Statewide ground-water quality in small public water systems

STATEWIDE GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN SMALL PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
John C. Donahue and Susan R. Kibler
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION WATERSHED PROTECTION BRANCH REGULATORY SUPPORT PROGRAM
ATLANTA
2008
CIRCULAR 12V

STATEWIDE GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN SMALL PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
John C. Donahue and Susan R. Kibler
The preparation of this report was funded in part through a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under the provisions ofSection 106 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, as amended.
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Noel Holcomb, Commissioner
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Carol A. Couch, Director
WATERSHED PROTECTION BRANCH Linda MacGregor, Branch Chief
ATLANTA
2008
CIRCULAR 12V

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................1:1
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ..................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 STATEWIDE SMALL PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM GROUND-WATER MONITORING PROJECT ........................................................................................... 1-2
1.3 ECONOMIC AND POPULATION CRITERIA ........................................................ 1-5
CHAPTER 2 HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK .......................................................2-1
2.1 COASTAL PLAIN PROVINCE .............................................................................. 2-1
2.2 PIEDMONT/BLUE RIDGE PROVINCE ................................................................. 2-2
2.3 VALLEY AND RIDGE PROVINCE ....................................................................... 2-3
CHAPTER 3 METHODS .............................................................................................3-1
3.1 FIELD METHODS ................................................................................................ 3-1
3.2 LABORATORY METHODS.................................................................................. 3-2
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS................................................................................................4-1
4.1 pH .......................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 CONDUCTIVITY .................................................................................................... 4-1
4.3 ANIONS AND NON-METALS ............................................................................... 4-1 4.3.1 Chloride .................................. .. .............. ..... ................... ........... ..... ........... ... ... 4-2 4.3.2 Sulfate ...................... .......... ........ ................ ...... .............. ... ......... ...... ........... .... 4-2 4.3.3 Nitrate/Nitrite .......... ................. .. .. .............. ...... ............. ... .................... ...... ...... 4-2 4.3.4 Total Phosphorus .......................................................... ..................... ....... ...... 4-2 4.3.5 Dissolved Oxygen ........ ................. ... ........... ........... ......... ........ ............... .. ....... 4-3
4.4 METALS ................................................................................................................ 4-3
4.4.1 Alkali Metals ............................... ............ .. ... ... .... ............ ...................... .. .... .... . 4-3 4.4.2 Alkaline Earth Metals ...................................................................................... 4-3 4.4.3 Copper, Lead, and Zinc ............. .......... ... ............. ......... .... ...................... ... ...... 4-4 4.4.4 Iron, Manganese, and Chromium ............................................................. ....... 4-5 4.4.5 Molybdenum, Uranium, and Vanadium ........... ............................... .... ............. 4-5 4.4.6 Aluminum and Titanium ................................................... ....... ......................... 4-6 4.4.7 Other Metals.................................................................................................... 4-6

4.5 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS .......,.,.........................................................4-6 4.6 RADIOACTIVITY....................................................................................................4-7 CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS..........................................................5-1 5.1 FIELD PARAMETERS ...........................................................................................5-1 5.2 ANIONS AND NON-METALS ................................................................................51 5.3 METALS .................................................................................................................5-2 5.4 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ...................................................................55 5.5 OVERALL QUALITY OF GROUND WATER AVAILABLE TO SMALL PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS ......................................................................................................S-5 CHAPTER 6 LIST OF REFERENCES .........................................................................6-1 APPENDIX
Laboratory and Well Data LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1. Map of Georgia, Showing the Counties That Lie Within the Study Area ..........................................................................................................1-3 Figure 1-2. Location Map, Showing Sampling Stations...................................1-4
LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1. Analytical Methods......................................................................3-2 Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-2 Table A-2. Chemical Components and Reporting Limits ................................A-34
ii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This report, covering the period October 2006 through February 2008, is the third in a series of summaries to examine potential ground-water impairment within specific areas of Georgia or involving specific types of wells. The first nineteen summaries of the Circular 12 series dealt with the chemical quality of ground water Statewide.
These summaries are among the tools used by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) to assess trends in the quality of the State's ground-water resources. EPD is the State organization with regulatory responsibility for maintaining and, where possible, improving ground-water quality and availability. EPD has implemented a comprehensive statewide ground-water management policy of antidegradation (EPD, 1991; 1998). Five components comprise EPD's current groundwater quality assessment program:
1. The Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network. The Georgia Geologic Survey Branch (GGS) of EPD and its successor, the Regulatory Support Program of the Watershed Protection Branch, maintain this program. Early in calendar year 2004, a three-part monitoring program replaced the Statewide aquifer-specific monitoring network. The new program examines ground-water: a) in the coastal area for influx of connate brines, sea water, or low-quality surface water; b) in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge for impacts from development and rural land use as well as to gain a more thorough understanding of the area's ambient ground water; and c) from small public water systems to spot check for intermittent contamination that might escape detection under item 2) below. The current report summarizes findings for part c) of the program, the Small Public Water System Monitoring Project.
2. Sampling of public drinking water wells as part of the Safe Drinking Water Program, also of the Watershed Protection Branch. This program provides data on the quality of ground water that the residents of Georgia are using.
3. Special studies addressing specific water quality issues. Examples of these types of studies include a survey of nitrite/nitrate levels in shallow wells located throughout the State of Georgia (Shellenberger, et al., 1996; Stuart, et al., 1995), operation of a Pesticide Monitoring Network conducted jointly by the GGS and the Georgia Department of Agriculture (GOA) (Talford, 1999; Glen, 2001 ), and the Domestic Well Pesticide Sampling Project conducted jointly by the GGS and the GOA (Overacre, 2004, Berry, 2005).
1-1

4. Ground-water sampling at environmental facilities such as municipal solid waste landfills, RCRA facilities, and sludge disposal facilities. The primary branches responsible for monitoring these facilities are EPD's Land Protection, Watershed Protection, and Hazardous Waste Management Branches.
5. The wellhead protection program (WHP), which is designed to protect the area surrounding a municipal drinking water well from contaminants. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved Georgia's WHP Plan on September 30, 1992. The WHP Plan became a part of the Georgia Safe Drinking Water Rules, effective July 1, 1993. The protection of public water supply wells from contaminants is important not only for maintaining groundwater quality, but also for ensuring that public water supplies meet health standards.
1.2 STATEWIDE SMALL PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM GROUND-WATER MONITORING PROJECT
The study area for the Statewide Small Public Water System Ground-Water Monitoring Project encompassed all 159 counties in Georgia (Fig. 1-1). The stations sampled consisted of 177 wells and 3 springs supplying water to small permitted public systems (Figure 1-2). For the purposes of this project, a small permitted system is defined as serving a population of 25 - 500 persons, as permitted by the EPD Drinking Water Program. An additional focus of this study included targeting stations that were located in low income and minority communities. Study participants were selected from the Public Water System Permittee List, which is available online at the EPD website. Water system operators who had participated in earlier studies were excluded unless they had expressed an interest in additional studies.
While the initial objective was to sample at least one station per county, not every county had a sampling station that met the study criteria. Some counties lacked ground-water systems that were sufficiently small. In other counties, the few suitable stations either had been used in a previous study or had owners who elected not to participate.
Waters from the sampled stations were field tested for pH, conductivity, temperature, and, where possible, dissolved oxygen. The sampling stations were located using global positioning system (GPS) receivers. At 19 stations, sample waters received comparative (water versus background) radioactivty measurements. Laboratory testing for the project included analyses for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), chloride, sulfate, nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, and metals, including uranium and arsenic.
1-2

Figure 1-1. Map of Georgia, Showing the Counties That Lie Within the Study Area.
1-3

Figure 1-2. Location Map Showing Sampling Stations. 1-4

The State has established limits, termed Primary or Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) and action levels, on the concentrations of certain substances in water made available to the public (EPD, 2007) . Primary MCLs apply to substances that pose a threat to health. Secondary MCLs apply to substances which, though not ordinarily a threat to health , nevertheless impart an offensive quality to the water, such as bad taste or ability to stain. Action levels apply to lead and copper due to health reasons. During routine copper and lead monitoring, if more than 10% of the water samples collected from user outlets in a public water system contain more than 15 parts per billion (ppb) of lead or more than 1,300 ppb of copper, the water system must apply treatment to lower the levels of these metals. Although the MCLs and action levels apply only to treated water made available to the public, they are useful guidelines for evaluating the quality of raw (untreated) water.
1.3 ECONOMIC AND POPULATION CRITERIA
Prior to sampling, the approximate geographic location of each well was compared to the economic and population data contained in the 2000 United States Decennial Census Survey (2000 Survey). More information on the 2000 Survey can be found on the United States Census Bureau (USCB) website at www.census.gov. For this project, the 2000 Survey was used, as the 2006 US Census American Community Survey (2006 Survey) was not available for all areas at the time of this report. Where possible, sampling locations were selected in areas that had above average levels of poverty or minority populations. Once the sampling for each station had been completed and the exact coordinates of the well had been determined, the location was again compared to the census data maps.
For the 2000 Survey, the USCB used a combination of income thresholds to establish the number of people living in poverty. The number is reported as a percentage of individuals living below the poverty level. More information as to how the
income thresholds and the poverty level are established can be found on the uses
website. In the US, the percentage of people living in poverty is reported as 12.4 percent. Of the 180 sites that were sampled for this project, 120 sites (67 percent) were located in areas where the level of poverty exceeded the national average.
The sampling locations were also compared to the USCB data for two minority populations: Hispanic/Latino and Black/African American. The percentage of the population in the US that self-identify as Hispanic/Latino is reported as 12.5 percent. Of the 180 sites that were sampled for this project, 6 sites (3 percent) were located in areas where the Hispanic/Latino population exceeded the 12.5 percent national average. The percentage of the population in the US that self-identify as Black/African American is reported as 12.3 percent. Of the 180 sites that were sampled for this project, 128 sites (71 percent) were located in areas where the Black/African American population exceeded the 12.3 percent national average.
1-5

CHAPTER 2 HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK
This report recognizes three hydrogeologic provinces in Georgia by their general geologic and hydrologic characteristics (Figure 1-1 ). These provinces consist of:
1. the Coastal Plain province of south Georgia;
2. the Piedmont/Blue Ridge province, which includes all but the northwest corner of north Georgia; and
3. the Valley and Ridge province of northwest Georgia.
Of the 180 stations, 7 were located in the Valley and Ridge province, 55 were located in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge province, and 118 were located in the Coastal Plain province.
2.1 COASTAL PLAIN PROVINCE
Georgia's Coastal Plain Province generally comprises a wedge of loosely consolidated sediments, ranging in age from Cretaceous to Holocene, which gently dip and thicken to the south and southeast. The oldest units are exposed along the Fall Line, which forms the northern limit to the Coastal Plain, and successively younger units crop out to the south and southeast. The Atlantic Ocean bounds the Coastal Plain to the east. The Coastal Plain passes out of the State to the northeast, the south, and the west.
The main water bearing units in the Coastal Plain consist of permeable sands and limestones. In their outcrop areas, these units are unconfined. Down dip from the outcrop areas, the water bearing units are confined above and below by layers of poorly permeable sediments. Water enters the aquifers in their updip outcrop areas, where permeable sediments of the aquifer are exposed. Ground-water flow through confined Coastal Plain aquifers is generally to the south and southeast, in the direction of the dip of the rocks. Porosity in the sands is primary, i.e., the void space lies between mineral grains. Porosity in the limestones is a mix of primary, as spaces between shell fragments, and secondary, as fractures and solution-enlarged voids. The limestones are the most prolific water producers in the Coastal Plain.
The Dougherty Plain, a karst plain that occupies much of southwest Georgia, is a major region of the Coastal Plain. This plain extends from Dooly County southwestward to Seminole County and is about 50 miles across at its widest point. The characteristic terrain is very flat and, except for numerous, commonly water-filled sinkholes and depressions, is nearly featureless. Smaller surface drainage ways (locally called
2-1

"drains") carry water only during wet periods. Normal drainage occurs via cave systems.
An important subsurface feature in the Coastal Plain is the Gulf Trough. The trough is a narrow linear northeast/southwest trending subsurface feature with an axis lying roughly along a line from Panama City, FL, through just south of Statesboro, GA (Kellam and Gorday, 1990; Scott, 2001 ). Lower permeability sediments occupying the trough impede groundwater flow to the south and southeast. Ground waters from the vicinity of the trough tend to have higher dissolved solid contents and may contain high amounts of barium, sulfate, and radionuclides.
2.2 PIEDMONT/BLUE RIDGE PROVINCE
Igneous and metamorphic bedrock ranging in age from Precambrian to Mesozoic characterizes the Piedmont/Blue Ridge province. The igneous rocks are predominantly granitic. Smaller amounts of mafic rocks also occur, with Mesozoic diabase being the youngest. The metamorphic rocks are predominantly regionally metamorphosed and multiply deformed. The rock types include schists, gneisses, amphibolites, quartzites, marbles, granulites, and mylonites. Minor amounts of contact metamorphic rocks may accompany diabase intrusions. The province passes out of the State to the northeast and southwest. The Fall Line forms the southern boundary of the province, while the Great Smoky-Cartersville Fault System bounds it to the northwest. The topography of the Blue Ridge region is predominantly mountainous, while that of the Piedmont region is predominantly rolling. The two regions, however, behave as a single hydrogeologic entity. The province contains a single aquifer system composed of two major hydrogeologic units: regolith and fractured bedrock (Heath, 1980; Daniel and Harned, 1997).
Typical regolith is highly porous and is composed of a surficial veneer of soil or, near stream bottoms and former stream bottoms, alluvium, underlain by saprolite (Heath, 1980; Daniel and Harned, 1998). Saprolite is bedrock that has undergone extensive chemical weathering in place to a material rich in clay minerals. Many of the structures and textures of the original bedrock are commonly preserved, with the saprolite appearing as a "rotten" version of the original rock. The saprolite typically grades downward through a transition zone into unweathered, fractured bedrock.
The regolith serves as a reservoir that feeds ground water downward into the underlying fractured bedrock (Heath, 1980). The water table usually lies within the regolith and, at rest, is a subdued imitation of the topography, with flow proceeding from high areas toward valleys.
Unlike the regolith, the bedrock has almost no primary porosity, i.e., void space between mineral grains. Nearly all the ground water in these rocks is stored in fractures and solution voids (secondary porosity). In the North Carolina Piedmont, Daniel and Harned (1998) found 1-3% porosity typical for bedrock.
2-2

