River Water-Column PCB Loading forFlow-Averaged Event 1 High-Flow Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database, USGS (1993a, 1993b), NYS Thruway Authority, and Office of Canals (1994a, 1993) TAMS/ Gradient
Whole-Water PCB s
River Mile = 197.6Total Load = 1.4 mg/s
Flow = 530 m3/s
Fennimore Bridge
River Mile = 194.6Total Load = 83 mg/s
Flow = 530 m3/s
Rogers Island
River Mile = 188.5Total Load = 68 mg/s
Flow = 560 m3/s
Thompson Island Dam
PCB Homologue
Notes: a. Flow-Averaged Event 1 samples were collected during the period of April 23 to May 8, 1993.b. Samples collected at Waterford are not represented here due to local canal construction which is believed to have influenced the samples.
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
10
20
30
40C
Total= 120 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
10
20
30
40C
Total= 160 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
10
20
30
40C
Total= 2.6 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Figure 3-45Upper River Water-Column PCB Loading forFlow-Averaged Event 2 Low-Flow Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database, USGS (1993a, 1993b), NYS Thruway Authority, and Office of Canals (1994a, 1993) TAMS/ Gradient
Whole-Water PCBs
River Mile = 197.6Total Load = 0.03 mg/s
Flow = 96 m3/s
Fennimore Bridge
River Mile = 194.6Total Load = 4.7 mg/s
Flow = 96 m3/s
Rogers Island
River Mile = 188.5
Total Load = 17 mg/s
Flow = 100 m3/s
Thompson Island Dam
River Mile = 156.5Total Load = 16 mg/s
Flow = 160 m3/s
Waterford
PCB Homologue
Note: Flow-Averaged 2 samples were collected during the period of May 12 to May 27, 1993.
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
Non
a
Dec
a
0
2
4
6
8C
Total= 170 ng/L
Loa
d (m
g/s)
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
Non
a
Dec
a
0
2
4
6
8C
Total= 49 ng/L
Loa
d (m
g/s)
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
Non
a
Dec
a
0
2
4
6
8C
Total= 0.29 ng/L
Loa
d (m
g/s)
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
Non
a
Dec
a
0
2
4
6
8C
Total= 95 ng/L
Loa
d (m
g/s)
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
Non
a
Dec
a
0
2
4
6
8C
Total= 90 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
Non
a
Dec
a
0
2
4
6
8C
Total= 0.61 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
Non
a
Dec
a
0
2
4
6
8C
Total= 180 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mon
o Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
Non
a
Dec
a
0
2
4
6
8C
Total= 190 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Figure 3-46Upper River Water-Column PCB Loading forFlow-Averaged Event 3 Low-Flow Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database, USGS (1993a, 1993b), NYS Thruway Authority, and Office of Canals (1994a, 1993) TAMS/ Gradient
Whole-Water PCBs
River Mile = 197.6Total Load = 0.05 mg/s
Flow = 85 m3/s
Fennimore Bridge
River Mile = 194.6Total Load = 15 mg/s
Flow = 85 m3/s
Rogers Island
River Mile = 188.5Total Load = 17 mg/s
Flow = 89 m3/s
Thompson Island Dam
River Mile = 156.5Total Load = 17 mg/s
Flow = 188 m3/s
Waterford
PCB Homologue
Note: Flow-Averaged 3 samples were collected during the period of June 6 to June 19, 1993.
Figure 3-48Upper River Water-Column PCB Loading for
Flow-Averaged 5 Low-Flow Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database, USGS (1993a, 1993b), NYS Thruway Authority, and Office of Canals (1994a, 1993) TAMS/ Gradient
W hole-Water PCBs
River M ile = 197.6
Total Load = 0.27 mg/s
Flow = 71 m3/s
Fennimore Bridge
River M ile = 194.6
Total Load = 2.5 mg/s
Flow = 71 m3/s
Rogers Island
River M ile = 188.5Total Load = 10 mg/s
Flow = 75 m3/s
Thompson Island Dam
River M ile = 156.5
Total Load = 12 mg/s
Flow = 171 m3/s
Waterford
PCB Homologue
Note: Flow-Averaged 5 samples were collected during the period of August 2 to August 17, 1993.
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
1
2
3
4
5C
Total= 130 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
1
2
3
4
5C
Total= 35 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
1
2
3
4
5C
Total= 3.8 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
1
2
3
4
5C
Total= 69 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Figure 3-49Upper River Water-Column PCB Loading for
Flow-Averaged 6 Low-Flow Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database, USGS (1993a, 1993b), NYS Thruway Authority, and Office of Canals (1994a, 1993) TAMS/ Gradient
W hole-Water PCBs
River M ile = 197.6
Total Load = 0.02 mg/s
Flow = 71 m3/s
Fennimore Bridge
River M ile = 194.6
Total Load = 2.0 mg/s
Flow = 71 m3/s
Rogers Island
River M ile = 188.5Total Load = 7.3 mg/s
Flow = 75 m3/s
Thompson Island Dam
River M ile = 156.5
Total Load = 10 mg/s
Flow = 201 m3/s
Waterford
PCB Homologue
Note: Flow-Averaged 6 water column sam ples were collected during the period of September 9 to September 23, 1993.
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
1
2
3
4C
Total= 0.23 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
1
2
3
4C
Total= 28 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
1
2
3
4C
Total= 98 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Mo
no Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
0
1
2
3
4C
Total= 51 ng/L
Loa
d (
mg/
s)
Figure 3-50
The Coincidence of the 137
Cs and 60
Co Maxima at River M ile 43.2 (Core 6)
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database
Note: Error bars represent two standard deviations in counting uncertainty. The radionuclide
is considered to be present when this uncertainty does not contain zero.
H igh-Resolution Sediment Core 6 (R iver M ile 43.2)Lents Cove
TAMS/Gradient
0
10
20
30
40
50
600 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500
137Cs7Be
Dep
th (
cm)
137Cs &
7Be (pCi/kg)
1971
Possible dredge boundary
Deposited pre-1954
Legend:
1992
Max
imu
m D
epth
of
7 Be
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 20 40 60 80 100
60Co
Dep
th (
cm)
1971
Possible dredge boundary
60Co (pCi/kg)
Legend:
Figure 3-51137
Cs Concentrations in H igh Resolution Sediment Core 11 and Core 19
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database
Note: Error bars represen t two standard deviations of counting uncertainty. The
radionuclide is considered to be present when this uncertainty does not contain zero.
TAMS/ Gradient
0
20
40
60
80
100
1200 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000
Core 11 (River M ile 143.5)Albany Turning Basin
137 Cs
7 Be
Dep
th (
cm)
137 Cs & 7Be (pCi/kg)
Max
imum
Dep
th
of
7B
e
1992
Estimated Sedimentation Rate > 5 cm /yr
Legend:
0
10
20
30
40
50
600 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000
Core 19 (River M ile 188.5)Thompson Is lan d D a m
137 Cs
7Be
Dep
th (
cm)
1 992
1963
Max
imu
m D
epth
of 7
Be
137Cs &
7Be (pCi/kg)
Deposited pre-1954
Legend:
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000
Core 19 at R iver M ile 188.5 -Collected in 1992
137Cs
7B e
Dep
th (
cm)
137Cs &
7B e (pCi/kg)
1992
1963
Max
imum
Dep
th
of 7
Be
Legend:
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000
Core at R iver M ile 188.5 -Collected in 1984 by LDEO
137Cs
Dep
th (
cm)
137C s (pCi/kg)
1963
Legend:
1984b
Figure 3-52
Comparison of 137Cs Profiles between a Phase 2 High-Resolution Sediment Core and a Historical Core at River M ile 188.5
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Notes: a. Error bars represent two standard deviations of counting uncertainty. The radionuclide is considered to be present when this uncertainty does not contain zero.
b. The historical core was not analyzed for 7B e; its core top is assu m ed to represent the 1984 period of collection.
