834

 1           DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
       DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, STATE OF FLORIDA
 2 
   
 3   SUGAR CANE GROWERS COOPERATIVE     )
     OF FLORIDA; ROTH FARMS, INC., and  )
 4   WEDGWORTH FARMS, INC.,             )
                      Petitioners,      ) DOAH Case No. 92-3038
 5        v.                            )
     SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT     )
 6   DISTRICT, an agency of the State   )
     of Florida; et al.,                )
 7                    Respondents.      )
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
 8   FLORIDA SUGAR CANE LEAGUE, INC.;   )
     UNITED STATES SUGAR CORPORATION;   )
 9   and NEW HOPE SOUTH, INC.,          )
                      Petitioners,      )
10        v.                            ) DOAH Case No. 92-3039
     SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT     )
11   DISTRICT, an agency of the State   )
     of Florida; et al.,                )
12                    Respondents.      )
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
13   FLORIDA FRUIT AND VEGETABLE        )
     ASSOCIATION; LEWIS POPE FARMS;     )
14   W.E. SCHLECHTER & SONS, INC.,      )
     and HUNDLEY FARMS, INC.,           )
15                    Petitioners,      )
          v.                            ) DOAH Case No. 92-3040
16   SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT     )
     DISTRICT, an agency of the State   )
17   of Florida; et al.,                )
                      Respondents.      )
18  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
                          100 S.E. 2nd Street
19                        Miami, Florida
                          April 6, 1994
20                        10:10 a.m -  5:50 p.m.
   
21              DEPOSITION OF RONALD D. JONES
   
22             Taken before THOMAS R. NEUMANN, Registered
     Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for
23   the State of Florida at Large, pursuant to Notice of
     Taking Deposition filed in the above cause.
24                          - - - - - - -

                                                 835

 1                       APPEARANCES
   
 2 
      ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS FLORIDA SUGAR CANE
 3    LEAGUE, INC., UNITED STATES SUGAR CORP., and
      NEW SOUTH HOPE, INC.
 4 
           EARL, BLANK, KAVANAUGH & STOTTS, P.A.
 5         215 So. Monroe Street
           Suite 350
 6         Tallahassee, Florida  32301
           BY:  WILLIAM L. HYDE, ESQ.
 7 
      ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-INTERVENOR
 8    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
   
 9         SUZAN HILL PONZOLI, ESQ.
           ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
10         99 N.E. 4th Street
           Miami, Florida  33132
11 
      ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS SUGAR CANE GROWERS
12    COOPERATIVE OF FLORIDA, ROTH FARMS, INC., AND
      WEDGWORTH FARMS, INC.
13 
           HOPPING, BOYD, GREEN & SAMS
14         123 South Calhoun Street
           P.O. Box 6526,
15         Tallahassee, Florida  32314
           BY:  GARY P. SAMS, ESQ.
16 
                                INDEX
17   Witness            Direct    Cross    Redirect    Recross
     RONALD D. JONES
18   By Mr. Hyde:         837                 947
     By Mr. Sams:                  892

                                                 836

 1 
   
 2                            EXHIBITS
   
 3     NUMBER                 BATES NO.                PAGE
   
 4     Composite Exhibit 89.............................893
       Exhibit 90.......................................901
 5     Exhibit 91.......................................910
       Exhibit 92.......................................910
 6     Exhibit 93.......................................914
       Exhibit 94.......................................916
 7     Exhibit 95.......................................922
       Exhibit 96.......................................926
 8     Composite Exhibit 97.............................929
       Exhibit 98.......................................947
 9     Exhibits 99 through 109..........................948
       Composite Exhibit 110............................971
10     Exhibit 111......................................974
       Exhibit 112......................................977
11     Exhibit 113......................................988
       Exhibit 114......................................990
12     Exhibit 115......................................991
       Exhibit 116......................................992
13     Exhibit 117......................................998
       Exhibit 118......................................999
14     Exhibit 119.....................................1000
       Exhibit 120.....................................1007
15     Exhibit 121.....................................1008
       Exhibit 122.....................................1009
16     Exhibit 123.....................................1010
       Exhibit 124.....................................1010
17     Exhibit 125.....................................1011
       Exhibit 126.....................................1011
18 
   

                                                 837

 1  Thereupon --
 2                        RONALD D. JONES
 3  was called as a witness and, having been first duly
 4  sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
 5                    DIRECT EXAMINATION
 6   BY MR. HYDE:
 7       Q.    Just again for purposes of the record would
 8   you please state your name and address, please?
 9       A.    My name is Ronald D. Jones.  I reside at
10   15069 Southwest 13th Court, Sunrise, Florida, 33190.
11       Q.    Dr. Jones, as you well know my name is
12   William Hyde.  I'm with the firm of Earl, Blank,
13   Kavanaugh & Stotts.
14             I'm here to depose you today in a follow up
15   deposition concerning your anticipated testimony in
16   the so-called Everglades SWIM Plan proceeding which
17   may or may not occur, depending on what the Florida
18   legislature does in the next few days.
19             MS. PONZOLI:  Or hours.
20             MR. HYDE:  My primary purpose here today is
21        to find out as much as I can about your data
22        collection and analytical tasks, especially as
23        they relate to phosphorous in the Everglades
24        Protection Area.
25             And just before I get into that particular

                                                 838

 1        category of questioning, I wanted to just do a
 2        couple of clean up questions from our previous
 3        deposition.
 4   BY MR. HYDE:
 5       Q.    During our previous deposition we
 6   identified a series of documents.  I think they were
 7   your declaration from the federal litigation in
 8   support of the U.S. motion for summary judgment and
 9   then another document entitled "Supplemental
10   Testimony of Ron Jones."  They were Exhibits 53 and
11   55 where you, in effect, expressed various opinions
12   about what your testimony would be in the context of
13   a hearing as to adverse impacts on the Everglades.
14             Do you intend at this moment or at this
15   time to offer any opinions in addition to those that
16   are set forth there?  And you can take a look at
17   Exhibits 53 and 55 if you would like to refresh your
18   recollection.
19             MS. PONZOLI:  Do you have them with you?
20             MR. HYDE:  Yes, they are a faxed copy.
21             MS. PONZOLI:  I do want to indicate that I
22        believe the United States had indicated at the
23        other deposition -- the beginning of this
24        deposition that Dr. Jones will also offer
25        testimony on phosphorous cycling, which he was

                                                 839

 1        questioned for several days by the cooperative.
 2        We don't anticipate at this time that we will be
 3        putting on an affirmative case, but we
 4        anticipate he would be offered in rebuttal
 5        testimony in that regard.
 6             I think we had also indicated that
 7        Dr. Jones would give expert testimony on the use
 8        of chemical treatment for phosphorous removal.
 9        To the best of my recollection, those are the
10        only two sort of generic additions that we
11        anticipate his adding.
12             MR. HYDE:  I thank you for clarifying.
13        Once you mentioned it, I did recall those two
14        myself.
15   BY MR. HYDE:
16       Q.    Dr. Jones, I want you to take a look at the
17   document and make sure there was something that was
18   not being left out.
19       A.    I might have a question concerning 55.  And
20   that would be, is this the modified version because I
21   had not --
22       Q.    54 was the earlier version which you did
23   modify.  I thought it was attached.
24             MS. PONZOLI:  Didn't we actually write on
25        this -- 54 would be ahead of this.

                                                 840

 1             THE WITNESS:  It's not it.
 2             MR. HYDE:  It should be there.
 3             THE WITNESS:  This is correct.  I'm sorry.
 4        I want to make sure we are looking at the same
 5        one.
 6   BY MR. HYDE:
 7       Q.    We are referring to Exhibits 53 and 55 from
 8   the previous deposition?
 9       A.    That's correct.  And it is my understanding
10   with the exception that counsel just made that this
11   is it, the area.
12       Q.    Now onto the main purpose of the deposition
13   today.
14             Dr. Jones, I want to go through the general
15   areas where you have done sampling and analysis,
16   first just to make sure I covered them.  Then we can
17   get into specific documents.
18             My review of your previous deposition and
19   the documents that we just referred to, Exhibits 53
20   and 55, indicate to me that you have done the
21   following.  Please note this is my assessment.  There
22   may be additional stuff.
23             You measured whether phosphorous has
24   accumulated in the soils of the Park and the refuge;
25   correct?

                                                 841

 1       A.    That's correct.
 2       Q.    You measured the areal phosphorous
 3   concentrations in the soils along transects in the
 4   Park, the Loxahatchee refuge, Water Conservation Area
 5   2A and Water Conservation Area 3A; is that correct?
 6       A.    That's correct.
 7       Q.    You also measured alkaline phosphatase
 8   activity in the water at sampling points along a
 9   transect in the Everglades National Park and in the
10   perimeter canal of the Loxahatchee refuge, correct?
11       A.    That's correct.  There were additional
12   places, also.
13       Q.    What additional places did you measure
14   alkaline phosphatase?
15       A.    In the water column across the transects in
16   Loxahatchee along the transects in Water Conservation
17   Area 3A and in the canals.  I guess it would be in
18   the canal down along U.S. 41.
19       Q.    You said also along transects in the refuge
20   and the canal along U.S. 41.  Where else was it?
21       A.    Water Conservation Area 2A and 3A.  I'm
22   limiting it to work that's done in the Everglades
23   freshwater environment because we have a number of
24   things done in Florida Bay and Whitewater Bay, also.
25   I don't wanted you to think --

                                                 842

 1       Q.    For purposes of my questioning here today
 2   I'm only concerned about that which you have done in
 3   the Everglades Protection Area, which would be
 4   specifically the refuge, the Park, water conservation
 5   areas 2A, 2B, 3A and 3B.  I'm not concerned about
 6   Florida Bay.
 7       A.    Florida Bay is part of the Everglades
 8   Protection Area because it's within the Park.
 9       Q.    I understand that, but I'm not really
10   interested for purpose of my question in Florida Bay.
11       A.    I understand.
12       Q.    Unless for some reason I change my mind,
13   but it doesn't seem likely.
14       A.    I understand.
15       Q.    Have you collected any phosphorous related
16   data, either soil, water in water conservation areas
17   2A, 2B or 3 or 3B?
18       A.    I have some information for 3B.  I don't
19   believe I ever collected any samples in 2B.  I have
20   been there and I may have collected some samples and
21   had them dried and they would be in storage, but they
22   have not been analyzed -- most certainly have not
23   been analyzed.
24       Q.    For what purpose did you collect data in
25   3B?

                                                 843

 1       A.    I collected samples in 3B.  I would say
 2   that samples and data are different from that
 3   standpoint.
 4       Q.    Well, as modified, what did you do in 3B?
 5       A.    I collected samples near the Richardson
 6   sites, if memory serves me.
 7       Q.    You say Richardson.  You are referring to
 8   Dr. Curtis Richardson?
 9       A.    I'm sorry, I'm referring to 2B.  I'm sorry.
10   Curtis Richardson sites in 2B.  Your question was for
11   3B, I apologize.
12       Q.    Just to make sure I understand, you
13   collected some data or you did some sampling in 2B?
14       A.    That's correct.
15             MS. PONZOLI:  Off the record.
16                  (Discussion off the record.)
17   BY MR. HYDE:
18       Q.    Why did you collect the samples in 2B from
19   the, I presume, the Duke Wetland Center sites?
20       A.    Near the Duke Wetland Center sites.  They
21   were collected just to get an idea perhaps of what
22   the total phosphorous content of the soil was in
23   those areas if there was reason to believe that the
24   data in the Duke wetland report was incorrect or for
25   comparison purposes.

                                                 844

 1       Q.    Did you find anything that indicated that
 2   the Duke Wetland Center data was incorrect or
 3   misleading?
 4             MS. PONZOLI:  Object to the form.  I think
 5        that's a pretty broad question.  I don't know he
 6        has even seen all of the Duke wetland site data.
 7             MR. HYDE:  I'm referring in the context of
 8        this particular sampling effort for 2B.
 9             THE WITNESS:  I have not gone in any
10        further to actually do that.  Time has been
11        pretty tight, so I still have those samples.
12        They may be analyzed in the future, but I doubt
13        it.
14   BY MR. HYDE:
15       Q.    Do you anticipate you will do that before
16   trial in this cause?
17       A.    I don't know.  I doubt it.
18       Q.    Excluding the Everglades agricultural area,
19   have you collected any other data including but not
20   necessarily limited to phosphorous data, either water
21   or soil and alkaline phosphatase data in the
22   Everglades Protection Area other than what you have
23   just noted for me here today?
24       A.    Yes.
25       Q.    What other data have you collected?

                                                 845

 1       A.    The data -- I have a student who is working
 2   in Water Conservation Area 3A.  We collected both
 3   mercury and phosphorous data in a grid network or
 4   grid pattern in the southern portion of Water
 5   Conservation Area 3A.
 6       Q.    Was that total phosphorous data?
 7       A.    Total phosphorous in the soil and total
 8   mercury in the soil.
 9             I have collected samples along with the
10   Environmental Protection Agency for mercury and
11   phosphorous in the canals, 50 canal stations.
12       Q.    Again, was that total phosphorous?
13       A.    Total phosphorous in soil and water
14   sediment and water and mercury.
15       Q.    At 50?
16       A.    50 canal stations, exactly.
17       Q.    That's throughout the EPA?
18       A.    Well, that's all the way from Lake
19   Okeechobee to Florida Bay.
20       Q.    Have you collected any other data?
21       A.    Yes, at various projects throughout the
22   last ten years there have been samples that have been
23   collected that have phosphorous values or alkaline
24   phosphatase values associated with them, various
25   other parameters.