Fractures, which open the rock to weathering, consist of faults and joints. Faults are breaks in the rock with differential displacement, and joints are breaks in the rock with little differential displacement (Heath, 1980). Fractures generally are more numerous and wider near the bedrock surface. Weathering can enlarge the fractures and alter the rock to saprolite. Large fractures in bedrock function as conduits, thus wells tapping bedrock can have larger yields than those tapping the regolith. At a depth of about 600 feet, pressure from the overlying rock column becomes too great and fractures are held shut (Daniel and Harned, 1998).
2.3 VALLEY AND RIDGE PROVINCE The Valley and Ridge Province lies northwest of the Great Smoky/Cartersville
Fault System and passes out of the State to the north and west. Bedrock in the province consists of consolidated Paleozoic sediments: sandstones, shales, mudstones, limestones, and dolostones. The rocks are folded and cut by numerous faults. Erosionally more resistant rock units form long ridges, while erosionally less resistant units underlie valleys. The faulting and folding have exposed the limestones and dolostones to weathering, and, karst features such as sinkholes and dry drainage ways occur in areas underlain by these carbonate rocks.
Primary porosity occurs, however, secondary porosity is the more important water-bearing feature. Surface and subsurface flow systems tend to be interconnected on a local scale. The carbonate rocks, notably those of the Knox Group, are the most prolific water producers, particularly where they occupy fold axes in broad valleys.
2-3

CHAPTER 3 METHODS
3.1 FIELD METHODS
Conductivity, pH, temperature, and, where possible, dissolved oxygen were monitored in the field with Horiba Model U-1 0 water quality meters. Garmin eTrex Legend GPS receivers were used to measure latitude and longitude at the sampling station. At 19 stations, radioactivity readings were taken both over a five-gallon plastic bucket filled with sample water (sample reading) and over ground at a distance from the bucket (background reading) (Table A-1, Part A). A Mount Sopris Instrument Co. Model SC-132 handheld scintillation counter was used to measure radioactivity.
In most cases, wells had dedicated pumps with plumbing downstream of the wellhead that included spigots or other outlets. The outlet nearest the wellhead was typically used as the monitoring and collection point. A Y-tube formed of garden hose was fitted to the outlet. The Y-tube had a plastic pitcher fitted on one branch to accommodate the water quality meter probe, and the other branch of theY-tube was left open to be used for sampling. The meter probe was inserted into the pitcher and the well's pump was turned on to initiate the purging process. Every five minutes, conductivity, pH, dissolved oxygen, and temperature readings were taken and recorded. Monitoring continued until these parameters stabilized, which typically occurred after 15 to 20 minutes of continuous purging. The final recorded readings of pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and temperature are reported in Table A-1. For springs and for wells with plumbing that would not allow the attachment of the Y-tube, the water quality meter's calibration cup was used to draw aliquots for monitoring.
Once the field parameters stabilized, a metals sample was collected in a plastic 500 milliliter bottle containing a nitric acid preservative; a nitrate/nitrite and phosphorus sample was collected in a plastic 125 milliliter bottle containing a sulfuric acid preservative; and a chloride and sulfate sample was collected in a half-gallon (approx. 2 liter) plastic jug. VOC samples were collected in a triplet of septum vials containing a hydrochloric acid preservative.
When sampling was completed, the sample bottles, except for the half-gallon jug, were placed in doubled plastic bags. The bagged samples and the jug were then placed in ice water in a cooler. A trip blank, a septum vial containing clean water and a hydrochloric acid preservative prepared by EPD laboratory personnel, accompanied the VOC samples during transport.
Four wells underwent follow-up sampling because lead exceeded the action level or uranium exceeded the Primary MCL. The four wells are: CLA-1 (uranium), GRE-1 (uranium), LIN-1 (lead), and PIK-1 (uranium).
3-1

3.2 LABORATORY METHODS
Laboratory measurements of the concentrations of VOCs, chloride, nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, and metals took place at the EPD laboratory. The US EPA has approved and assigned identification numbers to various testing procedures, termed EPA methods, used in environmental venues. The EPD lab used the methods given in the table below.

Table 3-1. Analytical Methods

Analyte Metals (1) Metals (2) Chloride and Sulfate Nitrate/Nitrite Total Phosphorus VOCs

EPA Method
200.7 200 .8 300.0 353.2 365.1 524.2

Method Type
ICP ICP/MS lon Chromatography Colorimetric Colorimetric GC/MS

The reporting limit is the lowest concentration of a substance that can be accurately measured. These limits are given in Table A-2 in the Appendix. The typical reporting limit for nitrate/nitrite is 0.02 parts per million (ppm) as nitrogen and for sulfate, the typical reporting limit is 10 ppm. During the current project, the high concentrations of these substances in some samples caused the reporting limits to be raised. Parts per million and parts per billion are equivalent, respectively, to milligrams per liter and micrograms per liter.

The ICP (inductively-coupled plasma spectrometry) method is generally the better method for analyzing major metals and abundant minor metals: calcium, magnesium, sodium, iron, manganese, titanium, and, to a degree, potassium. The values reported in Table A-1 Part B for calcium, cobalt, iron, potassium, magnesium, manganese, sodium, titanium, and vanadium were derived from ICP analysis.

The ICP method is subject to interferences when used for analyzing trace metals. These interferences can result in spuriously high reported concentrations for some metals. During this study, ICP analyses for zinc proved to be particularly vulnerable to interference. As a result, the values reported for chromium, nickel, copper, zinc, arsenic selenium, molybdenum, silver, cadmium, tin, antimony, barium, thallium, lead, and uranium were derived from ICP/MS (inductively-coupled plasma spectrometry/mass spectrometry) analysis. The ICP/MS method provides results for trace metals that are more accurate.

Chloride and sulfate were analyzed using ion chromatography, which depends on the affinity of the analyte for an ion-exchange medium. Nitrate/nitrite and total phosphorus were analyzed using colorimetric techniques. These methods involve converting the analyte to a strongly colored substance, which can then be compared

3-2

with a color standard. VOCs were analyzed with the GC/MS (gas chromatography/ mass spectrometry) technique.
3-3

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS
4.1pH
One hundred and eighty-three pH measurements were made on 179 of the 180 stations. An instrument malfunction prevented a pH reading at station COW-1. The pHs of waters at 118 Coastal Plain stations ranged from 3.65 to 8.75. The pH measurements at 54 of the stations in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge ranged from 4.66 to 9.40. The pHs at the 7 Valley and Ridge stations ranged from 4.86 to 7.81. Sample waters were basic at 94 Coastal Plain stations, 8 Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations, and 2 Valley and Ridge stations. Two Piedmont/Blue Ride stations that underwent follow-up sampling registered acidic during one sampling and basic during the other: station LIN1 changed from basic to acidic and station CLA-1 changed from acidic to basic.
4.2 CONDUCTIVITY
One hundred and eighty-four conductivity measurements were made covering all 180 stations. The conductivity measurements ranged from 6 microSiemenses per centimeter (uS/em) to 437 uS/em, with both the high and low values measured at Coastal Plain stations. Conductivities in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge ranged from 7 uS/em to 360 uS/em and, in the Valley and Ridge, from 10 uS/em to 346 uS/em. Inspection of Table A-1 shows that sample waters with lower conductivities generally tend to have acidic pHs and lower contents of sulfate and chloride and of the major metals calcium, magnesium, and sodium. Of the 4 stations that received follow-up sampling, original and follow-up conductivities were drastically different from each other only at station PIK-1.
In the Coastal Plain, the 11 stations with the lowest conductivities lie in the recharge area for the Cretaceous aquifer system, just south of the Fall Line. The up-dip portion of the Cretaceous aquifer system is sandy. Spring HAS:-2, a station registering one of the lowest conductivities in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge, issues from the Hollis Quartzite (Hewett and Crickmay, 1935).
4.3 ANIONS AND NON-METALS
Samples from all 180 stations received testing for nitrate/nitrite and total phosphorus. Samples from 167 stations not in the Dougherty Plain received testing for chloride and sulfate, as well. Experience has shown Floridan Aquifer system ground water from the Dougherty Plain contains little or no detectable chloride or sulfate.
4-1

4.3.1 Chloride
The chloride contents of sampled waters ranged from undetectable to 30 ppm, far below the Secondary MCL of 250 ppm. Detectable chloride occurred in samples from 18 of the 106 Coastal Plain stations tested, 6 of the 53 Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations tested and none of the Valley and Ridge stations. Samples with the three highest chloride contents came from southeastern Coastal Plain stations (CAM-1, CHA2, GLY-2). None of the stations that underwent follow-up sampling yielded any samples containing detectable chloride in the initial or the follow-up sampling.
4.3.2 Sulfate
Sulfate contents of sampled waters ranged from undetectable to 160 ppm, also below the Secondary MCL of 250 ppm. Sulfate was detected in samples from 67 of the 106 Coastal Plain stations tested, 20 of the 53 Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations tested, and none of the Valley and Ridge stations. Stations registering the four highest sulfate contents were in the Coastal Plain (highest to lowest: CAM-1, GLY-2, CAM-2, COL-1 ), with the three highest of these in the southeastern part. For 2 of the 4 stations that underwent follow-up sampling, the original samples and the follow-up samples contained nearly equal amounts of sulfate. Samples from the remaining 2 stations contained no detectable sulfate in the initial or the follow-up sampling.
4.3.3 Nitrate/Nitrite
The concentration range extended from undetected to 10 ppm as nitrogen. Nitrate/nitrite was detected in samples from 43 Coastal Plain stations, 42 Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations, and 6 Valley and Ridge stations. The sample with the highest nitrate/nitrite content came from an emergency stand-by well (LEE-1) at a mobile home park in the Dougherty Plain portion of the Coastal Plain. Nitrate/nitrite concentrations in samples from one other Coastal Plain station (DEC-2) and four Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations (CHE-1, HAB-1, LUM-1, WKE-1) exceeded the 3 ppm as nitrogen level generally considered the minimum likely reflective of human influence (Madison and Brunett, 1985). Though the LEE-1 sample equaled the Primary MCL for nitrate/nitrite, it did not exceed the MCL. Of the four multiply sampled stations, the repeat samples contained amounts of nitrate/nitrite that were roughly similar to those of the original samples.
4.3.4 Total Phosphorus
Total phosphorus data are available for all 180 stations. Phosphorus was detected in samples from 84 stations. Phosphorus concentrations ranged from undetected to 0.68 ppm, though most are below 0.1 ppm. Concentrations in Coastal Plain samples ranged from undetectable to 0.45 ppm, with 57 of 118 stations yielding water with detectable phosphorus. For Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations, concentrations ranged from undetected to 0.68 ppm (OGL-1 ), with 29 of 55 stations showing detectable amounts. Only one of the Valley and Ridge stations registered detectable phosphorus, at a level of 0.02 ppm. No MCLs are assigned to phosphorus. Among the four wells
4-2

subject to follow-up sampling, all except LIN-1 gave follow-up samples with amounts of phosphorus similar to those of the original samples.
4.3.5 Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved oxygen measurements are available for 45 stations and range from undetected to 8.88 ppm. The highest dissolved oxygen contents occur in sample waters from the Dougherty Plain and Fall Line areas of the Coastal Plain and in those from the Valley and Ridge. No MCLs exist for dissolved oxygen.
Though the monitoring/sampling apparatus is configured to minimize contact between the atmosphere and the sample water, air can nevertheless enter the sample water upstream of the apparatus and interfere with dissolved oxygen measurements. In open-hole wells when the water level is pumped below a productive fracture or other water-bearing feature, water can become aerated as it cascades down the well bore. In low recovery wells with short water columns, pumping the water level down near or to the pump's intake can allow the pump to take some air along with the sample water.
4.4 METALS
The metals analyzed for this project are given in Table A-1 Part B in the Appendix. Analyses failed to detect arsenic, nickel, tin, selenium, silver, cadmium, antimony, beryllium, and cobalt. These metals are not further discussed in this chapter. Samples from all 180 stations received metals analysis.
4.4.1 Alkali Metals
The EPD laboratory tested for the alkali metals sodium and potassium using the ICP method. Owing to low analytical sensitivity (reporting limit 5,000 ppb), potassium was not detected in any samples. No MCLs apply to either metal.
Sodium concentrations ranged from undetected to 160,000 ppb in well QUI-1. Detectable levels of the metal occurred in samples from 176 stations. The sodium content in the QUI-1 sample is nearly four times that in the sample with the second highest sodium content (JEF-2). As a general rule, waters with basic pHs and higher conductivities tend to have higher sodium contents. All four of the wells receiving follow-up sampling registered sodium results for the follow-up samples similar to those of the original samples. Although the number of samples in the Valley and Ridge province was comparatively small, the samples from that province seem generally lower in sodium than samples from the other two provinces.
4.4.2 Alkaline Earth Metals
The current study examined ground-water levels of the alkaline earth metals calcium, magnesium, and barium. The EPD laboratory determined calcium and
4-3