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 1 104
1.2 104
0 5 105
1 106
1.5 106
2 106
2.5 106
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Core 18 (RM 185.8)Total
137Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
137Cs
PCBs
Legend:
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 1 10 4
0 5 10 5 1 10 6 1.5 10 6 2 10 6 2.5 10 6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Core 19 (RM 188.5)Total 137Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
0 5 10 4 1 10 5 1.5 10 5 2 10 5 2.5 10 5 3 10 5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Core 21 (RM 177.8)Total 137Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
0 1 10 5 2 10 5 3 10 5 4 10 5 5 10 5 6 10 5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Core 22 (RM 177.8)Total 137Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
0 5 10 5 1 10 6 1.5 10 6 2 10 6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Core 23 (RM 189.3)Total 137 Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
Figure 3-53
Upper River High-Resolution Sediment Cores Depth vs.137
Cs Concentration and PCB Concentration
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database
Note: a. Scales of horizontal axes differ
GradientTAMS/
Figure 3-54
Lower River High-Resolution Sediment Cores Depth vs. 137
Cs Concentration and PCB Concentration
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database
Note: Scales of horizontal and vertical axes differ
TAMS/ Gradient
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Core 7 (RM 43.2)Total 137 Cs (pC i/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 1 10 4 1.2 10 4 1.4 10 4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Core 10 (RM 88.5)Total 137 Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
0
10
20
30
40
50
Core 2 (RM -1.9)Total
13 7Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 1 10 4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Core 6 (RM 43.2)Total 137 Cs (pC i/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
0 5000 1 10 4 1.5 10 4 2 10 4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Core 11 (RM 143.5)Total 137 Cs (pC i/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
137 Cs
PCBs
Legend:
137Cs
PCBs
Legend:
0 300 600 900 1200 1500
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Core 17 (Batten Kill)
Total 137Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000
0 500 1000 1500 2000
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Core 12 (Mohawk River)
Total 137Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
0 50 100 150 200 250
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Core 24 (Hoosic River)
Total 137Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Core 27 (RM 202.9, Background)
Total 137Cs (pCi/kg)
Total PCBs (µg/kg)
Dep
th
Figure 3-55Tributaries and Background High Resolution Sediment Cores
Depth vs.137 Cs Concentration and PCB Concentration
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database
Note: Scales of horizontal and vertical axes differ
GradientTAMS/
Figu
re 3
-56
Com
pari
son
of th
e Su
rfic
ial S
edim
ent C
onge
ner
Dis
trib
utio
nw
ith th
e C
orre
spon
ding
Tra
nsec
t 4 H
igh-
Flow
Sus
pend
ed-M
atte
r C
onge
ner
Dis
trib
utio
n
Sour
ce:
TAM
S/G
radi
ent D
atab
ase
TAM
S/G
radi
ent
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Suspended Matter (RM 151.7)
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Comparison of Albany Turning Basin Surficial Sediment with Green Island Bridge Suspended Matter
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Suspended Matter (RM 168.3)
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Comparison of Stillwater Pool Surficial Sediment with Stillwater Suspended Matter
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Suspended Matter (RM 77)
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Comparison of Kingston Surficial Sediment with Highland Suspended Matter
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Suspended Matter (RM 188.5)
Mas
s F
ract
ion
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Comparison of Thompson Island Pool Surficial Sediment with Thompson Island Dam Suspended Matter
Core 23 (RM 189.2)
Legend:
Core 23 (RM 189.2)
Legend:
Core 21 (RM 177.8)
Legend:
Core 21 (RM 177.8)
Legend:
Figure 3-57Comparison of the Thompson Island Pool Surficial Sediment Congener Distribution with the
Thompson Island Dam Suspended-Matter Congener Distributions associated with Low -Flow Winter and Summer Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/Gradient
0
0 .0 5
0.1
0 .1 5
0 5 10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
10
0
10
5
11
0
11
5
12
0
12
5
13
0
13
5
14
0
14
5
15
0
15
5
16
0
16
5
17
0
17
5
18
0
18
5
19
0
19
5
20
0
20
5
S u s p e n d e d M at ter (RM 1 8 8 . 5 )
Ma
ss F
ract
ion
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Transect 1 - Low Flow Winter Conditions
0
0 .0 5
0.1
0 .1 5
0 5 10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
10
0
10
5
11
0
11
5
12
0
12
5
13
0
13
5
14
0
14
5
15
0
15
5
16
0
16
5
17
0
17
5
18
0
18
5
19
0
19
5
20
0
20
5
S u s p e n d e d M a t ter ( R M 1 8 8 .5)
Ma
ss F
ract
ion
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Transect 6 - Low F low Summer Conditions
C o r e 2 3 ( R M 1 8 9 . 3 )
Legend:
C o r e 2 3 ( R M 1 8 9 .3 )
Legend:
0
0 .0 5
0.1
0 .1 5
0.2
0 .2 5
0 5 10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
10
0
10
5
11
0
11
5
12
0
12
5
13
0
13
5
14
0
14
5
15
0
15
5
16
0
16
5
17
0
17
5
18
0
18
5
19
0
19
5
20
0
20
5
S u s p e n d e d M at ter (RM 1 5 1 . 7 )
Ma
ss F
ract
ion
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Transect 6 - Low Flow Summer Conditions
0
0 .0 5
0.1
0 .1 5
0.2
0 .2 5
0 5 10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
10
0
10
5
11
0
11
5
12
0
12
5
13
0
13
5
14
0
14
5
15
0
15
5
16
0
16
5
17
0
17
5
18
0
18
5
19
0
19
5
20
0
20
5
S u s p e n d e d M at ter (RM 1 5 1 . 7 )
Ma
ss F
ract
ion
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Transect 1 - Low Flow Winter Conditions
C o r e 1 1 ( R M 1 4 3 . 5 )
Legend:
C o r e 1 1 ( R M 1 4 3 . 5 )
Legend:
Figure 3-58Comparison of the Albany Turning Basin Surficial Sediment Congener Distribution with the
Green Island Bridge Suspended-Matter Congener Distributions associated with Low -Flow W inter and Sum m er Conditions
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/Gradient
1975
1980
1985
1990
0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000
Figure 3-59 Total PCBs in Sediment vs. Approximate Year of Deposition at R iver M ile 188.5
Near the Thompson Island Dam: High Resolution Sediment Core 19
Core 19
Yea
r
Total PCBs (µg/kg)Note: a. Measurement uncertainty is estimated to be 0.75 * Sample Thickness/Sedimentation Rate.
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Legend:
Measurement
uncertainty a
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
050100150200
Figure 3-60Total PCB Content in Sediment Deposited Between 1991 and 1992 vs. River M ile
Total PCBs
Background & Tributary Contributions
Duplicate Measurements
Tot
al P
CB
s (µ
g/k
g)
River M ile
Bat
ten
Kil
l
Ho
osic
Riv
er
Mo
haw
kR
iver
Bac
k-
grou
nd
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/Gradient
River Mile 188.5
Legend:
Note: a . Duplicate pairs exist at River M iles 177.8 and 43.2. The solid symbol represents the mean of the duplicate pair.
