GROUNDWATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA FOR2020 Anthony W. Chumbley and John R. Scroggs GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DMSION WATERSHED PROTECTION BRANCH WATERSHED PLANNING AND MONITORING PROGRAM ATLANTA 2022 CIRCULAR 12AH GROUNDWATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA FOR2020 Anthony W. Chumbley and John R. Scroggs The preparation ofthis report wasfonded in part through a grantfrom the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under the provisions ofSection 106 ofthe Federal Water Pollution Control Act of1972, as amended. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Mark Williams, Commissioner ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Richard E. Dunn, Director WATERSHED PROTECTION BRANCH James A. Capp, Branch Chief ATLANTA 2022 CIRCULAR 12AH TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION.............................................................. 1-1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE................................................................ 1-1 1.2 FACTORS AFFECTING CHEMICAL GROUNDWATER QUALITY....... 1-2 1.3 HYDROGEOLOGIC PROVINCES OF GEORGIA............................... 1-3 1.3.1 Coastal Plain Province.................................................................. 13 1.3.2 Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province...................................................... 1-5 1.3.3 Valley and Ridge Province.......................................................... 1-5 1.3.4 Appalachian Plateau Province...................................................... 1-6 1.4 REGIONAL GROUNDWATER PROBLEMS.................................... 1-6 CHAPTER 2 GEORGIA GROUNDWATER MONITORING NETWORK....... 2-1 2.1 MONITORING STATIONS.........................................................~.... 2-1 2.2 USES AND LIMITATIONS.................................................................... 2..1 2.3 ANALYSES AND DATA RETENTION.............................................. 2-3 CHAPTER 3 CHEMICAL GROUNDWATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA.......... 3-1 3.1 OVERVIEW.......................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 CRETACEOUS AQUIFER SYSTEM................................................. 3-3 3.2.1 Aquifer System Description.............................................................. 3-3 3,2.2 Field Parameters............................................................................ 3.3 3.2.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds................ 3-5 3.2.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP).................. 3-5 3.2.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS)........ .. ................... ..................................................... ........ 3-5 3.3 CLAYTON AQUIFER.................................................................... 3-6 3.3.1 Aqulfer System Descr1ption..........................................-..... 3-8 3.3.2 Field Parameters........................................................................ 3-6 3.3.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds.............. 3-6 3.3.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP).. . ............ 3-8 3.3.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS).......... ................................... 3-8 3.4 CLAIBORNE AQUIFER................................................................. 3-8 3.4.1AquiferDescription...................................................................... 3-8 3.4.2 Field Parameters.. ........ 3-9 3.4.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds.............. 3-9 3.4.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICPJ................ 3-9 3.4.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS)... ........... 3-9 3.5 JACKSONIAN AQUIFER................................................................... 3-11 3.5. 1 Aquifer Descr1ption........... ..... ..................... ....................... 3-11 3.6.2 Field Parameters. .......... 3-11 3.5.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds............... 3-11 3.5.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP)................ 3-13 3.5.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMSJ....... .... .................... ................. 3-13 3.6 FLORIDAN AQUIFER SYSTEM........................................................... 3-13 3.6. 1 Aquifer System Characteristics ..................................................... ..... ........ ........ ........ . 3-13 3.8.2 Field Parameters............................................................................ 3-14 3.6.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds............... 3-15 ii 3.6.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP)................. 3-15 (3I.C6.P5MMeSt)a.l.s..b..y...I.n.d..u..c..ti.v..e..ly..-.C..o..u..p..le..d...P.l.a..s.m...a..M. ..a.s..s..S..p..e..c.t.r.o..m..e..t.r.y.................. 3-17 3.7 MIOCENE/SURFICIAL AQUIFER SYSTEM....................................... 3-18 3. 7. 1 Aquifer System Characteristics...................................................... 3-18 3.7,,2 Field Parameters........................................................................ 3-18 3. 7.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds............... 3-19 3. 7.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP).. ......... .. 3-19 3. 7.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMSJ............................................................................................... 3-19 3.8. PIEDMONT/BLUE RIDGE AQUIFER SYSTEM................................... 3-21 3.8.1 Aquifer System Characteristics....................................................... 3-21 3.8.2 Field parameters............................................................................... 3-23 3.8.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds................ 3-24 3.8.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP)..................... 3-24 3.8.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (/CPMS)...... ........................................................ 3-25 3.9 VALLEY AND RIDGE/APPALACHIAN PLATEAU AQUIFER SYSTEM....... .................. .......... ................................ ............... ...... 3-26 3.9.1 Aquifer System Characteristics....................................................... 3-26 3.9.2 Field Parameters......................................................................... 3-27 3.9.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds................ 3-27 3.9.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP)................... 3-27 3.9.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (/CPMS) ..................... 11 11 11 3-27 Ill CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS....................................... 4-1 4.1 PHYSICAL PARAMETERS AND pH............. 4-1 4. 1.1 pH. 4-1 4. 1.2 Conductivi'ty.............................................................................. 4-2 4. 1.3 Temperature............. 4-3 4.2 ANIONS, NON-METALS AND voes................................................ 4-3 4.2.1 Chloride and Fluor/de.................. 4-3 4.2.2 Sulfate........................................................................................... 4-3 4.2.3 Nitrate/Nitrite............. 4-4 4.2.4 Phosphorus............................................................................... 4-4 4.2.5 Dissolved Oxygen... 4-5 4.2.6 Volatile Organic Compounds............................................... 4.5 4.3 ICP METALS. 4-5 4.3.1 Aluminum............................................................................ 4-6 4.3.2 Iron and Manganese.............. 4-6 4.3.3 Cslcium, Magnesium, Sodium, and Potassium................................. 4-6 4.4 ICPMS METALS..................... 4-7 4.4. 1 Chromium and Nickel................................................................... 4-7 4.4.2 Arsenic, Selenium, Uranium, and Molybdenum................................ 4.7 4.4.3 Copper, Lead, and Zinc.................................................................... 4-8 4.4.4 Barium......... 4-8 4.5 CONTAMINATION OCCURRENCES................................................ 4-8 4.5. 1 Primary MCL and Action Level Exceedances.................................... 4-9 iv 4. 5.2 Secondary MCL Exceedances..................................................... 4-9 4. 5.3 Vo/at/le Organic Compounds................................................................. 4-10 4.6 GENERAL QUALITY.............................................................. 4-16 5.0 CHAPTER 5 LIST OF REFERENCES........................................... 5-1 V APPENDIX Laboratory" and Sta.tion Data............................................................... A-1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1. lb Hvdrggeoloqlc prgvlnces of Georgia........................... 1-4 Figure 3-1. The Malor Aquifers and Aquifer Systems of the Coastal Plalo Provine,-................................................................................. 3-2 Figure 3-2. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Cretaceous Aquifer System........................................................................................................................................................ 3-4 Figure 3-3. Location of the Stations Monitoring the Clayton Aquifer....... 3-7 Figure 3-4. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Clalborne Aquifer....... 3-1 O Figure 3-5. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Jacksonian Aquifer.... 3-12 Figure 3-6. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Floridan Aquifer System................................................................................................................. 3-16 Figure 3-7. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Miocene/Surflclal A_,guifer System................................................................................. 3-20 Figure 3-8. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Piedmont/Blue Ridge AgulferSystem.............. ............................ . . . ........ ................................... 3-22 Figure 3-9. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Valley-and-Ridge/ Appalachian Plateau Aquifer System................................................... 3-28 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1. Georgia Groundwater Monitoring Network, Calendar Year 2020 I .. .. I 2-2 Table 4-1. Contaminant Exceedances, Calendar Year 2020........ ............ 4-11 Table 4-2. voe Detection Incidents, Calendar Year 2020....................... 4-15 Table A-1. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Cretaceous/ Providence St:a.tiona.. .............................................................................. A-2 vi Table A-2. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Clayton Stations............ A-6 Table A-3. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Claiborne Stations........... A-8 Table A-4. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Jacksonian Stations...... A-1 O Table A-5. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Floridan Stations......... A-12 Table A-6. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Miocene Stations........... A-18 Table A-7. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Piedmont-Blue Ridge Stations........................................................................................... A-20 Table A-8. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Valley-and-Ridge/ Appalachian Plateau Stations............................................................. A-28 Table A-9. Analytes, EPA Analytlcal Methods, and Reporting Limits....... A-30 Table A-10. Analytea, Primary MCLs, and Secondary MCLs.................... A-33 vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report, covering the calendar year 2020, Is the thirty-fourth of the Circular 12 series. The first 19 reports, Circulars 12A through 12S, summarized the chemical quality of groundwater statewide across Georgia and utilized a static array of sampling stations that were sampled periodically, typically on a semiannual, annual, or biennial basis. The next five reports, Circulars 12T through 12X, dealt with specialized chemical groundwater quality issues: water quality in the Coastal region, water quality available to small public water systems, water quality in the Piedmont/Blue Rldge.physiographlc province, groundwater uranium in Georgia and groundwater arsenic in Georgia. With this report and its predecessors, Circular 12Y, 122, 12AA 12AB, 12AC, 12AD, 12AE, 12AF and 12AG continuing to monitor the chemical quality of groundwater in Georgia using a static array of periodically sampled stations. These summaries are among the tools used by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) to assess trends in the quality of the State's groundwater resources. EPD is the State organization with regulatory responsibility for maintaining and where possible, improving groundwater quality and availability. EPD has implemented a comprehensive statewide groundwater management policy of antidegradation (EPD, 1991; 1998). Four components comprise EPD's current groundwater quality assessment program: 1. The Georgia Groundwater Monitoring Network: EPD's Watershed Protection Branch, Source Water Assessment Program, took over the Georgia Groundwater Monitoring Network from the Regulatory Support Program when that program disbanded in 2012. The Monitoring Network is designed to evaluate the ambient groundwater quality of eight aquifer systems present in the State of Georgia. The data collected from sampling of the Groundwater Monitoring Network form the basis for this report. 2. Water Withdrawal Program (Watershed Protection Branch, Water Supply Section): This program provides data on the quality of groundwater that the residents of Georgia are using. 3. Groundwater sampling at environmental facilities such as municipal solid waste landfills, Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) facilities, and sludge disposal facilities. The primary agencies responsible for monitoring these facilities are EPD's Land Protection and Watershed Protection Branches. 