magnesium by the ICP method. The laboratory used the ICP/MS method to test for barium. A Primary MCL of 2,000 ppb applies to barium; no MCLs apply to calcium or magnesium.
Calcium was detected in samples from 169 stations, with the maximum level being 85,000 ppb in the sample from well LEE-1 on the Dougherty Plain. The concentration of this metal tends to be depressed in waters with the lowest pHs (below about 6.00). The metal is more abundant in Coastal Plain and Valley and Ridge samples than in those from the Piedmont/Blue Ridge.
Magnesium was detected in samples from 151 stations. Well CAM-1 gave the sample with the high magnesium concentration of 35,000 ppb. The concentration of this metal tends to be lower in waters at the lowest pHs (below about 6.00). Magnesium concentrations generally tend to be lower in Piedmont/Blue Ridge samples than in samples from the other two provinces.
Barium was detected in samples from 171 stations. The analytical sensitivity afforded by ICP/MS testing for barium showed the metal to be a nearly ubiquitous trace element. The highest concentration of the metal, 300 ppb, was found in water from well MOT-1. Barium concentrations generally tend to be lower in Piedmont/Blue Ridge samples than in samples from the other two provinces. In the Coastal Plain, the highest concentrations of barium are found in samples from the vicinity of the Gulf Trough.
For the four wells subject to follow-up sampling, original and follow-up samples had the same calcium and magnesium levels for well PIK-1 and rose slightly in the other three. In all four wells, barium exhibited more variability between the original sampling and the repeat sampling.
4.4.3 Copper, Lead, and Zinc
Copper was detected in samples at 17 stations, lead at 29 stations, and zinc at 55 stations. Copper concentrations ranged up to 22 ppb, a level well below the Secondary MCL of 1,000 ppb and the action level of 1,300 ppb. The two highest lead concentrations found were 130 ppb (well LIN-1 ), in excess of the action level of 15 ppb, and 15 ppb (well RIC-1 ), equal to the action level. The highest zinc level found was 2,200 ppb (well TIA-1 ), below the 5,000 ppb Secondary MCL. Detectable concentrations of all three metals seem slightly more likely to occur in acid waters. Detections of two or all three of these metals in a single sample were common.
Concerning the four multiply sampled wells, well LIN-1 was the only well to yield a sample with detectable copper. The metal was detected in the original sample but not in the follow up sample. Well LIN-1 was resampled because of the excessive lead content in the original sample. The lead content of the follow-up sample was 1.2 ppb versus the original of 130 ppb. Both samples from well CLA-1 contained lead in similar amounts. No lead was detected in the original or follow-up sampling of wells GRE-1
4-4

and PIK-1. Zinc contents in all four wells exhibited more variability between the original sampling and the repeat sampling.
4.4.4 Iron, Manganese, and Chromium
The EPD laboratory analyzed for iron, manganese, and chromium using the ICP method. Since chromium is typically a trace metal, the laboratory also used the ICP/MS method to analyze for its presence. Secondary MCLs of 300 ppb and 50 ppb apply respectively to iron and manganese. A Primary MCL of 100 ppb applies to chromium.
Iron was detected in samples from 95 stations, with exceedances at 26 stations. Manganese was found in samples from 63 stations, with exceedances at 27 stations. Chromium was detected at a level below the Primary MCL at 2 stations. Detectable iron or manganese does not necessarily accompany detectable chromium.
Iron levels in the samples ranged up to 18,000 ppb. The highest iron concentrations occur in samples from Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations, although roughly the same proportion of Coastal Plain stations show detectable iron as Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations. The sample that registered the 18,000 ppb iron concentration contained some reddish brown sediment stirred up after the well (station BAL-1) was purged for about 10 minutes. The sediment is suspected of containing iron that, when solubilized during the digestion procedure that readies the sample for analysis, contributed to the high concentration detected. Only two Valley and Ridge stations showed detectable iron. Acid waters are somewhat more favorable for iron detections than basic waters, particularly if the iron concentration exceeds the Secondary MCL.
Manganese levels ranged up to 41 0 ppb. The three highest manganese concentrations occurred in samples from Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations. Manganese detections are proportionately the most numerous for Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations and the least common for Valley and Ridge stations. As with iron, acid waters were more favorable for manganese detections and manganese Secondary MCL exceedances than basic waters. Manganese occurred along with iron in samples from 49 stations.
Both stations giving waters with detectable chromium were located in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge province.
Concerning the four wells that underwent follow-up sampling, the iron and manganese levels in the follow-up samples are similar to those in the original samples.
4.4.5 Molybdenum, Uranium, and Vanadium
The EPD laboratory tested for molybdenum and uranium using the ICP/MS method and for vanadium using the ICP method. No MCLs apply to molybdenum or vanadium. A Primary MCL of 30 ppb applies to uranium. Detectable molybdenum was found in three samples from two stations, both in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge, with levels
4-5

ranging up to 11 ppb. The three samples that contained detectable molybdenum also contained detectable uranium.
Uranium was found in 26 samples from 22 stations, with 20 of the stations located in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge province. Concentrations ranged up to 96 ppb (repeat sample from station CLA-1 ), with samples from Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations BAL-1, CLA-1, GRE-1, and PIK-1, exceeding the Primary MCL. All exceedances occurred in samples collected in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge. Uranium is more likely to occur in sample waters that are basic and in those that contain nitrate. All wells that underwent follow-up sampling gave samples with detectable uranium, both in the initial and in the follow-up samples.
Vanadium was detected in two samples from two stations, one a Piedmont/Blue Ridge sample (BAL-1) and the other a Coastal Plain sample (MIT-1 ). The pH of the Coastal Plain sample was basic and that of the Piedmont/Blue Ridge sample was acidic.
4.4.6 Aluminum and Titanium
Aluminum was detected in 30 samples from 29 stations, with levels ranging up to 1,300 ppb. Most of the aluminum detections occurred in acidic waters, although two of the three samples with the highest levels had basic pHs. Most aluminum detections occurred in waters with detectable nitrate/nitrite. Iron or manganese detections accompanied most aluminum detections. For aluminum, a Secondary MCL range of 50 ppb to 200 ppb applies, due to the varying success which treatment operations have with controlling aluminum levels. Only well CLA-1 of the follow-up sampled wells contained detectable aluminum. The second sample contained 1,300 ppb aluminum versus 130 ppb for the first. All reportable aluminum for this study was above the 50 ppb level.
Titanium was detected using the ICP method in three samples from two Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations. The levels ranged up to 15 ppb. No MCLs exist for titanium. In both cases in which detectable titanium was present in the sample water, detectable aluminum was also present.
4.4. 7 Other Metals
This study found a single thallium detection in the sample from well JON-1. The level of the metal was 1.2 ppb, below the Primary MCL of 2 ppb.
4.5 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
The EPD laboratory analyzed 184 samples from all 180 stations for VOCs. Eight samples from 8 stations tested positive for one or more of these compounds. Chloroform was the most widely occurring, being found in waters from four wells: CH01, JEF-2, OGL-1, and, PIC-1. Methyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) was next, being found in
4-6

samples from three wells: ROC-1, SUM-1, and TR0-1. The sample from well OGL-1 also contained a small amount of toluene. Well CHE-1 yielded a sample with a small amount of para-dichlorobenzene. None of the VOC occurrences exceeded Primary MCLs. Five samples containing VOCs came from Piedmont/Blue Ridge wells, two from Coastal Plain wells; and one from a Valley and Ridge well. 4.6 RADIOACTIVITY
Nineteen pairs of radioactivity measurements are available for 19 stations. The count taken over water exceeded the background count at GRE-1. Water obtained from this well proved to contain excessive uranium.
4-7

CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
5.1 FIELD PARAMETERS
One hundred and eighty-three pH measurements were made on waters from 179 of the 180 stations sampled for the project: 118 stations on the Coastal Plain, 54 stations in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge province, and seven stations in the Valley and Ridge. The pHs ranged from 3.65 to 9.40. Basic pHs predominated in the Coastal Plain, while waters from the remaining two provinces were predominantly acidic. Waters with the lowest pHs, however, occurred on the Coastal Plain. The sample waters collected in the Coastal Plain are predominantly basic because to the extensive use of limestone aquifers, particularly the Floridan aquifer, for water supplies in that area.
One hundred and eighty-four conductivity measurements were made covering all 180 stations. The conductivity measurements ranged from 6 uS/em to 563 uS/em. The waters with the lowest conductivities came from the Hollis Quartzite in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge and the sandy recharge area of the Cretaceous aquifer system. Sample waters with lower conductivities generally tend to have acidic pHs and lower contents of sulfate and chloride and of the major metals calcium, magnesium, and sodium.
Comparative radioactivity measurements indicated that well GRE-1 might have a problem with radionuclides. Excessive uranium was detected in the sample water.
5.2 ANIONS AND NON-METALS
Samples from all 180 stations received testing for nitrate/nitrite and total phosphorus. Samples from 167 stations not in the Dougherty Plain received testing for chloride and sulfate, as well. On-site dissolved oxygen measurements are available for 45 stations.
The chloride contents of sampled waters ranged from undetectable to 30 ppm. Detectable chloride occurred in samples from 24 stations. The stations giving waters with the highest chloride contents are located in the southeastern part of the Coastal Plain. None of the Valley and Ridge stations gave samples with detectable chloride. Proportionately fewer Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations gave samples with detectable chloride than Coastal Plain stations. No samples exceeded the Secondary MCL for chloride (250 ppm).
Analyses detected sulfate in samples from 87 stations. Sulfate contents ranged from undetected to 160 ppm, with the highest concentrations in the southeastern part of the Coastal Plain. Stations giving samples with detectable sulfate were proportionately
5-1

more common on the Coastal Plain than in the other two provinces. None of the Valley and Ridge samples contained detectable sulfate. No samples exceeded the Secondary MCL for sulfate (250 ppm).
Nitrate/nitrite was dete~ted in samples from 91 stations and ranged up to 10 ppm as nitrogen. Though none exceeded the Primary MCL, the sample from the Coastal Plain well LEE-1 equaled the Primary MCL of 10 ppm as nitrogen. Five other wells, one in the Coastal Plain and four in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge, gave samples with nitrate/nitrite levels in excess of the 3 ppm level considered to be a maximum for natural background.
Of the six samples with elevated nitrate/nitrite contents, four came from trailer park wells and two from small town wells. Trailer park well LEE-1 is situated in a mixed land use area with woodlands, row-crop fields, pecan orchards, and residential/ commercial developments nearby. The agricultural, horticultural, and residential/ commercial areas are all possible contributors to the water's nitrate/nitrite content. Of special note, a pecan grower with an orchard adjacent to the trailer park fertilizes via irrigation water, which can seasonally raise ground-water nitrate/nitrite levels. The elevated nitrate/nitrite content of water from mobile home park well HAB-1 may be due in part to an intermittently leaky sewer line up gradient from the well.
Total phosphorus data are available from all 180 stations. Phosphorus was detected in samples from 84 stations and ranged up to 0.68 ppm, with the highest level occurring in Piedmont/Blue Ridge sample OGL-1. A little more than half the Coastal Plain and Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations gave samples with detectable phosphorus; only one sample from the Valley and Ridge did so. No MCLs exist for phosphorus.
Dissolved oxygen measurements are available for 45 stations, with concentrations ranging up to 8.88 ppm. Most of the highest dissolved oxygen contents occur in sample waters from the Coastal Plain's Dougherty Plain and Fall Line areas and from the Valley and Ridge. Dissolved oxygen measurements are subject to interference from well and plumbing conditions that expose the sample water to air. Disallowing for interference, the high oxygen contents of these waters reflects their origin in ground-water recharge areas.
5.3METALS
Metals were analyzed in samples for all 180 stations, using ICP and ICP/MS methods. The ICP method has generally lower sensitivity and is subject to interferences. The method generally works well for the more abundant metals in ground water such as calcium and sodium. ICP/MS analysis works well for trace metals such as zinc or barium. Metals analyses did not detect any potassium, beryllium, arsenic, nickel, selenium, cadmium, antimony, silver, tin, or cobalt.
The EPD laboratory tested samples from all 180 stations for the alkali metals sodium and potassium. No MCLs are established for either metal. Due to the low
5-2

analytical sensitivity for the metal, no potassium was detected at any of the stations. Sodium was detected in samples from 176 stations, with a high level of 160,000 ppb at Coastal Plain station QUI-1. Well QUI-1 may be drilled to the same horizon as a municipal well at nearby Georgetown, which also gives water with a relatively high sodium content (Donahue, 1997). Two of the stations providing waters with no detectable sodium are located in the Cretaceous aquifer recharge area just south of the Fall Line. As a general rule, waters with basic pHs and higher conductivities tend to have higher alkali metal contents. Samples from Valley and Ridge stations seem to have generally lower sodium contents than those from the other two provinces.
The EPD laboratory tested samples from all 180 stations for the alkaline earth metals beryllium, magnesium, calcium, and barium. Primary MCLs of 2,000 ppb apply to barium and 4 ppb to beryllium. No MCLs apply to calcium and magnesium. No beryllium was detected in any samples.
Calcium was detected in samples from 169 stations, with the maximum level being 85,000 ppb in the sample from Dougherty Plain well LEE-1. This well also produced water with the highest nitrate/nitrite content in the study. Magnesium was detected in samples from 151 stations, with a high of 35,000 ppb occurring in a sample from southeastern Coastal Plain well CAM-1. The sample from this well also registered the highest sulfate content found by the study. The concentrations of both metals tend to be depressed in waters with the lowest pHs (below about 6.00).
The ICP/MS method detected barium in samples from 171 stations, with a high level of 300 ppb in well MOT-1, a concentration well below the Primary MCL of 2,000 ppb. Wells such as MOT-1 that are drilled in the vicinity of the Gulf Trough can yield waters with elevated concentrations of barium. The analytical sensitivity afforded by ICP/MS testing for barium showed the metal to be a widespread trace element.
Samples from all 180 stations received analyses for copper, lead, and zinc. Copper was detected in samples from 17 stations, lead in samples from 29 stations, and zinc in samples from 55 stations. The concentrations of copper ranged up to 22 ppb (well LIN-1); concentrations of lead ranged up to 130 ppb (well LIN-1); and concentrations of zinc ranged up to 2,200 ppb (well TIA-1 ). The lead concentration of the original sample from Piedmont/Blue Ridge well LIN-1 exceeded the action level (15 ppb). No other samples contained any of these three metals in excess of applicable action levels or MCLs. Detections of these three metals seem more likely to occur in acid waters. The three metals commonly occurred in various combinations in single samples.
The excessive lead level in the original sample from well LIN-1 and the high lead level in the sample from RIC-1 probably occurred when corrosion films that had built up on the brass raw water faucets at both locations became incorporated into the sample water. During the second sampling of LIN-1, the raw water faucet spout was scrubbed inside and out with a paper towel. Also, the faucet put out a good flow (in contrast to the trickle during the first sampling). This increased flow would have flushed the faucet
5-3