                                                 846

 1       Q.    How does that data differ from that which
 2   you have already identified?
 3             MS. PONZOLI:  Object to the form.
 4             THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry.  I don't
 5        understand what you mean.
 6   BY MR. HYDE:
 7       Q.    Well, you indicated, for example, that you
 8   had measured alkaline phosphatase activity in the
 9   Park and in the perimeter canal of the refuge and
10   also along some transects in the refuge canal along
11   U.S. 41 and WCA-2A and 3A.  Just a moment ago you
12   indicated that you had done some additional alkaline
13   phosphatase measurements.
14             I'm trying to understand how this latest
15   category is different from the -- more segregated
16   from what you had previously identified.
17       A.    The question I believe, unless I really
18   misunderstood it, was total phosphorous, other
19   analysis -- not alkaline phosphatase.
20             I have not necessarily measured alkaline
21   phosphatase at all of those other additional
22   stations.  There was additional alkaline phosphatase
23   work done.  It was not such a regular or in a defined
24   pattern as the transect studies were.
25             In addition, there was a document produced

                                                 847

 1   at my last deposition which had a series of locations
 2   where we measured alkaline phosphatase and total
 3   phosphorous in the water column on a grid in
 4   Everglades National Park in Water Conservation Area
 5   3A.  That document is missing with my earlier
 6   production last year.  And I would desperately like
 7   to find that because it was representing a lot of
 8   work with alkaline phosphatase.  I can't go back and
 9   repeat those -- I can't reanalyze the samples because
10   they were water and they had to be discarded.  That
11   work exists.  It was lost.
12       Q.    So we don't have it either, correct?
13       A.    I have not seen it in the documents.  We
14   found the three or four pages of material that showed
15   where the sampling locations were -- had conductivity
16   measurements and a small map indicating where the
17   grid points were.  What was attached to that was also
18   the data and the data is missing.
19       Q.    Well, perhaps if we come across it we can
20   revisit it.
21             Is there any other data that you have
22   collected in the EPA -- excluding, of course, the
23   Everglades agricultural area and Florida Bay?
24       A.    We have a number of laboratory studies that
25   have been done with samples collected from the EPA.

                                                 848

 1   And I guess from that standpoint it's not field data,
 2   but it is using samples from the area.
 3       Q.    What were the purpose or purposes of the
 4   lab studies?
 5       A.    There were two major premises.  One was to
 6   examine the uptake and incorporation of phosphorous
 7   removal efficiencies, if you will, phosphorous from
 8   the water column and its various forms by soils from
 9   predominantly Everglades National Park which had
10   different levels of total phosphorous.
11             The other was to examine the effects that
12   phosphorous had on limiting various microbial
13   activities in the soil.
14       Q.    Is there any other work that you have done
15   along these lines beyond that which you have already
16   identified?
17       A.    I'm thinking.
18       Q.    Take your time.
19       A.    It has been ten years.
20       Q.    I have trouble remembering what I did ten
21   weeks ago, so don't worry about it.
22       A.    I have done some work in Loxahatchee
23   National Wildlife Refuge pertaining to total
24   phosphorous and alkaline phosphatase activity and
25   water column concentrations of total phosphorous,

                                                 849

 1   orthophosphorous along gradients extending from tree
 2   islands that had bird rookeries on them.
 3             I have also analyzed a number of samples
 4   from Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge pertaining
 5   to total phosphorous and rainfall and total
 6   phosphorous in the 16 stations or whatever that are
 7   being used for monitoring in the refuge.  And I have
 8   analyzed a number of soil samples that were collected
 9   in parallel with the League and the cooperative entry
10   and access into various areas.
11       Q.    Is that all?
12       A.    Let me take a moment.
13             I had a student who did work in the
14   Everglades National Park in Water Conservation Area
15   3B looking at methane production and how it related
16   to various other soil parameters.  Total phosphorous
17   would have been one of those.
18       Q.    This work was done in Everglades National
19   Park in Water Conservation Area 3 --
20       A.    3B.
21       Q.    -- and the purpose was to investigate
22   methane?
23       A.    Methane production, methanogenesis.
24       Q.    Why was that study being done, for what
25   purpose?

                                                 850

 1       A.    There was just a Master's degree student
 2   paper.  I worked for many years now in the area of
 3   trace gas chemistry, analytical chemistry.  It is one
 4   of my interests, and so it was not done for the
 5   purpose of this issue.  It was just something that
 6   happened during that same time frame.
 7       Q.    When you say it was not done for the
 8   purpose of this issue, do you mean for the purposes
 9   of this proceeding?
10       A.    Yes, that is correct.
11       Q.    You are not going to be relying on it for
12   the purposes of your opinions?
13       A.    No.  I may very well rely on it.  It
14   contains some valuable information.  I can't discard
15   the stuff that I learned ten years ago just because
16   this proceeding started six years ago.
17       Q.    I understand that.  I'm just trying to find
18   out what you are relying on.
19       A.    Yes.
20       Q.    For what purpose would you rely on that
21   person's, I guess, Master's thesis?
22       A.    Yes.
23       Q.    Is it completed?
24       A.    It's completed and the work was published.
25       Q.    Who is the Master's student?

                                                 851

 1       A.    Dave Bachoon and myself.
 2       Q.    Do you recall in general terms what the
 3   title of that paper was?
 4       A.    It had the word "methanogenesis."
 5   "Potential Grades of Potential methanogenesis."  You
 6   would have been provided a copy.
 7       Q.    I think I do recognize it.
 8             What important information did you glean
 9   from that study for purposes of your opinion?
10       A.    It provides more of a background
11   information.  It provides me with some E, H or redox
12   potential of the soils within Everglades National
13   Park, and then just sort of general experience or
14   whatever in the Everglades that I have had.  It's all
15   part of my background.
16       Q.    What does it show you about redox
17   potential?
18       A.    That the soils particularly in Everglades
19   National Park are not highly reduced, that there is
20   oxygen present throughout the soil column even though
21   the soils are flooded.
22       Q.    Now we have gone through this methane
23   paper.  Are there any other documents that you can
24   think of or studies or data that relate to Everglades
25   work?

                                                 852

 1       A.    There is current work that's taking place.
 2       Q.    What is your current work?
 3       A.    We are currently starting as of yesterday
 4   and today and throughout next week -- the
 5   Environmental Protection Agency is down and we are
 6   running the transects in -- the four transects again.
 7   We will be looking at mercury and phosphorous along
 8   the transects.
 9       Q.    Is that for total phosphorous?
10       A.    Total phosphorous and water in the soil.
11       Q.    And mercury?
12       A.    And mercury.
13       Q.    Where are these transects?
14       A.    The transects are the same transects.
15   Everglades National Park transects, Water
16   Conservation Area 3A transects, 2A transects and
17   Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge transects.
18       Q.    Are you engaged in any other current work
19   in the Everglades Protection Area?
20       A.    Yes.  I have a student working on
21   Everglades National Park on nitrogen cycling.  I have
22   a post doc working on phosphorous effects on various
23   microbial enzymatic processes, and there are two
24   students working on mercury in -- well, the Park and
25   in Water Conservation Area 3B.

                                                 853

 1       Q.    I believe you just stated this work is also
 2   ongoing?
 3       A.    Yes.
 4       Q.    When do you anticipate it being done and
 5   why don't you just break it down in terms of a
 6   particular study being done?
 7       A.    The EPA mercury work I see going on for a
 8   long time.  You know, there will be obviously results
 9   coming out throughout the course and publishing some
10   papers now or working getting some papers published
11   now.  But I think that's probably over the next five
12   years.
13             Other projects will take between, you know,
14   one and two years.  I can't really break them down.
15   There are always results coming in all the time.  And
16   when the results are sufficient to publish or to
17   submit an article for publication, at that point the
18   project may not be complete, but at that point we
19   would submit an article for publication.
20       Q.    Has any of this current work reached that
21   state?
22       A.    Yes.  We have two articles.  The abstracts
23   have been accepted and we have been asked to write
24   articles for a mercury conference that's coming up
25   later on in the summer.  And we are submitting a

                                                 854

 1   paper which I produced last time for you all to look
 2   at on the "Analytical Methodology for Mercury
 3   Speciation Determinations."
 4             There are a number of abstracts.  I just
 5   can't recall which ones they would be that are in
 6   various stages of press or whatnot.
 7       Q.    Is all of this work concerned with mercury?
 8       A.    Mercury and phosphorous, both.  With the
 9   exception of the analytical paper, which is really
10   just a methods paper.
11       Q.    The analytical paper is which one?
12       A.    It would be of "Speciation of Mercury by
13   Gas Chromatography."
14       Q.    Has any of this work specifically or solely
15   related to just phosphorous?
16       A.    No.  I take that back.
17             The one project that my post doc is doing
18   is very much a phosphorous project.  But it has in
19   addition to that microbial activities, so it's not
20   just a measurement of phosphorous.
21       Q.    Has that project matured to a state where
22   you have information that you can rely on for
23   purposes of your opinions here?
24       A.    There is some information that has been
25   generated by that project which further substantiate

                                                 855

 1   published works that we have already done with
 2   microbial processes.  It has not gone far enough
 3   where we are ready to publish it.  We are in the
 4   process of working out the methodologies.
 5       Q.    How does it serve to substantiate those
 6   earlier papers?
 7       A.    It indicates, as the earlier publications
 8   have, that phosphorous is the key limiting factor in
 9   the Everglades, and that the nutrient pollution
10   coming into Everglades National Park is altering
11   these activities in the soil.
12       Q.    By "activities," you mean microbial
13   processes?
14       A.    Microbial activities, correct.
15       Q.    Is that post doctorate study available or
16   is the data available for it?
17       A.    There is no data at this point.  What we
18   have been doing is, we are shifting from using a
19   enzyme substrate that had ortho-methylfluorecene as
20   the indicator to an umbileferone.
21             It requires a lot of preliminary work to
22   make a change like that in the basic methodology, so
23   we are working those methods out.  As we work the
24   methods out, we gain some insight because we are
25   using natural samples.  But the data from that is not

                                                 856

 1   collected in the manner or the same way as if we were
 2   going to do these assays.
 3             What we are doing is just finding out
 4   whether these techniques work, how to make them work,
 5   and then we will go on and do a very defined
 6   experimental approach with a number of stations along
 7   the transects.
 8       Q.    I believe you previously indicated that you
 9   turned over, I guess, the bulk of this information
10   to -- perhaps all of it, but I want to make sure we
11   do have things, if you can just bear with me for a
12   moment because I'm not myself intimately familiar
13   with all of this.
14             You have turned over, I take it, the soil
15   phosphorous data that you have collected in the Park
16   refuge, water conservation areas 2A and 3A; correct?
17       A.    With the exception of the documents.
18             MS. PONZOLI:  These, the ones we brought
19        today, he has done some updating since his last
20        depo.
21   BY MR. HYDE:
22       Q.    We will get to that.  Beyond these
23   documents, which I would like to take a look at in a
24   while.
25       A.    Beyond those, you have everything.

                                                 857

 1   Everything was produced.  Whether it was actually
 2   selected and Xeroxed, I don't know.
 3       Q.    And that would be the same for the
 4   phosphorous concentrations and the water columns in
 5   those same areas?
 6       A.    Yes.
 7       Q.    That would also include your alkaline
 8   phosphatase activity along the Park transect,
 9   perimeter canal of the refuge, transects in the
10   refuge, canal on U.S. 41 and Water Conservation Area
11   2A and 3A?
12       A.    Where the data is available it has been
13   provided for selection.  I ought to point out that
14   these documents were not Xeroxed in totality.  I
15   mean, you all selected what you wanted and I don't
16   know for sure what that was.
17       Q.    Did you review the documents that we had
18   selected -- when I say "we," I mean what my firm
19   selected -- to ascertain whether documents had been
20   left out that related to those areas?
21             MS. PONZOLI:  Object to the form.
22             THE WITNESS:  I looked through the
23        documents.  I recall there were something like
24        maybe two and a half, three banker's boxes of
25        selected documents.  And obviously going through

                                                 858

 1        that many pages of material, I couldn't be as
 2        complete in the review.
 3             I did note that there were certain
 4        materials that were presented that were not in
 5        the Xerox of selected documents.
 6   BY MR. HYDE:
 7       Q.    Could you identify for me, if you can
 8   recall, what some of these more obvious omissions
 9   were?
10       A.    File folders, the file folders with the
11   label of what was in them.
12       Q.    You are talking about just the file folder
13   itself?
14       A.    That contained the data with the label on
15   the top describing what it was.  That often was not
16   included.  A number of -- I'll call it machine output
17   or computer paper with just many, many numbers from
18   the autoanalyzer.
19             MS. PONZOLI:  Being they took the summary
20        data but not the raw data?
21             THE WITNESS:  That's correct.
22   BY MR. HYDE:
23       Q.    Any other obvious omissions?
24       A.    That's -- those are the two that I recall
25   just from going through the documents.