1-1 4. The Wellhead Protection Program (WHP), which is designed to protect areas surrounding municipal drinking water wells from contaminants. The United States 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 supply wells from contaminants is important not only for maintaining groundwater quality, but also for ensuring that public water supplies meet health standards. Analyses of water samples collected for the Georgia Groundwater Monitoring Network during the period January 2020 through December 2020 and from previous years form the database for this summary. The Georgia Groundwater Monitoring Network Is presently comprised of 139 stations, both wells and springs. Twenty of the. stations are scheduled for quarterly sampling; the remainder are scheduled to be sampled yearly. Each sample receives laboratory analyses for chloride, sulfate, fluoride, nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, 26 metals, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Field measurements of pH, conductivity, and temperature are performed on the sample water from each station. Field dissolved oxygen measurements are made on sample water from wells. During the January 2020 through December 2020 period, Groundwater Monitoring staff collected 189 samples from 127 wells and 12 springs. A review of the data from this period and comparison of these data with those for samples collected for preceding monitoring efforts indicated that groundwater quality at most of the 139 stations has remained good. 1.2 FACTORS AFFECTING CHEMICAL GROUNDWATER QUALITY The chemical quality of groundwater is the result of complex physical, chemical, and biologlcal processes. Among the more significant controls are the chemical quality of the water entering the groundwater flow system, the reactions of the infiltrating water with the soils and rocks that are encountered, and the effects of the well-and-pump system. Most water enters the groundwater system in upland recharge areas and in areas of leakage from adjacent geologic units. Water seeps through interconnected pore spaces and fractures in the sells and rocks until discharged to a surface water body (e.g., stream, lake, or ocean). The initial water chemistry, the amount of recharge, and the attenuation capacity of soils have a strong influence on the quality of groundwater in recharge areas. Chemical interactions between the water and the aquifer host rocks have an increasing significance with longer residence times. As a result, groundwater from discharge areas tends to be more highly mineralized than groundwater in recharge areas. 1-2 The well-and-pump system can also have a strong influence on the quality of the well water. Well casings, through compositional breakdown, can contribute metals (e.g., iron from steel casings) and organic compounds (e.g., tetrahydrofurans from PVC pipe cement) to the water. Pumps can aerate the water being d~wn up and discharged. An improperly constructed or failing well can offer a conduit that allows local pollutants to enter the groundwater flow system 1.3 HYDROGEOLOGIC PROVINCES OF GEORGIA This report defines three hydrogeologic provinces 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 of north Georgia but the northwestern corner; 3. The combined Valley and Ridge and Appalachiah Plateau Provinces of northwest Georgia. 1.3.1 Coastal Plain Province Georgia's Coastal Plain Province generally comprises a wedge of loosely consolidated sediments and limestone rock that gently dip and thicken to the south and southeast. Groundwater in the Coastal Plain flows through interconnected pore space between grains and through solutlon-enlarged voids In carbonate rock. The oldest outcropping sedimentary formations (Cretaceous) are exposed along the Fall Line (Figure 1-1), which is the northern limit of the Coastal Plain Province. Successively younger formations occur at the surface to the south and southeast. The Coastal Plain of Georgia contains several confined and unconfined aquifers. Confined aquifers are those in which the readily permeable layer of aquifer medium is interposed between two layers of poorly permeable material (e.g., clay or shale). If the water pressure in such an aquifer exceeds atmospheric pressure, the aquifer is artesian. Water from precipitation and runoff enters the aquifers and aquifer systems in their updip outcrop areas, where permeable sediments hosting the aquifer are exposed. Water may also enter the aquifers downdip from the recharge areas through leakage from overlying or underlying aquifers. Most Coastal Plain aquifers are unconfined in their updip outcrop areas, but become confined in downdip areas to the south and southeast, where they are overlain by successively younger rock formations. Groundwater flow through confined Coastal Plain aquifers is generally to the south and southeast, in the direction of dip of the sedimentary layers. 1-3 a) Appalachian Plateau Province (2) Valley and Ridge Province (3) Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province G) coastal Plain Province G11A1W THDIPI G) Figure 1-1. The Hy:drogeologic Provinces of Georgia 1-4 The sediments forming the major aquifer systems in the Coastal Plain range in age from Cretaceous to Holocene. Horizontal and vertical changes in the sediment layers that form these aquifer systems determine the thickness and extent of the aquifer systems. Several aquifer systems may be present in a single geographic area forming a vertical "stack". The Cretaceous and Jacksonian aquifer systems (primarily sands) are a common source of drinking water within a 35-mile wide band that lies adjacent to and south of the Fall Line. However, the aquifer systems do extend downdip of the band. A well has been planned to test the Cretaceous aquifer along the Atlantic Coast for water supply development. Southwestern Georgia relies on three vertically stacked aquifer systems plus the upper part of the Cretaceous aquifer system for drinking water supplies: the Clayton, the Claiborne, and the Floridan aquifer systems. The Miocene/Surficial aquifer system (primarily sands) is the principal shallow aquifer system occupying much of the same broad area occupied by the Floridan aquifer system In central and eastern Georgia. The system is unconfined over most of its inland extent but becomes partly confined both in the coastal area and in the Grady, Thomas, Brooks, and Lowndes County area of South Georgia. 1.3.2 Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province Though the Piedmont and Blue Ridge Physiographic Provinces differ geologically and geomorphologically, the two physiographic provinces share common hydrogeological characteristics and thus can be treated as a single hydrogeologic province. A two-part aquifer system characterizes the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province (Daniel and Hamed, 1997). The upper part of the system is the regolith aquifer, composed of saprolite and over1ying soils and alluvium. The regolith aquifer is unconfined, and the water resides primarily in intergranular pore spaces (primary porosity). The lower aquifer in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge aquifer system is the bedrock aquifer. This aquifer is developed in metamorphic and igneous bedrock (mostly Paleozoic and Precambrian in age); the water resides in fractures and, in the case of marbles, solution-enlarged voids (secondary porosity). In contrast to the regolith aquifer, no intergranular (primary) porosity exists in the bedrock aquifer. The bedrock aquifer is semi-confined with the overlying regolith aquifer media and the bedrock itself offering local confinement to the fractures and voids. The regolith aquifer also serves as the reservoir that recharges the bedrock aquifer. 1.3.3 Valley and Ridge Province Faulted and folded consolidated Paleozoic sedimentary formations characterize the Valley and Ridge Province. The principal porosity present in aquifer media consists of fractures and solution-enlarged voids in the carbonate rocks; intergranular porosity may be important in some places. Locally, groundwater and surface-water systems closely interconnect. Dolostones and limestones of the Knox Group are the principal aquifers where they occur in fold axes at the centers of broad valleys. The greater hydraulic conductivities of the thick carbonate sections in this province permit higher yielding wells than in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province. 1-5 1.3.4 Appalachian Plateau Province Rocks in this province consist of consolidated Paleozoic sediments inclusive of the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian. Faulting and folding are less intense than in the Valley and Ridge province, and sediments tend to be flatter lying and more continuous areally. As in the Valley and Ridge Province, secondary porosity is the most Important type of porosity. The highly fractured Fort Payne Chert and the Knox Group are major water-bearing units In this province. Only a small part of this province extends into Georgia, at the State's far northwest comer (Dade County and parts of Chattooga and Walker Counties). Due to its small extent In Georgia and its lack of monitoring stations for the current project, the Appalachian Plateau Province is combined with the Valley and Ridge Province for the purposes of this report. 1.4 REGIONAL GROUNDWATER PROBLEMS Data from groundwater investigations in Georgia, including those from the Groundwater Monitoring Network, indicate that virtually all of Georgia has shallow groundwater sufficient for domestic supply. Iron, aluminum, and manganese are the only constituents that occur routinely in concentrations exceeding drinking water standards. These metals are mostly naturally occuning and do not pose a health risk. Iron and manganese can cause reddish or yellowish-brown to dark brown or black stains on objects and can give water a bitter metallic taste. Aluminum can cause water to appear cloudy. In the karstic carbonate terranes of the combined Valley and Ridge/ Appalachian Plateau Province and the Coastal Plain Providence of southwest Georgia, interconnection between the surface water systems and the groundwater systems can be extensive enough such that waters supplying some wells and springs (e.g., Crawfish Spring and Cedartown Spring) have been deemed under direct surface influence, requiring surface water type treatment if used for public supplies. In the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province, water available to wells drilled into bedrock consisting of granitic intrusive rocks, granitic gneisses, or hornblende gneiss/ amphibolite assemblages occasionally may contain excessive naturally occurring uranium. Aquifers in the outcrop areas of Cretaceous sediments south of the Fall Line typically yield acidic water that may require treatment. The acidity occurs naturally and results from the inability of the sandy aquifer sediments to neutralize acidic rainwater and from biologically influenced reactions between infiltrating water and soils. Groundwater from the Cretaceous along the coast is typically brackish but may be fresh at some locations. 1-6 Nitrate/nitrite concentrations in shallow groundwater from the farm belt in southern Georgia are usually within drinking water standards but are somewhat higher than levels found in other areas of the State. Three areas of naturally reduced groundwater quality occur in the Floridan aquifer system. The first Is the karstic Dougherty Plain of southwestern Georgia. The second is the Gulf Trough area. The third is in the coastal area of east Georgia. In the Dougherty Plain, as with the carbonate terranes of northwestern Georgia, surface waters and the contaminants they entrain can directly access the aquifer through sink holes. The Gulf Trough is a linear geologic feature extending from southwestern Decatur County through northern Effingham County and may represent a filled marine current channel (Huddleston, 1993). Floridan groundwater in and near the trough may be high in total dissolved solids and may contain elevated levels of sulfate, barium, radionuclides, and arsenic (Kellam and Gorday, 1990; Donahue et al., 2013). In the Coastal area of east Georgia, the influx of water with high dissolved solids content can dramatically raise levels of sodium, calcium, magnesium, sulfate, and chloride. In the Brunswick part of the Coastal area, groundwater withdrawal from the upper permeable zone of the Floridan aquifer system results in the upwelling of groundwater with high dissolved solids content from the deeper parts of the aquifer system (Krause and Clarke, 2001). In the Savannah portion of the Coastal area, heavy pumping in and around Savannah and Hilton Head, South Carolina has caused a cone of depression which has induced seawater to enter the Floridan aquifer system in South Carolina and to flow down-gradient toward Savannah. The seawater has not yet reached Savannah and may not reach Savannah for many years. The seawater enters the aquifer system via breaches in the Miocene confining unit along the bottoms of waterways and sand-filled paleochannels offshore of the Beaufort/Hilton Head area of South Carolina in what is referred to as the Beaufort Arch; where the top of the Floridan aquifer system is closer to the ocean water (Foyle et al., 2001; Krause and Clarke, 2001). 