spout thoroughly and did allow the use of the split tube apparatus, minimizing exposure of sample water to airborne lead. The lead concentration in the follow-up sample proved to be dramatically lower (1.2 ppb vs. 130 ppb), and the copper concentration fell to undetectable.
Iron was detected in samples from 95 stations, with Secondary MCL exceedances at 26 stations. Manganese was found in samples from 63 stations, with Secondary MCL exceedances at 27 stations. Chromium was detected at two stations, both in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge, with no Primary MCL exceedances.
Iron levels in the samples ranged up to 18,000 ppb, and, manganese levels up to 360 ppb. The highest iron and manganese concentrations are found in waters from Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations. Iron and manganese detections and exceedances tend to be more numerous in acid waters than in basic waters. Manganese occurred along with iron in samples from 47 stations.
The EPD laboratory tested samples from all 180 stations for molybdenum, uranium, and vanadium. No MCLs apply to molybdenum and vanadium. A 30 ppb Primary MCL applies to uranium.
Molybdenum occurred in three samples from two Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations, with levels ranging up to 11 ppb. Uranium accompanied molybdenum in samples from both stations.
Uranium, was found in 26 samples from 22 stations, with concentrations ranging up to 96 ppb (follow-up sample of well CLA-1 ). Twenty of the 22 stations were located in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge province and the remaining two in the Coastal Plain Province. Concentrations at 4 stations, all in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge, exceeded the Primary MCL. Uranium seems more likely to occur in sample waters that are basic and in those that contain nitrate/nitrite.
Vanadium was detected in samples from two stations, with a high concentration of 16 ppb. One of the two stations, located in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge, yielded acidic water, the other, located in the Coastal Plain, yielded basic water. No MCLS apply to vanadium.
Aluminum was detected in samples from 30 samples from 29 stations, with levels ranging up to 1,300 ppb. Waters with detectable aluminum tend to be acidic, to have detectable iron and manganese and to have detectable nitrate/nitrite. Samples with detectable aluminum also tend to have low concentrations of sodium, calcium, and magnesium. A Secondary MCL range is applied to aluminum depending on the ability of the treatment system to control aluminum levels.
Titanium was detected in three samples from two Piedmont/Blue Ridge stations. The levels ranged up to 15 ppb. Sample waters containing detectable titanium also contained detectable aluminum. No MCLs apply to titanium.
5-4

Thallium occurred in a single sample from a Fall-Line area Coastal Plain well. The well serves a trailer park located beside a railroad track in a mostly wooded area. The thallium level was below the Primary MCL of 2 ppb. The source of the metal is unknown, although illegal dumping is a possibility.
5.4 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
Analyses of 184 samples from 180 stations found VOCs in eight samples from eight stations. The detected VOCs consisted of the following: chloroform (four detections), MTBE (three detections), para-dichlorobenzene (one detection), and toluene (one detection, along with a chloroform detection). Five of the affected wells were located in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge province, three in the Coastal Plain, and one in the Valley and Ridge. All VOCs were below applicable MCLs (no MCL exists for MTBE). Chloroform usually does not enter ground water via recharge, but forms in situ as a byproduct from halogenated disinfectants. MTBE has been used as a motor fuel additive.
5.5 OVERALL QUALITY OF GROUND WATER AVAILABLE TO SMALL PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
From the standpoint of human health, the overall chemical quality of ground water available to small public water systems is generally good.
Of the metals subject to Primary MCLs or action levels, uranium was the only one to exceed its Primary MCL, which occurred for four Piedmont/Blue Ridge wells. Twenty of the 22 stations yielding water with detectable uranium were located in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge province. Outside of their concentration in that province, no regularity concerning the uranium occurrences is yet obvious. The metals copper, chromium, and lead are also subject to health-related limits, but the study found no exceedances for any of these metals. Two instances of high (though not excessive) lead in well water are almost certainly due to contamination of the sample water by corrosion films on brass raw water outlets (faucet brass alloys usually contain a small amount of lead for improving the machining characteristics of the metal). Copper also seems mostly a plumbing contribution. Chromium probably is naturally occurring.
Nitrate/nitrite is subject to a Primary MCL, though the study found no exceedances. Six wells yielded samples with nitrate/nitrite in excess of the 3 ppm as nitrogen level considered natural background. The wells serve a small town and three mobile home parks in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge and a mobile home park and a small town in the Coastal Plain. The Coastal Plain stations are located in the Dougherty Plain in areas of extensive agricultural land use. Fertilizer possibly contributes to the nitrate/nitrite contents of waters from the two Coastal Plain wells. One author is familiar with a large pecan orchard south of the mobile home park site that receives fertilizer via
5-5

irrigation water. For one of the Piedmont/Blue Ridge mobile home park wells, its location down gradient from an intermittently leaky sewer line may account for some part of the high nitrate/nitrite level in its water. Two other Piedmont/Blue Ridge mobile home park wells are located in mixed land-use settings: woodland, residential, and commercial/light industrial. Elevated nitrate/nitrite for these sites might be tied to the latter two land uses. No source for the elevated nitrate/nitrite level in the small town well sample is obvious.
Primary MCLs apply to certain VOCs, although no exceedances were observed in this study. The compounds most frequently encountered were MTBE and chloroform. The province with the most VOC contaminated wells is the Piedmont/Blue Ridge.
Secondary MCLs apply to iron, manganese, and aluminum. These metals are present naturally and occur widely in ground waters in Georgia. The metals exceeded Secondary MCLs in samples from 69 of the 180 stations and are a major cause of poor chemical and physical quality for ground water. Secondary MCLs also apply to the metals copper and zinc and to the anions chloride and sulfate. The study found none of these in excess of its Secondary MCL. Copper and zinc, though possibly naturally occurring in some cases, seem mostly derived from plumbing. Chloride and sulfate are naturally occurring.
5-6

CHAPTER 6 LIST OF REFERENCES
Berry, M., 2005, Domestic Pesticide Sampling Testing Project 2000-2004: Georgia Geologic Survey Project Report 55, 154 p.
Daniel Ill, C.C., and Harned, D., 1997: Ground-Water Recharge to and Storage in the Regolith-Crystalline Rock Aquifer System, Guilford County, North Carolina: USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 97-4140, 65 p.
Donahue, John C., 1997, Ground-Water Quality in Georgia for 1995: Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 12L, 96 p.
EPD, 1991, A Ground-Water Management Plan for Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 11 (1991 edition).
EPD, 1998, A Ground-Water Management Plan for Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 11 (1998 edition).
EPD, 2007, Environmental Rule 391-3-5, Safe Drinking Water.
Glen, J.C., 2001, Pesticide Monitoring Network 1989-2000: Georgia Geologic Survey Project Report 43, 58 p.
Heath, R.C., 1980, Basic Elements of Ground-Water Hydrology with Reference to Conditions in North Carolina: USGS Open File Report 80-44, 87 p.
Hewett, D. F., and Crickmay, G. W., 1937, The Warm Springs of Georgia, Their Geologic Relations and Origin, a Summary Report: USGS Water Supply Paper 818, 40 p., 8 pl.
Kellam, M.F., and Gorday, L.L., 1990, Hydrogeology of the Gulf Trough-Apalachicola Embayment Area, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 94, 75 p.
Madison, R.C., and Brunette, J.O., 1985, Overview of the Occurrence of Nitrate in Ground Water of the United States in National Water Summary 1984, Hydrologic Events, Selected Water-Quality Trends, and Ground-Water Resources: USGS Water Supply Paper 2275, p.93-105.
Overacre, L., 2004, Domestic Well Water Testing Project 2003: Georgia Geologic Survey Project Report 53, 65 p.
Scott, T.M., 2001, Text To Accompany the Geologic Map of Florida: Florida Geological Survey Open File Report 80, 28 p.
6-1

Shellenberger, D.L., Barget, R.G., Lineback, J.A., and Shapiro, E.A., 1996, Nitrate in Georgia's Ground Water: Georgia Geologic Survey Project Report 25, 12 p., 1 pl.
Stuart, M.A., Rich, F.J., and Bishop, G.A., 1995, Survey of Nitrate Contamination in Shallow Domestic Drinking Water Wells in the Inner Coastal Plain of Georgia: Ground Water, Vol. 33, No. 2, p. 284-290.
Talford, B., 1999, Pesticide Monitoring Network 1998-1999: Georgia Geologic Survey Project Report 40, 60p.
US Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census Tables, <http://factfinder.census. gov>, Dec.2006,Jan.2007.
6-2

Appendix Laboratory and Well Data

LABORATORY AND WELL DATA

Table A-1 lists the values for both laboratory parameters and field parameters for each well or spring. For this table, the following abbreviations are used:

bg CP Cl Co. cond. cps
diss 02
EMC FOR Ga. MHP Mt. MTBE
NA
NO
No. NOx
p
PBR PCE ppm ppm N ppb RV SID SHS
S04
SP TCE temp uS/em USFS USAGE
voc
VR

=background =Coastal Plain province =chloride =county =conductivity =counts per second =dissolved oxygen =electric membership corporation =Franklin D. Roosevelt =Georgia =mobile home park =mountain =methyl-tert-butyl ether =not available or not analyzed =not detected =number =nitrate/nitrite =total phosphorus =Piedmont/Blue Ridge province =tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene) =milligrams per liter (parts per million) =milligrams per liter as nitrogen =micrograms per liter (parts per billion) =recreational vehicle =subdivision =State Historic Site =sulfate =State Park =trichloroethylene =temperature (degrees Celsius) = microsiemens/centimeter =U.S. Forestry Service =U.S. Army Corps of Engineers =volatile organic compound =Valley and Ridge province

Table A-2 gives the reporting limits for the various analytes. The list of abbreviations used for Table A-1 also applies to Table A-2.

A-1

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Name

I I I I Date oH cond.l diss hemol Radioactivftv

VOCs

ppb

APP-1 CP

City of Graham Well #1 Appling

03/27/07 7.85 156 NA 24.4 NA

NA

ND

ND ND NO 0.03

APP-2 CP

City of Surrency Well #2 Appling

11/14/07 8.08 190 NA 27.0 NA

NA

NO

NO 29 NO NO

ATK-1 CP

The Oaks SID Well Atkinson

09/20/07 7.69 240 NA 22.2 20

20

ND

ND 69 NO 0.03

BAC-1 CP

Lee's MHP Well Bacon

03/27/07 8.03 159 NA 22.9 NA

NA

ND

11 NO NO 0.02

)>

BAK-1

Jones Ecology Center Well #2

03/14/07 7.55 121 NA 20.5

90

90

ND

NA NA 1.80 ND

I
1\J

CP

Baker

BAL-1 PBR

Mallard Glen S/D Well Baldwin

10/24/07 6.99 179 NA 18.3 NA

NA

NO

NO 32 ND 0.23

BAN-1 PBR

Homer Hill Street Well Banks

09/06/07 6.54 105 NA 17.2 NA

NA

ND

ND 17 0.23 ND

BAR-1 PBR
BAT-1 VR
BEN-1 CP
BER-1 CP
BIB-1 CP

Bent Creek SID Well #1 Barrow
KOA Cartersville Well #1 Bartow
Queensland-Fontana Street Well Ben Hill
City of Alapaha Well #1 Berrien
Timber Ridge S/0 Well #1 Bibb

10/04/07 6.80 84 NA 17.6 NA

NA

8/16/07 6.66 339 3.95 17.5 NA

NA

03/28/07 7.66 122 NA 21.7 80

80

06/21/07 7.81 231 NA 22.8

30

30

10/03/07 4.39 6 NA 19.3 NA

NA

ND

ND 10 0.20 0.03

ND

ND ND 2.80 ND

ND

NO NO NO 0.02

ND

12 49 NO 0.24

ND

NO NO 0.12 NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part B: Metals.

APP-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 100.0 NO 1.2 NO NO 29K NO NO 9100 NO 11K NO NO

APP-2 CP

NO NO NO NO 66.0 NO NO NO 86 30K 42 NO 14K NO 19K NO NO

ATK-1

NO NO NO NO 64.0 NO NO NO NO 45K 48 NO 20K 18 7600 NO NO

)>

CP

I

Vl

BAC-1

NO NO NO NO 52.0 NO NO NO NO 21K NO NO 12K NO 17K NO NO

CP

BAK-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 3.6 NO 1.1 NO NO 42K NO NO NO NO 1600 NO NO

BAL-1 PBR

NO NO 130 NO 9.9 NO 1.6 43.0 210 39K 18K NO 2700 NO 19K 15 16

BAN-1 PBR

NO NO NO 6.9 6.1 NO NO 18.0 250 21K NO NO 3000 NO 10K NO NO

BAR-1 PBR

NO NO NO NO 5.5 NO NO 12.0 NO 17K NO NO 2000 25 9500 NO NO

BAT-1 VR

NO NO NO NO 6.9 NO NO NO NO 53K NO NO 15K NO 2800 NO NO

BEN-1 CP
BER-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 150.0 NO NO NO NO 36K 140 NO 2700 16 2300 NO NO NO NO NO NO 130.0 NO NO NO NO 32K 32 NO 21K NO 15K NO NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non:-Metals.