1 9 7 5
1 9 8 0
1 9 8 5
1 9 9 0
0 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 3 0 0 ,0 0 0 4 0 0 ,0 0 0 5 0 0 ,0 0 0 6 0 0 ,0 0 0
C o r e 1 9
Ye
ar
T o t a l P C B s ( µ g / k g )
T h o m p s o n I s la n d D a m - R iv e r M i l e 1 8 8 . 5
L e g e n d :
C o r e 1 1
1 9 7 5
1 9 8 0
1 9 8 5
1 9 9 0
0 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 ,0 00 1 5 ,0 0 0 2 0 ,0 00
T o t a l P C B s ( µ g / k g )
Yea
r
A lb a n y T u r n i n g B a s i n - R iv e r M i l e 1 4 3 .5b
L e g e n d :
1 9 7 5
1 9 8 0
1 9 8 5
1 9 9 0
0 2 , 0 0 0 4 , 0 0 0 6 ,0 0 0 8 ,0 0 0 1 0 ,0 00 1 2 , 0 0 0 1 4 ,0 0 0
C o r e 1 0
Ye
ar
T o t a l P C B s ( µ g / k g )
K in g s t o n - R iv e r M i l e 8 8 . 5
L e g e n d :
1 9 7 5
1 9 8 0
1 9 8 5
1 9 9 0
0 2 ,0 0 0 4 ,0 0 0 6 ,0 0 0 8 ,0 0 0 1 0 ,0 00
C o r e 6
C o r e 7
Ye
ar
T o t a l P C B s ( µ g / k g )
L e n t s C o v e - R i v e r M i l e 4 3 . 2
L e g e n d :
1 9 7 5
1 9 8 0
1 9 8 5
1 9 9 0
1 ,0 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 3 , 0 0 0 4 , 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 6 ,0 0 0 7 , 0 0 0
C o r e 2
Ye
ar
T o ta l P C B s (µ g / kg )
U p p e r N e w Y o r k B a y - R i v e r M ile - 1 . 9
L e g e n d :
1 9 7 5
1 9 8 0
1 9 8 5
1 9 9 0
0 5 0 ,0 0 0 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 1 5 0 ,0 0 0 2 0 0 ,0 0 0 2 5 0 ,0 0 0 3 0 0 ,0 0 0
C o re 2 1
C o re 2 2
Ye
ar
T o t a l P C B s ( µ g / k g )
S t i l lw a te r P o o l - R iv e r M ile 1 7 7 . 8a
L e g e n d :
F i g u r e 3 - 6 1T o t a l P C B s i n P o s t - 1 9 7 5 S e d i m e n t v s .
A p p r o x i m a t e Y e a r o f D e p o s i t i o n i n t h e H u d s o n R iv e r
S o u r c e : T A M S /G r a d ie n t D a t a b as e T A M S / G r a d ie n t
c . F o r a l l d i a g r a m s , m e a s u r e m e n t u n c e r t a i n t y i s e s t im a te d to b e = 0 . 7 5 x s a m p l e th ic k n e ss /s e d i m e n t a t i o n r a t e .
N o t e s : a . M e a s u r e m e n t u n c e r t a i n t y i s n o t s h o w n i n o r d e r t o i m p r o v e v i su a l c l a r i t y o f t h e d a t a .
b . D a s h e d l i n e r e p r e s e n t s a w e ig h t e d r u n n i n g a v e r a g e o f t h e d a t a a n d i s i n c l u d e d f o r v i s u a l r e f e r e n c e .
0
5 , 0 0 0
1 0 ,0 00
1 5 ,0 00
2 0 ,0 00
2 5 ,0 00
3 0 ,0 00
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d i m e n t D e p o s i t e d B e t w e e n 1 9 9 1 a n d 1 9 9 2
T o t a l P C B s
B a c k g r o u n d & T r i b u t a ry C o n t r i b u t i o n s
D u p l i c a t e M e a s u r e m e n t s
To
tal
PC
Bs
(µ
g/k
g)
R i v e r M i leBa
tte
n
Kil
l
Ho
os
ic
Riv
er
Mo
ha
wk
Riv
er
Ba
ck
-
gro
un
d
L e g en d :
0
5 ,0 0 0
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 5 ,0 0 0
2 0 ,0 0 0
2 5 ,0 0 0
3 0 ,0 0 0
3 5 ,0 0 0
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d i m e n t D e p o s i t e d B e tw e e n 1 9 8 7 a n d 1 9 9 0
T o t a l P C B s
B a c k g ro u n d & T r i b u ta r y C o n tr i b u t i o n s
D u p l i c a t e M e a s u re m en t s
To
tal
PC
Bs
(µg
/kg
)
R iv e r M i l eBa
tte
n
Kil
l
Ho
os
ic
Riv
er
Mo
ha
wk
Riv
er
Bac
k-
gro
un
d
L e g e n d :
0
1 0 ,00 0
2 0 ,00 0
3 0 ,00 0
4 0 ,00 0
5 0 ,00 0
6 0 ,00 0
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d im e n t D e p o s i t e d B e t w e e n 1 9 8 2 a n d 1 9 8 6
T o ta l P C B s
B a ck g r o u n d & T rib u t a r y C o n tr i b u t i o n s
D u p l ic a t e M e a s u r e m e n ts
To
tal
PC
Bs
(µg
/kg
)
R iv e r M i l e
Ba
tte
n
Kil
l
Ho
osi
c
Riv
er
Mo
ha
wk
Riv
er
Ba
ck
-
gro
un
d
L e g e n d :
0
5 0 , 0 0 0
1 0 0 , 0 0 0
1 5 0 , 0 0 0
2 0 0 , 0 0 0
2 5 0 , 0 0 0
3 0 0 , 0 0 0
3 5 0 , 0 0 0
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d im e n t D e p o s i t e d B e t w e e n 1 9 7 5 a n d 1 9 8 1
T o ta l P C B s
B a c k g r o u n d & T r i b u t a r y C o n t r i b u tio n s
D u p l i c a t e M e a s u r e m e n ts
To
tal
PC
Bs
(µg
/kg
)
R i v e r M i l e
Ba
tte
n
Kil
l
Ho
os
ic
Riv
er
Mo
ha
wk
Riv
er
Ba
ck
-
gro
un
d
L e g e n d :
F ig u r e 3 - 6 2T o ta l P C B C o n t e n t i n S e d i m e n t v s R iv er M i l e
N o t e : a . V e r t i c a l a x is r a n g e i n c r e a s e s i n s u c c e s s i v e d ia g r a m s a s a g e o f s e d im e n t r e p r e s e n t e d in c r e a s e s .
S o u r c e : T A M S /G r a d i e n t D a ta b a s e
b . D u p l ic a t e p a i r s e x i s t o n a l l g r a p h s a t R i v e r M i l e s 1 7 7 .8 a n d 4 3 .2 . T h e s o l i d s y m b o l r e p r e s e n ts th e m e a n o f th e d u p l ic a t e p a i r .
T A M S / G r a d i e n t
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0255075100125150175200
Figure 3-63137
Cs Levels in Surface Sediments in the Hudson RiverBased on High-Resolution Sediment Coring R esults
M ain Stem Hudson
Tributaries
137C
s (p
Ci/
Kg
)
R iver M ile
Notes:
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database
a. Measurement uncertainty represents ý two standard deviations (ý2 ).
Measurement
uncertaintya
Legend:
Mean [137
Cs] level between RM 177.8 and -1.9.