1-7 CHAPTER 2 GEORGIA GROUNDWATER MONITORING NETWORK 2.1 MONITORING STATIONS For the period January 2020 through December 2020, attempts were made to place sampling stations .in the Coastal Plain Province's six major aquifer systems, in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province, and in the Valley and Ridge/ Appalachian Plateau Province (Table 2-1 ). Stations are restricted to wells or springs that are for the most part tapping a single aquifer or aquifer system. Attempts were made to have some monitoring stations located in the following critical settings: 1. areas of recharge; 2. areas of possible pollution or contamination related to hydrogeologic settings (e.g., granitic intrusions, the Dougherty Plain, and the Gulf Trough); 3. areas of significant groundwater use. Most of the monitoring stations are municipal, industrial, and domestic wells that have well construction data. 2.2 USES AND LIMITATIONS Regular sampling of wells and springs of the Groundwater Monitoring Network permits analysis of groundwater quality with respect to location (spatial trends) and time of sample collection (temporal trends). Spatial trends are useful for assessing the effects of the geologic framework. of the aquifer and regional land-use activities on groundwater quality. Temporal trends permit an assessment of the effects of rainfall and drought periods on groundwater quality and quantity. Both trends are useful for the detection of non-point source pollution. Non-point source pollution arises from broadscale phenomena such as acid rain deposition and application of agricultural chemicals on crop lands. It should be noted that the data of the Groundwater Monitoring Network represent water quality in only limited areas of Georgia. Monitoring water quality at the 139 sites located throughout Georgia provides an indication of groundwater quality at the locality sampled and at the horizon corresponding to the open interval in the well or to the head of the spring at each station in the Monitoring Network. Caution should be exercised in drawing unqualified conclusions and applying any results reported in this study to groundwaters that are not being monitored. 2-1 Table 2-1. Georgia Groundwater Monftorrng Network, Calendar Year 2020. Aquifer or Aquifer System I Number of I Stations Visited (Samples I Taken) Cretaceous 21 stations (21 samples) Clayton Claiborne Jacksonian Floridan 5 stations (5 sample) 3 stations (3 samples) 11 stations (11 samples) 38 stations (59 samples) Miocene/Surficial 6 stations (6 samples) Piedmont/Blue Ridge 47 stations (73 samples) Valley and Ridge/ Appalachian Plateau 8 stations (11 samples) Primary Stratigraphic Equivalents Age of Aquifer Host Rocks Ripley Formation, Cusseta Sand, Blufftown Formation, Eutaw Formation, Tuscaloosa Formation, Providence Sand, Steel Creek Formation, Gaillard Formation, Pio Nono Formation Clayton Formation Late Cretaceous Paleocene Claiborne Group Middle Eocene Barnwell Group Ocala Group, Suwanee Limestone Late Eocene I Middle Eocene to Early Olig,ocene Hawthorne Group, Miccosukee Formation, Cypresshead Formation Miocene to Recent Various igneous and metamorphic complexes Shady Dolomite, Knox Group, Conasauga Group Precambrian and Paleozoic Paleozoic, mainly Cambrian, Ordovician 2-2 Stations of the Groundwater Monitoring Network are intentionally located away from known point sources of pollution. The stations provide baseline data on ambient water quality in Georgia. EPD requires other forms of groundwater monitoring for activities that may result in point source pollution (e.g., landfills, hazardous waste facilities, and land application sites) through its environmental facilities permit programs. Groundwater quality changes gradually and predictably in the areally extensive aquifer systems of the Coastal Plain Province. The Monitoring Network allows for some definition of the chemical processes occurring in large confined aquifers. Unconfined aquifers in northern Georgia and in the surface recharge areas of southern Georgia are of comparatively small extent and more open to interactions with land use activities. The wide spacing of most monitoring stations does not permit equal characterization of water-quality processes in these settings. The quality of water from monitoring stations drawing from unconfined aquifers represents only the general nature of groundwater in the vicinity of the stations. Groundwater In the recharge areas of the Coastal Plain aquifer systems is one of the future drinking-water resources for down-flow areas. Monitoring stations in these recharge areas, in effect, constitute an early warning system of potential future water quality problems in confined portions of the Coastal Plain aquifer systems. 2.3 ANALYSES AND DATA RETENTION Analyses are available for 189 water samples collected from 139 stations (127 wells and 12 springs) during the period January 2020 through December 2020. In 1984, the first year of the Groundwater Monitoring Network, EPD staff sampled from 39 wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge and Coastal Plain Provinces. Between 1984 and 2004, the network had expanded to include 128 stations situated in all three hydrogeologic provinces, with most of the stations being in the Piedmont and Coastal Plain Provinces, the largest hydrogeologic provinces In Georgia. Groundwater from all monitoring stations is tested for chloride, sulfate, fluoride, nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, a variety of metals, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Testing for the VOCs was done using the Gas Chromatography / Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) method (EPA method 524.2). Testing for anions chloride, fluoride and sulfate was done using the Ion Chromatography method (EPA method 300.0). Testing for nitrite / nitrate as total nitrogen was done using the Automated Colorimetry method (EPA method 353.2). Testing for phosphorus was done using the Semi-Automated Colorimetry method (EPA method 365.1 ). Appendix Table A-9 llsts the EPA methods used to test for these analytes along with a reporting limit for each analyte. The results of the chemical tests are reported in this Circular. Before collecting a sample, EPD personnel also observe and record certain field measurements; pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and temperature. This Circular also reports these measurements. Testing for aluminum, beryllium, calcium, cobalt, iron, potassium, magnesium, manganese, sodium, titanium, and vanadium was undertaken using the inductively 2-3 coupled plasma {ICP) method (EPA method 200.7 in Table A-9). This method works well for most of the major metals listed above. This method was also used to test for arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead, antimony, selenium, thallium, and zinc. The inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICPMS) method (EPA method 200.8 in Table A-9) was also used to test for the metals mentioned in the previous sentence as well as for molybdenum, silver, tin, and uranium. The ICPMS method generally gives better results for trace metals. Pursuant to the Georgia Safe Drinking Water Act of 1977, EPD has established Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for certain analytes and other parameters, certain of which are included in analyses performed on Groundwater Monitoring samples (EPD, 2009). Primary MCLs pertain to analytes that can adversely affect human health if the maximum concentration for an analyte is exceeded for drinking water. Secondary MCLs pertain to parameters that may give drinking water objectionable, though not health-threatening, properties that may cause persons served by a public water system to cease using the water. Unpleasant taste and the ability to cause stains are examples of such properties. MCLs apply only to treated water offered for public consumption; nevertheless, they constitute useful guidelines for evaluating the quality of untreated (raw) water. Table A-10 in the Appendix lists the Primary and Secondary MCLs for Groundwater Monitoring Network analytes. Most wells currently on the Monitoring Network have in-place pumps. Using such pumps to purge wells and collect samples reduces the potential for crosscontamination that would attend the use of portable pumps. Pumped wells may affect voe concentrations of sample water. Two wells, the MIiier Ball Park Northeast Well (PA9C) and the Springfield Egypt Road Test Well (Ml17), are flowing, which dispenses altogether with pumps and lessens the effects of the pump-well system on sample water. Sampling procedures are adapted from techniques used by United States Geologic Survey (USGS) and EPA. For wells except PA9C and Ml17, EPD personnel purge the wells (EPA recommends removing three to five times the volume of the water column in the well) before collecting a sample to reduce the influence of the well, pump, and plumbing system on water quality. A purge of 15 to 20 minutes is usually sufficient to allow readings of pH, conductivity, temperature, and dissolved oxygen to stabilize and to allow corrosion films on the plumbing to be flushed away. The apparatus used for monitoring field measurements and collecting samples consists of a garden hose with two branches at its end and a container. One branch conveys water to a container; the other branch allows the water to flow freely. On the container branch, water enters the bottom of the container, flows past the probe of the instrument taking field measurements, and discharges over the top of the container. Such an apparatus minimizes the exposure of the sample water to atmosphere. Once the field measurements have stabilized, sample containers are then filled with water discharging from the end of the free-flowing branch. Sample waters do not pass through a filter before collection. As a rule, trends for field measurements with increasing purge time include a lowering of pH, conductivity and dissolved oxygen. For 2-4 shallower wells, the temperature tends to approach the mean atmospheric temperature for the area. For deeper wells rising temperatures due to geothermal heating may become apparent. Once the sample bottles are filled, they are promptly placed on ice to preserve water quality. EPD personnel transport samples to the laboratory on or before the Friday of the week during which the samples were collected, well before holding time for the samples lapse. Field measurements and analytical results are provided in Tables A-1 through A-8 in the Appendix. Files at EPD contain records of the field measurements and chemical analyses. Owners of wells or springs receive copies of the laboratory analysis sheets as well as cover letters and laboratory sheet summaries. The cover letters state whether any MCLs were exceeded. The Drinking Water Program's Compliance and Enforcement Unit receives notification of Primary MCL exceedances involving public water supplies. Station numbering assigns each station a two-part alphanumeric designation, the first part consisting of an alphabetic abbreviation for the aquifer being sampled and the second part consisting of a serial number, sometimes with an alphabetic suffix, the two parts separated by a dash. Some wells were also added from previous sampling and monitoring programs that were previously labeled with a County alphabetic abbreviation instead of an aquifer. In this case the previous identification number was retained for cross reference with previous samples. In order for the groundwater database to be compatible with the Georgia Environmental Monitoring and Assessment System (GOMAS), a Watershed Protection Branch branch-wide water database, the stations were also assigned a three-part alphanumeric designation; the first part being an alphabetic abbreviation ,.GW1 (for groundwater), the second part numeric representing the local river basin and the third part a serial number. 2-5 CHAPTER 3 CHEMICAL GROUNDWATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA 3.1 OVERVIEW Georgia's major aquifer systems are grouped into three hydrogeologic provinces for the purposes of this report: the Coastal Plain Province, the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province, and the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau Province. The Coastal Plain Province comprises six major aquifer systems that are restricted to specific regions and depths within the Province (Figure 3-1 ). These major aquifer systems commonly incorporate smaller aquifers that can be locally confined. Groundwater Monitoring Network wells in the Coastal Plain aquifer systems are generally located in three settings: 1. Recharge (or outcrop) areas that are located in regions that are geologically updip and generally north of confined portions of these aquifer systems: 2. Updip, confined areas that are located in regions that are proximal to the recharge areas, yet are confined by over1ying geologic formations. These are generally south to southeast from the recharge areas; 3. Downdip, confined areas, located to the south or southeast in the deeper, confined portions of the aquifer systems, distal to the recharge areas. The Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province comprises two regional aquifers, the regolith aquifer and the bedrock aquifer (Daniel and Harned, 1997). The regolith aquifer is composed of saprolite - bedrock that has undergone intense chemical weathering -- plus soil and alluvium. The regolith aquifer, highly porous and appreciably permeable, serves as the reservoir that recharges the bedrock. The igneous and metamorphic bedrock exhibits low porosity - nearly all of the porosity is secondary and consists of discontinuous fractures, but can be very permeable as fractures can locally transmit water rapidly. Despite the regional scale of these two aquifers, flow systems are small-scale and localized, in contrast to those of the Coastal Plain. Paleozoic sedimentary formations characterize the combined Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau Province, although unlike in the Coastal Plain, these sedimentary formations are consolidated and have been subjected to faulting and folding. Also, In contrast to the Coastal Plain Province, the faulting and folding has resulted in the creation of numerous, small-scale localized flow systems in the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau Province. The major water-bearing units in the province are carbonate rocks. Faulting and fracturing of the carbonates have led to the widespread development of karst features, which significantly enhance porosity and permeability and exert a strong influence on local flow patterns. 3-1 CLAl!SORNE. CLAYTON A ; FLORIDAN / MIOCENE CRETACEOUS I! B MSL JACKSONIAN ,I MIOCENE !fLORIDAN D 1000' CRETACEOUS CLAIBORNE FLORIDAN FLORIDAN Figure 3-1. The Major Aquifers and Aquifer Systems of the Coastal Plain Province (after Davis, 1990). 3-2 3.2 CRETACEOUS AQUIFER SYSTEM 3.2. 