                                                 859

 1       Q.    You indicated that you had also collected
 2   some data in Water Conservation Area 2B nearby the
 3   Duke Wetland Center sites?
 4       A.    I collected samples, yes.
 5       Q.    You collected some samples near the Duke
 6   Wetland Center sites in Water Conservation Area 2B;
 7   is that correct?
 8       A.    That's correct.
 9       Q.    Was that turned over?
10       A.    There is no data.  There are little ground
11   up bottles of dirt and they are hard to Xerox.
12       Q.    So it's just the samples, you haven't
13   performed any analysis?
14       A.    No analysis.  That's why I distinguished
15   between data and samples.
16       Q.    What about the bulk mercury and total
17   phosphorous data from the soil in Water Conservation
18   Area 3A?
19       A.    That data has been turned over with the
20   exception of what's contained in the new documents.
21       Q.    Now, the mercury and total phosphorous, are
22   they just samples or data in soil and water from the
23   50 canal stations?
24       A.    There is now data on the complete set of
25   data.

                                                 860

 1       Q.    You are saying there is now data.  Is that
 2   something to be turned over?
 3       A.    Yes, portions of it.  Portions were
 4   available the last time you deposed me.  We indicated
 5   this was an ongoing project.  As that data becomes
 6   available we would make it available.  Last week I
 7   received some information.
 8       Q.    I just want to make sure I understand what
 9   it is.
10       A.    Yes.
11       Q.    The data from lab studies done on samples
12   from the EPA to examine uptake of phosphorous from
13   the water column -- I guess it was primarily from the
14   Park -- have to do with measuring the effects of
15   phosphorous and microbial activities?
16       A.    You have the data and the published papers
17   for that, and the submitted articles that went along
18   with the data.
19       Q.    Now, what about the total phosphorous and
20   alkaline phosphatase measurements along the gradients
21   extending from bird rookeries?
22       A.    You have that data.
23       Q.    Was that done in the refuge only?
24       A.    Yes.
25       Q.    What about the total phosphorous

                                                 861

 1   measurements in rainfall and at 16 stations of the
 2   refuge?
 3       A.    You have that data, and there is additional
 4   data to be produced today.
 5       Q.    Now, what about data that had been
 6   processed in connection with the, I guess, Master's
 7   paper on methane production?
 8       A.    You have the paper and the whole file that
 9   contains all of the data with that.
10             Again, I should say I produced that data.
11   I cannot -- considering the way it was done, the
12   whole packets weren't taken in always.  I can't
13   remember how many purple stickies or orange stickies
14   were stuck on the things for FLSC.
15       Q.    You did not withhold any of it?
16       A.    No.  I turned over everything that was in
17   my file with the exception of privileged information.
18       Q.    Were your soil sediment samplings or
19   phosphorous all collected in the same manner?
20       A.    No.
21       Q.    Would you describe for me the different
22   ways -- first of all, how many different ways did you
23   collect soil samples for phosphorous?
24       A.    Approximately five.
25       Q.    Did you collect the samples in different

                                                 862

 1   ways to learn different things, or was it just sort
 2   of an evolution over time?
 3             MS. PONZOLI:  Object to the form.
 4             THE WITNESS:  Actually, the collection
 5        method, a number of them are still being used.
 6        Certain areas it's easier to collect it one way,
 7        others areas it's impossible to collect it.
 8   BY MR. HYDE:
 9       Q.    Why don't you take me down the list of the
10   different ways that you have collected soil sediment
11   for phosphorous analysis?
12       A.    Okay.  When we are sampling in canals or in
13   deeper water areas, we use what's referred to as an
14   Eckman core or box core sampler.
15       Q.    Spell that.
16       A.    E-C-K-M-A-N.  There may not be a C in
17   there.  It might be E-K-M-A-N.  And that is, simply,
18   it looks like a clam shell.  It goes down and sits on
19   the bottom and grabs a sediment sample.
20             We have also used what is called an
21   eggshell core device, and this is simply a piece of
22   stainless steel pipe with a polycarbonate plastic
23   liner in what's called an eggshell at the bottom of
24   it which is a very, very thin piece of plastic that
25   acts -- as a sample goes in, it looks like a series

                                                 863

 1   of fingers that opens up.  And then when you draw the
 2   sample up, the fingers are forced back closed and it
 3   retains the sample in the coring tube.
 4       Q.    In what area is the eggshell core device
 5   utilized?
 6       A.    We used that in the canals.  And we have
 7   also utilized it in the -- just by hands in the water
 8   conservation areas.
 9       Q.    What's the third category?
10       A.    The third category would be PVC cores.
11       Q.    And where was that?
12       A.    That was predominantly used in the water
13   conservation areas and the Everglades National Park,
14   Loxahatchee.  That was used in all of the areas.
15       Q.    And then what's the fourth category?
16       A.    The fourth category would be what we call a
17   grab sample, which is using a hand when you go out.
18   We used that sampling methodology everywhere.  It's
19   probably the predominant mechanism that we used after
20   we compare -- we have used that for comparison with
21   cores.
22             We find out there is no difference between
23   cores and the grab sample.  We used the grab sample
24   because it's much easier than trying to carry a
25   sampling device.

                                                 864

 1       Q.    And you indicated there was a fifth one?
 2       A.    Fifth and really another coring device.
 3   It's a large polycarbonate tube and we use these
 4   tubes when we want to make thin sections of the soil,
 5   when we want to profile the soil, say, two centimeter
 6   increments.  Or if we want to get certain fractions,
 7   we will use those cores.  There are other mechanisms
 8   that we have used, but they are all a variation on
 9   these five principals on these devices.
10       Q.    When you were sampling the water column for
11   phosphorous, did you use one or several different
12   methodologies for doing so?
13       A.    I have used other methods, but
14   predominantly in the Everglades we simply submerged a
15   sample bottle.  We have a protocol for how you go
16   about filling those bottles.
17       Q.    What other methodologies did you utilize to
18   sample the water column?
19       A.    We collected samples using syringes from
20   very shallow areas.  We have also collected samples
21   from a pumping device.  Pumping is more of a vacuum
22   suction device rather than pumping, and we collected
23   on some occasions from canals or bridges.  At
24   structures like that we will use a polyethylene pail,
25   bucket, on a line.  We also have a teflon coated

                                                 865

 1   Niskin bottle.
 2       Q.    How do you spell that?
 3       A.    N-I-S-K-I-N.
 4       Q.    What is that?
 5       A.    It's an expensive sampling device designed
 6   for oceanographic sampling.  We have utilized that on
 7   certain occasions.  We generally reserve the use of
 8   those types of bottles for oceanographic work.  I
 9   have used it in the marsh.
10       Q.    Any other methodologies used?
11       A.    No, it's all variations and the protocols
12   are various, depending on what kind of sample you are
13   going to collect.
14       Q.    How would one know from looking at your
15   records that a particular sampling methodology was
16   employed?
17       A.    For water?
18       Q.    Just for water for the moment.
19       A.    It would be described in the materials and
20   methods portion of the papers that are published, or
21   generally it's just knowledge.  For instance, I know
22   how I collected the samples in the marsh.  When I
23   would write a paper I would include that methodology.
24             We are now doing work for the state of
25   Florida and have a -- you have to have DEP approved

                                                 866

 1   project plans for those particular types of work.
 2   Under those circumstances, it's actually described in
 3   the project plans.
 4       Q.    What about for water column samples that
 5   are not reflected in a published paper or otherwise
 6   covered by one of these Department of Environmental
 7   Protection plans?
 8       A.    Then you would have to ask the individual
 9   who collected the samples what mechanism they used.
10   I mean, of those mechanisms I would say they
11   basically only used one at the time.  So it's not
12   that difficult.
13       Q.    I would like to ask you the same question
14   about the soil sampling methodologies.  How would one
15   know from examining your records what methodology was
16   employed for a given sample set?
17       A.    Most everything is published under that
18   circumstance.  The other would be, again, just by
19   asking the individual who collected the samples,
20   which is myself for the most part, and then for other
21   projects, again, those that are requiring either a
22   DEP or EPA project plan and description.  Those
23   projects have been described under those
24   circumstances.
25       Q.    You indicated regarding the water column

                                                 867

 1   sampling that the predominant way of doing it was the
 2   sample bottle with the protocol for it.  Was there a
 3   predominant methodology utilized for the soil
 4   sampling?
 5       A.    I would say for the soil sampling, no.  We
 6   pretty much -- it depends on the specific project
 7   what the purposes are because there are very
 8   oftentimes that we want to know what's in various
 9   increments in depth in the core, and then we have to
10   use a coring thing.  If we are only interested in,
11   let's say, the top ten centimeters then we would use
12   a grab sample in conjunction with cores.  QC the data
13   or QA the data, whichever way you want to look at it.
14   You can't make that distinction as easily.
15       Q.    In terms of the number of samples
16   collected, was one methodology employed more often
17   than the others?
18       A.    It would be a real close tie between grab
19   samples and the PVC cores.  It took us a long time to
20   convince ourselves that grab samples were as good as
21   the cores.
22       Q.    Going back to your soil sampling methods,
23   in the canals, was that done pursuant to a particular
24   protocol or QA/QC plan?
25       A.    The EPA actually conducted that sampling.

                                                 868

 1   I was along on several of the trips.  They had with
 2   my help designed a protocol plan.  I have reviewed
 3   the plan.
 4       Q.    When was this particular type of sampling
 5   done?
 6       A.    The majority of it was done during the 50
 7   canal stations that we examined last year some time.
 8       Q.    This is basically part of the mercury
 9   measurements?
10       A.    Mercury phosphorous measurements in the
11   sediments of the canals.
12             I have a clamshell box full myself.  I
13   can't say that I have not used it.  We found it to be
14   very difficult to use in the marsh, so we don't use
15   that.
16       Q.    Now, the eggshell core device, was that
17   sampling done pursuant to an established protocol or
18   QA/QC plan?
19       A.    The device is probably something I wasted
20   $900 on.  It was a sampling device.  We went out and
21   found out a $2 piece of PVC pipe worked just as well,
22   if that answers your question.
23       Q.    Are you saying you really don't use it?
24       A.    If you want to buy it, you can have it.
25   I'll give you a deal.

                                                 869

 1       Q.    Now, concerning the PVC cores, was that
 2   done pursuant to an approved protocol or QA/QC plan?
 3       A.    It's a pretty standard method.  It's
 4   basically taking a sharpened piece of PVC pipe and
 5   putting it through the soil.  It doesn't require a
 6   lot of training.
 7             We have now incorporated that into our
 8   comprehensive QA plan.  That's in the process of
 9   being submitted right now.  But there is nothing
10   really particular or awe inspiring in that method.
11       Q.    What about the grab samples?
12       A.    Those are described the same type of thing.
13   We are putting that into our QA plan at the time.
14   Mostly described in the publications, though.
15       Q.    This is not part of an approved EPA or DEP
16   protocol or QA/QC plan?
17             MS. PONZOLI:  Object to the form.
18             THE WITNESS:  As far as I know, the EPA has
19        no restrictions on how you collect the samples.
20        It's an analysis.  And as long as you do sample
21        collection in the way it doesn't contaminate the
22        samples, there is no -- to my knowledge, any
23        kind of a written standard methodology for
24        collecting soil samples.
25   BY MR. HYDE:

                                                 870

 1       Q.    Now, as to the coring device for, I guess,
 2   establishment of soil profiles, was that done pursuant
 3   to some protocol or QA/QC plan?
 4       A.    All of these things are in project specific
 5   plans where you describe what you are going to do.
 6   People look to see whether they are contaminated.
 7   With any of these methods, none of them are given
 8   EPA's approval or sanction or DEP as being this is
 9   how we wanted you to do it.  If you don't do it this
10   way, you have to describe them and show how you are
11   going to keep cross contamination from coming out of
12   samples and those types of things.
13             But it's a project specific description.
14   It's not like a chemical analysis where you need to
15   utilize approved techniques if you want to have a
16   certification.
17       Q.    That's why I used the more general term
18   protocol.  It could be one that it self establishes
19   as opposed to someone else, would that be correct?
20       A.    I would hesitate to agree with that.
21       Q.    Does this protocol have some official title
22   to it?
23       A.    There are approved protocol and there are
24   disapproved protocols and there are experimental
25   protocols, a number of things that have -- especially

                                                 871

 1   if you are in the process of doing water or waste
 2   water or sewage or something that needs to be
 3   certified by HRS or another organization.
 4       Q.    Which of the soil sampling methodologies --
 5   you identified five of them -- fall within the
 6   category of approved methodologies?
 7             MS. PONZOLI:  Object to the form.  I think
 8        you asked and answered that.
 9             THE WITNESS:  I indicated basically there
10        are no -- for soil sampling, there are as many
11        ways as you can -- I have listed five there.
12        And there are maybe 50 or more.  I don't know.
13             There are many, many, many, ways to collect
14        a sample.  That is not what is examined under
15        approval or disapproval under the circumstances.
16   BY MR. HYDE:
17       Q.    I think I have a pretty good handle on how
18   a sample bottle is utilized for a water column
19   sample.
20             Can you describe for me the syringe
21   approach that you noted earlier.  How does that --
22   how was that done?
23       A.    The syringe approach is very often in the
24   later stages of the marsh drying down.  The water is
25   very shallow so you want to somehow be able to sample