Well Name County

VOCs ppb

BLE-1

Middle Ga. Wilderness Institute West Well 08/09/07 7.18 226 NA 19.2

50

50

CP

Bleckley

NO

NO NO NO 0.04

BRA-1 CP

Deerwood SID #1 Brantley

04/26/07 7.85 276 NA 25.2 NA

NA

NO

21 76 NO NO

BR0-1 CP

Fernwood MHP Well #1 Brooks

09/20/07 7.18 169 NA 21.4 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 0.12 0.23

BR0-2 CP

Eaglewood Estates Well Brooks

12/19/07 7.42 189 NA 20.2 NA

NA

NO

NO NO NO 0.32

BRY-1 CP

Ken's MHP Well Bryan

11/15/07 8.03 144 NA 21.9 NA

NA

NO

NO NO NO 0.04

BUL-2

Newton's Mobile Home Village Well

12/12/07 8.17 140 NA 21.5 NA

NA

NO

NO NO NO 0.03

)>

CP

Bulloch

I

..(:::.

BUR-1

City of Midville Well #2

04/12/07 7.73 138 NA 21.4 NA

NA

NO

NO 12 NO 0.07

CP

Burke

BUR-2 CP

City of Keysville Well #1 Burke

10/24/07 4.60 8 NA 20.4

NA

NA

BUT-1 PBR

Indian Springs Main Well Butts

08/22/07 6.00 115 NA 18.0 200

200

CAL-1

Nothing Fancy Catfish House Well #1

03/14/07 7.40 139 NA 21.3

NA

NA

CP

Calhoun

CAM-1

Camden Co. Flea Hill Recreation Well #1 04/26/07 7.48 434 NA 26.3

NA

NA

CP

Camden

CAM-2 CP

Ga. Episcopal Center Well Camden

10/18/07 7.50 339 NA 22.6

18

18

NO

NO NO 0.03 NO

NO

NO 15 0.17 0.05

NO

NA NA 1.10 NO

NO

30 160 NO NO

NO

27 110 NO 0.06

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part B: Metals.

BLE-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 53.0 ND ND ND ND 68K 460 ND 2900 45 3000 ND ND

BRA-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 64.0 ND ND ND ND 39K 110 ND 22K ND 19K ND ND

BR0-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 15.0 ND ND ND 130 37K 61 ND 12K 34 3100 ND ND

)>

BR0-2

ND ND ND ND 27.0 ND ND ND ND 46K 86 ND 14K 44 3600 ND ND

I

(}1

CP

BRY-1 CP

ND ND 10 ND 8.1 ND ND ND ND 28K 39 ND 8000 ND 9300 ND ND

BUL-2 CP

ND ND ND ND 24.0 ND ND ND ND 35K 41 ND 4900 65 6400 ND ND

BUR-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 58.0 ND ND ND ND 40K 110 ND 2400 110 2500 ND ND

BUR-2 CP

ND ND ND ND 6.7 ND ND ND ND ND 21 ND ND ND 1300 ND ND

BUT-1 PBR

ND ND 12 ND ND ND ND 3.4 ND 16K 350 ND 5100 ND 16K ND ND

CAL-1 CP
CAM-1 CP
CAM-2 CP

ND ND ND ND 62.0 ND ND ND ND 47K ND ND 1400 ND 1800 ND ND ND ND ND ND 35.0 ND ND ND ND 70K 43 ND 35K ND 22K ND ND ND ND ND ND 36.0 ND ND ND ND 54k 32 ND 29K ND 22K ND ND

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Welt Name County

VOCs ppb

CAN-1 CP

Excelsior EMC Well #1 Candler

06/05/07 8.11 131 NA 24.5 NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND ND

CAR-1 PBR

Villa Forest MHP Carroll

09/12/07 9.40 253 0.01 17.3 NA

NA

ND

ND 12 ND ND

CAR-2 PBR

City of Roopville Well #1 Carroll

12/05/07 4.80 24 NA 18.0 NA

NA

ND

ND ND 1.60 ND

CHA-1 CP

St. George School Well Charlton

04/25/07 7.46 303 NA 23.5 NA

NA

ND

17 23 NO ND

CHA-2 CP

Stephen Foster S.P. Well Charlton

10/17/07 7.19 332 NA 21 .9 NA

NA

NO

26 61 ND ND

)>

CHH-1

Plantation Inn Mobile Estates Well

10/25/07 7.96 241 NA 22.6 NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND NO

I

0)

CP

Chatham

CHH-2 CP

Oatland Island Wildlife Center Well Chatham

12/12/07 8.24 145 NA 21.3 NA

NA

NO

ND ND ND 0.03

CHT-1 CP

Camp Darby Well Chattahoochee

CH0-1 VR

City of Menlo Alpine Well Chattooga

CHE-1 PBR

Little River MHP Well #1 Cherokee

CLA-1 PBR

Crestmont Farms S/D #1 Clarke

CLA-1RPT Crestmont Farms S/D #1

PBR

Clarke

04/25/07 5.80 110 0.02 20.6 NA

08/01/07 5.71 305 5.82 16.5 NA

08/09/07 5.32 231 2.1 17.6 NA

10/04/07 6.99 87 NA 18.8 NA

1/31/08 7.18 88 NA 18.5

NA

NA

ND

NA NA ND 0.08

NA

Chloroform = 1.1 ND ND 1.00 NO

NA

p-Dichloro-

24 ND 4.80 ND

benzene = 0.53

NA

ND

ND ND 0.25 0.04

NA

ND

ND ND 0.24 0.03

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part B: Metals.

CAN-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 31.0 ND ND ND ND 30K 110 ND 3500 45 10K ND ND

CAR-1 PBR

ND ND 43 ND 8.4 ND ND ND ND 42K 940 ND 4600 370 7200 ND ND

CAR-2 PBR

ND ND ND ND 22.0 ND ND ND ND 1000 ND ND ND 24 5100 ND ND

)>

CHA-1

ND ND ND ND 32.0 ND ND ND ND 46K ND ND 26K ND 24K ND ND

I

--..j

CP

CHA-2 CP

ND ND ND ND 37.0 ND ND ND 83 60K 54 ND 26K ND 22K ND ND

CHH-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 12.0 ND ND ND ND 31K 120 ND 9800 ND 11K ND ND

CHH-2 CP

ND ND ND ND 12.0 ND ND ND ND 26K ND ND 10K ND 10K ND ND

CHT-1 CP

ND ND 50 ND 120.0 ND ND ND ND 12K 1300 ND 2600 20 1600 ND ND

CH0-1 VR

ND ND ND ND 72.0 ND ND ND ND 35K ND ND 21K ND 1100 ND ND

CHE-1 PBR
CLA-1 PBR
CLA-1RPT PBR

6.6 NO ND ND 44.0 ND ND NO ND 15K ND ND 6000 34 19K ND ND NO ND 37 ND 4.0 ND 5.9 86.0 130 18K 210 ND 1300 ND 11K 13 ND NO ND 55 ND 8.8 ND 5.6 96.0 1300 20K 250 ND 1400 10 11K 14 NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

VOCs ppb

CLY-1 CP

George T. Bagby S.P. Well Clay

06/05107 7.71 250 0.02 20.9 NA

NA

NO

NO 14 NO NO

CLT-1 PBR

Corinth Woods SID Well #1 Clayton

08122/07 6.30 350 2.11 18.4 NA

NA

NO

NO 92 0.59 NO

CLI-1 CP

Town of Argyle Well #1 Clinch

04125107 7.69 264 NA 24.4

NA

NA

NO

10 83 NO 0.03

CLI-2 CP

City of DuPont Well #1 Clinch

10117107 7.72 187 NA 22.8 NA

NA

NO

NO 32 NO 0.08

COF-1 CP

Maple Hill MHP Well Coffee

10118/07 7.36 140 NA 22.8

50

50

NO

NO NO NO 0.09

COF-2

General Coffee S. P. Well #1

12/04107 7.82 201 NA 22.5 NA

NA

NO

NO 36 ND NO

)>
I

CP

Coffee

CX>

COL-1 CP

Sunlit Pines MHP Well #1 Colquitt

3114107 7.50 437 0.04 23.2 NA

NA

NO

NO 97 NO 0.02

COL-2 CP
COU-1 CP
C00-1 CP
COW-1 PBR
COW-2 PBR

City of Berlin Well #1 Colquitt
Windy Acres MHP Well #1 Columbia
Sunshine Acres MHP Well Cook
The Gates SID Well #1 Coweta
Aspen Woods SID Well #2 Coweta

11/29107 7.57 147 NA 20.8 NA

NA

08/08107 6.87 71 NA 20.2

NA

NA

03/14/07 7.26 273 2.86 21.6 NA

NA

12/13107 NA 170 NA 18.8 NA

NA

02/25/08 5.97 56 NA 16.9 NA

NA

NO

NO 13 NO 0.03

NO

NO 11 NO 0.17

NO

NO 23 NO 0.45

NO

NO 12 0.25 0.08

NO

NO NO 0.46 0.05

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part B: Metals.

CLY-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 8.3 ND ND ND ND 12K 25 ND 3800 ND 40K ND ND

CLT-1 PBR

ND ND ND ND 19.0 ND ND 12.0 66 44K ND ND 9400 ND 16K ND ND

CLI-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 37.0 ND ND ND ND 46K 73 ND 20K 27 9500 ND ND

)>

CLI-2

ND ND ND ND 27.0 ND ND ND 340 40K 39 ND 15K 23 ND ND ND

I

<0

CP

COF-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 170.0 ND ND ND ND 27K ND ND 9700 64 8500 ND ND

COF-2 CP

ND ND ND ND 57.0 ND ND ND ND 26K 31 ND 16K 18 11K ND ND

COL-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 41.0 ND ND ND ND 58K 46 ND 23K ND 7100 ND ND

COL-2 CP

ND 9.9 23 ND 39.0 ND 3.2 ND ND 31K 94 ND 11K 10 3700 ND ND

COU-1 CP
C00-1 CP
COW-1 PBR
COW-2 PBR

ND ND ND ND 28.0 ND ND ND ND 9100 1000 ND 3400 160 7400 ND ND ND ND ND ND 14.0 ND ND ND ND 31K ND ND 15K ND 6900 ND ND ND ND 20 ND 3.9 ND ND 1.2 ND 23K NO NO 3800 NO 10K ND NO NO NO NO NO 17 ND 1.1 NO 390 9900 260 NO 1800 NO 6700 NO NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

VOCs ppb

CRA-1 CP

Crawford Co. Country Estates Well Crawford

05/10/07 3.78 54 7.28 19.0 NA

NA

NO

10 NO 2.80 0.14

CRI-1 CP

Veterans Memorial. S.P. Well Crisp

11/07/07 7.86 96 NA 20.0 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 1.10 NO

DAW-1 PBR

Golden Ridge S/0 Well Dawson

07/11/07 5.58 35 4.97 15.2 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 0.06 NO

DEC-1 CP

City of Climax Well #2 Decatur

05/09/07 7.05 210 4.38 21.0 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 0.54 NO

DEC-2 CP

City of Brinson Well #1 Decatur

)>
..l....
0

DOD-1 CP

City of Chauncey Well #4 Dodge

DOD-2 CP

City of Rhine Well #2 Dodge

D00-1 CP

City of Dooling Well #1 Dooly

11128/07 7.55 168 NA 20.6 NA

NA

04/12/07 7.61 165 NA 20.4 NA

NA

12/20/07 7.41 156 NA 20.5 NA

NA

06/07/07 6.11 164 8.36 20.4 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 5.80 NO

NO

NO NO 0.26 0.04

NO

NO NO 0.22 NO

NO

NA NA 1.20 0.06

DOG-1 CP

Creekside RV Park Well #1 Dougherty

06/19/07 7.22 255 8.32 21.0 NA

NA

DOL-1 PBR

Dogwood Blossom MHP Well #1 Douglas

09/12/07 8.26 60 NA 16.0 NA

NA

EAR-1 CP

Town of Jakin Old Well Early

06/19/07 7.21 285 4 .02 20.9 NA

NA

EAR-2

Kolomoki Mounds S.P. Museum Well

11/28/07 7.80 154 NA 21.4 NA

NA

CP

Early

NO

NA NA 1.20 NO

NO

NO NO 1.00 NO

NO

NA NA 1.30 NO

NO

NO 14 NO 0.05

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part 8: Metals.

CRA-1 CP

NO 9.2 NO NO 54.0 NO NO NO 180 1300 54 NO 1100 30 6000 NO NO

CRI-1 CP

NO NO 11 NO 3.5 NO 2.4 NO NO 33K 310 NO NO NO 1500 NO NO

DAW-1

NO NO NO NO 16.0 NO 1.4 NO NO 3100 43 NO 1100 NO 2300 NO NO

PBR

)>

....I........