2 uncertainty about meanσ
σ
TAMS/Gradient
0
5
1 0
1 5
2 0
2 5
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d i m e n t D e p o s i t e d b e t w e e n 1 9 9 1 a n d 1 9 9 2
M e a s u r e d
B a c k g r o u n d & T rib u t a r y C o n t r i b u t i o n s
D u p l ic a t e M e a s u r e m e n ts
PC
Bs/1
37 C
s (µ
g/p
Ci)
R iv e r M i l e
Ba
tte
n
Kil
l
Ho
osi
c
Riv
er
Mo
ha
wk
Riv
er
Ba
ck
-
gro
un
d
L e g e n d :
0
5
1 0
1 5
2 0
2 5
3 0
3 5
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d i m e n t D e p o s i t e d b e t w e e n 1 9 8 7 a n d 1 9 9 0
M e as u r e d
B a c k g r o u n d & T r i b u t a ry C o n t r i b u t i o n s
D u p l i c a te M e a s u r e m e n t s
PC
Bs
/1
37 C
s (µ
g/p
Ci)
R i v e r M i l e
Ba
tte
n
Kil
l
Ho
os
ic
Riv
er
Mo
ha
wk
Riv
er
Bac
k-
gro
un
d
L e g en d :
0
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d i m e n t D e p o s i te d b e t w e e n 1 9 8 2 a n d 1 9 8 6
M e a s u r e d
B a c k g r o u n d & T r i b u t a ry C o n t r i b u t i o n s
D u p l i c a t e M e a s u r e m e n t s
PC
Bs
/13
7 Cs
(µg
/pC
i)
R i v e r M i le
Ba
tte
n
Kil
l
Ho
osi
c
Riv
er
Mo
haw
k
Riv
er
Ba
ck
-
gro
un
d
L e g en d :
0
5 0
1 0 0
1 5 0
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d i m e n t D e p o s i t e d b e t w e e n 1 9 7 5 a n d 1 9 8 1
M e a s u r e d
B a c k g r o u n d & T r ib u t a r y C o n t r i b u t i o n s
D u p l i c a t e M e a s u r e m e n t s
PC
Bs/1
37 C
s (
µg
/pC
i)
R iv e r M i l e
Ba
tte
n
Kil
l
Ho
os
ic
Riv
er
Mo
ha
wk
Riv
er
Ba
ck
-
gro
un
d
L e g e n d :
F ig u r e 3 - 6 4
T o t a l P C B s /1 3 7
C s C o n t e n t in S e d im e n t v s R iv e r M i l e
S o u r c e : T A M S / G r a d i e n t D a t a b a s e
N o t e : a . V e r t i c a l a x i s r a n g e i n c r e a s e s i n s u c c e s s i v e d i a g r a m s a s a g e o f s e d im e n t r e p re s e n t e d i n c r e a s e s .
b . D u p l i c a t e p a i r s e x i s t o n a l l g r a p h s a t R i v e r M i l e s 1 7 7 . 8 a n d 4 3 .2 . T h e s o l i d s y m b o l r e p r e s e n t s t h e m e a n o f th e d u p l i c a t e p a i r .
T A M S /G r a d i e n t
0
50
100
150
050100150200
Figure 3-65
Time Interval Comparison for Total PCBs/137
Cs Ratios: 1975 through 1992
1975 - 1981
1982 - 19861987 - 1990
1991 - 1992
Background
PC
B/13
7 Cs
(µg/
pC
i)
River M ile
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database
RM 188.5, Thompson Island Dam, Core 19
Bac
k-gr
ound
Bat
ten
Kil
l
Hoo
sic
Riv
erM
ohaw
kR
iver
Legend:
TAMS/Gradient
0
5
10
15
20
050100150200
Figure 3-66
Comparison of M easured and Calculated Total PCBs/137
Cs Ratiosfor Sediment Deposited between 1991 and 1992
Measured
Duplicate Measurements
Calculated - Based on Thompson Island Dam Measurement
Calculated - Based on Stillwater Measurement
Background & Tributary Contributions
PC
Bs/
137C
s (µ
g/p
Ci)
River MileBat
ten
Kil
l
Ho
osic
Riv
er
Mo
haw
kR
iver
Bac
k-
grou
nd
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database
Legend:
TAMS/ Gradient
Note: a. Duplicate pairs exist at River Miles 177.8 and 43.2. The solid symbol represents the mean of the duplicate pair.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
050100150200
Figure 3-67
Comparison of M easured and Calculated Total PCBs/137
Cs Ratiosfor Sediment Deposited between 1982 and 1986
Measured
Duplicate Measurements
Calculated - Based on Thompson Island Dam Measurement
Calculated - Based on Stillwater Pool Measurement
Background & Tributary Contributions
PC
Bs/
137 C
s (µ
g/p
Ci)
R iver MileBat
ten
Kil
l
Ho
osi
cR
iver
Mo
haw
kR
iver
Bac
k-
gro
und
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database
Legend:
TAMS/Gradient
Note: Duplicate pairs exist at River Miles 177.8 and 43.2. The solid symbol represents the mean of the duplicate pair.
0
5
1 0
1 5
2 0
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d im e n t D e p o s i t e d b e t w e e n 1 9 9 1 a n d 1 9 9 2
M e a s u r e d
D u p l i c a t e M e a s u r e m e n ts
C a l c u l a t e d - B a s e d o n S t illw a te r P o o l M e a s u r e m e n t
B a c k g r o u n d & T r i b u ta r y C o n t r i b u t io n s
PC
Bs/1
37 C
s (µ
g/p
Ci)
R i v e r M ile
Ba
tte
n
Kil
l
Ho
os
ic
Riv
er
Mo
ha
wk
Riv
er
Ba
ck
-
gro
un
d
L e g e n d :
0
5
1 0
1 5
2 0
2 5
3 0
3 5
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d i m e n t D e p o s i t e d b e t w e e n 1 9 8 7 a n d 1 9 9 0
M e a s u r e d
D u p l i c a t e M e a s u r e m en t s
C a l c u la t e d - B a s e d o n S t i l lw a t e r P o o l M e a s u r e m e n t
B a c k g r o u n d & T r i b u t a ry C o n t r i b u t i o n s
PC
Bs/1
37 C
s (
µg
/pC
i)
R i v e r M i l e
Bat
ten
Kil
l
Ho
osi
c
Riv
er
Mo
ha
wk
Riv
er
Bac
k-
gro
un
d
L e g e n d :
0
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d i m e n t D e p o s i t e d b e t w e e n 1 9 8 2 a n d 1 9 8 6
M e a s u r e d
D u p l i c a t e M e a s u r e m en t s
C a l c u l a t e d - B a s e d o n S t i l l w a t e r M e a s u r e m e n t
B a c k g r o u n d & T r ib u t a r y C o n t r i b u t i o n s
PC
Bs/1
37 C
s (
µg
/pC
i)
R i v e r M i l e
Bat
ten
Kil
l
Ho
osi
c
Riv
er
Mo
haw
k
Riv
er
Bac
k-
gro
un
d
L e g e n d :
0
5
1 0
1 5
2 0
2 5
05 01 0 01 5 02 0 0
S e d i m e n t D e p o s i t e d b e t w e e n 1 9 7 5 a n d 1 9 8 1
M e a s u r e d
D u p l i c a t e M e a s u r e m e n t s
C a l c u l a t e d - B a s e d o n S t i l l w ate r M e a s u r e m e n t
B a c k g r o u n d & T r i b u t a r y C o n t r i b u t i o n s
PC
Bs/1
37 C
s (µ
g/p
Ci)
R i v e r M i le
Ba
tte
n
Kil
l
Ho
osi
c
Riv
er
Mo
ha
wk
Riv
er
Ba
ck
-
gro
un
d
L e g en d :
F i g u r e 3 - 6 8
T o t a l P C B s / 1 3 7 C s R a t i o s i n D a t e d S e d im e n t v s R iv e r M i l e :A C o m p a r i s o n o f C a l c u la t e d a n d M e a s u r e d R e s u l t s
S o u rc e : T A M S / G r a d ie n t D a t a b a s e
N o t e : a . V e r t i c a l a x is r a n g e i n c r e a s e s in s u c c e s s i v e d i a g r a m s a s a g e o f s e d i m e n t r e p r e s e n te d i n c r e a s e s .
b . E r r o r b a r s r e p r e s e n t ý 2 5 % u n c e r t a i n t y i n t h e m e a s u r e d v a l u e .c . D u p l i c a t e p a i r s e x is t o n a l l g r a p h s a t R iv e r M i l e s 1 7 7 . 8 a n d 4 3 .2 . T h e s o l i d s y m b o l rep re s e n t s th e m e a n o f th e d u p lic a t e p a i r .