                                                 872

 1   that shallow water.  It's of interest to what's
 2   happening in that pool, more of a scientific aspect
 3   of any of the nutrient cycles.
 4             You go to the very shallow appeal because
 5   of the syringe -- we are talking about a syringe made
 6   for an injection -- you would be really sick if you
 7   used these.  These are 120 mil syringes.  But they
 8   are about an inch and a half in diameter, but they
 9   have the same lower fitting on the base of them that
10   allows you to place the syringe in very, very shallow
11   area of water.
12             You simply draw up a sample into the
13   syringe, rinse the syringe three times by shaking and
14   squirting that water out so it's not contaminating
15   the bottle and collecting a final sample in the
16   syringe and placing it in the sample bottle.
17       Q.    Once you transfer it to the sample bottle,
18   it's then treated in the same fashion as a sample
19   bottle would be?
20       A.    In fact, the water is squirted into the
21   sample bottle.  It's rinsed in the same manner.  If
22   you were collecting the sample under water, rinsing
23   the bottle, everything is the same.  There is one
24   more step involved collecting the water first in a
25   syringe because you can't submerge a sample bottle in

                                                 873

 1   a shallow body of water.
 2       Q.    Do you reuse the syringes?
 3       A.    The syringes are reused.  They are rinsed
 4   at every location and they are rinsed with distilled
 5   water and light free water, if you want to call it
 6   that.  It's not a very common mechanism for sampling
 7   in the marsh.  I'm not sure how many times an
 8   individual syringe would be used.  We take a number
 9   of them out with us.
10       Q.    Describe for me, if you will, the pumping
11   or vacuum device that you alluded to earlier.
12       A.    Sure.  Again, in places where you can stir
13   up the sediment or the water column is fairly
14   stagnant, you want to get an idea of what is in
15   there, we have a device that sits a fixed distance
16   off the bottom, approximately five centimeters off
17   the bottom, has holes in it and a piece of plastic
18   tubing going to a vacuum flask.
19             You place the device on the area.  You let
20   it sit there until all the sediment settles, until
21   the existing conditions re-establish themselves, and
22   then you simply hook this vacuum pump up to the
23   vacuum flask and the tube from the sampling device
24   and draw the sample into the flask and discard that
25   and rinse it and then collect the sample that you are

                                                 874

 1   going to analyze.
 2       Q.    Once you have done that, is it also
 3   transferred to a typical sample bottle and then
 4   treated?
 5       A.    Yes.
 6       Q.    So the methodology from that point on is
 7   the same as you would employ for a typical sample
 8   bottle?
 9       A.    The collection techniques are the only
10   things that vary.
11       Q.    Would that be the same for the pail
12   methodology?
13       A.    Yes.  The pail methodology again in some
14   places it's -- it would be life threatening to try to
15   get down to the edge of the water or do something
16   like that.  So we have to come up with a mechanism
17   for doing that for checking the surface sample.  So a
18   clean pail is a way of doing it.  Actually this is
19   one of the approved methods, if you will,
20   surprisingly enough.
21       Q.    That sample is transferred to a sample
22   bottle and then treated the same?
23       A.    That's correct.
24       Q.    Describe for me if you will the Niskin
25   bottle method.

                                                 875

 1       A.    Okay.  A Niskin bottle is a -- was invented
 2   I guess probably in the early 1950's, maybe earlier
 3   than that.  I think it was in the 1950's.  It's
 4   designed primarily for oceanographic sampling.  There
 5   were various numbers of designs of Niskin bottles.
 6   The one I have is one where there is no internal
 7   parts, if you will.  The older designed bottles had
 8   rubber or metal springs on the inside that would pull
 9   two caps over a piece of -- what a Niskin bottle is
10   is PVC with two caps on either end.  They are opened
11   up.  You send a messenger down the line which is
12   nothing more than a brass weight.  It hits a
13   triggering device and causes the bottle to close.
14             The mechanisms of closing is what is
15   undergoing transformations for the last 37 or so
16   years.  I happened to have the latest version of
17   this.  We did the trials on it.  It has an external
18   sampling thing and the bottles are also teflon lined.
19       Q.    What utility does a Niskin bottle sampling
20   methodology serve in the Everglades Protection Area?
21       A.    People are using Niskin bottles and I think
22   they are mistaken for doing that.  It's not a very
23   good sample device for the marshes.  They were
24   designed for oceanographic purposes.  We bought it to
25   sample off of the same places where we are using the

                                                 876

 1   budget.  In fact, that's what we did.
 2             We compared the Niskin bottle to the bucket
 3   sample.  Once we convinced ourselves the bucket was
 4   as good as the Niskin bottle, we went strictly to
 5   using a bucket sample for that.  They call them
 6   bailers, actually is the scientific name for it.  We
 7   used the Niskin bottle only when we are on hydro wire
 8   on a ship.  That's what they were designed for.  They
 9   weren't designed for collecting samples by hand.
10             They are used when you have -- depends.  If
11   you wanted to collect a sample from the canal in the
12   bottom, then you have to use this kind of sampling
13   device.
14       Q.    Once you have a water column sample in hand --
15   by that I mean, it's in your sample bottle -- I would
16   like for you to describe for me not the methodology
17   but describe step by step how that sample was
18   transferred to your laboratory or a laboratory for
19   analysis.
20             Tell me if there is any different way
21   depending on how you sample that you might have
22   transferred a given sample.
23             MS. PONZOLI:  Object to the form.
24             THE WITNESS:  The bottles -- there are
25        multiple types of sample collected.  There are

                                                 877

 1        samples that are used for, let's say, turbidity
 2        and microbiological parameters which are treated
 3        in a different way than the samples which are
 4        going to be looked at for dissolved nutrients.
 5   BY MR. HYDE:
 6       Q.    I'm just concerned now about the samples
 7   regarding total phosphorous and alkaline phosphatase.
 8       A.    Yes.  Those are handled in the same way
 9   turbidity and microbiological samplings would be
10   handled.  Alkaline phosphatase is a biological
11   parameter.
12             It's important that those samplings are
13   analyzed as soon as possible.  We have a procedure
14   that requires us to analyze those samples immediately
15   upon return from the field.  So it could be as short
16   as an hour to as long as six to eight hours if the
17   samples are stored for those parameters.
18             We have found no difference in that time
19   frame by experimentation, but those samples are -- as
20   opposed to the other samplings, are not refrigerated.
21   They are kept at ambient temperature.  If you
22   refrigerate them, you destroy the microbiological
23   parameters.
24       Q.    Once you have the sample in the bottle,
25   what do you do with it?

                                                 878

 1       A.    It's placed in an ice chest.
 2       Q.    Nothing else in it?
 3       A.    No.  It sits in an ambient temperature,
 4   transported back to the laboratory and analyzed.
 5       Q.    That usually occurs between one and six to
 6   eight hours from the time it was sampled in the
 7   field?
 8       A.    That's correct.  Total phosphorous
 9   measurements do not have to be done immediately.  You
10   can do total nitrogen because you are looking at
11   total nutrients.  It doesn't matter what fraction
12   it's in, it's still analyzed in the fact that it's
13   total.
14             What we can do under those circumstances is
15   we generally refrigerate the samples after we have
16   taken the sample out for alkaline phosphatase given
17   it's late in the day.
18             If it's not late in the day, if it's
19   reasonable time, we actually process the total
20   phosphorous on the same day.  We can generally
21   refrigerated those.  Our recommended time is 24 hours
22   to have them prepared for analysis.
23       Q.    What's the outer limit for testing them for
24   total nitrogen and total phosphorous?
25       A.    I believe -- I have to look at our

                                                 879

 1   comprehensive plan.  I believe it's 24 hours we say
 2   we do that.  We do hold the samples until we are sure
 3   that the analysis has -- in other words, if there is
 4   a question about the data, we drop a vial or lose
 5   something or whatever else like that, rather than
 6   discard that, the sample is kept in the refrigerator
 7   until it's analyzed, which could be as much as two
 8   weeks.
 9             But that is always noted on our data sheets
10   as to whether we had to do that.  It doesn't happen
11   very often.  But considering the total nutrients,
12   there is no indication that they change with time.  I
13   think EPA protocol says from 28 days.  That's if I'm
14   not mistaken.
15       Q.    Concerning the initial phase of one to six
16   or eight hours, are you referring there to alkaline
17   phosphatase?
18       A.    Any other microbial parameter.  But under
19   your question, alkaline phosphatase.
20             MS. PONZOLI:  Can we break at this point?
21             MR. HYDE:  Yes, this is a good breaking
22        point.  Afterwards we will get to the soil
23        samples from the field to the laboratory.

                                                 880

 1                  (Thereupon, a brief recess was taken,
 2                  after which the following proceedings
 3                  were had:)
 4   BY MR. HYDE:
 5       Q.    Dr. Jones, I would like to ask you some
 6   questions about how your soil samples which were
 7   taken from the field to the laboratory.
 8             First of all, once you had all of the
 9   samples in hand from whatever sampling methodology
10   you employed, did you treat them the same way?
11       A.    Yes.
12       Q.    How was that?
13       A.    Samples were in the field.  Large roots,
14   snails, rocks, whatever non-representative material
15   or material that could bias the sample one way or the
16   other was picked out using pretty much standard
17   protocol.  Roots that are living are white.  You take
18   those out and throw them out.  That sample is then
19   placed into a polypropylene sample cup, labeled and
20   then generally placed in an ice chest, cooler and
21   transported back to the laboratory.
22       Q.    Are those samplings refrigerated or
23   otherwise cooled?
24       A.    Most of the analysis we have done are total
25   analysis.

                                                 881

 1       Q.    By total --
 2       A.    Total nutrient phosphorous and nitrogen.
 3   In fact, all of the analyses are microbial.  So no,
 4   you will not refrigerate them.
 5       Q.    I think you stated that foreign matter such
 6   as rocks and live roots were taken out pursuant to
 7   some standard protocol; is that correct?
 8       A.    That's correct.
 9       Q.    What is that protocol?
10       A.    Basically when soil scientists long ago
11   recognized if you want to find out what the soil
12   fertility is or if you want to look at soil nutrient,
13   you don't want to go next to the corn plant and get
14   all the corn roots in your sample.
15             What you are looking at is the matrix of
16   soil, not the matrix of plant roots.  If you want to
17   analyze plants roots, you analyze plant roots.  The
18   protocol states you have to remove that type of
19   material because it's not representative of what you
20   are looking for.
21             There are cases where the soil down here is
22   really limestone.  Under that circumstance, you don't
23   go out and removal the limestone, so I don't want you
24   to get that idea.  But in the area of, say, for
25   instance, the marsh or whatever, generally rocks are

                                                 882

 1   not in there.
 2             But sampling like we did in the Everglades
 3   agricultural area, considering those are fields, very
 4   often that would be a large chunk, a piece of rock or
 5   limestone in the sample, and that's removed because
 6   it's not soil.
 7       Q.    You specifically mentioned removing live
 8   roots.  Does that imply that you leave dead roots in?
 9       A.    That's correct.  Dead roots are
10   representative of the soil.  That's part of the
11   genesis and decomposition of the soil, is dead plant
12   material.  That's what it's made up of.  Peat is by
13   definition partially decomposed plant material, and
14   dead roots would be a portion of that.
15       Q.    You use a sieve or a grate or some other
16   device to separate out this foreign matter or do you
17   just do it by hand?
18       A.    It's done by hand.
19       Q.    So one could still get maybe small rocks or
20   small live roots or something like that?
21       A.    Yes, material that goes on -- generally
22   there are other steps.  This material is dried in the
23   laboratory so there are other screening techniques
24   that come into play when it's dried and ground.  And
25   not all materials grind the same way.

                                                 883

 1       Q.    So then you take it and put it in a ice
 2   chest and you take it back to your lab?
 3       A.    That's correct.
 4       Q.    What do you do once you get it back to the
 5   lab?
 6       A.    Depending on what analyses are going to be
 7   taking place, if it's a mercury sample it will be
 8   frozen at minus 20 degrees centigrade.  If mercury is
 9   going to be analyzed, it doesn't matter what others
10   are going to be analyzed.  We freeze the sample after
11   taking out samples that we are going to use for
12   microbial or biological activities.
13             If it's just going to be analyzed for total
14   nutrients, say total phosphorous -- which is the
15   predominant -- or total nitrogen or total carbon, the
16   cap is removed from the sample bottle, placed in a
17   drying oven and air dried for 12 hours.
18       Q.    Is this dryer a particular device or you
19   are saying it's just a common type of kitchen oven?
20       A.    No, scientific device.  Even though it may
21   look like your typical Kenmore, it's priced at such
22   and they will never admit that they take the tag off
23   and raise the price by about 300%.  It's nothing more
24   than a forced air oven.
25       Q.    Like a convection oven?