1 Aquifer System Description The Cretaceous aquifer system is a complexly interconnected group of aquifer subsystems developed in the late Cretaceous sands of the Coastal Plaln Province. These sands outcrop in an extensive recharge area immediately south of the Fall Line in west and central Georgia (Fig. 3-2). In east Georgia, overlying Tertiary sediments restrict Cretaceous outcrops to valley bottoms. Five distinct subsystems of the Cretaceous aquifer system, including the Providence aquifer, are recognized west of the Ocmulgee River (Pollard and Vorhis, 1980). These merge into three subsystems to the east (Clarke et al, 1985; Huddlestun and Summerour, 1996). The aquifer thickens southward from the Fall line, where the clays and sands pinch out against crystalline Piedmont rocks, to a column approximately 2,000 feet thick at the southern limits of the main aquifer use area (limit of current utilization, Figure 3-2). Below the limit of utilization some Cretaceous wells have reached depths of 4,000 feet. The Providence aquifer, a prominent subsystem of the Cretaceous aquifer system in the western Coastal Plain, is developed in sands and coquinoid limestones at the top of the Cretaceous column. The permeable Providence Formation-Clayton Formation interval forms a single aquifer in the updip areas (Long, 1989) and to the east of the Flint River (Clarke et al., 1983). East of the Ocmulgee River, this joint penneable interval is termed the Dublin aquifer (Clarke et al., 1985). This report treats the Providence aquifer as a part of the Cretaceous aquifer system. EPD used 21 wells to monitor the Cretaceous aquifer system. Reported depths ranged from 128 feet (K7) to 1025 feet (PD6). All wells except wells MAC1, and MAR1 are local government owned public supply wells. Well MAC1 provides water for a park and well MAR1 produces process water for a sand mining operation. All wells are sampled annually. 3.2.2 Field Parameters The pHs of sample waters from all 21 wells ranged from 3.90 {K9A) to 9.09 (K15A), with a median of 5.19. As a rule, pHs of waters from the deeper wells are basic (pH>7.0), while those from shallower wells are acidic {pH<7.0). Well PD3 seems to be the exception. The sampling pH of 8.39 of well PD3 would be expected for a well about twice the reported depth of 456 feet. Conductivities are available for all 21 wells and ranged from 17 uS/cm (K10B) and (BUR2) to 470 uS/cm (K1 SA), with a median of 53 uS/cm. As a rule, the deeper wells gave water with the higher conductivities. The temperatures measured should be viewed as approximations of the temperature of the water in the aquifer. Temperatures over all 21 well samples ranged from 18.46 degrees C (K10B) to 30.20 degrees C (K1 SA). Comparing well depths with sample water temperatures shows that the deeper wells generally tend to yield water with higher temperatures. The water 3-3 N A 0 25 60 Milea Sampling Stations CJ General Recharge Area (from Davis et al., 1989) Figure 3-2. Locations of Stations Monitorin9 the Cretaceous Aquifer System. 3-4 temperature can also depend somewhat on the time of year measured, since sample water must traverse a zone influenced by surface temperature on its way from the aquifer to the measurement point. Dissolved oxygen measurements are available for 20 of the 21 wells. Concentrations ranged from 0.30 mg/L (PD6) up to 8.79 mg/L (K1 OB). Generally, the dissolved oxygen content of groundwater decreases with depth. Dissolved oxygen measurements can suffer from various interferences and processes that can expose the groundwater to air. -An inadequately purged well may deliver water that has been in contact with air in the well bore. Pumping a wall's water level down near the pump intake can entrain air into the pumped water. Also, pumping the water level in the well below. a recharging horizon allows water to "cascade" or fall freely down the well bore and splash, thereby becoming aerated. 3.2.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds Testing for chloride, sulfate, fluoride, combined nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) was done for samples from all 21 wells. None of the 21 samples contained detectable chloride. Two samples contained detectable fluoride: well K15A 0.48 mg/L and well K20 0.28 mg/L. Well PD2A had detectable voes (chloroform 0.60 ug/L). Sulfate was detected in samples from four wells, with all concentrations at or below 47 mg/L (MAR1 ). Nitrate/nitrite was detected in 12 samples and ranged up to 2.4 mg/L (PD2A). Samples from 12 wells contained detectable phosphorus, with concentrations ranging up to 0.26 mg/L (K3 and MAC1 ). 3.2.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP) Twenty of 21 samples contained detectable sodium, which ranged up to 76,000 ug/L (PD3). The current high reporting limit for analyzing potassium accounts for the 1ack of potassium detections. Four wells gave samples with detectable aluminum ranging up to 390 ug/L (K12). Fourteen wells yielded samples containing detectable calcium, and 11 wells gave samples containing detectable iron. Calcium levels ranged from undetected to 63,000 ug/L (WEB1 ). Iron levels ranged from undetected to 1,700 ug/L (CHT1 ), with samples from seven wells exceeding the Secondary MCL of 300 ug/L. Seven samples contained detectable magnesium, with a maximum value of 3,500 ug/L (PD6). Eight wells gave samples with detectable manganese. None exceeded the Secondary MCL of 50 ug/L. Beryllium, cobalt, potassium, vanadium, and titanium remained undetected. 3.2.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) ICPMS analysis found detectable levels of copper, zinc, barium and lead. Barium was detected in 19 of 21 samples with a maximum concentration of 79 ug/L (CHT1 ). Copper was detected in samples from five wells with the maximum level at 23 ug/L (K12); zinc was detected in samples from six wells, with the maximum level at 46 ug/L (K12); lead was detected in samples from four wells, with the maximum 3-5 level at 1.7 ug/L (K11A and K12). The copper and lead levels fell below their respective action levels of 1,300 ug/L and 15 ug/L and zinc below its secondary MCL of 5,000 ug/L. The highest concentrations for these three metals tend to occur in samples with the lowest pHs. These three metals commonly leach into sample water from plumbing and are not necessarily present naturally. 3.3 CLAYTON AQUIFER 3.3. 1 Aquifer System Description The Clayton aquifer system of southwestern Georgia is developed mainly in the middle limestone unit of the Paleocene Clayton Formation. Limestones and calcareous sands of the Clayton aquifer system crop out in a narrow belt extending from northeastern Clay County to southwestern Schley County (Figure 3-3). Aquifer thickness varies, ranging from about 50 feet in the outcrop area to 265 feet in southeastern Mitchell County (Clarke et al., 1984). Both the Flint River to the east and the Chattahoochee River, to the west are the areas of discharge for the aquifer in its updip extent. Leakage from the underlying Providence aquifer system and from overlying permeable units in the Wilcox Formation confining zone provides significant recharge in downdip areas (Clarke et al., 1984). As mentioned previously, permeable portions of the Clayton and Providence Formations merge to form a single aquifer in the updip area and east of the Ocmulgee River. East of that river these combined permeable mnes are called the Dublinaquifer (Clarke et al., 1985). 3.3.2 Field Parameters EPD sampled five wells annually to monitor the Clayton aquifer system. Wells CT3, CT5A, SUM1 and SUM2 are public supply wells and well CT8 is a private well. These wells vary in depth from 80 feet (CTB) to 367 feet (CT3). The sample waters had a pH range of 4.25 (SUM2) to 7.95 (CT5A), an electrical conductivity range of 41 uS/cm (CT8) to 261 uS/cm (CT3), a temperature range of 18.21 degrees C (CTB) to 21.05 degrees C (CT3) and a dissolved oxygen range of 0.49 mg/L (CT3) to 6.36 mg/L (CT8). 3.3.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds Testing for chloride, sulfate, fluoride combined nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) was done for samples from all five wells. No volatile organic compounds were detected in any of the five samples. Sulfate was detected in three samples and ranged from 12 mg/L (CT5A) to 92 mg/L (SUM2). Nitrate/nitrite was detected in three samples and ranged from 0.37 mg/L (SUM2) up to 1.9 mg/L (SUM1 ). Phosphorus was detected in one sample: 0.03 mg/L (CT5A). Fluoride was detected in Well SUM2 at a level of 0.33 mg/L. No samples contained detectable chloride. 3-6 ~\ . . . _ _ ~r------;t. ~ S. \\ .{ .-j. I , .., - -t\.. N A 0 25 50 Milea / tl , - \ ~ l', ' I -W ~----{ - I ~- l~ ,~Cr-::) ,. Sampling Stations c::::J General Recharge Area (from Davis et al., 1989) Figure 3-3. Location of the Stations Monitoring the Clayton Aquifer. 3-7 3.3.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP) All five samples contained detectable sodium ranging from 1,600 ug/L (CT5A) to 9,100 ug/L (SUM1 ). The current high reporting limit for analyzing potassium accounts for the lack of potassium detections. One well gave a sample with detectable aluminum at a concentration of 1,200 ug/L (SUM2). Three wells yielded samples containing detectable calcium at levels ranging from undetected to 43,000 ug/L (CT5A) and two wells gave samples containing detectable iron at levels ranging from undetected to 770 ug/L (SUM2), which exceeded iron's 300 ug/L Secondary MCL. Three samples contained detectable magnesium from undetected to 9,100 ug/L (SUM2). Four wells gave samples with detectable manganese with one well (SUM2) exceeding the Secondary MCL of 50 ug/L with a detection of 21 O ug/L. Beryllium, cobalt, potassium, titanium and vanadium remained undetected. 3.3.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) ICPMS analysis found detectable levels of nickel, copper, zinc, barium and lead. Nickel was detected at a concentration of 10 ug/L (SUM2). Barium was detected in all five samples with a maximum concentration of 81 ug/L (SUM2). Copper was detected in one sample at a level of 8.1 ug/L (CT8); zinc was detected in three samples, with the maximum level at 38 ug/L (SUM2); and lead was detected In samples from two wells, with the maximum level at 1O ug/L (SUM2). The copper and lead levels of all three wells fell below their respective action levels of 1,300 ug/L and 15 ug/L and the zinc levels were below their secondary MCL of 5,000 ug/L. 3.4 CLAIBORNE AQUIFER 3.4. 1 Aquifer Description The Claiborne aquifer is developed primarily in the sandy units in the middle and lower portion of the Middle Eocene Claiborne Group of southwestern Georgia. Claiborne Group sands crop out in a belt extending from northern Early County through western Dooly County. Recharge to the aquifer occurs both as direct infiltration of precipitation in the recharge area and as leakage from the overlying Floridan aquifer system (Hicks et al., 1981; Gordey et al., 1997). The discharge boundaries for the updip portion of the aquifer are the Ocmulgee River to the east and the Chattahoochee River to the west. The aquifer generally thickens to the southeast and is more than 350 feet thick near its downdip limit of utilization (Figure 3-4) (Tuohy, 1984). The clay-rich upper unit of the Claiborne Group, the Lisbon Formation, acts as a confining layer and separates the Claiborne aquifer from the overlying Floridan aquifer system (McFadden and Perriello, 1983; Long, 1989; Huddlestun and Summerour, 1996). The lower, water-bearing parts of the group had been 3-8 correlated with the Tallahatta Formation (e.g., McFadden and Perriello, 1983; Long, 1989: Clarke et al., 1996) or more recently, have been divided into two formations, the upper one termed the Still Branch Sand and the lower one correlated to the Congaree Formation (Huddlestun and Summerour, 1996). East of the Ocmulgee River, permeable Congaree-equivalent sands are included in the Gordon aquifer (Brooks et al., 1985). Three stations, all in or near the recharge area, were available to monitor the Claiborne aquifer. Wells CL2 and CL4A are municipal public supply wells, and well CL8 supplies water for drinking and other purposes for a State forestry nursery. Well CL2 is 315 feet deep, CL4A is 230 feet deep, and CL8 is not known precisely, but is about 90 feet deep. 3.4.2 Field Parameters The pH of sample water from all the wells were mildly acidic or basic; CL2 at 7.13, CL4A at 6.56 and CL8 at 6.07. Conductivities registered at 70 uS/cm (CL8), 146 uS/cm (CL4A), and 202 uS/cm (CL2); and temperatures registered at 19.90 degrees C (CL2), 20.17 degrees C (CL4A) and 19.63 degrees C (CL8). Dissolved oxygen contents measured at 3.43 mg/L (CL2) and 0.34 mg/L (CL8). Since well CL4A exposes water to air, there was no measurement for dissolved oxygen for the water at this well. 3.4.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds Well CL2 was the only station to give a sample with detectable nitrate/nitrite (0.59 mg/L as nitrogen). A sample from well CL4A contained detectable sulfate at 12 mg/L. Samples from three wells contained detectable phosphorus (CL2 at 0.02, CL4A at 0.36 mg/L and CL8 at 0.56 mg/L). None of the samples contained voes. detectable chloride, fluoride or 3.4.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP) Calcium and sodium were detected in samples from all three wells. The maximum and minimum calcium concentrations were 40,000 ug/L (CL2) and 12,000 ug/L (CLB). The maximum and minimum sodium concentrations were 1,800 ug/L (CL8) and 1,400 ug/L {CL2). Detectable magnesium occurred only in the samples from well CL8 (1,200 ug/L) and CL4A (2,900 ug/L). Wells CL4A and CL8 gave samples with detectable iron at 2,000 ug/L and 510 ug/L respectively and manganese at 55 ug/L and 50 ug/L respectively. The CL4A and CL8 samples both exceeded the iron Secondary MCL of 300 ug/L and the CL4A sample exceeded the manganese Secondary MCL of 50 ug/L respectively. 3.4.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) ICPMS analyses found barium in all three samples. The maximum and minimum barium concentrations were 35 ug/L (CL8) and 10 ug/L (CL2). Zinc was detected in a sample from well CL8 (10 ug/L). Analysis found no other trace metals. 3-9 N A ,. Sampling Stations [ : ] General Recharge Area {from Davis et al.1 1989) Figure 3-4. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Claiborne Aquifer. 3-10 3.5 JACKSONIAN AQUIFER 3. 5. 