G r a d ie n tT A M S /
0
1
2
3
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
Core 21 1991-1992
Core 22 1991-1992
Cong
ener
Con
cent
ratio
n N
orm
aliz
ed to
BZ#
52
Figure 3-69Comparison of the Duplicate Core Results on a Congener Basis
for RM 177.8 near Stillwater for 1991 to 1992
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database
Legend:
TAMS/ Gradient
0
0 . 5
1
1 . 5
2
2 . 5
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
0
11
0
12
0
13
0
14
0
15
0
16
0
17
0
18
0
19
0
20
0
21
0
C o re 2 1 - 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2
A r o c lo r 1 2 6 0
0
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
PC
B C
on
ge
ne
r C
on
ce
ntr
ati
on
No
rma
liz
ed
to
BZ
#5
2 PC
B C
on
ge
ne
r Co
nc
en
tratio
n
No
rma
lize
d to
BZ
#5
2
Aro
clo
r 12
60
on
ly
N o te : a . Th is p lo t h a s a s e p a r a te v e r t i c a l a x i s s c a l e f o r A ro clo r 1 2 6 0 c o n g e n e r c o n c e n tr a t i o n s d u e t o c o m p o s i tio n .
L e g e n d :
0
0 . 5
1
1 . 5
2
2 . 5
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
0
11
0
12
0
13
0
14
0
15
0
16
0
17
0
18
0
19
0
20
0
21
0
C o re 2 1 - 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2
A r o c lo r 1 2 4 2
PC
B C
on
ge
ne
r C
on
ce
ntr
ati
on
No
rma
liz
ed
to
BZ
#5
2 L e g e n d :
0
0 . 5
1
1 . 5
2
2 . 5
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
0
11
0
12
0
13
0
14
0
15
0
16
0
17
0
18
0
19
0
20
0
21
0
C o r e 2 1 - 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2
A r o c l o r 1 2 5 4
PC
B C
on
ge
ne
r C
on
ce
ntr
ati
on
No
rma
liz
ed
to
BZ
#5
2 L e g e n d :
0
0 .5
1
1 .5
2
2 .5
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
0
11
0
12
0
13
0
14
0
15
0
16
0
17
0
18
0
19
0
20
0
21
0
C o r e 2 1 - 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2
8 2 % A 1 2 4 2 + 1 6 % A 1 2 5 4 + 2 % A 1 2 6 0
PC
B C
on
ge
ne
r C
on
ce
ntr
ati
on
No
rma
liz
ed
to
BZ
#5
2
P C B C o n g e n e r ( B Z # )
L e g e n d :
F ig u r e 3 - 7 0A C o m p a r i s o n b e tw e e n t h e P o s t - 1 9 9 0 S e d im e n t P C B C o n g e n e r P a t t e r n
f o r C o r e 2 1 a t R i v e r M i l e 1 7 7 . 4 n e a r S t i l l w a t e r a n d T h r e e A r o c l o r M i x t u r e s
T A M S /G r a d i e n tS o u r c e : T A M S /G r a d i e n t D a t a b a s e
TA
MS
/Gra
die
nt
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
210
RM 177.8 (Core 21)Aroclor 1254Aroclor 1260
PC
B C
ongen
er Con
centration
Norm
alized to B
Z#52
Aroclor 1260 on
ly
PCB Congener (BZ#)
PC
B C
onge
ner
Con
cen
trat
ion
Nor
mal
ized
to
BZ
#52
More-Chlorinated Congeners in Surface Sediments at River M ile 177.8 near Stillwater1991 to 1992
Legend:
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
170
17
5
18
0
185
19
0
19
5
200
205
21
0
RM 177.8 (Core 21)Aroclor 1254Aroclor 1260
PC
B C
ong
ener C
oncen
trationN
ormalized
to BZ
#52
Aroclor 1260 on
ly
PCB Congener (BZ#)
PC
B C
ong
ener
Con
cen
trat
ion
Nor
mal
ized
to
BZ
#52
More-Chlorinated Congeners in Surface Sediments at River Mile 177.8 near Stillwater1991 to 1992
Legend:
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
17
0
17
5
180
18
5
19
0
195
20
0
20
5
210
RM 194.6Aroclor 1254Aroclor 1260
PC
B C
ong
ener C
oncen
trationN
ormalized
to BZ
#52
Aroclor 1260 on
ly
PCB Congener (BZ#)
PC
B C
ong
ener
Con
cen
trat
ion
Nor
mal
ized
to
BZ
#52
Note: a. Arrows indicate detected target congeners unique to Aroclor 1260.
More-Chlorinated Congeners in Suspended Matter at River Mile 194.6 at Rogers IslandApril 12 to 14, 1993
Legend:
Figure 3-71Normalized PCB Congener Concentrations in Stillwater 1991 to 1992
Sediments and Rogers Island Suspended Matter vs. Aroclors 1254 and 1260
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
0
0 .5
1
1 .5
2
2 .5
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
0
11
0
12
0
13
0
14
0
15
0
16
0
17
0
18
0
19
0
20
0
21
0
R M 1 7 7 .8 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2
PC
B C
on
ge
ne
r C
on
ce
ntr
atio
n
No
rma
liz
ed
to
BZ
#5
2 P C B C o n g e n e r P a t te r n in 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2 S e d i m e n ts a t R M 1 7 7 . 8 n e a r S t i l l w a te r
L e g e n d :
0
0 .5
1
1 .5
2
2 .5
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
0
11
0
12
0
13
0
14
0
15
0
16
0
17
0
18
0
19
0
20
0
21
0
R M 1 7 7 .8 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2
R M 1 7 7 .8 1 9 8 7 t o 1 9 9 0
PC
B C
on
ge
ne
r C
on
ce
ntr
ati
on
No
rma
liz
ed
to
BZ
#5
2 P a t t e r n C o m p a r is o n f o r 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2 a n d 1 9 8 7 t o 1 9 9 0 a t R M 1 7 7 .8
L e g e n d :
0
0 . 5
1
1 . 5
2
2 . 5
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
0
11
0
12
0
13
0
14
0
15
0
16
0
17
0
18
0
19
0
20
0
21
0
R M 1 7 7 .8 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2
R M 1 7 7 .8 1 9 8 2 t o 1 9 8 6
PC
B C
on
ge
ne
r C
on
ce
ntr
ati
on
No
rma
liz
ed
to
BZ
#5
2
P a t t e r n C o m p a r i s o n f o r 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2 a n d 1 9 8 2 t o 1 9 8 6 a t R M 1 7 7 . 8
L e g e n d :
0
0 .5
1
1 .5
2
2 .5
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
0
11
0
12
0
13
0
14
0
15
0
16
0
17
0
18
0
19
0
20
0
21
0
R M 1 7 7 .8 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2
R M 1 7 7 .8 1 9 7 5 t o 1 9 8 1
PC
B C
on
ge
ne
r C
on
ce
ntr
atio
n
No
rma
liz
ed
to
BZ
#5
2
P C B C o n g e n e r ( B Z # )
P a t t e r n C o m p a r i s o n f o r 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2 a n d 1 9 7 5 t o 1 9 8 1 a t R M 1 7 7 . 8
L e g e n d :
F i g u r e 3 -7 3A C o m p a r i s o n b e t w e e n t h e 1 9 9 1 t o 1 9 9 2 P C B C o n g e n e r P a t t e r na t R i v e r M i le 1 7 7 . 8 n e a r S t i l lw a t e r w it h th e P e r i o d 1 9 7 5 t o 1 9 9 0
T A M S / G r a d ie n tS o u r c e : T A M S / G r ad ie n t D atab a s e
0
1
2
3
0
10
20 30 40
50
60 70 80
90
10
0
11
0
120
130
14
0
150
160
17
0
18
0
190
200
1991 through 1992
Albany (RM 143.5)
Stillwater (RM 177.8)
PC
B C
ong
ener
Co
nce
ntra
tio
n N
orm
aliz
ed t
o B
Z#5
2
Legend:
0
1
2
3
0
10
20 30 40
50
60 70 80
90
10
0
110
120
13
0
14
0
150
160
17
0
18
0
190
200
1987 through 1990
Albany (RM 143.5)
Stillwater (RM 177.8)
PC
B C
on
gene
r C
on
cent
rati
on
Nor
mal
ized
to
BZ
#52 Legend:
0
1
2
3
0
10 20
30 40 50
60
70 80 90
100
11
0
120
130
14
0
15
0
160
170
18
0
190
200
1982 through 1986
Albany (RM 143.5)
Stillwater (RM 177.8)
PC
B C
ong
ener
Co
ncen
trat
ion
Nor
mal
ized
to
BZ
#52 Legend:
0
1
2
3
0
10 20
30
40 50
60 70 80
90
100
110
12
0
130
14
0
15
0
160
17