DEC-1

NO NO NO NO 5.7 NO NO NO NO 40K NO NO 3600 NO 1800 NO NO

CP

DEC-2 CP

NO NO NO NO 3.2 NO NO NO NO 49K NO NO 1200 NO 2500 NO NO

DOD-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 90.0 NO NO NO NO 51K NO NO 3600 NO 2700 NO NO

DOD-2 CP

NO NO 20 NO 37 NO NO NO NO 48K NO NO 2300 NO 2000 NO NO

000-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 13.0 NO NO NO NO 29K NO NO NO NO 2800 NO NO

DOG-1 CP

NO NO 43 NO 12.0 NO NO NO NO 51K NO NO 1100 NO 2600 NO NO

DOL-1 PBR
EAR-1 CP
EAR-2 CP

NO NO NO NO 13.0 NO NO 1.2 NO 6400 64 NO 2100 NO 4400 NO NO NO NO NO NO 16.0 NO NO NO NO 57K NO NO 1100 NO 3200 NO NO NO NO NO NO 6.5 NO NO NO NO 31K 140 NO 5600 NO 14K NO NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

VOCs ppb

ECH-1 CP

Echols Co. Water Authority Well #1 Echols

04/25/07 8.15 100 NA 21.7 NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND 0.03

EFF-1 CP

Twin Oaks MHP Well Effingham

10/25/07 7.90 226 NA 22.9 NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND ND

ELB-1 PBA

Beaverdam MHP Well #1 Elbert

07/11/07 6.21 104 NA 16.9 NA

NA

ND

ND 16 1.20 0.07

EMA-1 CP

City of Summertown Well #4 Emanuel

04/10/07 7.74 150 NA 19.8

80

80

ND

ND ND 0.09 0.02

EMA-2 CP

City of Garfield Railroad Ave. Well Emanuel

12/04/07 7.76 152 NA 21.5

NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND ND

)>
...I....
1\:)

EVA-1 CP

City of Daisy Well #1 Evans

05/23/07 7.96 139 NA 24.1

NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND ND

FAN-1 PBA

Fishhook Point SID Well Fannin

07/25/07 6.47 95 NA 16.6 NA

NA

ND

ND ND 0.55 ND

FAY-1 PBA

Fernwood MHP Well #1 Fayette

02/13/08 5.88 94 NA 16.4 NA

NA

ND

ND ND 0.27 0.05

FL0-1 VA
FL0-2 VA
FOA-1 PBA
FAA-1 PBA

Camp Sidney Dew Main Well Floyd
USFS Pocket Recreation Area Well Floyd
Wood Creek SID Well Forsyth
Victoria Bryant SP Well #1 01 Franklin

08/01/07 6.02 249 3.95 16.1 NA

NA

02/14/08 5.15 10 NA 14.8 NA

NA

08/09/07 6.36 205 0.14 16.8

NA

NA

01/24/08 6.04 34 NA 16.3

NA

NA

ND

ND ND 0.05 ND

ND

ND ND 0.24 0.02

ND

ND 12 0.10 ND

ND

ND ND ND 0.10

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part 8: Metals.

ECH-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 13.0 NO NO NO NO 24K NO NO 5100 13 2700 NO NO

EFF-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 15.0 NO NO NO NO 31K 65 NO 7200 NO 11K NO NO

ELB-1 PBR

NO NO NO NO 43.0 NO NO 2.5 NO 20K NO NO 3600 NO 12K NO NO

)>

..I....

EMA-1

NO NO NO NO 94.0 NO NO NO NO 46K NO NO NO NO 2100 NO NO

UJ

CP

EMA-2 CP

NO NO NO NO 110.0 NO NO NO NO 39K 25 NO 4700 120 7000 NO NO

EVA-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 27.0 NO NO NO NO 27K 29 NO 6200 14 15K NO NO

FAN-1 PBR

NO NO NO NO 4.3 NO NO NO 60 11K 23 NO 1800 NO 4400 NO NO

FAY-1 PBR

NO NO NO NO 59 NO NO NO 250 14K NO NO 3200 NO 10K NO NO

FL0-1 VR

NO NO NO NO 15.0 NO NO NO NO 43K NO NO 7000 NO 1700 NO NO

FL0-2 VR
FOR-1 PBR
FRA-1 PBR

NO NO NO NO 4.0 NO 1.8 NO 320 1900 1100 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 12.0 NO NO 2.5 NO 29K 180 NO 3700 62 8800 NO NO NO NO 10 NO 5.6 NO NO NO NO 7000 1100 NO 1100 30 5400 NO NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

VOCs ppb

GIL-1 PBR

USAGE Doll Mt. Campground Well Gilmer

07/11/07 7.84 156 0.18 16.1

NA

NA

NO

NO NO 0.03 NO

GLA-1 CP

City of Mitchell Well #3 Glascock

05/24/07 4.48 27 NA 19.6 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 2.20 NO

GLY-1 CP

Woodland MHP Well Glynn

09/19/07 7.79 275 NA 23.9 NA

NA

NO

21 79 NO 0.03

GLY-2

Hofwyi-Broadfield Plantation SHS Well

11/14/07 7.96 329 NA 25.5 NA

NA

CP

Glynn

NO

26 110 NO 0.10

GRA-1 CP

Pinecrest MHP Well #2 Grady

06/05/07 7.87 188 5.24 22.2 NA

NA

NO

NA NA 0.03 NO

:...It.>..

GRE-1

City of White Plains Well #1

06/06/07 6.72 124 NA 19.1

60

80

NO

NO NO 1.00 0.10

..j:::.

PBR

Greene

GRE-1RPT City of White Plains Well #1

PBR

Greene

08/23/07 6.88 137 NA 18.9 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 1.20 0.09

HAB-1 PBR

Village MHP Well #1 Habersham

07/26/07 5.02 49 NA 16.2 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 5.20 NO

HAL-1 PBR
HAN-1 PBR
HAs-1 PBR
HAs-2 PBR

Leisure Lake Village Well #1 Hall
Sheffield Landing SID Well Hancock
Valley Inn Well Harris
FDA SP Camp and Cottage Spring Harris

07/12/07 7.55 268 0.22 17.8 NA

NA

12/13/07 6.55 163 NA 18.7 NA

NA

04/26/07 6.49 164 1.12 18.9 NA

NA

02/21/08 5.05 7 NA 16.3 NA

NA

NO

NO 52 NO NO

NO

NO 20 NO 0.07

NO

NA NA 0.05 0.02

NO

NO NO NO NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part 8: Metals.

GIL-1 PBR

ND ND ND ND 6.7 ND 1.2 ND ND 23K 29 ND 2000 61 5900 ND ND

GLA-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 8.0 ND ND ND ND 1100 ND ND ND ND 4800 ND ND

GLY-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 47.0 ND ND ND ND 40K 450 ND 26K ND 20K ND ND

GLY-2 CP

ND ND ND ND 45.0 ND ND ND ND 44K 520 ND 27K ND 27K ND ND

GRA-1

ND ND 11 ND 2.6 ND ND ND ND 21K ND ND 12K ND 2900 ND ND

)>

..I....

CP

01

GRE-1

ND ND ND 6.7 6.9 ND ND 41.0 ND 21K ND ND 7200 ND 13K ND ND

PBR

GRE-1RPT PBR

ND ND 52 11.0 4.9 ND ND 60.0 ND 23K ND ND 7500 ND 13K ND ND

HAB-1 PBR

ND ND 14 ND 93.0 ND ND ND 110 2300 ND ND 3000 90 7300 ND ND

HAL-1 PBR
HAN-1 PBR
HA8-1 PBR
HAS-2 PBR

ND ND ND ND 110.0 ND ND NO ND 39K 22 ND 4300 ND 9400 ND ND ND ND 500 ND 12.0 ND ND ND ND 26K 750 ND 8400 270 16K ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 20K ND ND 2500 92 6800 ND ND ND ND ND ND 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1000 ND ND

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

VOGs ppb

HAT-1 PBR

Sanders MHP Spring Hart

07/11/07 4.66 23 NA 17.4 NA

NA

ND

ND ND 1.40 ND

HOU-1 CP

City of Elko Well #1 Houston

06/07/07 7.13 224 1.81 19.4 NA

NA

ND

ND ND 0.43 ND

IRW-1 CP

Irwinville Water Works, Inc. Well Irwin

03/28/07 7.64 149 NA 19.7 NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND 0.03

JA5-1

Martin's Marina Well

PBR

Jasper

)>

_I ._

JDA-1

S&E MHP

0)

CP

Jeff Davis

08/22107 6.61 142 NA 19.1

NA

NA

03/27/07 7.79 164 NA 26.4 NA

NA

NO

NO NO NO NO

NO

NO NO NO 0.03

JEF-1 CP
JEF-2 CP

City Bartow Well #1 Jefferson
City of Avera Well Jefferson

05/24/07 7.35 206 NA 19.8 NA 12/13/07 6.80 115 NA 18.8 NA

NA

NO

NO NO NO NO

NA

= Chloroform 0.62 NO NO 0.03 0.05

JEN-1 CP

City of Perkins Well #1 Jenkins

04/10/07 7.80 152 NA 20.9

80

80

JOH-1

Scott Water and Sewer Authority Well #1 05/09/07 7.31 165 NA 21.1

NA

NA

CP

Johnson

JON-1 CP

Jones Acres MHP Well Jones

10/03/07 4.45 22 NA 19.3 NA

NA

LAM-1 PBR

Fullers Community Park Well Lamar

10/25/07 6.99 111 NA 18.7 NA

NA

LAN-1 CP

Westwind Farms Well #1 Lanier

11/29/07 7.69 191 NA 21.7 NA

NA

NO

NO 12 0.02 0.10

NO

NO NO 0.04 NO

NO

NO NO 1.90 0.02

NO

NO 12 0.34 NO

NO

NO 43 NO 0.04

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part B: Metals.

HAT-1
PBR

ND ND ND ND 28.0 ND ND ND ND 1500 ND ND 1100 33 3100 ND ND

HOU-1
CP

ND 7.8 42 ND 7.4 ND ND ND ND 46K ND ND 1300 ND 2400 ND ND

IRW-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 54.0 ND ND ND ND 42K ND ND 4200 ND 2500 ND ND

JAS-1
PBR

ND ND 16 ND ND ND ND 1.1 ND 32K 200 ND 5600 90 11K ND ND

)>

JDA-1

ND ND 17 ND 290.0 ND ND ND 170 30K 160 ND 13K ND 5800 ND ND

..I....

CP

-.....!

JEF-1

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 67K 86 ND 2100 60 3200 ND ND

CP

JEF-2
CP

ND ND ND ND 12.0 ND ND ND ND 1200 430 ND ND ND 45K ND ND

JEN-1
CP

ND ND ND ND 8.6 ND ND ND ND 45K 190 ND 2000 51 3000 ND ND

JOH-1
CP

ND ND ND ND 140.0 ND ND ND ND 54K ND ND 2000 ND 3000 ND ND

JON-1
CP

ND 15 ND ND 15.0 1.2 2.8 ND 180 1600 ND ND ND ND 3900 ND ND

LAM-1
PBR

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 22K ND ND 4500 ND 9200 ND ND

LAN-1
CP

ND ND ND ND 31.0 ND ND ND ND 38K ND ND 17K ND 4500 ND ND

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

VOCs ppb

LAU-1 CP

Shady Pines MHP Well #1 Laurens

08/09/07 7.30 218 NA 21.4

20

20

ND

ND 15 ND 0.03

LAU-2 CP

Old Coleman Street Well Laurens

10/24/07 7.45 140 NA 19.7 NA

NA

ND

ND ND 0.95 0.03

LEE-1 CP

Weslo Estates Well #3 Lee

10/24/07 6.94 414 NA 20.4 NA

NA

ND

14 ND 10.00 ND

LIB-1

Sasser's MHP Well

CP

Liberty

)>

...I ...

LIB-2

Fort Morris SHS Well

co

CP

Liberty

06/05/07 8.22 148 NA 23.5

NA

NA

11/15/07 8.08 203 NA 23.0

NA

NA

ND

ND 16 ND ND

ND

ND 42 ND 0.03

LIN-1 PBR

Fishing Creek RV and MHP Well Lincoln

07/11/07 7.18 71 NA 20.0 NA

NA

ND

ND 15 0.45 ND

LIN-1RPT PBR

Fishing Creek RV and MHP Well Lincoln

09/06/07 6.48 86 NA 18.4 100

100

ND

ND 18 0.41 0.08

LON-1 CP
LOW-1 CP
LOW-2 CP
LUM-1 PBR
MCD-1 CP

Benton Bay MHP Well Long
Pecan Grove MHP West Well Lowndes
Ga. Sherriffs' Boys' Ranch Well Lowndes
Cane Creek Trailer Park Well Lumpkin
221 Corral Well McDuffie

06/05/07 7.91 177 NA 20.9

40

40

06/21/07 7.84 158 NA 22.2

NA

NA

1/30/08 7.56 137 NA 20.6

NA

NA

07/12/07 6.06 215 6.41 16.6 NA

NA

06/06/07 4.33 26 NA 19.4

NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND 0.02

ND

ND 19 ND ND

ND

ND ND ND ND

ND

ND ND 4.30 ND

ND

ND ND 1.80 ND

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part B: Metals.