1 Aquifer Description The Jacksonian aquifer system (Vincent, 1982) of central and east-central Georgia is developed prlmarily in sands of the Eocene Barnwell Group, though isolated limestone bodies are locally important. Barnwell .Group outcrops extend from Macon and Crawford Counties (Hetrick, 1990) eastward to Burke and Richmond Counties (Hetrick, 1992). Figure 3-5 shows the_ extent and most significant Jacksonian recharge areas. Aquifer sands form a northern elastic facies of the Barnwell Group; the sands grade southward into less permeable silts and clays of a transition facies (Vincent, 1982). The water-bearing sands are relatively thin, ranging from 10 to 50 feet in thickness. Limestones equivalent to the Barnwell Group fonn a southern carbonate facies and are included in the Floridan aquifer system. The Savannah River and the Flint River are the eastern and western discharge boundaries for the updip parts of the Jacksonian aquifer system. The Jacksonian aquifer system is equivalent to the Upper Three Runs aquifer, as discussed by Summerour et al. (1994), page 2, and Williams (2007), "General Hydrogeology" table. Eleven wells were available to monitor the Jacksonian aquifer system. Wells J1 B, J8A, Jg and J10 are domestic wells, while all the other wells are public supply wells. All are drilled wells from 90 feet (J1 B) to 660 feet (WAS1 ), where the depth is known, and each Is scheduled for annual sampling. 3.5.2 Field Parameters The pHs for all the wells were near neutral. The pHs range from 7.21 (J6) to 8.29 (J9). Conductivities ranged from 174 uS/cm (J9) to 346 uS/cm (J5). Temperatures ranged from 18.67 degrees C for well J4 to 20.37 degrees C for well J9, with water from the deeper wells usually registering higher temperatures. Dissolved oxygen concentrations ranged from 0.59 mg/L for well J6 to 6.46 mg/L for well J9 and are usually lowest in the deeper wells. 3.5.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds Sample waters from wells J5 and J6 contained detectable sulfate of 12 mg/L and 15 mg/L respectively. Nitrate/nitrite was detected in eight of the eleven samples ranging from undetected to 2.4 mg/L as nitrogen (J1 B), and all measurements were below the Primary MCL of 1O mg/L as nitrogen. Phosphorus was detected in water from nine of the eleven wells and ranged from undetected to 0.17 mg/L {J10). No sample waters contained detectable chloride. Fluoride was detected in samples from wells J4 (0.37 mg/L) and J5 (0.21 mg/L). The sample water from well J4 had detectable trihalomethanes (disinfectant by-products possibly from leaky check valve) in the following concentrations: bromodichloromethane 0.6 mg/L, chlorodibromomethane 1.2 mg/L and bromoform 0.99 mg/L. 3-11 \/1,,//h,)~7 , ,; 1-2_, LLt _l [ / _---.,.,.,..; ,.._;.rL--r \. ~>,0,i?_(r \\ ~ . .--\~...,.-,,, N A a 25 \ /~~l f. F~ S- - . ~l ,....,...._.I.._-,--._,_1_ ' (- ~-- - ~ ' 1 i ~'\. t lr l 7 / t~ ~ -... LJ Sampling Stations c:::J General Recharge Area (from Davis et al., 1989) Figure 3-5. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Jacksonian Aquifer. 3-12 3.5.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP) All eleven wells gave waters with detectable calclum from 33,000 ug/L (J9) to 67,000 ug/L (J5). Magnesium was detected in seven of the eleven wells and ranged from undetected to 2,500 ug/L (J5). Detectable sodium occurred in each well sample and ranged from 1,600 ug/L (J9) to 4,200 ug/L (J1 B). Aluminum was detected in two samples at a concentration of 270 ug/L (WAS1) and 460 ug/L (J1B). Iron was detected in seven of the eleven wells .and ranged from undetected to 190 ug/L (J6). Wells J5, J8A, JEF1 and WAS1 gave a sample containing 77 ug/L, 15 ug/L, 54 ug/L and 14 ug/L manganese respectively. The sample from well J5 and JEF1 exceeded the manganese Secondary MCL of 50 ug/L. According to Kellam and Gorday (1990}, the high calcium/magnesium ratios for these wells signifies that they derive most of their recharge from local surface water. 3.5.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) Ten of the eleven wells yielded waters containing detectable barium, with a range from undetected (JEF1) to 76 ug/L (WAS1 ). Copper was detected in well J10 at 17 ug/L and zinc was detected in three of the eleven samples, with the maximum level at 15 ug/L (WAS2). The copper and lead levels fell below their respective action levels of 1,300 ug/L and 15 ug/L. Analysls found no other trace metals. 3.8 FLORIDAN AQUIFER SYSTEM 3.6.1 Aquifer System Characteristics The Floridan aquifer system is developed predominantly in Eocene and Oligocene limestones and dolostones that underlie most of the Coastal Plain Province (Figure 3-6). The aquifer is a major source of groundwater for much of Its outcrop area and throughout its downdip extent to the south and east. The upper water-bearing units of the Floridan are the Eocene Ocala Group and the Oligocene Suwanee Limestone (Crews and Huddlestun, 1984). These limestones and dolostones crop out in the Dougherty Plain (a karstic area in southwestern Georgia) and in adjacent areas along strike to the northeast. In parts of Camden and Wayne Counties, the Oligocene unit is absent and the upper portions of the Floridan are restricted to units of Eocene age (Clarke et al., 1990). The lower parts of the Floridan consist mainly of dolomitic limestone of mlddle and early Eocene age and pelletal, vuggy, dolomitic limestone of Paleocene age, but extend into the late Cretaceous in Glynn County. The lower portions of the Floridan are hydrologlcally connected with the upper parts but are deeply buried and not widely used except for some municipal and industrial wells in the Savannah area. From its updip limit, defined by clays of the Barnwell Group, the aquifer system thickens to well over 700 feet in coastal Georgia. 3-13 A dense limestone facies occupying the Gulf Trough locally limits groundwater quality and availability (Kellam and Gordey, 1990; Applied Coastal Research Laboratory, 2001 ). The Gutf Trough may be a filled marine-current channel extending across Georgia from southwestern Decatur County through northern Effingham County. The trough, active beginning in the early Eocene. had ceased operating and filled with sediment in the Miocene. A groundwater divide separates a smaller southwestward flow regime in the Floridan aquifer system in the Dougherty Plain in southwestern Georgia from the larger southeastward flow regime characteristic for the aquifer system under the remaining part of Georgia's Coastal Plain. Rainfall infiltration in outcrop areas and downward leakage from extensive surficial residuum recharge the Dougherty Plain flow system (Hayes et al., 1983). The main body of the Floridan aquifer system, lying to the east, is recharged by leakage from the Jacksonian aquifer and by rainfall infiltration in outcrop areas and in areas where overlying strata are thin. Significant recharge also occurs in the area of Brooks, Echols, Lowndes, Cook and Lanier counties where the Withlacoochee River and numerous sinkholes breach the upper confining units (Krause, 1979). Monitoring water quality in the Floridan aquifer system was done by using 37 wells and one spring, with 28 scheduled for sampling on a yearly basis and 10 on a quarterly basis. The total number of samples collected was 59. All 37 wells are drilled wells. Thirty-three wells are local-government-owned public supply wells. One well supplies industrial process water, one well is a former USGS test well, one a private residence well and the remaining well supplies water for a coastal marina. Depths range from 174 feet (PA25 municipal well) to 1,211 feet (PA9C test well). The one remaining site is Radium Spring in Albany. 3.6.2 Field Parameters Measurements of pH are available for all samples from all 38 locations and ranged from 7.01 (PA59) to 8.09 (PA2). The median pH is 7.65 and the mean is 7.60. Conductivities are also avallable for all the samples from all sites and ranged from 157 uS/cm (PA41A) to 2,885 uS/cm (PA9C) with a median of 309 uS/cm and a mean of 362 uS/cm. Temperatures are available for all sampling events and ranged from 16.80 degrees C for well PA17 to 28.04 degrees C for well GLY4 with a median of 22.86 degrees C and a mean of 22.78 degrees C. The high temperatures reflect the geothennal effect of the deeper wells. Forty-eight dissolved oxygen measurements are available from 32 wells. The available measurements range from 0.13 mg/L (PA34B) to 6.59 mg/L (GLY4) with a median of 0.49 mg/L and a mean of 1.49 mg/L. No measurements were taken at spring PA59 or at wells PA2, PA5, PA9C, PA14A, and PA28 because the raw water outlets will not permit the attachment of the usual sampling apparatus and exposes sample water to air. 3-14 3.6.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds Nine Floridan wells yielded 12 samples containing detectable chloride. Chloride concentrations ranged from undetected to 680 mg/L (PA9C), with the 680 mg/L sample exceeding the Secondary MCL of 250 mg/L. The measurement for well PA9C is more than 16 times the next highest concentration of 41 mg/L for well PA4. Well PA9C derives water from the lower part of the Floridan aquifer. Twentyfour samples from 16 wells contained detectable sulfate. Sulfate levels ranged from undetected to 250 mg/L (PA9C}, with the 250 mg/L sample equaling the Secondary MCL of 250 mg/L for sulfate. Forty samples from 25 wells contained detectable fluoride at levels ranging from undetected to 1.6 mg/L (PA36). Nineteen samples from 10 wells and one spring contained detectable nitrate/nitrite. Concentrations ranged from undetected to 2.3 mg/L as nitrogen (PA59). There is a general tendency for shallower wells to give samples with higher levels of nitrate/nitrite. Nitrate/nitrite levels in the samples from each quarterly sampled well tend, as a rule, to be similar. Phosphorus was detected in 38 samples from 30 wells and one spring. Phosphorus levels ranged up to 0.57 mg/L {PA32) as total phosphorus. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), consisting entirely of trihalomethane compounds, were detected in four samples from four wells. These compounds typically arise as byproducts from disinfection and their presence can indicate the reflux of treated water back down a well or result from sterilizing well plumbing following maintenance. The occasional nature of trihalomethane detections suggests a maintenance related origin. In the past Radium Spring has yielded samples with the voe trichloroethylene, which is found in dry cleaning degreasers. Springs are subject to surface contaminations more so than deeper wells. 3.6.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP) ICP analyses found detectable levels of potassium, manganese, iron, calcium, magnesium, aluminum, and sodium. Detectable potassium occurred in two samples from wells PA4 and PA9C). Failure to find detectable potassium in other samples results from the insensitivity of the testing procedure, as indicated by the high reporting limit (5,000 ug/L) for the metal. Detectable manganese occurred in 16 samples from twelve wells. The maximum concentration of 96 ug/L occurred in one sample from well PA34B. All samples from quarteriy-sampled well PA34A and samples from annually sampled wells PA16, PA18, PA348, PA34C and PA34D exceeded the Secondary MCL of 50 ug/L. The manganese levels in the samples from each of the quarterly sampled wells vary within a restricted range. Wells giving samples with manganese detections seem clustered in two areas: one in the Cook-Irwin-Lanier County area and the other in the Candler-Emanuel-JenkinsTelfair-Toombs County area. Iron was detected in 22 samples from 18 wells and one spring. Of these, two samples exceeded the Secondary MCL of 300 ug/L; annual wells PA9C (1,300 ug/L) and GLY2 (470 ug/L). The iron contents of samples from four quarterly wells (PA29, PA34AD and PA36) seemed to vary within restricted ranges. Detectable magnesium was found in all samples from all wells and spring except for those from quarterly well PA25 and annual well PA60. Magnesium concentrations ranged up to 66,000 ug/L (well PA9C), with a mean of 3-15 'N A 25 SD Miles Sampling Stations CJ General Recharge Area (from Davis et al., 1989) Figure 3-6. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Floridan Aquifer System. Note: Point PA34A represents wells PA34A, PA34B, PA34C, and PA34D 3-16 12,307 ug/L and a median of 11,000 ug/L. Wells PA25 and PA60 are Floridan recharge area wells. Kellam and Gorday (1990) have noted that Ca/Mg ratios are higher in groundwaters from Floridan recharge areas, as is the case with these wells. Magnesium levels in samples from each quarterly well seem to vary within relatively narrow ranges. Calcium was detected in all samples from the 37 Floridan wells and spring. Concentrations ranged from 21,000 ug/L (PA41A) to 96,000 ug/L (PA9C), with a mean of 39,695 ug/L and a median of 35,000 ug/L. For samples from quarterly wells, calcium concentrations seem to fall within a narrow range for each well. Aluminum was detected above the Secondary MCL of 50-200 ug/L in seven samples from six wells; PA29 (960 ug/L and 470 ug/L), THO2 (810 ug/L), PA57 (530 ug/L), PA18 (480 ug/L), GLY3 (220 ug/L) and PA348 (120 ug/L). Sodium was also found in all sample waters from all 37 wells and spring and ranged in concentration from 1,800 ug/L {PA27 and PA41A) to 350,000 ug/L (PA9C), with a mean of 16,405 ug/L and a median of 7,500 ug/L. Sodium concentrations generally increase with depth. 3.6. 5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) ICPMS analysis found the following detectable metals in the Floridan samples: nickel, copper, zinc, lead, arsenic, molybdenum, barium and thallium. Well PA23A gave two samples with detectable arsenic (5.3 ug/L and 5.4 ug/L). Quarterly well PA25 gave one sample out of four showing detectable thallium (1.2 ug/L) below the Primary MCL (2 ug/L). Quarterly well PA28 gave one sample out of four showing detectable nickel (15 ug/L) below the Primary MCL (100 ug/L). Three samples from three wells contained detectable copper, one from annual well PA17 and one each from quarterly wells PA14A and PA36.. Eight samples from five wells contained detectable zinc. Annual well PA17 contained detectable lead (5.8 ug/L). Copper and lead detections were below the action levels of 1,300 ug/L for copper and 15 ug/L for lead. The zinc concentration fell below the Secondary MCL of 5,000 ug/L. Ten samples drawn from quarterly wells PA23A, PA28 and PA56 contained detectable molybdenum. Well PA28 produced the sample with the highest concentration of 20 ug/L. All three wells are in the Gulf Trough area. Barium was detected in all samples from all wells and spring and ranged in concentration from 3.2 ug/L (PA60) to 220 ug/L (PA34B), all below the Primary MCL of 2,000 ug/L. The mean concentration of barium was 83.1 ug/L and the median was 67.0 ug/L. Barium seems to be more abundant in samples from wells of 400 foot to 700-foot depth range. 