                                                 884

 1       A.    Well, it's a convection oven with a blower
 2   on it.  So there is forced air coming up through
 3   this.  It's not just convection.
 4       Q.    How long does it dry?
 5       A.    It's dried for 12 to 24 hours.  Generally
 6   12 hours overnight.
 7       Q.    Why is there such a spread?
 8       A.    It doesn't matter.  It's dried to where
 9   there is no water activity.  It doesn't make any
10   difference.  You could dry it for six weeks, but that
11   would take your oven space up.  You don't want to
12   remove it too soon because then it will still have
13   water.
14             The way you determine that is you take your
15   particular soil, place it in an oven, weigh it -- I
16   should say weigh it before you place it in the oven.
17   You keep weighing it until it's no longer losing any
18   weight.  That's how you determine the length of time
19   that's necessary.
20       Q.    At what temperature does this drying
21   process take place?
22       A.    80 degrees centigrade.
23       Q.    Is that temperature maintained uniformly
24   throughout the drying period?
25       A.    Yes.

                                                 885

 1       Q.    Once you finish drying the soil sample,
 2   drying the soil sample, what do you do?
 3       A.    The sample is milled in a Wiley mill.
 4       Q.    What do you mean by milled?
 5       A.    Ground.
 6       Q.    What is a Wiley mill?
 7       A.    W-i-l-e-y mill.  Any soil scientist -- I
 8   mean I'm unfamiliar with any others.  It's a standard
 9   mill used for grinding soil samples, dried samples
10   for science.
11       Q.    So it's milled in the Wiley mill.  What
12   then do you do with it?
13       A.    The sample is collected and placed in a
14   glass scintillation vial for storage.
15       Q.    Once you have the vial in storage, then you
16   want to analyze it for, say, total phosphorous.  What
17   do you do with it at that point?
18       A.    The sample would be taken out, weighed to
19   the appropriate amount that you are using for that
20   particular analysis.  I believe total phosphorous is
21   25 milligrams.  You weigh out 25 milligrams into
22   three additional vials because we do the analysis in
23   triplicate.  Then we add some magnesium sulfate in
24   sulphuric acid and we oxidize the organic carbon away
25   and convert all of the phosphorous organic forms of

                                                 886

 1   phosphorous into orthophosphates by a technique
 2   called ashing.
 3             Then we hydrolyze the ash and measure
 4   orthophosphate on an auto analyzer.
 5       Q.    Is orthophosphates the same thing as saying
 6   total phosphorous?
 7       A.    At this point it is because what the
 8   purpose of the ashing is to converts all of the
 9   phosphorous forms into orthophosphorous.
10       Q.    Is this process done pursuant to some
11   standardized methodology?
12       A.    Yes, it is.
13       Q.    What is that methodology?
14       A.    There is the preparation process, which is
15   different than the analytical process.  There are
16   multiple procedures that are used.
17       Q.    Take me through them step by step.
18       A.    There is ASTM -- and I'm sorry, right now I
19   could probably guess at what it is, something
20   standards in testing materials.  It's the code book
21   for different techniques, different ways to analyze
22   these things.  ASTM method for ashing.
23             There is also a soils standard method for
24   ashing, and those two techniques combine for the
25   preparation.

                                                 887

 1       Q.    Is that also an ASTM method?
 2       A.    All of these methods cross reference each
 3   other.  You will have one manual written for drinking
 4   water, another manual written for soils.  You have a
 5   manual written for sludge.
 6             You have some standard -- just reference
 7   materials that are around.  They all tend to cross
 8   reference each other.  There are EPA methods.  There
 9   are AWWA methods.  There are a number of different
10   publications that you can reference.  So I sort of
11   hesitate to answer with a simple yes to that
12   question.
13       Q.    Well, do you not use one particular
14   reference point for doing this?
15       A.    They all are essentially the same.  It's
16   just that one says this is how you do it for sludge
17   and the other one says this is how you do it for
18   sediment and the other one says this is how you do it
19   for soils.  So it's sort of pick and choose.
20             I'm just pointing out that the technique is
21   the same for all of those, it just depends which
22   manual you particularly use, but they all cross
23   reference each other.
24             Any one of them are approved and we have
25   those all listed down and we are saying it's in our

                                                 888

 1   comprehensive plan.  They are all listed as methods
 2   of use.
 3             The method for analysis of the phosphorous
 4   is simply we reference back to the EPA method.
 5       Q.    Which EPA method is that?
 6       A.    I have to look at the table.  But it's the
 7   ascorbic acid method for measurement of phosphorous.
 8       Q.    Are those all of the standardized methods
 9   that are utilized when analyzing a soil sample for
10   phosphorous?
11       A.    Yes.  We don't do anything particularly
12   unique in the methodology portion of the thing.  I
13   mean, there are other -- we have our instruments
14   standardized at lower levels.  We optimize our
15   strengths for determining lower levels.
16             But that's much more prevalent for the
17   water column work than it is for the soils.  The
18   soils are pretty much there.
19       Q.    Once you reduced it to your 25 milligrams
20   sample, for lack of a better term, what do you do at
21   that point?
22       A.    That's the sample that's added and then
23   hydrolyzed, meaning putting it back in the water.
24   And then the water is placed onto the auto analyzer.
25       Q.    And what is the auto analyzer?

                                                 889

 1       A.    The auto analyzer is an automatic or a
 2   continuous sampler and an analysis that then
 3   automatically reports the values for phosphorous
 4   contained in the sample.
 5       Q.    Is that a particular machine or
 6   manufacturer's product?
 7       A.    Yes, it is.
 8             The instrument that the company would have --
 9   I called it an auto analyzer, that's a rendered name.
10             I actually have RFA 300, which is
11   manufactured by a competing company.  But it's a
12   standard device.  DEP has them, DERM has them, South
13   Florida Water Management District has them.
14   They are a common instrument?
15       Q.    Once provide the sample to the auto
16   analyzer, does the machine then in effect take over
17   and do the remainder of the work?
18       A.    As much as a machine can.  I mean, there
19   are sometimes a number of operations that have to be
20   manually put into the machine.  The data has to be
21   checked, QA, upon the end of the analysis to
22   determine whether it needs to be reanalyzed or that
23   type of thing.
24       Q.    But does the machine then, I guess, print
25   out, for lack of a better term, the results of the

                                                 890

 1   analysis?
 2       A.    That's correct.
 3       Q.    And how is this printout done?  Is it, for
 4   example, just a raw data that you are referring to
 5   earlier as being the standard computer sheet
 6   printout?
 7       A.    That's correct.
 8       Q.    Once you have the raw data, what do you do
 9   with it?
10       A.    QA it.
11       Q.    What does that QA process entail?
12       A.    The first thing would be to examine all of
13   the output stored on a hard disk for a short period
14   of time.
15             And so the first thing we do is in the
16   process of examining what each one of the individual
17   peaks look like, see if there was an air bubble to
18   make certain that the computer program discriminated
19   the peaks in the right manner.  So there is a visual
20   observation, a check that is done at that point.
21             The data then is printed out in hard copy.
22   We then make comparisons of the duplicate cups.  So
23   if you have -- we generally end up with six cups.
24   Two duplicates of three samples or perhaps just two
25   duplicates of two samples.  It depends what analysis

                                                 891

 1   and what kind of statistics we want to run on it.
 2             But there is a minimum of four sample cups
 3   to look at.  So what you would be doing would be
 4   looking at that set of four numbers.  And if one
 5   number is plus or minus two standard deviation units
 6   from the mean, that cup can be discarded as an error
 7   associated with that particular sample.
 8             These are generally very obvious.  I mean,
 9   there was air bubble that passed through the cell,
10   it's usually not two or three times the standard
11   deviation.  It's on the order of magnitude
12   difference.  That's the initial review.
13             The numbers are then averaged together to
14   produce a final result for that particular soil
15   sample.
16       Q.    Then once you have the averages, what do
17   you do with them?
18       A.    They are recorded in a data sheet.  If it's
19   for our purposes, we will save it until we have
20   enough to make a publication, a scientific
21   publication, or we will turn it over to the various
22   groups of people who have requested the data.
23             MR. HYDE:  Anyone have an objection to
24        taking a break for lunch now?
25             MS. PONZOLI:  No, that's fine.  Let's be

                                                 892

 1        back at five to one.
 2             MR. HYDE:  An hour from now.
 3                  (Thereupon, a lunch recess was taken,
 4                  after which the following proceedings
 5                  were had:)
 6             MR. SAMS:  Dr. Jones my name is Gary Sams.
 7        And by consent of Bill Hyde, who has been taking
 8        your deposition, I'm going to ask you some
 9        questions about documents and a few additional
10        questions.
11             Upon the conclusion of my questions I will
12        turn the matter back over to Bill to carry on.
13             Anything else you need?
14             MS. PONZOLI:  I guess you would need my
15        consent also, but that's probably a small point.
16             MR. SAMS:  I assume that we had your
17        consent, but you can give it if you wish.
18             MS. PONZOLI:  Yes.
19                    CROSS EXAMINATION
20   BY MR. SAMS:
21       Q.    Dr. Jones, I'm going to hand you a document
22   that the United States furnished us following your
23   last deposition.
24             What I would like to do primarily with this
25   document --

                                                 893

 1             MS. PONZOLI:  This is not in the pile we
 2        supplied this morning.
 3             MR. SAMS:  This was faxed to me after the
 4        last deposition.  I will need one copy to ask
 5        questions about.
 6             MS. PONZOLI:  He will need one to look at.
 7        Does he have one?
 8             MR. SAMS:  Yes, he does.
 9             MS. PONZOLI:  I'm looking with him.
10             MR. SAMS:  If you don't mind, I would just
11        like to have you go through these -- let's mark
12        this as Exhibit 89.
13          (The documents referred to were thereupon
14           marked Composite Exhibit 89 for Identification.)
15   BY MR. SAMS:
16       Q.    This is a composite exhibit.  I would like
17   to just go through this and have you identify to the
18   best of your ability what these things are.
19             I think we discussed some of these at your
20   prior deposition.  I don't intend to dwell on those.
21   However, if you would indicate that we did examine
22   you about those at the prior deposition it would help
23   me.
24             Page No. 3, I'm referring to the fax pages
25   at the top right-hand corner.  Is that the latitude

                                                 894

 1   and longitude designations for the E-map 50 canal
 2   station survey?
 3       A.    Yes, it is.
 4       Q.    Could you identify for me in short form for
 5   the record pages 4 and 5?
 6             MS. PONZOLI:  I don't know if I understand
 7        the question.  Do you understand the question
 8        Dr. Jones?
 9             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  These are, as it says
10        at the top, Everglades canal fish samples which
11        would be Gambusia, mosquito fish.  And the
12        numbers designated in the thing, 31 A, B, C, D
13        and E those represent five individual fish
14        collected at site 31 as indicated on page 3.
15        And then there would be their mercury
16        concentrations in the next column.
17   BY MR. SAMS:
18       Q.    There are three columns of data or three
19   sets of three columns of data.  I believe we saw this
20   at your last deposition?
21       A.    I don't know if this is complete.  I was
22   not counting up all of the numbers on here.  There
23   are additional sheets that have this information.  I
24   think this is all of it.
25             MR. HYDE:  Can I ask just for clarifying

                                                 895

 1        the record, what is the measurement of
 2        concentration of -- the mercury concentration in
 3        the individual fishes?
 4             THE WITNESS:  Listed under HG concentration
 5        parts per billion or nanogram per gram.
 6   BY MR. SAMS:
 7       Q.    Are you familiar with the health advisory
 8   limits of the state government?
 9       A.    Yes.
10       Q.    And what units are those expressed in?
11       A.    Parts per million.
12       Q.    Dr. Jones, is the fax page 6 the same data
13   tabulated differently for the fish?
14       A.    I believe it's the average of them,
15   although there are places where I believe some of
16   the -- no.  There are some missing points in here,
17   and those were -- have been presented in a later set
18   of documents.
19             You may have those either today -- or I may
20   be mistaken.  Those may have been bottom samples and
21   there was no fish taken on those.  The B in the first
22   column and the station would indicate bottom sample.
23   So that means there were no fish with the blanks.
24   This is complete average data.
25       Q.    Where the phrase no fish appears, does that

                                                 896

 1   mean that the data are to be found elsewhere?
 2       A.    No, it means there were no fish collected
 3   at that site because there were no fish to be
 4   collected at that site.  Some of these were anoxic
 5   waters.
 6       Q.    Fax page 7, can you identify what this?
 7   And perhaps it continues on to pages 8 and 9.
 8       A.    That's correct.  Pages 7, 8 and 9 are
 9   actually one sheet of a computer printout, one long
10   sheet.  And these are data of mosquito fish collected
11   in the EAA during our entry and the mercury
12   concentrations.
13       Q.    You say these are in the EAA?
14       A.    Yes.
15       Q.    What code or other identification would
16   enable us to identify the site from which these fish
17   samples were collected?
18       A.    If you see in the sample ID, we can go to
19   the first page where it says sample ID, and it says
20   standard 1 through 8.  Then it has blank, blank and
21   then 9-1, 9-2 and 9-3.
22             Those would be the individuals collected
23   from that particular -- from site 9 in that survey
24   and then 10-1, 11, 12.  Those would be all of that.
25   You had been provided all of those which would tell