0
180
190
20
0
1975 through 1981
Albany (RM 143.5)
S tillwater (RM 177.8)
PC
B C
on
gen
er C
on
cen
trat
ion
No
rmal
ized
to
BZ
#52
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Legend:
Figure 3-74A Comparison of the PCB Congener Pattern Chronology
between River Mile 143.5 near Albany andRiver M ile 177.8 near Stillwater for 1975 to 1992
TAMS/ GradientSource: TAMS/Gradient Database
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Kingston (RM 88.5) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 88.5River Mile 177.8
PC
B C
ong
ener
Con
cen
trat
ion
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#
52
Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Lents Cove (RM 43.2) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 43.2River Mile 177.8
PC
B C
ong
ener
Co
ncen
trat
ion
No
rmal
ized
to
BZ
#52 Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Albany Turning Basin (RM 143.5) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 143.5River Mile 177.8
PC
B C
ong
ener
Co
ncen
trat
ion
No
rmal
ized
to
BZ
#52
Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Upper New York Bay (RM -1.9) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River M ile -1.9River Mile 177.8
PC
B C
onge
ner
Co
ncen
trat
ion
No
rmal
ized
to
BZ
#52
Legend:
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Figure 3-75A Comparison of the Combined Thompson Island Dam PCB Load Congener Pattern
Recorded at Stillwater with Downstream Congener Patternsin Sediments Dated Post-1990
TAMS/GradientSource: TAMS/Gradient Database
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Albany Turning Basin (RM 143.5) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 143.5River Mile 177.8
PC
B C
onge
ner
Con
cent
ratio
n N
orm
aliz
ed t
o B
Z#5
2 Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Kingston (RM 88.5) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 88.5River Mile 177.8
PC
B C
onge
ner
Con
cent
rati
on
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#5
2 Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Lents Cove (RM 43.2) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 43.2River Mile 177.8
PCB
Con
gene
r Con
cent
rati
on
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#5
2 Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Upper New York Bay (RM -1.9) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile -1.9River Mile 177.8
PC
B C
onge
ner
Co
ncen
trat
ion
No
rmal
ized
to
BZ
#52 Legend:
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Figure 3-76A Comparison of the Combined Thompson Island Dam PCB Load Congener Pattern
Recorded at Stillwater with Downstream Congener Patternsin Sediments Dated 1987 to 1990
TAMS/GradientSource: TAMS/Gradient Database
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Albany Turning Basin (RM 143.5) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 143.5River Mile 177.8
PC
B C
onge
ner
Con
cen
trat
ion
N
orm
aliz
ed t
o B
Z#5
2 Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Kingston (RM 88.5) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 88.5River Mile 177.8
PCB
Con
gene
r Co
ncen
trat
ion
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#5
2
Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Lents Cove (RM 43.2) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 43.2River Mile 177.8
PCB
Con
gene
r Con
cent
rati
on
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#5
2 Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Upper New York Bay (RM -1.9) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River M ile -1.9River Mile 177.8
PCB
Con
gene
r Con
cent
rati
on
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#5
2 Legend:
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Figure 3-77A Comparison of the Combined Thompson Island Dam PCB Load Congener Pattern
Recorded at Stillwater with Downstream Congener Patternsin Sediments Dated 1982 to 1986
TAMS/GradientSource: TAMS/Gradient Database
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
30 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Albany Turning Basin (RM 143.5) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 143.5River Mile 177.8
PC
B C
onge
ner
Co
ncen
trat
ion
N
orm
aliz
ed t
o B
Z#5
2 Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Kingston (RM 88.5) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 88.5River Mile 177.8
PC
B C
onge
ner
Co
ncen
trat
ion
N
orm
aliz
ed t
o B
Z#5
2 Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Lents Cove (RM 43.2) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile 43.2River Mile 177.8
PCB
Con
gene
r Co
ncen
trat
ion
Nor
mal
ized
to
BZ
#52 Legend:
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
200
205
Upper New York Bay (RM -1.9) vs. Stillwater (RM 177.8)
River Mile -1.9River Mile 177.8
PCB
Con
gene
r Co
ncen
trat
ion
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#5
2 Legend:
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Figure 3-78A Comparison of the Combined Thompson Island Dam PCB Load Congener Pattern
Recorded at Stillwater with Downstream Congener Patternsin Sediments Dated 1975 to 1981
TAMS/GradientSource: TAMS/Gradient Database
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
RM 143.5
Mohawk River
PCB
Con
gene
r Con
cent
ratio
nN
orm
aliz
ed to
BZ#
52a
Comparison of PCB Congener Patterns: RM 143.5 near Albanyand Mohawk River Sediments for 1991 to 1992 Deposition
Legend:BZ#4/BZ#52 = 36
PCB Congener (BZ#)
0
1
2
3
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
RM 143.5
77% RM 177.8 + 1% Mohawk River+ 3% A1260 + 19% A1016
RM 177.8
PCB
Con
gene
r Con
cent
ratio
nN
orm
aliz
ed to
BZ#
52
Comparison of PCB Congener Patterns: RM 143.5 near Albanyand a Calculated Mixture for 1991 to 1992 Deposition
Legend:
PCB Congener (BZ#)
0
1
2
3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
RM 143.5
85% RM 177.8 + 15% A1260
RM 177.8
PCB
Con
gene
r Con
cent
ratio
nN
orm
aliz
ed to
BZ#
52
Comparison of PCB Congener Patterns: RM 143.5 near Albanyand a Calculated Mixture for 1982 to 1986 Deposition
Legend:
PCB Congener (BZ#)
Figu
re 3
-79
Com
pari
son
of P
CB
Con
gene
r Pa
tter
ns a
t Riv
er M
ile 1
43.5
Sour
ce:
TAM
S/G
radi
ent D
atab
ase
TAM
S/G
radi
ent
Note:a. The vertical scale range is increased to accommodate the peak for BZ#110.
Fig
ure
3-80
Com
pari
son
of P
CB
Con
gene
r P
atte
rns
at R
iver
Mile
-1.
9
Sour
ce:
TA
MS/
Gra
dien
t Dat
abas
eT
AM
S/G
radi
ent
Note:
a. The vertical scale range is increased to accommodate the peak for BZ#110.