3-17 3.7 MIOCENE/SURFICIAL AQUIFER SYSTEM 3. 7. 1 Aquifer System Characteristics The Miocene/Surficial aquifer system is developed in sands of the Miocene Hawthorne Group and of the Pliocene Miccosukee and Cypresshead Formations of the Georgia Coastal Plain (Figure 3-7). The Hawthorne Group covers most of the Coastal Plaln and consists predominantly of sand and clay (Huddlestun, 1988), although carbonate rocks and phosphorites may locally be significant (Huddlestun, 1988; Clarke et al., 1990). Clarke et al., 1990, note that three sequences consisting of a basal dense phosphatic limestone layer, a middle clay layer, and an upper sand layer typify the Miocene section in the coastal area. The sand layers in the two lowermost of the sequences host the lower and upper Brunswick aquifers, which are included in the Mlocene/Surficial aquifer system of this report. The Cypresshead Formation overlies the Hawthorne Group in the Coastal area (from the Atlantic coast to about 45 miles inland) and consists, in updip areas, predominantly of fine to coarse-grained quartz sand and, in downdip areas, interbedded fine sand and clay (Huddlestun, 1988). In the Coastal Plain of far south central and southwestern Georgia, the Mlccosukee Formation overlies the Hawthorne Group (Huddlestun, 1988). The Miccosukee Formation consists predominantly of sand but contains some clay. The characteristic lithology consists of thin-bedded to laminated fine to medium sand with scattered layers or laminae of clay. Also Included in the aquifer system are Pleistocene arkosic sands and gravels lnterbedded with clays and Holocene sands and gravels interbedded with muds. The upper part of the aquifer system is unconfined, whereas the deeper parts of the system may be locally confined and under artesian conditions. Six annually sampled wells were used to monitor the Miocene/Surficial aquifer system. Wells Ml1, Ml2A and Ml10B are private domestic wells, well WAY1 is a public supply well for a mobile home park and well Ml10B is no longer being used as a drinking water source. Well Ml16 is used for general purposes at a fire station. Well Ml17 originated as a geologic bore hole - a hole drilled for investigating bedrock -- that became a flowing well. It is currently used both as a domestic water source and as an augmentation well for maintaining a pond. Well Ml2A is a bored well. The remainder are drilled wells. Depths, actual or approximate, have been determined for all six wells. 3. 7. 2 Field Parameters The pHs of the sample waters from the six wells used to monitor the Miocene/Surficial aquifer system ranged from 4.28 (Ml2A) to 7.87 (Ml16). Two of the six wells sampled (Ml2A and Ml10B) produced acidic water. The remaining four 3-18 wells gave basic water. The acidic water-yielding wells included two of the shallowest, while the basic water-producing wells included the two deepest. Conductivities ranged from 98 uS/cin (Ml10B) to 326 uS/cm (Ml16). Water temperatures ranged from 19.34 degrees C (Ml17) to 22.97 degrees C (Ml2A). Dissolved oxygen data are available for five of the six wells and range from 0.44 mg/L (WAY1) to 5.55 mg/L (Ml2A). Valid dissolved oxygen measurements cannot be made on well Ml17 since the water is exposed to air before sampling. 3. 7.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds Chloride registered at 25 mg/L in a sample from the bored well Ml2A. The sample from the deepest Miocene well (Ml 16) provided the only sulfate detection at 33 mg/L. Nitrate/nitrite was detected in the sample water from well Ml1OB at 0.06 mg/L and bored well Ml2A at 7.9 mg/L as nitrogen, which lies in the range of likely human influence (~ 3.1 mg/L as nitrogen) (Madison and Brunett, 1984). Detectable phosphorus was found in samples from four of the six wells. The concentrations ranged from not detected (Ml2A and Ml17) to 0.27 mg/L (Ml108). One of the samples contained detectable voes in the form of chloroform at 1.4 ug/L (Ml2A). 3. 7.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry {ICP) Samples from all six wells contained calcium, magnesium, and sodium. Calcium levels ranged from 4,300 ug/L (well Ml2A) to 46,000 ug/L (well Ml17). Magnesium levels ranged from 2,200 ug/L (well Ml17) to 16,000 ug/L (well Ml16). Sodium levels ranged from 6,000 ug/L (well Ml10B) to 18,000 ug/L (well Ml16). Potassium was detected in well Ml2A at a concentration of 6,100 ug/L. Iron was detected in the sample from well WAY1 at 73 ug/L and well Ml10B at 1,300 ug/L. This last value far exceeds the Secondary MCL for iron of 300 ug/L. Manganese was found in samples from five wells: Ml1 (10 ug/L), Ml17 (12 ug/L), Ml2A (13 ug/L), Ml10B (71 ug/L), and WAY1 (370 ug/L). The 71 ug/L and 370 ug/L levels exceed the Secondary MCL for manganese of 50 ug/L. The high iron and manganese levels in water from drilled well Ml10B are the reason the residents ceased using the water for household purposes, i.e., cooking, drinking, and laundering. Aluminum was detected in well Ml2A at a concentration of 120 ug/L, above the Secondary MCL range of 50-200 ug/L. 3. 7.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) ICPMS analyses found detectable copper, zinc, selenium and barium in the Miocene aquifer samples. All six samples contained detectable barium, which ranged in concentration from 18 ug/L (Ml1) to 140 ug/L (Ml10B). The sample from drilled well Ml10B contained selenium at a level Of 16 ug/L. Selenium at detectable levels is rare in Georgia's groundwater. Zinc was detected in five of the six water samples, ranging from undetected in well Ml17 to 100 ug/L from well Ml10B. The sample from we11M12A contained copper at a level of 8.3 ug/L. The copper, lead, and zinc in the water samples were likely derived from plumbing. None of the metals exceeded applicable action levels (1,300 ug/L for copper and 15 ug/L for lead} or MCLs (5,000 ug/L Secondary for zinc). 3-19 Sampling Stations D General Recharge Area (from O'Connell and Davis, 1991) Figure 3-7. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Miocene/Surficial Aquifer System. 3-20 3.8 PIEDMONT/BLUE RIDGE AQUIFER SYSTEM 3.8. 1 Aquifer System Characteristics The Piedmont/Blue Ridge aquifer system in Georgia is part of the Piedmont and mountain aquifer system that extends from New Jersey into Alabama (Daniel and Hamed, 1997). The system is unconfined or semiconfined and is composed of two major hydrogeologic units: a) regolith and b) fractured igneous and metamorphic bedrock (Heath, 1980; Daniel and Harned, 1997). Figure 3-8 shows the extent of the system in Georgia. The regolith hydrologic unit is comprised of a mantle of soil, alluvium in and near stream bottoms and underlying saprolite. Saprolite is bedrock that has undergone extensive chemical weathering in place. Downward percolating, typically acidic, groundwater leaches alkali, alkaline earth and certain other divalent metals from micas, feldspars, and other minerals composing the original rock, leaving behind a clay-rich residual material. Textures and structures of the original rock are usually well-preserved, with the saprolite appearing as a highly weathered version of the original rock. The regolith unit is characterized by high mostly primary porosity (35% to 55%) (Daniel and Harned, 1998) and serves as the reservoir that feeds water into the underlying fractured bedrock. Though it can store a great deal of water, saprolite, owing to its clay content, is relatively impermeable. Saprolite grades downward through a transition zone consisting of saprolite and partially weathered bedrock with some fresh bedrock into fresh bedrock. The fractured bedrock hydrologic unit is developed in igneous and metamorphic rocks. In contrast to the regolith, the porosity in such rocks is almost totally secondary, consisting of fractures and solution-enlarged voids. In the North Carolina Piedmont, Daniel and Harned (1997) found 1% to 3% porosity typical for bedrock. Fractures consist of faults, breaks in the rock with differential displacement between the broken sections, and joints, breaks in the rock with little or no differential displacement (Heath 1980). Fractures tend to be wider and more numerous closer to the top of the bedrock. Daniel and Hamed (1997) noted that at a depth of about 600 feet, pressure from the overlying rock column becomes too great and holds fractures shut. Fracturing in schistose rocks consists mainly of a network of fine, hair-line cracks which yield water slowly. Fractures in more massive rocks (e.g. granitic rocks, diabases, gneisses, marbles, quartzites) are mostly open and are subject to conduit flow. Thus, wells intersecting massive-rock fractures are able to yield far larger amounts of water than wells in schistose rocks or even wells in regolith. Fractures can be concentrated along fault zones, shear zones, late-generation fold axes, foliation planes, lithologic contacts, compositional layers, or intrusion boundaries. 3-21 25 50 MIies , '- ..J fl<\ /-f (,,.\_ ' '- ~? /? ,~ / "- -~ Sampling Stations c:J General Recharge Area (from O'Connell and Davis, 1991) Figure 3-8. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Aquifer System. 3-22 Seventy-three samples from 41 wells and six springs were used to monitor water quality in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge aquifer system. Forty of these wells are drilled. Thirty-two of the 41 wells are public supply wells, and the remaining nine are domestic. One of the 41 wells is bored (P43) and is in domestic use. Of the six springs, four (P12A, P44, HAS2 and TOW1) are mineral springs at State Parks, one (BR7) is free flowing beside a County Road and the last (BR5) is a public supply source. The State Park mineral spring P12A and the following wells are scheduled for sampling on a quarterly basis: P21, P23, P25, P32, P34, P35, P37 and BR1 B. Well P25 was added to the network on a quarterly basis, and per agreement with the State Park manager an annual filtered sample is to be collected in addition to the quarterly unfiltered ones. The remaining stations are sampled on a yearly basis. Where their depths are known, wells deriving water from the bedrock aquifer range in depth from 80 feet (P45) to 705 feet (P24). Domestic bored well P43 (unknown) is the only well drawing from the regolith aquifer. 3. 8. 2 Field Parameters Seventy-one pH measurements from 46 stations are available for the Piedmont/Blue Ridge aquifer system. The pHs ranged from 4.52 (HAS2) to 8.75 (BR9). Twenty-five total samples were basic; all four samples from quarterly spring P12A and quarterly well P32, three samples from quarterly well P35 and one sample from wells BR1B, BR9, P20, P21, P24, P44, P46, P47, COU1, COU4, FAY1 18.8, MAD1, UPS1, and WAS3. The remaining samples were acidic. The mean pH was 6.66 and the median 6.67. Conductivity measurements are available for all 73 samples. Conductivities range from 13 uS/cm (HAS2) to 971 uS/cm (well P32). The mean conductivity was 220 uS/cm and the median was 184 uS/cm. Samples with the higher pHs generally tended to have higher conductivities and vice versa. Temperatures were available for all sampled waters and range from 9.72 degrees C (spring TOW1) to 28 .14 degrees C (spring P44). The mean temperature was 17.51 degrees C and the median was 17.56 degrees_ C. Geothermally elevated temperatures are not readily apparent for the Piedmont/Blue Ridge. Latitude, ground elevation, and season appear to have more influence on the sampling temperature. Dissolved oxygen measurements are available for 60 of the 73 samples from 38 of 47 stations. The samples from quarterly spring P12A and annual springs P44, HAS2, BR5, BR7 and TOW1; and wells P39, FRA1, and UN11 received no dissolved oxygen measurements since exposure of the sample water to air can render the measurement inaccurate. Dissolved oxygen levels ranged from 0.46 mg/L for well P32 to 8 .55 mg/L for well P21. The 8.55 mg/L high reading for well P21 lies just below the oxygen saturation level (9.60 mg/L) for the temperature at sampling (17.45 degrees C). This reading suggests free-falling (cascading) water in the well or entrainment of air at the pump intake due to a low pumping water level and does not reflect the actual oxygen level in the groundwater. 3-23 3. 8.3 Major Anions oxygen, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds All samples received testing for chloride, sulfate, fluoride, nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, and voes. Five stations yielded eight samples with detectable chloride: quarter1y spring P12A with one sample and quarterly well P37 with all four samples; and annual wells P30, WAS3 and WKE1 with one sample each. Well P37 gave the sample with the highest level at 30 mg/L. Detectable fluoride occurred in 23 samples from 15 stations. Most prominent of these samples were quarterly wells P23 with four samples at levels between 0.95 mg/L and 1.20 mg/L and P32 with three samples at levels between 2.0 mg/L and 2.2 mg/L (equal to or above the Secondary MCL of 2.0 mg/L) and quarterly spring P12A with four samples at levels ranging from 4.5 mg/L to 4.7 mg/L. This last range of levels exceeds the Primary MCL of 4 mg/L for fluoride; the spring water from this station has consistently done so in the past. Historical fluoride levels for spring P12A have ranged from slightly above 4 mg/L to slightly above 5 mg/L. Sulfate was detected in 33 samples from eight quarter1y and seven annual stations, with the highest concentration (660 mg/L) occurring in a sample from quarterly well P32. Quarterly spring P12A and quarterly wells P21, P25, P32, P37 and BR1 B each have sulfate values that vary within narrow ranges. Nitrate/nitrite was detected in 50 of 73 samples from 33 stations with high concentrations of 4.50 mg/L, 3.40 mg/L, 2.70 mg/L and 2.50 mg/L as nitrogen for wells HAL1, WKE1, P30 and P37 respectively. These levels are well below the Primary MCL of 10 mg/L as nitrogen, but two are within the range of likely human influence e, 3.1 mg/Las nitrogen) (Madison and Brunett, 1984). Detectable phosphorus occurred in 45 samples from 31 stations, with the highest concentration of 0.19 mg/L being found in a sample from quarterly well P34. Phosphorus concentrations vary within narrow ranges within the samples from quarterly spring P12A and from quarterly wells P21, P23, P25, and P34. Detectable voes occurred in samples from wells COU4 (methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) 1.2 ug/L), and UPS1 (chloroform 1.2 ug/L). Chloroform, bromodichloromethane and dichloromethane are disinfectant by-products; MTBE and toluene are fuel additives. 