LAU-1 CP

NO NO 17 NO 6.2 NO NO NO NO 63K 31 NO 4400 NO 4000 NO NO

LAU-2 CP

ND ND 12 ND 78.0 ND 1.5 ND ND 47K ND ND ND ND 1900 ND ND

LEE-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 9.5 ND ND ND ND 85K ND ND ND ND 4400 ND ND

LIB-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 13.0 ND ND ND ND 21K 76 ND 11K ND 13K ND ND

LIB-2

ND ND ND ND 25.0 ND ND ND ND 28K 150 ND 17K ND 17K ND ND

)>
I

CP

~

<0

LIN-1

ND 22 61 ND 8.9 ND 130.0 16.0 ND 15K ND ND 3300 ND 7700 ND ND

PBR

LIN-1RPT PBR

ND ND 20 ND 6.6 ND 1.2 19.0 ND 17K ND ND 3500 ND 7700 ND ND

LON-1 CP

ND ND 12 ND 18.0 ND ND ND ND 46K ND ND 5600 15 12K ND ND

LOW-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 21.0 ND ND ND ND 33K ND ND 12K 11 3600 ND ND

LOW-2 CP
LUM-1 PBR

ND ND ND ND 25 ND ND ND ND 27K 30 ND 11K ND 3000 ND ND 12 ND ND ND 10.0 ND ND ND ND 25K ND ND 8100 ND 6600 ND ND

MCD-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 73.0 ND ND ND 90 1200 ND ND 1300 23 2400 ND ND

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

VOCs ppb

MCI-1 CP

Sapelo Gardens SID Well #1 Mcintosh

11/08/07 7.83 249 NA 25.0 NA

NA

NO

13 66 NO NO

MCI-2 CP

Eulonia Community Well Mcintosh

11/14/07 8.02 246 NA 25.3 NA

NA

NO

13 63 NO 0.06

MAC-1 CP

Whitewater Creek Park Well #1 Macon

03/15/07 5.68 59 NA 19.5 NA

NA

NO

NO 12 NO 0.26

MAD-1 PBR

City of lla Well #1 Madison

10/04/07 7.29 116 NA 17.8 NA

NA

NO

NO 13 0.02 0.03

)>
I

MAR-1

Unimim Corporation Well #1

04/26/07 4.76 125 2.86 19.9 NA

NA

NO

NA NA 0.26 NO

1\)

0

CP

Marion

MER-1 PBR

Town of Lone Oak Well #1 Meriwether

08/23/07 5.19 132 8.88 20.7 NA

NA

NO

11 NO 1.40 0.06

MER-2 PBR

City of Gay Well #2 Meriwether

12/05/07 6.03 38 NA 16.8 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 1.80 0.04

MIL-1 CP

City of Colquitt Well #3 Miller

03/14/07 7.40 146 NA 20.4

20

20

MIT-1 CP

Hinsonton Water System Well #1 Mitchell

05/09/07 7.87 242 1..69 22.2 NA

NA

MIT-2

Maple New Hope Child Care Center Well 11/28/07 7.32 220 NA 20.7

NA

NA

CP

Mitchell

MON-1 PBR

City of Culloden Lockett Street Well Monroe

10/03/07 5.86 133 NA 18.8

90

90

MOT-1 CP

Williams MHP Well #1 Montgomery

04/11 /07 7.87 144 NA 22.0 NA

NA

NO

NA NA 2.20 NO

NO

NA NA NO 0.09

NO

NO 13 0.99 0.04

NO

15 37 0.63 0.02

NO

NO NO NO ND

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part 8: Metals.

MCI-1 CP

ND ND 12 ND 58.0 ND NO ND ND 36K 340 ND 23K ND 19K ND ND

MCI-2 CP

ND NO ND NO 54.0 NO ND ND 390 34K 43 ND 22K ND 19K ND NO

MAC-1 CP

ND ND ND NO 51.0 NO ND ND ND 6800 1000 ND NO 18 1200 ND ND

MAD-1 PBR

ND NO 12 ND 5.9 NO ND ND ND 24K 590 ND 4400 150 10K NO ND

)>

I
1...\..).

MAR-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 4.5 ND ND NO ND ND ND NO ND NO 25K NO NO

MER-1 PBR

ND 9.0 48 ND 29.0 NO ND ND 84 14K ND ND 1800 ND 11K NO ND

MER-2 PBR

ND ND ND NO 48.0 ND ND NO NO 4000 53 ND ND NO 6900 ND ND

MIL-1 CP

ND ND NO NO 4.7 NO NO ND ND 49K NO NO ND ND 2300 ND ND

MIT-1 CP

ND NO ND ND 240.0 ND 1.1 4.8 ND 22K NO ND 16K ND 5700 ND 13

MIT-2 CP
MON-1 PBR
MOT-1 CP

ND NO NO NO 19.0 ND NO NO ND 63K NO ND 4900 ND 3700 NO ND ND NO 120 ND 29.0 ND 2.1 ND ND 20K 49 ND 6000 100 12K ND ND ND ND ND ND 300.0 ND ND NO ND 33K 42 ND 4200 54 11K NO NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

I I I Date pH cond.

Sampled

uS/em

VOCs ppb

MOR-1 PBR

Triple 8 Restaurant Well Morgan

08/08/07 6.68 85 NA 21 .1 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 1.50 0.07

MUR-1 PBR

Fort Mt. Estates Well Murray

07/11/07 5.19 69 NA 13.8 NA

NA

NO

13 NO 0 .24 NO

MUS-1 CP

Carmouche Range Well Muscogee

04/25/07 4.39 15 7.88 21 .1 NA

NA

NO

NA NA 0.05 NO

NEW-1

Oak Forest MHP Main Well

07/12/07 7.35 97 NA 18.2 NA

NA

NO

NO 12 NO 0.03

)>

PBR

Newton

I

[\) [\)

OC0-1

Apalachee Pointe SID Well #1

08/23/07 7.17 101 NA 17.8 NA

NA

NO

NO 11 0.12 0.05

PBR

Oconee

OGL-1 PBR

Smokey Road Water System Well #1 Oglethorpe

06/06/07 6.71 102 NA 18.1 NA

NA

Toluene= 1.9 NO NO 2 .30 0.68

Chloroform = 0.68

PAU-1 PBR

City of Hiram Well #2 Paulding

08/16/07 5.32 157 4.03 17.8 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 1.40 0.02

PEA-1 CP

Rolling Hills MHP Well #1 Peach

PIC-1 VR

SharpTop Cove Well #1 Pickens

PIE-1 CP

Martin MHP Well #2 Pierce

PIK-1 PBR

City of Molena Well #3 Pike

PIK-1RPT PBR

City of Molena Well #3 Pike

03/15/07 4.09 23 7.37 19.4 NA 08/09/07 5.84 124 NA 16.3 NA 10/18/07 7.55 200 NA 21.8 NA 08/22/07 5.50 123 0.00 18.2 NA 12/05/07 6.33 75 NA 18.0 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 0.82 NO

NA

Chloroform = 0.91 NO 15 0.11 NO

NA

NO

13 NO ND 0.02

NA

NO

NO 15 0.12 0.02

NA

NO

NO 15 0.07 NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part B: Metals.

MOR-1 PBR

ND 15 25 ND 21 .0 ND ND 1.3 ND 20K ND ND 3000 ND 9400 ND ND

MUR-1 PBR

ND ND 950 ND 16.0 ND 2.4 ND ND 5400 ND ND 1800 ND 5000 ND ND

MUS-1 CP

ND 6.5 NO ND 12.0 ND 1.4 ND ND ND 34 ND ND ND ND ND ND

NEW-1 PBR

ND ND ND ND 2.9 ND ND ND ND 20K 230 ND 3200 120 8800 ND ND

::t>

OC0-1

ND ND ND ND 8.6 ND ND ND 84 21K 40 ND 2800 73 8400 ND ND

I
1'\)
w

PBR

OGL-1 PBR

ND ND 52 ND 12.0 ND 5.9 13.0 64 24K 360 NO 3000 ND 5200 ND ND

PAU-1 PBR

ND ND 52 ND 10.0 ND ND ND ND 14K ND ND 9700 ND 6800 ND ND

PEA-1 CP

ND 6.9 34 ND 5.5 ND 1.0 ND ND ND 50 ND ND ND 2300 ND ND

PIC-1 VR
PIE-1 CP
PIK-1 PBR
PIK-1RPT PBR

ND ND 15 ND 13.0 ND ND ND ND 20K 2700 ND 1500 28 4100 ND ND ND ND 23 ND 11.0 ND ND ND ND 31K 110 NO 14K ND 23K ND ND ND ND 23 ND 20.0 ND ND 37.0 ND 11K 41 ND 3000 99 7100 ND ND ND ND 21 ND 18.0 ND ND 37.0 ND 11K 45 ND 3000 97 7300 ND ND

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

VOCs ppb

POL-1 VR

City of Rockmart Plum Street Well Polk

08/16/07 7.81 259 NA 17.8 NA

NA

ND

ND ND 0.54 ND

PUL-1 CP

Hartford Water Authority Well Pulaski

03/29/07 6.98 150 NA 22.2 NA

NA

ND

ND 14 ND 0.05

PUT-1 PBR

Deer Run MHP Well #2 Putnam

08/08/07 6.87 112 NA 18.8 NA

NA

ND

ND ND 1.10 0.04

QUI-1

Bonaparte's Retreat Well

03/15/07 8.75 405 NA 27.5 NA

NA

NO

ND ND 0.02 0.07

CP

Quitman

)>

I

1\)
+:-

RAB-1

Dillard Holiday Inn Express Well

09/05/07 7.30 61 NA 16.0 NA

NA

ND

ND 12 ND ND

PBR

Rabun

RAN-1 CP

City of Shellman Pearl Street Well Randolph

03/15/07 7.30 192 NA 20.3 NA

NA

ND

ND 14 ND ND

RIC-1 CP
ROC-1 PBR
SCR-1 CP
SCR-2 CP
SEM-1 CP
STE-1 PBR

Heritage MHP North Well Richmond
Hi Roc Shores Front Well Rockdale
City of Hiltonia Well Screven
Lawton Place MHP Well Screven
Paradise Acres Well #102 Seminole
Lake Harbor Shores Well #4 Stephens

08/08/07 4.46 12 NA 21 .3 NA

08/23/07 5.43 56 NA 18.2 NA

04/10/07 7.68 174 NA 20.8 NA

12/12107 7.69 170 NA 20.1

NA

05/09/07 7.25 246 5.42 22.2

NA

09/05/07 6.36 103 NA 17.4

60

NA

ND

ND ND 1.10 ND

NA

MTBE=0.99 ND ND 1.60 ND

NA

ND

ND 10 ND ND

NA

ND

ND ND 0.85 0.09

NA

ND

NA NA 2.40 ND

60

ND

ND ND 0.09 0.03

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part 8: Metals.

POL-1 VR

NO NO NO NO 20.0 NO NO NO NO 41K NO NO 11K NO 2100 NO NO

PUL-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 47.0 NO NO NO NO 47K 980 NO 1500 21 1700 NO NO

PUT-1 PBR

NO NO NO NO 14.0 NO 1.1 NO NO 24K NO NO 1100 NO 14K NO NO

QUI-1 CP

NO 13 14 NO 15.0 NO NO NO NO 1300 NO NO 3900 NO 160K NO NO

)>

RAB-1

NO 6.6 250 NO NO NO 2.5 2.6 NO 11K 920 NO 1500 13 7100 NO NO

I
1\)

PBR

(Jl

RAN-1

NO 13 14 NO 15.0 NO NO NO NO 58K NO NO 3900 NO 3500 NO NO

CP

Rlc-1 CP

NO 5.7 NO NO 4.0 NO 15.0 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 1900 NO NO

ROC-1 PBR

NO NO 16 NO 35.0 NO ND NO NO 7600 NO NO 1900 120 5900 NO NO

SCR-1 CP

NO NO NO ND NO NO ND NO ND 50K NO NO 3300 NO 3500 NO NO

SCR-2 CP
SEM-1 CP
STE-1 PBR

NO NO NO NO 45.0 NO NO NO NO 54K NO NO 2900 NO 4200 NO NO NO NO NO NO 4.0 NO NO NO NO 49K NO NO NO NO 2100 NO NO NO NO 21 NO 21.0 NO NO 3.5 NO 18K NO NO 7000 NO 8700 NO NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

VOCs ppb

STW-1 CP

Louvale Community Well #1 Stewart

03115/07 5.65 70 NA 19.0 NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND 0 .03

STW-2 CP

Providence Canyon S.P. Well Stewart

02/21/08 6.83 107 NA 20.4 NA

NA

ND

ND 12 ND 0.17

SUM-1 CP

Briar Patch MHP Well Sumter

03/14/07 4.11 70 5.42 20.3 NA

NA

MTBE:O.BO

14 NO 1.60 ND

SUM-2 CP

City of Andersonville Well Sumter

)>

I
1\)

TAL-1

Junction City Well #2

0)

CP

Talbot

12/20/07 4.38 82 NA 19.3 NA

NA

08/23/07 7.99 203 0.12 21.5 NA

NA

ND

NO 36 0.31 NO

ND

ND 36 NO ND

TAI-1 PBR
TAT-1 CP
TAT-2 CP
TAV-1 CP
TEL-1 CP
TER-1 CP
TH0-1 CP

A. H. Stephens S. P. Well Taliaferro
City of Collins Well B Tattnal
Rotary Corporation Well Tattnal
Potterville Community Well #1 Taylor
City of Jacksonville Well #1 Telfair
Terrell Co. Head Start Well Terrell
Carter MHP Well #1 Thomas

01/23/08 6.33 248 NA 17.5 NA

NA

04/11/07 8.06 144 NA 24.0 NA

NA

12/04/07 8 .05 145 NA 24.0 NA

NA

08/23/07 3.65 24 6.07 19.3 NA

NA

03/29/07 7.97 128 NA 21.4 NA

NA

06/06/07 7.44 244 0.11 22.0 NA

NA

3/14/07 7.26 301 0.97 20.8 NA

NA

ND

10 ND ND ND

ND

ND ND NO 0.04

NO

ND ND ND NA

ND

ND ND 0.25 0.18

ND

ND ND ND 0.03

ND

NA NA ND ND

ND

ND ND 0.02 0.02

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part B: Metals.