                                                 897

 1   you where those would be located in the EAA.
 2       Q.    That's the map that we examined before
 3   during your deposition?
 4       A.    Yes, along with my field notes which you
 5   had me read into the record -- or someone had me read
 6   into the record.
 7       Q.    What does the third column of the data
 8   represent, imported PH?
 9       A.    It stands for peak height.  This program
10   wasn't run by the same machine that was doing the
11   analysis.  So we took those peak height values and
12   imported them into a Lotus program.  We were able to
13   process the data while the instrument was running
14   other samples.
15       Q.    So that was, in essence, a mechanical entry
16   that doesn't affect the ultimate?
17       A.    Truly not mechanical.  It means the data
18   goes from the instrument, analytical mercury
19   detector, onto a disk.  That disk, instead of
20   being -- instead of using the Lotus program on that
21   computer, we take that disk and put it on another
22   computer and import that file into a Lotus spread
23   sheet on there.
24             It's just a way of making -- being able to
25   do mercury analysis at the same time you are doing

                                                 898

 1   the data crunching or the number crunching.
 2       Q.    Does that column of numbers get used in any
 3   way in interpreting the balance of the numbers shown
 4   on the chart?
 5       A.    Yes.  They are the same numbers we could
 6   have called it peak height, imported.  It means we
 7   took it from one computer and did it on another one.
 8   That probably doesn't need to be there, the word
 9   "imported."
10       Q.    Recognizing you are talking to somebody who
11   is pretty illiterate in computers and scientific
12   field tests.  What's a peak height, again?
13       A.    A peak height is when the instrument is
14   measuring a sample -- in this case, mercury.  The
15   higher the concentration of mercury, the higher the
16   little line loop, the trace.  So it goes up to a
17   certain level at the highest level.  That's the peak
18   height, it is that point and it drops off at the
19   sample, goes out of the carrier stream.
20       Q.    I assume my experts will be able to figure
21   out what that means.
22             Which column ultimately was the number that
23   you resolved as the concentration of mercury and
24   tissue?
25       A.    It would say correct mean HG, nanogram per

                                                 899

 1   gram.
 2       Q.    The next-to-the-last column?
 3       A.    That is correct, right before the standard
 4   deviation.  There are too many decimal places, but
 5   other than that.
 6       Q.    I take it that the reference numbers have
 7   nothing to do with the 50 canals surveyed; is that
 8   correct?
 9       A.    No, they don't.  They had something to do
10   with -- it's a column that's placed in.  It also had
11   something to do with the label of the samples for
12   making sure the right weights go to the right place
13   and all of that kind of stuff.
14       Q.    On pages 10, 11, 12, are those similar runs
15   for mercury concentrations in fish tissue taken in
16   the Shark Valley of the Park or and the Park?
17       A.    They were taken in the Park in Shark
18   Valley.
19       Q.    And when were these samples taken?
20       A.    That's a good question.  Probably in the
21   December, January time frame.
22       Q.    Of '92 or '93?
23       A.    Of '93 and '94.
24       Q.    How does one identify the location from
25   which these samples were obtained?

                                                 900

 1       A.    They were all collected -- they were all
 2   collected at a site out near the center of the slough
 3   down by the tower.  This is just a series of numbers.
 4   We were looking at size ratios, sex determinations
 5   and stuff like that.
 6             This is preliminary information.  I
 7   don't -- other than putting it on a map, that's the
 8   only thing I would be able to tell you about this.
 9       Q.    Why don't we consider doing that.  I'm not
10   sure this map is very satisfactory.  It's a well worn
11   map.  Why don't we mark this as the next exhibit.
12             MS. PONZOLI:  I don't mind if you mark it
13        as an exhibit.  I won't have Dr. Jones drawing
14        on the map, but he can tell you it's in the tram
15        trail.  And you can identify the tram trail
16        which is probably visible on the map.
17             THE WITNESS:  It's not.  That's the problem
18        with the map, none of the landmarks are
19        featured.  I can point to the general area.  I'm
20        not going to be real close because of the fact
21        that the landmarks aren't on this particular
22        map.
23             MR. SAMS:  Let's do the best that we can.
24        We will mark it as Exhibit 90.

                                                 901

 1          (The document referred to was thereupon
 2           marked Exhibit 90 for Identification.)
 3             MS. PONZOLI:  The tram trails exist on
 4        other maps fairly defined, it's not an unknown
 5        landmark for the Park.
 6   BY MR. SAMS:
 7       Q.    Could you point to the approximate
 8   location?
 9       A.    It would be approximately right there.
10       Q.    Are you pointing to the west of a label
11   that says L-67, and roughly to the south of the label
12   that says L-29?
13             MS. PONZOLI:  I don't mind his telling you
14        approximately in words, but when you put the dot
15        on the page or he puts it, it becomes almost the
16        same at some point.
17             So you are welcome to mark your map however
18        you wish.  I will only have my witness give you
19        a verbal representation.
20             MR. SAMS:  That's all I asked him for.
21             MS. PONZOLI:  I see your pen poised to
22        mark?  I want to make sure --
23   BY MR. SAMS:
24       Q.    Can you tell me?
25       A.    That's approximately correct.  I feel much

                                                 902

 1   more comfortable if it were a different map.  Again,
 2   this data is just very preliminary for that purpose.
 3       Q.    Is that point somewhat to the west of and
 4   above the first D in Dade, again recognizing you are
 5   describing only an approximation?
 6       A.    Yes.
 7       Q.    Now, I take it these were analyzed in a
 8   similar manner to the ones we looked at, pages 7
 9   through 9; is that correct?
10       A.    That's correct, although there were some
11   fish in here that had large enough size to them that
12   they had to be split in half.  Again, this is an
13   unusual data set.
14       Q.    Why does that make it unusual?
15       A.    This is the data set that we -- again, this
16   is an experimental -- it's a set of data we had no
17   intention of doing anything with other than going out
18   and getting an idea what mercury concentrations we
19   are looking at.
20             Are we going to see high mercury
21   concentrations, low, what size fish can we throw in
22   the vile without having it explode in the autoclave?
23   It wasn't a data set to be used for any type of -- we
24   are not going to use this data set for making any
25   interpretation or making any comments on any mercury

                                                 903

 1   anywhere in the Everglades.
 2       Q.    Was there a problem in the analysis?
 3       A.    No.  There is no problem at all.  It's just
 4   if we don't utilize data, that we don't have a
 5   specific purpose.  It helps me form background
 6   knowledge of the system and analytical techniques
 7   that are going to be necessary.
 8             But it's not a set of data that's going to
 9   be used for making any kind of publication or
10   anything like that.  It's just preliminary
11   information which will go on defined experimental
12   protocol sampling designed to do this data properly
13   when we have that goal in mind.
14       Q.    And these data were all from the same site;
15   is that correct?
16       A.    They were all from the same location.
17       Q.    Was that in the marsh?
18       A.    It was in the marsh.
19       Q.    Does that include the data on page 12?
20       A.    Yes.
21       Q.    What are those data on page 12?
22       A.    The one with the number one besides them
23   are for Gambusia, and No. 2 is Poecillia.  And I
24   don't have the faintest idea what that is.
25       Q.    I see the word "oyster."

                                                 904

 1       A.    That's our standard reference material from
 2   the NITS reference material that we run to check and
 3   see how well our analyses are turning out.
 4       Q.    Do any of these columns display calculated
 5   mercury concentrations in tissue?  I'm referring
 6   again to page 12?
 7       A.    I don't believe so.  I think this is a data
 8   set that has gone no further.  The first thing would
 9   be peak height.  It's possible that the second column
10   is an uncorrected mercury concentration, but I don't
11   believe it is.
12       Q.    Then I would direct your attention to pages
13   13 and 14 and ask you where these data were
14   collected.
15       A.    It says at the top, crayfish research road
16   Everglades National Park.  It would be to the best of
17   my knowledge the road heading towards the research
18   center alongside the road there to collect some
19   crayfish.
20       Q.    In a canal?
21       A.    I presume so.  This is a portion of Bill
22   Loftus' data.  And he was, again, just trying to get
23   a general idea of what kind of mercury concentration
24   to expect at various species, and this is what that
25   represents.

                                                 905

 1       Q.    I see in pages 15, 16 and perhaps 17
 2   another data set.  Do those go together, those pages?
 3       A.    Yes, they do.
 4       Q.    Where were these data collected -- or these
 5   fish, rather?
 6       A.    These would have been collected along the
 7   tram road.  This to the best of my recollection --
 8   these are again samples that were collected -- these
 9   particular samples were collected by Bill Loftus, and
10   they were collected just right next to the air boat
11   launching ramp on the tram road.
12       Q.    Is that near the other location?
13       A.    It's approximately four or five kilometers
14   to the west of the other location, which is out in
15   the marsh.  This is just next to the road.
16       Q.    I'm sorry, you may have said in a canal or
17   in a marsh?
18       A.    There is no canal there.  So it would be
19   the marsh, as it is.
20       Q.    Let me go back.  I think you said the last
21   two sets of data we looked at were collected by
22   Dr. Loftus?
23       A.    Mr. Loftus.  He is working on his Ph.D.
24       Q.    Did you collect any of the data or any of
25   the fish?

                                                 906

 1       A.    In the last two sets, no.
 2       Q.    In the first set, did you collect those
 3   fish?
 4       A.    The ones that say EAA I collected.
 5       Q.    Did he collect all of the fish in the Park?
 6       A.    Yes.
 7       Q.    Were you with them at the time he collected
 8   those fish?
 9       A.    No, I was not.
10       Q.    How were they provided to you, in what
11   condition?  Were they iced?
12       A.    He did the analysis.  They were iced.  And
13   Bill collected them and analyzed them himself.
14       Q.    At what laboratory?
15       A.    At my laboratory.
16       Q.    Is he someone whom you trained to use the
17   analytical equipment in your laboratory?
18       A.    Yes.  This is actually part of his
19   dissertation.  This is the scoping portion of his
20   dissertation, to find out approximately what levels
21   he should be expecting in different levels of the
22   food chain.
23       Q.    What is the next set that belongs together,
24   is it pages 18, 19 and 20?
25       A.    That would be pages 18 through 23.

                                                 907

 1       Q.    Are those, again, fish collected by
 2   Mr. Loftus?
 3       A.    They are various species.  There are fish,
 4   there are invertebrates.  I know one of these
 5   organisms is a spider.  Just about anything we could
 6   put into an ampule was digested and we attempted to
 7   get some idea of what the limitations of our
 8   ampulation technique is.
 9       Q.    Where is the mercury concentration in fish
10   tissue listed on these tables?
11       A.    In this case it would be on pages 21, 22
12   and 23.  If you turn to page 21, you would see it
13   listed in two columns there.  The individuals are
14   listed in the second column from the left.  It's
15   nanogram per gram and the means are listed in
16   nanogram per gram in the third column from the left
17   and the standard deviation in the last column.
18       Q.    I take it the comment you made about not
19   intending to use these data in your work applies to
20   all of the ones obtained by Mr. Loftus; is that
21   correct?
22             MS. PONZOLI:  Object to the form.
23             THE WITNESS:  I don't know that I would
24        say -- I'm not intending to utilize these
25        numbers in any other manner than to just -- I

                                                 908

 1        know now something about what spiders have in
 2        the Everglades.  They can't be chunked out of my
 3        mind.  I happen to know there is mercury in a
 4        spider in the Everglades.  That doesn't mean I
 5        have any way of saying what every species of
 6        spiders have, how statistically accurate that
 7        is.
 8             I know there is some mercury in spiders.
 9        So, I mean, if there is that type of knowledge I
10        do intend to -- don't intend to throw it out.
11   BY MR. SAMS:
12       Q.    In connection with this case you don't
13   intend to use this data?
14       A.    I don't think so.  I'm saying it's part of
15   my general background of mercury, so I wouldn't -- I
16   have no way of getting rid of that information, you
17   know.
18       Q.    How would one identify which sample on
19   pages 18 through 23 is which critter -- which type of
20   critter?
21       A.    If you look on page 23 there is a key.  It
22   has 7, 6, 2 equal 5 equals on these tables.  And it
23   says species and you see a list of 7.
24       Q.    That's the code?
25       A.    Yes.  6, 2, et cetera.