3.8.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP) ICP analysis found detectable aluminum, calcium, iron, potassium, magnesium, manganese and sodium. No beryllium, cobalt, titanium or vanadium was detected. Calcium was found in all samples except springs HAS2 and TOW1. The probable explanation for no detectable calcium in these springs are probably because the springs flow through a homogeneous quartzite rock. The highest calcium levels ranging from 150,000 ug/L to 280,000 ug/L occurred in the quarterly samples from well P32. The mean calcium concentration was 29,025 ug/L and the median concentration was 17,000 ug/L. As a rule, calcium levels of samples from each quarterly station tend to cluster closely. Magnesium was detected in 66 samples from 40 stations. Magnesium contents of sample waters ranged from not detected up to 35,000 ug/L (well P30). As with calcium, magnesium levels in samples from each quarterly well generally tend to cluster. Samples from annual bedrock wells P38, P43, FRA1 and BRB; and annual springs HAS2, BR5 and TOW1 contained no detectable magnesium. Sodium was present in 71 of 73 3-24 samples and ranged from not detected in the samples from springs HAS2 and TOW1 to 39,000 ug/L from spring P12A. Sodium levels for each quarterly well have a general tendency to cluster. The mean sodium concentration was 11,804 ug/L and the median was 8,600 ug/L. Detectable potassium was found in all four samples from one station (well P35) in a range of 6,600 ug/L to 6,700 ug/L. The low sensitivity of the current laboratory testing procedure for potassium probably accounts for the apparent scarcity of this metal. Aluminum was detected in three samples from wells P25, P47 and WHl1. Well P25 registered the highest level at 520 ug/L. Aluminum levels exceeded the Secondary MCL range of 50-200 ug/L in all three samples. Iron was detected in 32 samples from 22 wells and two springs, with a range from not detected up to 2,300 ug/L (well COU3). This concentration exceeds the Secondary MCL for iron of 300 ug/L. Seven other wells produced seven samples with an iron level greater than the Secondary MCL; P35 (310 ug/L), P47 (320 ug/L), COU1 (960 ug/L), COU4 (320 ug/L), HAL1 (670 ug/L), MAD1 (610 ug/L) and WHl1 (510 ug/L). Manganese was detected in 46 samples from 23 wells and three springs, with a maximum concentration of 310 ug/L (well COU3). Seventeen samples from wells P20, P25, P35, P37, COU1, COU3, COU4, HAS1, MAD1 and WAS3 equaled or exceeded the Secondary MCL of 50 ug/L. 3.8.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) ICPMS analysis of water samples detected the following metals: chromium, copper, zinc, selenium, barium, thallium, lead and uranium. None of the following metals were found in detectable amounts: nickel, arsenic, molybdenum, silver, cadmium, tin and antimony. Chromium was detected in one sample from quarterly well P32 at 16 ug/L. Copper occurred in six samples from six wells, with a maximum level of 18 ug/L in the sample from well P22. All copper detections occurred in mostly acidic waters, with the highest pH for a sample containing detectable copper registering at 6.61 (P39). No detectable copper occurred in any neutral or basic waters. Zinc was detected in 21 samples from 16 wells, with the maximum level at 240 ug/L from well FRA1. All zinc detections except for wells P20 (pH 7.71), P24 (pH 7.22), P35 (pH 7.18), P46 (pH 7.99), COU4 (pH 7.11) and MAD1 (pH 7.40) occurred in acidic waters. Lead was detected in 1O samples from seven wells. All lead detections occurred in acidic water. All lead detections occurred with zinc or copper detections except in wells P21 and P38. These three metals commonly leach into sample water from plumbing and are not necessarily present naturally. Barium was a nearly ubiquitous trace metal, being detected in 67 samples from 40 wells and five springs. Four samples from quarterly spring P12A. one sample from quarterly well P32 and one sample from annual well P46 contained no detectable barium. The maximum sample concentration was 220 ug/L from well P20. No samples exceeded the Primary MCL of 2,000 ug/L. Uranium was detected in 11 samples from six wells. Uranium detections were down from previous years due to the reporting limit of the lab going from the previous 1.0 ug/L to 10 ug/L. Uranium concentrations ranged from not detected up to 30.2 (P21), 33.9 (P21) and 34.6 ug/L (P34). The three highest detections exceeded the Primary MCL of 30 ug/L for uranium. Granitic bedrock is present where these wells 3-25 are drilled and is the most common bedrock type to host uraniferous water. Selenium was detected in two samples from annual wells P39 (6.0 ug/L) and UPS1 (11.0 ug/L). Thallium was detected in two samples from quarterly wells P21 (2.0 ug/L) and P37 (1.2 ug/L) 3.9 VALLEY AND RIDGE/APPALACHIAN PLATEAU AQUIFER SYSTEM 3.9.1 Aquifer System Characteristics Since Georgia's portion of the Appalachian Plateau Province extends over such a small area of the State, i.e., its northwestern comer, this report includes that province with the Valley and Ridge Province for purposes of discussion. Bedrock in the combined province is sedimentary, comprising limestones, dolostones, shales, siltstones, mudstones, conglomerates and sandstones (Figure 3-9). Primary porosity in the province's bedrock is low, leaving fractures and solution-enlarged voids as the main water-bearing structures. The bedrock In the province is extensively faulted and folded, conditions that have served to proliferate fracturing and to segment water-bearing strata into numerous local flow systems, in contrast to the expansive regional flow regimes characteristic of the Coastal Plain sediments. Fractures in limestones and dolostones can become much enlarged by dissolution, greatly increasing their ability to store water. Zones of intense fracturing commonly occur in carbonate bedrock along such structures as fold axes and fault planes and are especially prone to weathering. Such zones of intense fracturing give rise to broad valleys with gently sloping sides and bottoms covered with thick regolith. The carbonate bedrock beneath such valleys presents a voluminous source of typically hard groundwater. As in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province, the regolithic mantle of soil and residuum derived from weathered bedrock blankets much of the Valley and Ridge/ Appalachian Plateau Province. The water table lying within the regolithic mantle yields soft water ("freestone" water) sufficient for domestic and light agricultural use (Cressler et al., 1976; 1979). The regolithic mantle also acts as a reservoir, furnishing water to the underlying bedrock, which supplies most of the useful groundwater in the province. Monitoring water quality in the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau aquifers made use of five springs and three drilled wells (Figure 3-9). Springs VR2A, VR8, VR10 and VR12 are public supply springs. Spring VR3 is a fonner public supply spring now serving ornamental purposes in a public park. Well VR1 is a public supply well, well VR6A is an industrial process water source and well VR13 is a private domestic well. Spring VR8 is scheduled for quarterly sampling, while all the other stations are sampled on an annual basis. All stations tap carbonate bedrock aquifers. 3-26 3.9.2 Field Parameters Sample water pHs ranged from 7.03 for spring VR10 to 7.86 for spring VR12. Conductivities ranged from 212 uS/cm (spring VR12) to 371 uS/cm (well VR13). Dissolved oxygen ranged from 4.19 mg/L (spring VR10) to 5.37 mg/L (well VR1 ). Dissolved oxygen measurements were made on spring waters at or downstream of spring heads; however, due to atmospheric exposure at the spring heads, these measurements may not validly represent oxygen levels in the water prior to discharge. The temperature measurements ranged from 15.07 degrees C (spring VR3) to 17.70 degrees C (well VR6A). For spring waters, contact with the surface environment may have altered actual water temperatures present at the spring heads, since water temperatures were measured downstream from the spring heads. 3.9.3 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds Neither chloride nor fluoride were detected in any of the sample waters. Detectable sulfate was present In sample water from well VR6A at a level of 11 mg/L. Detectable nitrate/nitrite was present in all sample waters and ranged from 0.38 mg/L as nitrogen in spring VR12 to 1.70 mg/L as nitrogen in spring VR1 O. Phosphorus was detected in two wells: well VR6A {0.02 mg/L) and well VR13 {0.04 mg/L). The sample from well VR6A was the only one to contain detectable voes. The compounds were 1,1-dichloroethylene at 1.3 ug/L (Primary MCL = 7 ug/L) and tetrachloroethylene at 2.0 ug/L (Primary MCL = 5 ug/L). These compounds, particulariy the chlorinated ethylenes, are used primarily as solvents. The owner/user of well VR6A manufactures barium and strontium compounds and anthraquinone. 3.9.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (JCP) ICP analysis found calcium and magnesium in all samples, sodium in all samples but one, iron in four samples and aluminum in one sample. Aluminum was detected in the sample from well VR13 (2,900 ug/L). Iron was detected in the samples from well VR13 (73 ug/L) and three of the four samples from spring VR8 (24 ug/L, 26 ug/L and 30 ug/L), all below the Secondary MCL of 300 ug/L. Calcium levels ranged from 25,000 ug/L (spring VR12) to 67,000 ug/L {well VR13). Magnesium levels ranged from 11,000 ug/L (well VR13) to 18,000 ug/L (well VR1). Sodium levels ranged from undetected (spring VR12) to 11,000 ug/L {well VR6A). 3.9.5 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) ICPMS analysis found zinc, barium and lead. Detectable barium was present in 11 of 11 samples and ranged from 9.2 ug/L (well VR1) to 430 ug/L (well VR6A). All samples save the one from VR6A have barium levels below 100 ug/L. Well VR6A furnishes process water to a firm that manufactures barium and strontium compounds and is situated in an area that sees the mining and processing of barite. Well VR13 had a sample with a zinc (44 ug/L) and lead (1.3 ug/L) detection and spring VR10 had a sample with a zinc detection (15.0 ug/L). 3-27 N A 25 I 50 Mile Sampling Stations D General Recharge Area (from Davis et al., 1989) Figure 3-9. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Valley-and-Ridge/Appalachian Plateau Aquifer System. 3-28 CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS EPD personnel collected 189 water samples from 127 wells and 12 springs on the Groundwater Monitoring Network during the calendar year 2020. The samples were analyzed for voes, chloride, sulfate, fluoride, nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, 14 trace metals by ICPMS analysis, and 23 major metals by ICP analysis. All stations now receive analyses for fluoride because one of the stations was known to produce water with excessive levels of fluoride. These wells and springs monitor the water quality of eight major aquifers and aquifer systems as considered for this report in Georg_ia: Cretaceous/Providence aquifer system, Clayton aquifer, Claiborne aquifer, Jacksonian aquifer Floridan aquifer system, Miocene/Recent aquifer system, Piedmont/Blue Ridge aquifer system, Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau aquifer system. 4.1 PHYSICAL PARAMETERS AND pH 4.1.1 pH The Cretaceous/Providence aquifer system, developed in Coastal Plain sands, furnished waters with the overall lowest pHs. This aquifer system featured only five of 21 wells yielding waters with basic pHs. Not many stations were available to sample wells tapping the Clayton, Clalborne, or Jacksonian aquifers. However, the results are these: 1) Clayton acidic as expected for updip portions of the aquifer and basic for downdip deeper portions 2) Claiborne - the two acidic wells are fairly shallow and updip in sands; and the basic well is deeper and probably penetrates some limey sand or limestone and is almost neutral; 3) Jacksonian - all eleven wells were basic or nearly neutral basic and neutral waters should be expected from limey sands. The Floridan aquifer system, as might be expected for carbonate-rock aquifers, gave waters with mildly basic pHs. Waters from the Floridan are the most basic in pH of any in the study. 4-1 The Miocene aquifer system is developed in sands. However, these may include shelly detritus in some places (evident at surface excavations near well Ml17 and at coastal well Ml16). Dissolution of such detritus can raise the pHs of groundwaters In such areas, giving water from these wells a nearly neutral to mildly basic pH. In places where such shelly matter is not available, waters emerge with low pHs, as at well Ml2A. Sample-water pHs in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge are generally mildly acidic, with 25 out of 73 sample measurements exceeding or equaling a pH of 7.00. The Valley-and-Ridge/Appalachian Plateau sampling stations are all located in the Valley-and-Ridge sector. With carbonate rocks being the major aquifer media, samples from the sector would be expected to be mildly basic, which all eleven samples taken in the sector were found to be basic. In the past, some of these samples were found to be slightly acidic. The incidence of past acidic waters was probably due to a larger amount of typically acidic precipitation entering the springs' flow systems than the carbonate bedrock can neutralize. The very acidic pHs of the sample waters in the updip portions of the Jacksonian, Clayton, Claiborne, and, particularly, the Cretaceous/Providence can face metal plumbing with leaching and corrosion problems. Such waters may contain elevated or excessive, but not naturally occurring, levels of lead, copper, and zinc. 4. 