STW1 CP

ND 5.4 13 ND 11.0 ND ND ND ND ND 790 ND ND ND 27K ND ND

STW2 CP

ND ND 450 ND 6.7 ND ND ND 80 21K 480 ND 1100 ND 9300 ND ND

SUM-1 CP

ND 5.4 15 ND 16.0 ND NO ND NO NO NO NO NO 25 11K ND NO

SUM-2 CP

ND ND 41 ND 60 ND 1.1 ND 570 12K 160 ND 4200 46 2600 NO NO

):>

TAL-1

ND NO NO NO 5.3 ND NO ND 110 14K ND ND ND ND 28K NO ND

I
1\)

CP

---.1

TAI-1

ND NO 2200 ND 140 NO 2 NO NO 54K 2800 NO 7800 410 15K NO NO

PBR

TAT-1 CP

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 25K NO ND 8200 NO 14K ND NO

TAT-2 CP

NO NO NO NO 6.3 NO NO NO ND 22K 45 NO 7900 NO 20K NO NO

TAY-1 CP

NO ND 10 ND 2.7 ND ND NO NO NO 100 ND NO NO 1500 NO NO

TEL-1 CP
TER-1 CP
TH0-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 150.0 NO NO ND NO 25K 280 NO 11K 20 2900 NO NO NO ND NO NO 7.1 NO NO NO NO 38K 10 NO 5300 NO 7000 NO NO NO NO 15 NO 19.0 NO NO NO NO 40K NO NO 20K NO 3900 ND ND

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

V OCs ppb

TH0-2 CP

Waverly/Four Corners Thomas

1/30/08 7.65 166 NA 25.4 NA

NA

NO

NO NO NO NO

TIF-1 CP

Forest Lakes S/0 Well #1 Tift

05/10/07 7.50 262 0.01 22.2 NA

NA

NO

NO NO NO NO

T00-1 CP

Shady Acres MHP Well Toombs

05/23/07 7.94 122 NA 22.9 40

40

NO

NO NO NO 0.05

TOW-1

Brasstown Bald Spring

PBR

Towns

)>

f

1\) (X)

TRE-1

City of Soperton Well #1

CP

Treutlen

09/05/07 5.34 7 NA 13.4 NA

NA

04/11/07 7.53 203 NA 21.3 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 0.32 NO

NO

NO NO NO 0.02

TR0-1 PBR
TUR-1 CP

Rosemont Elementary School Well Troup
Ashburn-Turner Co. Recreation Well Turner

04/26/07 5.75 144 0.06 18.9 NA 05/1 0/07 7.68 158 0.54 20.8 NA

NA

MTBE=0.92 NA NA 0 .02 0 .12

NA

NO

NO NO NO NO

TWI-1 CP

Twiggs Co.-Black Bottom Well #1 Twiggs

05/1 0/07 5.11 13 NA 18.4 NA

NA

NO

NO NO 0.35 NO

UNI-1 PBR

Bryant Cove S/0 Well #2 Union

08/08/07 6.67 101 2.8 16.3 NA

NA

UPS-1 PBR

Country Village S/0 Well #13 Upson

08/22/07 6.85 163 1.37 19.2 NA

NA

WAL-1 VR

Valley View Ranch Reid Well Walker

08/01/07 4.85 18 5.56 16.7 NA

NA

WAT-1

City of Jersey Water Tank Road Well

08/23/07 6 .34 60 NA 22.6 NA

NA

PBR

Walton

NO

NO NO NO 0.02

NO

NO NO 0.08 0.06

NO

NO NO 0.22 NO

NO

NO NO 1.50 0.03

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part B: Metals.

TH0-2 CP

NO NO NO NO 130 NO NO NO 210 21K NO NO 14K NO 14K NO NO

TIF-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 220.0 NO NO NO NO 42K 200 NO 7800 46 3000 NO NO

T00-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 89.0 NO NO NO NO 27K 56 NO 3100 16 14K NO NO

TOW-1 PBR

NO NO NO NO 4.2 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 1200 NO NO

)>

TRE-1

NO NO NO NO 290.0 NO NO NO NO 53K NO NO 9400 150 7000 NO NO

I
1\)

CP

<0

TR0-1

NO NO 21 NO 7.2 NO NO NO NO 13K 1700 NO 2500 79 8700 NO NO

PBR

TUR-1 CP

NO NO 17 NO 48.0 NO NO 1.1 NO 30K NO NO 1300 NO 1700 NO NO

TWI-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 8.1 NO 1.1 NO NO 2000 39 NO NO NO 1400 NO NO

UNI-1 PBR

NO NO 51 NO 11.0 NO 1.0 NO NO 41K NO NO 1300 NO 2100 NO NO

UPS-1 PBR

NO 5.5 10 NO 4.2 NO 1.0 NO 61 22K NO NO 3900 NO 6400 NO NO

WAL-1 VR
WAT-1 PBR

NO 8 NO NO 10.0 NO 3.1 NO 95 1100 87 NO NO 35 1300 NO NO NO NO 91 NO NO NO NO 9.2 94 8300 NO NO 4200 NO 5200 NO NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

VOCs ppb

WAE-1 CP

Baptist Village Well #1 Ware

09/20/07 7.68 232 NA 23.6 NA

NA

ND

15 35 ND 0.04

WAE-2 CP

City of Manor Well Ware

11/08/07 7.70 260 NA 24.7 NA

NA

ND

12 77 ND ND

WAN-1 PBR

Camak Quarry Well #1 Warren

07/12/07 6.54 118 NA 18.6 100

100

ND

ND ND 0.02 ND

WAS-1

City of Harrison Well #1

CP

Washington

)>

cI.v

WAS-2

City of Riddleville Well #1

0

CP

Washington

05/09/07 7.34 170 NA 19.8 NA

NA

1/31/08 7.60 183 NA 19.4 NA

NA

ND

ND ND 0.22 ND

ND

ND ND 0.08 ND

WAY-1 CP

Raintree Trailer Park Main Well Wayne

09/19/07 7.80 129 NA 21.8 NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND 0.08

WAY-2 CP

City of Odum Well #1 Wayne

11/14/07 8.08 185 NA 25.6 NA

NA

ND

ND 23 ND ND

WEB-1 CP

City of Weston Well #1 Webster

06/19/07 6.95 300 1.38 19.9 NA

NA

ND

ND 0 0.34 ND

WHE-1 CP
WHI-1 PBR
WHT-1 VR
WIL-1 CP

City of Alamo Well #1 Wheeler
Sweetwater Coffeehouse Well White
Prospect Crossing S/D Well Whitfield
City of Pineview Well #1 Wilcox

05/09/07 7.61 179 NA 22.2

NA

NA

07/12/07 5.99 88 4.37 16.3 NA

NA

08/10/07 7.04 346 O.Q1 17.1

NA

NA

03/29/07 7.57 165 NA 20.5

NA

NA

ND

ND ND ND ND

ND

ND ND 0.70 ND

ND

ND ND 0.03 ND

ND

ND 12 0.71 0.03

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part B: Metals.

WAE-1 CP

NO NO NO NO 51.0 NO NO NO NO 40K 44 NO 17K NO 17K NO NO

WAE-2 CP

NO NO 11 NO 56.0 ND ND ND ND 48K 100 ND 20K 21 12K ND NO

WAN-1 PBR

ND ND ND ND 5.7 ND ND 1.5 ND 14K 280 ND 5000 110 22K ND ND

WA5-1 CP

ND NO ND ND 100.0 NO 1.1 NO NO 52K ND NO 2000 NO 3000 NO NO

WA5-2

ND ND 11 NO 35 ND ND NO ND 61K 74 ND 1200 NO 2500 ND NO

)>
w_I.,

CP

WAY-1

ND ND ND ND 30.0 ND ND ND ND 25K ND ND 8900 110 11K ND ND

CP

WAY-2 CP

ND ND ND ND 75.0 ND ND ND ND 27K ND ND 14K ND 18K ND ND

WEB-1 CP

ND ND ND ND 22.0 ND ND ND ND 62K NO ND 1600 ND 1700 ND ND

WHE-1 CP
WHI-1 PBR
WHT-1 VR
WIL-1 CP

NO NO ND NO 190.0 ND ND ND ND 43K 200 ND 9600 81 3500 ND ND NO ND NO ND 72.0 ND ND ND 64 7900 350 ND 1500 10 8700 NO NO NO ND 26 ND 170.0 NO ND ND ND 37K ND NO 23K NO 1600 ND NO NO NO NO NO 29.0 NO NO NO NO 55K 140 NO 1500 13 2000 NO NO

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part A: Station Identification and Location, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals.

Well Name County

WKE-1 PBR

City of Rayle Well #1 Wilkes

WIN-1 CP

City of Allentown Old Well Wilkinson

WOR-1 CP

City of Warwick Well #1 Worth

WOR-2

City of Sumner Well #1

CP

Worth

)>

I

VJ

(\)

06/07/07 6.23 91 NA 18.5 NA

NA

05/10/07 6.72 112 NA 20.8 NA

NA

11/07/07 7.43 179 NA 20.4 NA

NA

11/06/07 7.36 207 NA 21.7 NA

NA

VOCs ppb
ND

11 ND 3.90 0.13

ND

ND 13 ND NO

ND

ND ND 2.00 ND

ND

ND ND ND ND

Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Statewide Small Public Water Systems. Part 8: Metals.

WKE-1 PBR
WIN-1 CP
WOR-1 CP
WOR-2 CP

ND ND 12 ND 43.0 ND ND ND ND 15K ND ND 1900 ND 11K ND ND ND ND ND ND 12.0 ND ND ND ND 34K 380 ND 1100 ND 2400 ND ND ND ND ND ND 2.3 ND ND ND ND 36K ND ND 2600 ND 3700 ND ND ND ND ND ND 200.0 ND ND ND ND 48K 73 ND 16K 30 4600 ND ND

)>
wwI

TABLE A-2. CHEMICAL COMPONENTS AND REPORTING LIMITS

Component

Reporting Limit

Component

Reporting Limit

Vinyl Chloride

0.5 ppb

1'1Dichloroethvlene
Dichloromethane

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

Trans-1 ,2Dichloroethvlene Cis-1 ,2Dichloroethylene
1'1 '1Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Benzene

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

1,2-Dichloroethane 0.5 ppb

Dichlorodifluoromethane Chloromethane

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

Bromomethane

0.5 ppb

Chloroethane

0.5 ppb

Fluorotrichloromethane 1,1-Dichloroethane

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

2,2-Dichloropropane 0.5 ppb

Bromochloromethane Chloroform

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

Trichloroethylene

0.5 ppb

1, 1-Dichloropropene 0.5 ppb

1,2-Dichloropropane 0.5 ppb

Dibromomethane

0.5 ppb

Toluene

0.5 ppb

1'1 ,2Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

Chlorobenzene

0.5 ppb

Bromodichloromethane Cis-1 ,3-Dichloropro_Qene Trans-1 ,3Dichloropropene 1,3-Dichloropropane

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

Ethylbenzene Total Xylenes

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

Chlorodibromomethane 1 ,2-Dibromoethane

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

Styrene p-Dichlorobenzene

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

1'1 '1 ,2Tetrachloroethane
Bromoform

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

a-Dichlorobenzene 0.5 ppb

lsopropylbenzene 0.5 ppb

1,2,4Trichlorobenzene

0.5 ppb

1'1 ,2,2Tetrachloroethane

0.5 ppb

A-34

TABLE A-2. CHEMICAL COMPONENTS AND REPORTING LIMITS, CONTINUED.

Component

Reporting Limit

Component

Reporting Limit

Bromobenzene

0.5 ppb

1 ,2,3Trichloropropane n-Propylbenzene

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

o-Chlorotoluene

0.5 ppb

1 ,3,5Trimethylbenzene p-Chlorotoluene

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

Tert-Butylbenzene 0.5 ppb

1 ,2,4Trimethylbenzene Sec-Butylbenzene

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb

p-lsopropyltoluene 0.5 ppb

m-Dichlorobenzene 0.5 ppb

n-Butylbenzene

0.5 ppb

Silver (ICP) Aluminum (ICP) Arsenic (ICP) Barium (ICP) Beryllium (ICP) Calcium (ICP) Cobalt (ICP) Chromium (ICP) Copper (ICP) Iron (ICP) Potassium (ICP) Magnesium (ICP)

10 ppb 60 ppb 80 ppb 10 ppb 10 ppb 2000 ppb 10 ppb 20 ppb 20 ppb 20 ppb 5000 ppb 1000 ppb

1 ,2-Dibromo-3chloropropane Hexachlorobutadiene Naphthalene
1 ,2,3Trichlorobenzene Methyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) Chloride

0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb 0.5 ppb 10 ppm

Manganese (ICP) Sodium (ICP) Nickel (ICP) Lead (ICP) Antimony (ICP) Selenium (ICP)

10 ppb 1000 ppb 20 ppb 90 ppb 120 ppb 190 ppb

Sulfate Nitrate/nitrite Total Phosphorus

10 ppm
0.02 ppm as Nitrogen 0.02 ppm

Titanium (ICP) Thallium (ICP) Vanadium (ICP)

10 ppb 200 ppb 10 ppb

A-35

TABLE A-2. CHEMICAL COMPONENTS AND REPORTING LIMITS, CONTINUED.

Component Zinc (ICP)

Reporting Limit 20 ppb

Chromium (ICP/MS) 5 ppb

Nickel (ICP/MS)

10 ppb

Copper (ICP/MS)

5 ppb

Zinc (ICP/MS)

10 ppb

Arsenic (ICP/MS)

5 ppb

Selenium (ICP/MS) 5 ppb

Molybdenum (ICP/MS)

5 ppb

Component Silver (ICP/MS)

Re~ortin_g Limit 5 ppb

Cadmium (ICP/MS) 0.7 ppb

Tin (ICP/MS)

30 ppb

Antimony (ICP/MS) 5 ppb

Barium (ICP/MS)

2 ppb

Thallium (ICP/MS) 1 ppb

Lead (ICP/MS)

1 ppb

Uranium (ICP/MS) 1 ppb

A-36

The Department of Natural Resources is an equal opportunity employer and offers all persons the opportunity to compete and participate in each area of DNR employment regardless of race, color,
religion, national origin, age, handicap, or other non-merit factors.