0
1
2
3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
RM -1.9 (Upper New York Bay)
44% RM 177.8 + 56% Newtown Creek
PCB
Con
gene
r C
once
ntra
tion
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#5
2
Comparison of PCB Congener Patterns: RM -1.9 and a Mixture of 44% RM 177.8 and 56% Newtown Creek for 1991 to 1992 Deposition
Legend:
PCB Congener (BZ#)
0
1
2
30
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
RM -1.9 (Upper New York Bay)
RM 177.8
PCB
Con
gene
r C
once
ntra
tion
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#5
2
Comparison of PCB Congener Patterns: RM -1.9 in Upper New York Bay and the RM 177.8 Stillwater Core for 1991 to 1992 Deposition
Legend:
PCB Congener (BZ#)
0
1
2
3
4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
Newtown Creek
40% A1242 + 36% A1254 + 24% A1260
PCB
Con
gene
r C
once
ntra
tion
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#5
2a
Comparison of PCB Congener Patterns: Newtown Creek for 1991 to 1992 Deposition and a Mixture of Aroclors
Legend:
PCB Congener (BZ#)
0
1
2
3
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
RM -1.9 (Upper New York Bay)
44% RM 177.8 + 56% Newtown Creek
PCB
Con
gene
r C
once
ntra
tion
Nor
mal
ized
to B
Z#5
2
Comparison of PCB Congener Patterns: RM -1.9 and a Mixture of 44% RM 177.8 and 56% Newtown Creek for 1991 to 1992 Deposition
Legend:
PCB Congener (BZ#)
And River Mile 188.5 at Thompson Island Pool
Averaging Estimate on GE Data
Figure 3-88
Average Daily PCB Homologue Load at Rogers Island (river Mile 194.6) and Thompson Island Dam (River Mile 188.5)
April 1991 through February 1996, Averaging Estimate on GE Data
Figure 3-89Gain across the Thompson Island Pool
Total PCBs, GE Data
Figure 3-90Gain across the Thompson Island Pool
Mono-Chlorinated PCBs, GE Data
Figure 3-91Gain across the Thompson Island Pool
Di-Chlorinated PCB Homologues, GE Data
Figure 3-92Gain across the Thompson Island Pool
Tri-Chlorinated PCB Homologues, GE Data
Figure 3-93Gain across the Thompson Island Pool
Tetra-Chlorinated PCB Homologues, GE Data
Figure 3-94PCB Homologue Composition Change across the Thompson Island Pool
April 1991 through February 1995, GE Data
Figure 3-96Summer PCB Homologue Concentrations
June through August 1992, GE Data
Figure 3-98Summer PCB Homologue Concentrations
June through August 1994, GE Data
Figure 3-99Summer PCB Homologue Concentrations
June through August 1995, GE Data
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-100Total PCB Load from USGS Data:
Ratio Estimator
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
PC
B lo
ad (
kg/y
r)
1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993
Year
Rogers IslandSchuylervilleStillwaterWaterford
Legend:USGS Upper Hudson RiverSampling Stations
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Figure 3-101Total PCB Load from USGS Data:
Averaging Estimator
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
PC
B L
oad
(kg/
yr)
1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993
Year
Rogers IslandSchuylervilleStillwaterWaterford
Legend:USGS Upper Hudson RiverSampling Stations
Figure 3-102Water-Column PCB Homologue Composition at River M ile 194.6 at Rogers Island
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/Gradient
Notes:a . Loading for Transect 3 converted to monthly basis.b. Represen ts whole-water analysis.
0
10
20
30
40
50
Mo
no
Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Transect 3 a: March 26-31, 19936 kg/month
D issolved-Phase PCBs
Suspended-Phase PCBs
Mas
s F
ract
ion
(%
)
PCB H omologue
Legend:
0
10
20
30
40
50
Mo
no
Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
W hole-Water PCBs
Ma
ss F
ract
ion
(%
)PCB Homologue
M ean M a rch ConditionBased on GE Data
17 kg/month
Legend:
b
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Mo
no
Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Transect 3a: March 26 - 31, 1993
26 kg/month
Dissolved-Phase PCBs
Suspended-Phase PCBs
Mas
s F
ract
ion
(%
)
PCB H omologue
Legend:
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Mo
no
Di
Tri
Tet
ra
Pen
ta
Hex
a
Hep
ta
Oct
a
No
na
Dec
a
Transect 6a: August 19 - September 1, 1993
15 kg/month
Dissolved-Phase PCBs
Suspended-Phase PCBs
Mas
s F
ract
ion
(%
)
PCB Homologue
Legend:
Figure 3-103Water-Column PCB Homologue Composition of the Net Thompson Island Pool Load
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/Gradient
Note:
a. Loading for transects converted to monthly basis.
E a r l y S p r i n g C o n d i t i o na
M a r c h 2 6 t o 3 1 , 1 9 9 31 8 k g / d a y
T h o m p s o n I s l a n d P o o l0 .8 7 k g / d a y
S p rin g R u n o f f E v e n t b
A p r i l 1 2 t o 1 4 , 1 9 9 31 8 k g / d a y
T h o m p so n Is l a n d P o o l0 . 1 4 k g / d a y
L a t e S p r i n g M e a n c
M a y t o J u n e 1 9 9 31 .4 k g / d a y
T h o m p so n Is l a n d P o o l0 .5 9 k g / d a y
S u m m e r M e a nJ u l y t o S e p t e m b e r , 1 9 9 3
1 . 0 k g / d a y
T h o m p s o n I s l a n d P o o l0 . 7 5 k g / d a y
P C B L o a d in g O r ig in a tin g A b o v e B a k e rs F a lls
In c r e m e n t a l P C B L o a d in g b e tw e e n B a k e r s F a lls a n d R o g e r s Is la n d
In c re m e n ta l P C B L o a d in g f r o m T h o m p s o n Is l an d P o o l
In c re m e n ta l P C B L o a d in g b e tw e e n T h o m p s o n Is la n d D a m a n d W a te r fo rd
L e g e n d :
P C B L o a d in g O r ig in a tin g A b o v e B a k e rs F a lls
In c r e m e n t a l P C B L o a d in g b e tw e e n B a k e r s F a lls a n d R o g e r s Is la n d
In c re m e n ta l P C B L o a d in g f r o m T h o m p s o n Is l an d P o o l
In c re m e n ta l P C B L o a d in g b e tw e e n T h o m p s o n Is la n d D a m a n d W a te r fo rd
L e g e n d :
F ig u r e 3 - 1 0 4C o m p a r is o n o f 1 9 9 3 U p p e r H u d s o n R i v e r P C B L o a d i n g s
a t W a t e r f o r d b a s e d o n P h a s e 2 D a t a
S o u rc e : T A M S / G r a d i e n t D a ta b a s e T A M S /G r a d i e n t
N o t e s :a . T h e l a r g e P C B l o a d i n g b e l o w t h e T h o m p s o n I s l a n d P o o l i s t h e re s u l t o f s c o u r o f t h e H u d s o n R iv e r s e d i m e n t s c a u s e d b y o n s e t o f t h e s p r i n g f lo o d e v e n t in t h e H o o s i c R i v e r.
b . T h e P C B lo a d i n g a c r o s s t h e T h o m p s o n I s l a n d P o o l i s es t im a t e d a s t h e d iffe re n c e b e t w e e n t h e P C B lo a d i n g s a t S c h u y l e r v i l l e a n d R o g e r s I s l a n d s i n c e t h eT h o m p s o n I s l a n d D a m s a m p l e i s c o n s i d e r e d t o o v e r - r e p r e s e n t d i l u t i o n b y t h e M o s e s K i l l .
c . T h e 7 % d e c r e a s e i n P C B lo a d b e t w e e n T h o m p s o n I s l a n d D a m a n d W ate r fo rd i s w i t h i n m e a s u r e m e n t u n c e r t a in ty a n d i s n o t re p r e s e n t e d h e r e .
180 kg /m o n th c
44 kg /m o n t h32 kg /m o n t h
20 kg /m o n t h
540 kg /m o n th b
24 kg /m o n t h
32 kg /m o n t h
42 kg /m o n t h
43 kg /m o n t h
76 kg /mon th c
190 kg /m o n th
19 kg /mon th
26 kg /mon th
41 kg /mon th
44 kg /m o n t h
44 kg /mon th
F i g u r e 3 - 1 0 5C o m p a r i s o n o f T r a n s e c t R e s u l t s , F l o w - A v e r a g e d E v e n t R e s u l t s , a n d M o n thly M e a n B a s e d o n G E D a ta
Source : TA M S /Gradient D a tabase • T A M S /C a d m u s /G r a d ien t
N o tes:a . PC B L o a ding for t ransec ts and f low-averaged events i s conver ted to a month ly bas i s .b. T he PCB load ing ac ros s t he Thompson I s l and Poo l is estim ated as the d i f fe rence be tween the PCB load ing a t Schuyle rv i l l e and Rogers I s land s ince the Thom p s o n I s l a n d D a m s a m p le i s cons idered to over - represen t di lut ion by the M oses Kil l .
c . Sam pl ing even t exh ib i t s a ne t dec rease in PCB load be tween Rogers I s l and and Thom p s o n I s la n d D a m w h ich i s no t represen ted here .