                                                 909

 1       Q.    I would like to ask you to identify some
 2   other documents we have seen today.
 3             I show you first what appears to be a
 4   letter from Ron to Jerry dated March 1, 1994.  Is
 5   that from you to Jerry Tober of the EPA?
 6       A.    Yes, it is.
 7       Q.    What was the purpose of your writing that
 8   letter?
 9       A.    We have been discussing for a long time in
10   the context of the remap proposal of things that
11   needed to be included that were more process oriented
12   rather than sort of field oriented measurements
13   mapping type of programs, since I'm more interested
14   in the processes involved in mercury and phosphorous.
15             He had requested that I send him a short
16   paragraph describing some of the things that I
17   thought were important in our considerations in sort
18   of process, transport process and of mercury so that
19   he could include this in the latest draft of -- I
20   believe it's the remap proposal.  I'm not sure it was
21   a remap.  It was on one of those drafts for the EPA.
22       Q.    Have you revised this recommendation at all
23   since you made it to Dr. Tober?
24       A.    I discussed it with him yesterday and it
25   hasn't been revised.  He just thanked me for giving

                                                 910

 1   it to him.  And apparently he presented all of these
 2   suggestions and they were agreed to.
 3       Q.    Agreed to by whom?
 4       A.    By whoever is in charge, I guess the
 5   funding for them or whatever.  To the best of my
 6   understanding, there has been at least partial
 7   funding of all of these particular things.  I don't
 8   know the level of the funding at this time.
 9             MR. SAMS:  I would like that marked as
10        Exhibit 91.
11          (The document referred to was thereupon
12           marked Exhibit 91 for Identification.)
13   BY MR. SAMS:
14       Q.    The next document you provided us was
15   actually a set of documents clipped together.
16             Could you tell me first whether they belong
17   together and, if so, give me a description of what
18   each document is?
19       A.    Okay.  Starting with Bates No. 96353 and
20   ending with 89678?
21       Q.    Yes.
22             MR. SAMS:  I would like that marked as
23        Exhibit 92.
24          (The document referred to was thereupon
25           marked Exhibit 92 for Identification.)

                                                 911

 1             MR. SAMS:  Do you have an extra copy of 91?
 2        I gave the reporter mine.
 3             THE WITNESS:  I have one.
 4   BY MR. SAMS:
 5       Q.    If you could just answer the first
 6   question, I guess to get it started.  These belong
 7   together.  I think you said they did; is that
 8   correct?
 9       A.    I haven't said anything yet.
10       Q.    It appears now that I look at it these are
11   separate documents.
12       A.    Without reading it in totality I would have
13   to agree that I think that is a separate document.  I
14   don't have any reason to believe it's anywhere other
15   than it was in sequence in the file and it was just
16   clipped together.
17             MR. SAMS:  Let the record reflect I'm going
18        to ask you to remove 9675 through 9678, if I
19        may.
20   BY MR. SAMS:
21       Q.    With that removal, do they now address the
22   same subject?
23       A.    Yes, they do.
24       Q.    Could you briefly describe each of these --
25   let me just ask you a series of questions, if that

                                                 912

 1   may keep you from having to do a long narrative.
 2             As I understand it, these documents relate
 3   to a proposal that you and another investigator
 4   proposed to do to establish a field dosing experiment
 5   for development of the class 3 nutrient numerical
 6   criterion; is that correct?
 7             MS. PONZOLI:  Object to the form.
 8             THE WITNESS:  Not really.
 9   BY MR. SAMS:
10       Q.    What do these relate to?
11       A.    There was never a proposal made.  There
12   was -- we were requested by the TOC to put together a
13   sort of scoping approach document type of a thing.
14   But I don't -- we called it a pre-proposal.  There
15   has been a number of things in there.
16             I would hesitate to call it a full blown
17   proposal or anything like that.  I mean, it was only
18   like three pages long or five pages at the most, I
19   guess.  That's not quite what I would consider to be
20   a proposal.
21       Q.    Do these all relate to that pre-proposal or
22   whatever the submittal would be?
23       A.    It relates to that and the presentations
24   that were made to TOC and the District's staff on
25   this particular concept.

                                                 913

 1       Q.    By?
 2       A.    By myself.
 3       Q.    And then do the comments of other reviewers
 4   comprise pages 9660 through 9663 and 9669 through
 5   9670, and then 9671 through 9674?
 6       A.    Outside reviewers?
 7       Q.    Outside of the agency or the TOC.
 8             MS. PONZOLI:  I'm sorry, would you give me
 9        the question again?  You want to read it back?
10             MR. SAMS:  I asked if those three documents
11        were comments by other reviewers.
12             MS. PONZOLI:  On the pre-proposal?
13             THE WITNESS:  Did you exclude the District
14        comments?
15   BY MR. SAMS:
16       Q.    I did.  But if that fits that category,
17   then I would amend it to include also 9664 through
18   9668.
19       A.    Those are comments on -- most of these are
20   comments on a document that was sent to a number of
21   people as if it were a proposal, and there was never
22   a document prepared for such a review.  But
23   nonetheless, these are comments upon that particular
24   document.
25       Q.    Were these forwarded to you by the

                                                 914

 1   District?
 2       A.    Yes, they were.
 3       Q.    The water management district?
 4       A.    I received them from the water management
 5   district.  I wouldn't say they forwarded them to me.
 6       Q.    How did you obtain them?
 7       A.    Some of them came at a meeting we had at
 8   the District where they presented them and I picked
 9   up a package of material which they contained.
10   Others were delivered to me by, I'll say, third
11   parties because I honestly don't remember who I
12   received them from.  It could have been any one of a
13   number of people.
14             MR. SAMS:  I'm going to ask the court
15        reporter to mark another document which is Bates
16        Nos. 9679 through 9688.  Mark that as
17        Exhibit 93.
18          (The document referred to was thereupon
19           marked Exhibit 93 for Identification.)
20   BY MR. SAMS:
21       Q.    I ask if that's a document -- do they
22   belong together?
23             MS. PONZOLI:  Are you excluding 9685,
24        Mr. Sams?
25             MR. SAMS:  Yes.

                                                 915

 1             MS. PONZOLI:  That's been removed?
 2             MR. SAMS:  Yes.
 3             THE WITNESS:  He is removing 85 from the
 4        file.
 5   BY MR. SAMS:
 6       Q.    Those were the pages that I asked you
 7   about.  Did those documents fit together?
 8       A.    Did you take 85 out?
 9       Q.    I'm sorry.  I misunderstood your clarifying
10   question.  I thought you said 7585 is part of this
11   document.
12       A.    It's one document.
13       Q.    What does this document consist of?  And in
14   particular I'm interested, Dr. Jones, in the tables
15   1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.
16       A.    This was something that was sent to me by
17   EPA on the 15th, I guess, of March, the date on the
18   bottom.  It sort of gives me an idea how many samples
19   I would be handling in my laboratory for mercury and
20   various other types of analysis.
21       Q.    Is that under the remap study?
22       A.    I don't know whether it's remap or E-map or
23   I just considered it.  EPA mercury study, I'm pretty
24   sure it's a remap, but it could change on a daily
25   basis.

                                                 916

 1       Q.    I show you what was stapled together and
 2   includes Bates stamps 9686 through 9698 and ask you
 3   if those documents belong together.
 4       A.    Yes, they do.
 5             MR. SAMS:  I'll have this marked as
 6        Exhibit 94.
 7          (The document referred to was thereupon
 8           marked Exhibit 94 for Identification.)
 9   BY MR. SAMS:
10       Q.    Dr. Jones, have you reviewed the data that
11   are described in these papers that we have just
12   marked as Exhibit 94?
13       A.    Yes, I have.
14       Q.    If you could turn to page 9690, have you
15   formed any observations concerning those data?
16       A.    The data is of such limited number, my
17   understanding this study was basically done as a
18   training exercise for the District's staff on how to
19   collect mercury samples.
20             It's my opinion that you really can't make
21   any interpretation from this data set.  The only
22   thing I can say from it is that the values for the
23   concentration of both total mercury and methyl
24   mercury appear to be reasonable.
25       Q.    Reasonable in comparison to what?

                                                 917

 1       A.    The data that we collected in the marshes
 2   that -- the remap study, EPA.
 3       Q.    What data have you collected in the marshes
 4   under the remap study?
 5       A.    We had a number of laboratory
 6   intercalibration exercises.  I think three with our
 7   laboratory, Batel, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, the
 8   Athens EPA laboratory and the Cincinnati laboratory,
 9   to some extent.  We have done work on that.
10             Then also in our development of the
11   speciation -- mercury speciation techniques we have
12   collected samples predominantly from the L-67 canal
13   and from water conservation areas 3A just to have
14   actual samples to work with.
15             These just appear to be in the same ranges
16   that we are finding in the same ranges that Batel is
17   finding.
18       Q.    What number of fish have you analyzed for
19   mercury when the fish came from marshes under the
20   entire calibration exercise?
21       A.    Fish were not included.
22       Q.    Turning next to page -- Bates No. 9695, I
23   notice that the highest methyl mercury samples appear
24   to be from the 217 guage area in Water Conservation
25   Area 2A; is that correct?

                                                 918

 1       A.    In this table, yes, it does.
 2       Q.    Is that a phosphorous enriched or
 3   phosphorous unenriched site, relatively speaking?
 4       A.    Relative to what?
 5       Q.    Relative to whatever you would consider to
 6   be natural background, first.
 7       A.    I can't speak specifically for the 217
 8   guage, but for sample station due south of S-10C at
 9   approximately the same distance in as the 217 guage,
10   it would be an enriched area.
11       Q.    And you don't know whether the 217 guage
12   area itself is enriched or unenriched?
13       A.    I have never done any work at the 217
14   guage.  It all comes in the definition what's
15   enriched and unenriched.  I have different
16   parameters.
17       Q.    When you say that the area that you spoke
18   of as being about the same distance from the
19   structure as the 217 guage, what phosphorous
20   concentrations of water were you referring to?
21       A.    I'm not referring to it being enriched
22   because of phosphorous concentrations of water.
23       Q.    On what basis did you refer to it as
24   enriched?
25       A.    Decreased alkaline phosphatase activity.

                                                 919

 1       Q.    Do you know the phosphorous content of the
 2   sediments at that location?
 3       A.    At the 217 guage?
 4       Q.    No.  The alternate point that you stated
 5   that you could identify the state of enrichment.
 6       A.    I do, but I can't name it without looking
 7   at the table and seeing where the 217 guage is and
 8   making a parallel and drawing a line through it to
 9   see where it was.
10       Q.    I think you have the set in the same order
11   that I do here.  Can you tell me what the next page
12   is and whether it goes with any other page?
13       A.    9699 does not go with any other page.
14             MS. PONZOLI:  Off the record.
15                  (Discussion off the record.)
16   BY MR. SAMS:
17       Q.    Can you tell me whether page 9700 relates
18   to any of the other pages it's with?
19       A.    It's a single document.
20       Q.    There is a reference to sampling the week
21   of the 11th.  Is that April sampling, that's being
22   done?
23       A.    My understanding is it has been put off for
24   a week but it will be happening somewhere around the
25   11th.

                                                 920

 1       Q.    What is the purpose of that sampling?
 2       A.    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a
 3   project to cut a gap between the L-67 A and C levees
 4   to allow water to flow from Water Conservation Area
 5   3A to Water Conservation Area 3B.  This is some work
 6   to see if there were any changes in vegetation
 7   alkaline phosphatase or total phosphorous during the
 8   course of that experiment, if you will.
 9       Q.    Who is Jim Stone?
10       A.    He is a gentleman who works -- Doctor.
11   Dr. Jim Stone, he works in Plantation -- or
12   Fort Lauderdale, by the address.
13       Q.    Can you tell me which of the next pages
14   belong together?  It appears to be 9701 through maybe
15   9726.
16       A.    That's correct.
17       Q.    Have you reviewed this paper?
18       A.    I have not.
19       Q.    Was it provided to you by David Lane at
20   your request?
21       A.    It was not.
22       Q.    Do pages 9727 and 9728 relate to any of the
23   pages which follow?
24       A.    Yes, they do.
25       Q.    What pages belong together?  Does it run

                                                 921

 1   all the way through 9771?
 2       A.    Yes, it does.
 3       Q.    What is your purpose in obtaining this
 4   manuscript?
 5       A.    This is a manuscript that Dr. Amador and I
 6   put together.  It was on Everglades soils and carbon
 7   metabolism.  This is just the latest version to be
 8   submitted to Soil Science.
 9             MR. HYDE:  Can I see what the follow-up
10        page is?  Mine has two letters.  It says
11        Table 1. Okay.
12   BY MR. SAMS:
13       Q.    Does this study have anything to do with
14   the effect of nutrients on mercury cycling in the
15   Everglades?
16       A.    It doesn't have mercury cycling, no.
17       Q.    Do pages 9774 through 9783 have anything to
18   do with the effect of nutrients on mercury cycling in
19   the Everglades?
20       A.    No.
21       Q.    Could you identify for me what pages 9784
22   through 9786 are?
23       A.    These are total phosphorous in the water
24   column and non-purgeable from the water done in the
25   50 stations in the EPA study.

                                                 922

 1       Q.    Did these result in the phosphorous data
 2   from -- that we have seen from the first round of
 3   cycling -- first cycle of sampling in that study?
 4       A.    Yes.
 5       Q.    Are these data that you did not have at the
 6   time of your last deposition?
 7       A.    I believe you have a copy of this.  It was
 8   presented in my documents.  If it wasn't, I can't
 9   imagine why it wouldn't have been.
10             MR. SAMS:  Just to be sure, we've got to
11        mark this as Exhibit 95.
12          (The document referred to was thereupon
13           marked Exhibit 95 for Identification.)
14   BY MR. SAMS:
15       Q.    Can you identify the documents that seems
16   to be stapled together and is comprised of page 9787
17   through 9789?
18       A.    Yes.
19       Q.    What is that?
20       A.    This would be an example of the machine
21   output for total phosphorous analysis, and I believe
22   this is for EAA soils.
23       Q.    This would have been taken on the EAA entry
24   back in March '93; is that correct?
25       A.    I believe so, yes.

                                                 923

 1       Q.    And this is machine output from your lab?
 2       A.    Yes -- excuse me.  This goes with another
 3   set of documents in here.  It may be mislabeled on
 4   the top as EAA.  It may need to be EPA.
 5             At that point it would be sediments from
 6   the canals.  That's why I was looking through here
 7   and picking out the other documents.
 8       Q.    Could you attempt to do that?
 9       A.    Yes.  I don't believe that to be the case.
10   I just want to be certain.  I believe it's mislabeled
11   and it should be EPA sediments, canal sediments.
12       Q.    Is it possible to identify the locations
13   from which the samples were taken?
14       A.    The number in pen and pencil written on the
15   side.  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.  It should be
16   continuing on the next document, 9790 through 9794.
17   There should be 50 total stations.  There also will
18   be some 205, 215, 235, those would be the duplicates
19   taken at stations 55, 15, and 35.
20       Q.    So basically pages 9787 through 9794 are
21   related to each other in the manner that you
22   described?
23       A.    Yes, to the best of my understanding, the
24   problem being that the label here, which I didn't put
25   on this table, this was my technician that wrote this

                                                 924

 1   on, he has a tendency to get EPA.  -- USEPA,
 2   Everglades Protection Area and EAA messed up
 3   sometimes.
 4       Q.    And these, to the best of your
 5   recollection, will be Everglades Protection Area
 6   sediment samples?
 7       A.    They would be EPA.  Environmental
 8   Protection Agency, the canal samples.  I do that by
 9   looking at -- if you would be willing, 9841 is the
10   summary table.
11             MS. PONZOLI:  Do we need to remove that
12        from the document?  That's inside.
13             MR. SAMS:  I don't know where that is.
14             THE WITNESS:  It would be in the last set
15        of documents.
16             MS. PONZOLI:  Inside sequentially.
17             MR. SAMS:  I may be overlooking something.
18        Mine seems to end with 9816, the set I was
19        handed.
20             MS. PONZOLI:  Yours ends with what?
21             MR. SAMS:  The last page I have is 9816.
22             MR. HYDE:  No.
23             MR. SAMS:  Off the record.
24                  (Discussion off the record.)
25   BY MR. SAMS:

                                                 925

 1       Q.    You were about to explain to me, Dr. Jones,
 2   something regarding the pages 9787 through 9794
 3   utilizing the page with the Bates No. 9841?
 4       A.    That's correct.
 5       Q.    What were you about to tell me?
 6       A.    I compared sample No. 1 with the one on
 7   9787, and you see that the average is 2302.66 under
 8   the column labeled TP on 9841.
 9       Q.    Yes.
10       A.    That appears to be the -- approximately the
11   average you would get by averaging those four numbers
12   together.  So therefore, knowing that these are the
13   EPA canal sediments which I have labeled as such on
14   9841, I realize -- and since these documents were,
15   when they were handed to me, attached as one here, I
16   just happened to relabel the one top thing.
17             I had sent this to Dr. Tober at EPA.  He
18   doesn't have any interest in having numerous pages of
19   machine output.  So the summary table was sent and
20   that's why it was separated.
21       Q.    Does 9841 necessarily go along with any
22   other page?  For example, does it belong with 9842
23   through 9844?
24       A.    I believe 9829 through 9844 was all in a
25   package of material that I sent to Jerry Tober at

                                                 926

 1   EPA.
 2             MR. SAMS:  Why don't we to try to get the
 3        record a little clearer.  Mark as the next
 4        Exhibit 9787 through 9794 -- Bill, in other
 5        words, I'm leaving out for the time being 9841
 6        so we can keep it in context.  Mark that
 7        Exhibit 96.
 8          (The document referred to was thereupon
 9           marked Exhibit 96 for Identification.)
10             MR. SAMS:  Off the record.
11                  (Discussion off the record.)
12   BY MR. SAMS:
13       Q.    Describe for me document by document,
14   Dr. Jones, if you could, what the documents are that
15   start with 9795 and continue to the end.
16             If you could do that in a way that we can
17   identify pages that belong together, I would
18   appreciate it.
19       A.    I'll indicate right now some of this
20   material has been produced simply because of the
21   request, you know, and that there will be some
22   duplicate pages or there will be pages that under
23   ordinary circumstances I would have discarded because
24   they are a later version of that that are more
25   complete.

                                                 927

 1             Some of these are working documents where
 2   Jennifer Tothos, who was the technician, would have
 3   presented a table, left something out and said please
 4   add this, you need to give me the means or no, that's
 5   not the way we wanted the standard deviations.  But
 6   they are all of different variations on there.
 7   Ordinarily I would have gotten those.
 8       Q.    If you could, identify each document and
 9   who prepared it.
10       A.    I'll try to do that, but I may not be able
11   to do that.  I'll do it to the best of my ability on
12   the time frame like this, okay, because it would take
13   us longer.
14             The first document is EPA water samples
15   collected from South Florida Water Management
16   District from various structures within the Water
17   Conservation Area.
18             The table is not appropriately labeled.
19   There is no data on here.  I'm not sure what the rest
20   of the values are.  This is an early version of that
21   particular information.  I would ordinarily have
22   discarded this table.
23             The second series of information started
24   with No. 9796 is results of analysis of fish
25   collected from the holeyland sites 1 and 7 -- not

                                                 928

 1   holeyland sites, that wasn't received.  It goes along
 2   with the KBN data that was collected for Hopping,
 3   Boyd, Green, I believe.  These are just analyses of
 4   replicate samples.  The number that says these are
 5   represented on the next pages with 9797 and going to
 6   96798.  You can see in there it has sample ID and has
 7   HS-5 and 10-A.
 8             Those have to do with the chain of custody
 9   forms that we received from KBN indicating where the
10   fish sample was located.
11       Q.    Which numbers identify station numbers,
12   sampling station numbers?
13       A.    It would be in the sample.  You have to go
14   back to the data sheets, chain and custody forms
15   which had been produced previously, so they are not
16   in this packet.
17       Q.    Who took these fish that were sampled?
18       A.    I don't know.  I wasn't there.
19       Q.    Who forwarded them to your lab?
20       A.    I'm not sure whether the District forwarded
21   them to our lab or whether KBM forwarded them to our
22   lab.
23       Q.    Would it have to have been one or the other
24   of those?
25       A.    Yes.

                                                 929

 1       Q.    And your lab's analysis is then contained
 2   on pages -- summary on 9796 and detail on 9797 and
 3   9798?
 4       A.    That's correct.
 5             MR. SAMS:  I'm going to have this whole
 6        package marked as Composite Exhibit 97 so we can
 7        keep trucking through here.
 8          (The documents referred to were thereupon
 9           marked Composite Exhibit 97 for Identification.)
10   BY MR. SAMS:
11       Q.    If you could just walk us through --
12             MR. HYDE:  Did that also include 9795 or
13        was that being discarded?
14             MR. SAMS:  Yes, it does.
15             THE WITNESS:  With the exception of 9800,
16        which has got absolutely no reason being in
17        here.  That is just a piece of paper that got
18        stuck in by mistake.  I don't know where that
19        came from.
20   BY MR. SAMS:
21       Q.    What belongs together next?
22       A.    9799 and 9801.
23       Q.    What do they tell us?
24       A.    Can we remove this page?  It's really a
25   piece of paper.

                                                 930

 1             MR. SAMS:  Sure.  Let the record reflect we
 2        are removing 9800 as superfluous and unrelated.
 3             THE WITNESS:  These are analyses of bass
 4        and catfish.
 5   BY MR. SAMS:
 6       Q.    Where were they taken?
 7       A.    These were along with the KBN sample.
 8   Sample HS-1-53 would tell us by looking at the chain
 9   of custody form that was provided to us by KBN.
10       Q.    The analyses were done in your lab?
11       A.    Yes.
12       Q.    And page 9801 is what?  Is that an
13   averaging?
14       A.    That's the summary sheet, I believe, for --
15   that would be the averages for these sheets, I
16   believe for the top data sheet.
17       Q.    Next, what belongs together?
18       A.    9802 through 9804 are some data sheets for
19   the samples.  It says EPA samples collected on March
20   10, 1994.  And this would be the raw data, if you
21   will, or the machine output data from --
22       Q.    How does one identify the sample sites?
23       A.    Under sample name it has S-6, S-5A, S-6,
24   S-12D.  S-6 would be the S-6 structure.
25       Q.    These are all structures?

                                                 931

 1       A.    Yes.
 2       Q.    Where were these collected above or below
 3   the structure?  Can you identify --
 4       A.    I believe they are collected above the
 5   structure.  The South Florida Water Management
 6   District's staff is collecting these samples,
 7   transporting them and delivering them to our
 8   laboratory.
 9             At this time we are just trying to collect
10   enough data to get some idea what's going through
11   these structures as it relates to mercury and, you
12   know its --
13       Q.    All right.
14             MR. HYDE:  Let me ask the last sample name,
15        C 1235 R 84?
16             THE WITNESS:  Yes.
17             MR. HYDE:  What is that referring to?
18             THE WITNESS:  That's along Alligator Alley.
19        I'm not certain.  These are structures that were
20        selected or areas that were selected by the
21        District and EPA and myself.  We all talked
22        about them, but I'm not sure which one that is.
23             I would just think that's 84 because of R
24        84 makes me think of Alligator Alley.  That's
25        the only -- you know, that's the only thing

                                                 932

 1        there.  It could also be the field blank, for
 2        that matter.
 3   BY MR. SAMS:
 4       Q.    Is it your understanding, Dr. Jones, that
 5   these were at sites identified for sampling as the
 6   first 50 on cycle zero of E-map?
 7       A.    No, this is a totally different set.  This
 8   is a biweekly sampling for mercury at these
 9   structures throughout the Everglades.
10       Q.    Is that the working sample by soft mud?
11       A.    By the South Florida Water Management
12   District, yes.
13       Q.    What is the next set that belongs together?
14       A.    I'm going to have to go back and retract
15   something I said on the first page.  9795 -- and
16   because I said Jennifer, I see now it's MEHG
17   concentration.  It's not a properly labeled table.
18   It's better off later on.  This is methyl mercury and
19   not total mercury.  It does not have anything to do
20   with 9802.
21             The next set of documents that go together
22   would be 9805 -- I believe it goes to 9808.
23       Q.    What was the sampling episode from which
24   these analyses were conducted?
25       A.    It's again KBN samples that were fish

                                                 933

 1   samples that were sent to us by either KBN or the
 2   District.
 3       Q.    And the analyses, including the summary
 4   tables, were prepared in your lab?
 5       A.    Yes.
 6       Q.    What's the difference between normalized
 7   mercury concentration parts per billion and corrected
 8   mercury parts per trillion?
 9       A.    The PPT value is the value for what was in
10   the sample as a liquid.  And when we normalize it, we
11   normalize it to the way of the fish so that's
12   converting it into nanogram per liter, micrograms per
13   gram.
14       Q.    The next set of pages that go together are
15   what?
16       A.    9809 and 9810.  I don't know that there is
17   a summary table for these.
18       Q.    You said 9809?
19       A.    Yes, and 9810.
20       Q.    And what do these analyses relate to.  That
21   was again KBN samples?
22       A.    Yes, they are.
23       Q.    Then what?
24       A.    9811 through 9816 is another one of these
25   things that give us an idea of how many samples we

                                                 934

 1   might be expecting to analyze from the EPA.
 2       Q.    Then we come to 9817?
 3       A.    Which is an individual single document.
 4       Q.    What does that relate to?
 5       A.    We were trying to get an idea of how
 6   difficult it was to filter water and what kind of
 7   variation we would see by removing different size
 8   fractions.  So we took some lake water and added some
 9   soil to it, shook it up and then ran it through these
10   different sized filters, unfiltered 20 micron, 5
11   micron, 12 micron and 1 micron, to see what
12   proportion of the mercury was removed by doing the
13   filter.
14             This was more from how difficult is it to
15   filter a sample than actually what the values are for
16   mercury.  But we do intend to do these now with
17   natural water, since we found out we could do it with
18   essentially mud.
19       Q.    Is there any other page that goes with
20   this?
21       A.    No.
22       Q.    What belongs together next?
23       A.    9818 through 9820.  I don't believe there
24   are any duplicates so far in what we have hit, but
25   it's possible.  I haven't pulled together the R

                                                 935

 1   mercury data other than to make some rough comparison
 2   with KBN's.  This is the same thing.  This is more
 3   fish samples.
 4             MR. HYDE:  I don't have the pages beginning
 5        with 9818.
 6             MR. SAMS:  That turned out to be an extra.
 7        I have a duplicate.
 8             MS. PONZOLI:  I think Dr. Jones brought
 9        them to my office.
10             THE WITNESS:  I put my people under some
11        pressure to produce copies.  I think that's what
12        happened.
13             MR. HYDE:  This is all still part of
14        composite Exhibit 97?
15