A p r i l
F low - A v e r a g e d E v e n tT r a n s e c t R esu l t sa
M a r c h
A u g u s t
J u l y
M a y
J u n e
S e p t e m b e r
M o n t h l y M e a n B a s e d o n G E D a t a
P C B L o a d ing O r ig ina t ing above Bakers Fa lls
Increm enta l L o a d ing from the Thompson I s l andP o o l
Increm e n tal L o a d ing betw een Bakers Fa l l s andRogers I s land
L e g e n d :
R esu l t sa
Figure 3-106Mean PCB Loadings at the Thompson Island Dam
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/Gradient
Notea. Data for November 1995 through February 1996 are not represented here due to two anomalously high background load measurements which were not observed consistently at downstream locations.
Period of ErraticReleases from the GEHudson Falls Facility/
Remnant Deposit Areas
Sept 1991 - May 1993
98 kg/month
Background Load0.13 kg/day
Load from GE Hudson Falls
Facility /RemnantDeposit Areas
2.5 kg/day
Net Load fromThompson Island
Pool Sediments0.66 kg/day
Prior to Onset of MajorReleases from GE Hudson
Falls Facility/RemnantDeposit Area21 kg/month
April - August 1991
Background Load0.08 kg/day
Load from GE Hudson Falls
Facility/RemnantDeposit Areas
0.27 kg/day
Net Load fromThompson IslandPool Sediments
0.36 kg/day
27 kg/month
July 1994 - Oct. 1995
Background Load0.17 kg/day
Load from GE Hudson Falls
Facility/RemnantDeposit Areas
0.28 kg/day
Net Load fromThompson IslandPool Sediments
0.46 kg/daya
One Year PeriodFollowing Bakers Falls
Renovation35 kg/month
June 1993 - June 1994
Background Load0.11 kg/day
Load from GE Hudson Falls
Facility/RemnantD eposit Areas
0.23 kg/day
Net Load fromThompson Island
Pool Sediments0.82 kg/day
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
7/1/
1993
12/3
0/19
93
7/1/
1994
12/3
0/19
94
7/1/
1995
12/3
1/19
95
Figure 3-107Water Column Total PCB Concentrations at the Thompson Island Dam:
June 1993 to May 1996 - GE Data
Tot
al P
CB
Con
cen
trat
ion
(n
g/L
)
Date
TAMS/GradientSource: TAMS/Gradient Database
AverageSummer
Water ColumnConcentration
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Mono Di Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta
May 199652 kg/month (1.7 kg/day)
Mas
s F
ract
ion
(%
)
PCB Homologue
a
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Mono Di Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta
June 199522 kg/month (0.73 kg/day)
Mas
s F
ract
ion
(%
)
PCB Homologue
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Mono Di Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta
June 199434 kg/month (1.1 kg/day)
June 1994
Mas
s F
ract
ion
(%
)
PCB Homologue
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Mono Di Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta
August 199326 kg/month (0.87 kg/day)
Mas
s F
ract
ion
(%
)
PCB Homologue
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Mono Di Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta
June 199336 kg/month (1.2 kg/day)
Mas
s F
ract
ion
(%
)
PCB Homologue
0
10
20
30
40
50
Mono Di Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta
June 199111 kg/month (0.37 kg/day)
Mas
s F
ract
ion
(%
)
PCB Homologue
Figure 3-108PCB Homologue Composition of the Net Thompson
Island Pool Load, GE Data
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
Note:a. Mass transport is based on instantaneous flow values reported by GE.
Mono Di Tri Tetra Penta Hexa Hepta Octa
Rogers Island
Thompson Island Dam
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
50.0
PC
B L
oad
(kg/
mon
th)
PCB Homologue
Figure 3-109Total PCB Load at Rogers Island and the Thompson Island Dam - May 27
1996, GE Data
Source: GE Remnant Deposit Monitoring Report Monthly Update, July 5, 1996 TAMS/Gradient
0
5
10
15
20
150160170180190200210
Transect 3 - March 26 to 31, 1993
River Stations
TributariesP
CB
Loa
d (
kg/
day
)
River MileBatten Kill
Hoosic River 3/27/93
Mohawk River
Legend:
Hoosic River b
3/30/93
0
5
10
15
20
150160170180190200210
Transect 4 - April 12 to 14, 1993
River Stations
Tributaries
PC
B L
oad
(k
g/d
ay)
River Mile
Batten Kill Hoosic River
Mohawk River
Legend:
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
150160170180190200210
Transect 6 - August 19 Through September 1, 1993
River Stations
Tributaries
PC
B L
oad
(k
g/d
ay)
River Mile
Batten Kill Hoosic River Mohawk River
Legend:
Figure 3-110PCB Load vs. River Mile for ThreePhase 2 Water-Column Transects
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
b. Hoosic River dissolved and suspended matter PCB concentrations for 3/27/93 were used here to provide a upper bound estimate on the Hoosic River load.
Note:a. The vertical scale for each plot is adjusted to accommodate the range of loads.
������������
������������
������������
������������
Transect 1 - January 19930.98 kg.day
������������������������������
������������������������������
Transect 3 - March 199321 kg/day
������
������
Transect 6 - August 19930.76 kg/day
Transect 4 - April 199322 kg/day
Figure 3-111PCB Loadings to the Hudson River at River Mile 153.9
near Albany based on the Water-Column Transect Sampling
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database TAMS/ Gradient
PCB Loading Originating above Bakers Falls
Incremental PCB Loading between Bakers Falls & Waterford
PCB Loading from the Batten Kill
PCB Loading from the Hoosic River
PCB Loading from the Mohawk River����
����
Legend:
Figure 3-112Fractional PCB Loads at Albany for 1991 to 1992
Based on Dated High-Resolution Sediment Core Results
Source: TAMS/Gradient D atabase TAMS/ Gradient
PCB Loading Originating above Bakers Falls
Incremental PCB Loading between Bakers Falls & Waterford
PCB Loading from the Batten Kill
PCB Loading from the Hoosic River
PCB Loading from the Mohawk River
Legend:
Note: Based on Table 3-25.
Notes: a. Exponential decline in Upper Hudson load = 0.2765/year b. Exponential decline in downstream loads = 0.057/year c. 1 lb/day = 0.454 kg/daySource: Thomann, et al. (1989 and 1991) TAMS/Gradient
Figure 3-113Model-Projected PCB Loadings to Lower Hudson River and Harbor for 1993
Upper Hudson River
0.5 lb/day (11%)
Atmosphere0.16 lb/day (3%)
Tributaries1.1 lb/day (24%)
Leachate0.03 lb/day (1%)
Stormwater0.9 lb/day (20%)
CSOs0.6 lb/day (13%)
Sewage1.3 lb/day (28%)
Projected Total Load = 4.6 lb/day (2.1 kg/day)
Notes: a. Loadings are for 1993 only and should not be used to directly estimate conditions for other time periods (see text for discussio b. 1 lb/day = 0.454 kg/day
Source: TAMS/Gradient Database and various others discussed in text at Sections 2.3 and 3.5 TAMS/Gradient
Figure 3-114Estimated PCB Loadings to Lower Hudson and Harbor for 1993
Sewage0.9 lb/day (10%)
CSOs0.4 lb/day (4%)
Stormwater0.5 lb/day (5%)
Leachate 0.03 lb/day (~0%)
Tributaries1.0 lb/day (11%)
Atmosphere0.16 lb/day (2%)
Upper Hudson River6.4 lb/day (68%)
Estimated Total Load = 9.4 lb/day (4.3 kg/day)