1.2 Conductivity Conductivity in groundwaters from the sandy Cretaceous/Providence aquifer system seems to be highest for the deeper wells in the Providence sands near the Chattahoochee River. Overall, conductivities are relatively low, in the range of lower tens of microsiemens. Similar conductivities can be found in waters from the updip portions of the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers, where the media consist mostly of sand; then higher conductivities in the deeper downdip portions. For the Piedmont/Blue Ridge aquifer system, low conductivities could be associated with groundwaters hosted by quartzites or quartz veins. High conductivities may arise in waters in deep flow regimes where waters are long in contact with granitic and other reactive host rocks. Conductivities of groundwaters in the Floridan and other carbonate rock aquifers are generally higher than those in siliceous rocks. This condition results from the dissolution of carbonate minerals, in cases augmented by dissolution of intergranular sulfate, where dissolved sulfate will also be present in the water. 4-2 4.1.3 Temperature Groundwater temperatures measured under the current sampling procedure are only approximations of the actual groundwater temperature, as some heating can result from the action of pumping and heating or cooling can result from exposure to ambient surface conditions. Nevertheless, groundwaters from shallower wells in the northern part of the State are overall somewhat cooler than those from the southern part; and those from wells much deeper than about 400 to 500 feet show effects from geothermal warming. 4.2 ANIONS, NON-METALS AND voes 4.2. 1 Chloride and Fluoride Chloride at currently detectable levels is not too common in ambient groundwaters. Abundance seems to be largest in the deeper Floridan waters, which had detections at nine out of 38 stations. The Floridan occurrences seem restricted to the Gulf Trough and Coastal areas, with the Coastal area sample from well PA9C giving the study's only Secondary MCL exceedance for chloride. The Miocene/Surficial aquifer had one of six stations of less than 100 feet depth giving water with detectable chloride. Chloride is also relatively abundant in Piedmont/Blue Ridge waters, detected at five out of 47 stations. All water samples now receive testing for fluoride. Abundance seems to be largest in the Floridan waters with 25 detections at 38 stations. Miocene sample waters had three detections at six stations and Piedmont/Blue Ridge sample waters had 15 detections at 47 stations. The Piedmont/Blue Ridge station P12A, a mineral spring, had the only Primary MCL exceedance. The lowest incidences of detectable fluoride were in the Cretaceous/Providence aquifer system (2 of 21 stations), the Jacksonian aquifer (2 of 11 stations) and the Clayton aquifer (1 of 5 stations). 4.2.2 Sulfate Sulfate is more widespread than chloride. Sulfate is more abundant in deeper waters, with the shallowest occurrence from Piedmont/Blue Ridge mineral spring P12A (0 feet-deep), along with Cretaceous well MAR1 and Piedmont well P35, 150 feet-deep each. Sulfate seems more abundant in Floridan sample waters, detectable at 16 out of 38 stations. Sulfate is also abundant in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge, occurring in detectable amounts in waters from 15 of 47 stations. The Cretaceous aquifer yielded samples containing detectable sulfate in four out of 21 stations. The Clayton aquifer yielded samples containing detectable sulfate in three out of five stations. Jacksonian sample waters yielded two out of eleven stations with detectable sulfate. The sample from Piedmont well P32 yielded the study's highest overall sulfate content and a Secondary MCL exceedance. The other 4-3 Secondary MCL exceedance of sulfate was from Floridan well PA9C. The lowest incidences of detectable sulfate were in the Miocene/Surficial aquifer at one of six stations, the Claiborne aquifer with one of three stations and the Valley and Ridge aquifer with one of eight stations. 4.2.3 Nitrate/Nitrite One hundred six (106) samples from 78 of the 139 stations sampled for this project contained detectable nitrate/nitrite. At least one sampling station drawing from each of the aquifers and aquifer systems discussed in this report gave a sample with detectable nitrate/nitrite. The combined substances are most widespread among the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau, where all stations gave samples containing detectable amounts. The combined substances are also widespread in Cretaceous, Jacksonian, Piedmont/Blue Ridge and Floridan waters. The two highest concentrations of nitrate/nitrite (7.9 mg/L well Ml2A and 3.4 mg/L well WKE1) occurred at Miocene/Surficlal and Piedmont stations. Both samples exceeded the naturally occurring maximum level of 3 mg/L (as nitrogen), a level generally considered to indicate human influence (Madison and Brunett, 1984; Gaskin et al., 2003). Since nitrate/nitrite, an oxidant, becomes depleted the farther water travels away from oxidizing near-surface environments and into reducing ones. a crude inverse relation exists between the concentration of the combined substances and well depths. The nitrate/nitrite concentrations in Floridan samples illustrate this: the combined substances are undetected in most wells deeper than about 400 feet and reach a maximum concentration of 2.3 mg/L in spring PA59 and 1.8 mg/L and 1.9 mg/L in four of four samples from well PA25, 174 feet deep. The situation in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge is less straightforward, as springs P12A and HAS2 lack detectable nitrate/nitrite in all five samples, and well P24 at 705 feet and wells P39 and P20 at 600 feet each gave water with concentrations of 0.36 mg/L, 0.99 mg/L and 0.53 mg/L respectively. 4.2.4 Phosphorus Analyses determine only total phosphorus; the method used (EPA Method 365.1) for testing cannot determine how the element is bound. There were only three samples from three stations collected for the Claiborne, however this aquifer registered the highest mean phosphorus content of 0.31 mg/L. Of the more extensively sampled Piedmont/Blue Ridge and Floridan aquifer systems, the former registered a mean phosphorus content of 0.04 mg/L and the latter a content of 0.04 mg/L. The high phosphorus value for the Floridan was .57 mg/L (well PA32) and the high for the Piedmont/Blue Ridge was 0.19 mg/L (well P34). The highest value for all the aquifers was in the Floridan aquifer system at a level of 0.57 mg/L detected in the sample from station PA32. However, the Floridan aquifer system still only registered a mean phosphorus content of 0.04 mg/L. The apparent low phosphorus content occurred for the Clayton aquifer with one detection from five stations. 4-4 4.2.5 Dissolved Oxygen The measurement of dissolved oxygen contents is beset with some difficulties that can cause spurious values: instrument malfunction; aeration of well water due to cascading or to a pump's entraining air at low pumping water levels; measuring at spring pools or at sampling points that cannot be isolated from the atmosphere. Nevertheless, measured dissolved oxygen generally decreases with well depth. 4.2.6 Volatile Organic Compounds Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were found in 10 samples from 10 wells (see Table 4-2). No station exceeded the trihalomethane Primary MCL of 80 ug/L. The trihalomethanes; chloroform, bromoform, bromodichloromethane and chlorodibromomethane were the most widely occurring of the voes. These compounds- result from halogen-bearing disinfectants reacting with organic matter naturally present in the water. Two scenarios accompany the occurrence of the compounds. The first involves disinfection of the well and plumbing components incident to maintenance or repairs, as took place in well Ml2A. The second scenario involves leaking check valves or foot valves that allow disinfectant-treated water to flow back down the well when pumps are off, as apparently happened with wells UPS1 and J4. Well VR6A yielded water containing chlorinated ethylene compounds. Sample water from VR6A has also contained detectable chlorinated benzene compounds in the past. The former are used as solvents; in addition to solvent uses, the latter can be used as disinfectants, fumigants, pesticides, and starters for manufacturing other compounds. The owner of well VR6A, Chemical Products Corporation, manufactures barium and strontium compounds. Well COU4 yielded water containing methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE; 2methoxy-2-methyl-propane), which has no MCL. An advisory range of 20 ug/L to 40 ug/L has preliminarily been set due to offensive taste and smell. The compound has been added to motor fuels as an oxygenate (promotes cleaner burning). That use is being curtailed due to the greater water solubility of the compound compared to other fuel components thus its heightened ability to contaminate groundwater. Data on the long-term health effects of the compound are sparse. 4.3 ICP METALS Analysis using inductively coupled plasma spectrometry (ICP) works well for metals that occur in larger concentrations in groundwater samples. Samples in this study were not filtered, so the method measured analytes that occurred in fine suspended matter as well as those occurring as solutes. The laboratory used the technique to test for aluminum, beryllium, calcium, cobalt, iron, potassium, magnesium, manganese, sodium, titanium, and vanadium. No beryllium, cobalt, titanium or vanadium occurred in any samples at detectable levels. 4-5 4.3. 1 Aluminum Aluminum, a common naturally occurring metal in the State's groundwater may be present in particulate form or as a solute. Current sampling procedures do not allow separate analyses of particulates and solutes. For its Secondary MCL, aluminum is subject to a range of concentrations from 50 ug/L to 200 ug/L, depending on the ability of a water system to remove the metal from water undergoing treatment. The EPD laboratory's reporting level for the metal of 60 ug/L lies within the Secondary MCL range, therefore placing any sample with detectable aluminum within the MCL range. The metal appears to be most abundant in water samples with acidic pHs and, as a rule, is more concentrated the higher the acidity. The Miocene/Recent aquifer system, updip portions of the Cretaceous/Providence aquifer system, and updip terrigenous elastic-rich portions of the Clayton aquifer are examples. The metal is also abundant in particulate water samples. Aquifers giving mildly basic samples such as the carbonate hosted Floridan aquifer and carbonate portions of the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau aquifers produce few sample waters containing any detectable aluminum. The metal's abundance in bedrock waters from the Piedmont Blue Ridge aquifer system seems also low. Samples from deeper wells with more strongly basic pHs (approaching 8.00) may contain some detectable aluminum. 4.3.2 Iron and Manganese Iron and manganese are also two more naturally occurring metals in Georgia's groundwater. Both, like aluminum, may occur as fine particulates or as solutes. Both seem more abundant in acidic waters. Manganese also seems more abundant in waters with low dissolved oxygen contents. Sand units (e.g., the Cretaceous and updip Clayton) and shallower igneous/metamorphic bedrock give waters with the highest Iron or manganese concentrations. Waters with the lowest concentrations are drawn from carbonate units (e.g., the Floridan and the carbonates in the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau province), which also usually have the higher pH waters. 4.3.3 Calcium, Magnesium, Sodium, and Potassium Calcium is most abundant in sample waters from the Jacksonian aquifer with an average calcium content of 54,545 ug/L for eleven samples. Sample waters from the Floridan, the Valley and Ridge and the Piedmont/Blue Ridge aquifer systems also contain high calcium levels. The metal could be considered least abundant in samples from the Cretaceous/Providence aquifer system with an average calcium content of 6,890 ug/L for 21 samples. Magnesium appears most abundant in the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau aquifer system with a 15,000 ug/L average and least abundant in the Cretaceous/Providence system with a 533 ug/L average. 4-6 Detectable sodium is nearly ubiquitous. The metal is most abundant in waters from the Floridan and the Piedmont/Blue Ridge and least so in waters from the more updip Cretaceous. The testing method used by the EPD laboratory to analyze for potassium is not very sensitive (reporting limit 5,000 ug/L}, therefore detectable potassium was found in only seven samples from four stations - one sample from one station in the Miocene, two samples from two stations in the Floridan and four samples from one station In the Piedmont/Bi'ue Ridge. Kellam and Gorday (1990) observed that Ca/Mg ratios are highest in the Floridan where recharge areas are closest. Their observation also applies to the Floridan in this study, and a wide range of Ca/Mg ratios from indefinitely large (division by zero or a very small number) to 1.3 exists. However, for carbonate or carbonate-bearing aquifer media in the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau, Jacksonian, Claiborne, and Miocene/Surficial aquifers and aquifer systems the rule does not seem to apply. The ratios seem to avaerage around 2.4 for the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau samples, and to range from 23.8 up to indefinitely large for the Jacksonian. The low number of sampling stations situated in these other aquifers or aquifer systems might cause the differences between Floridan Ca/Mg ratios and ratios for the other aquifers and aquifer systems to be apparent. 4.4 ICPMS METALS The ICPMS method works well for most trace metals. Sample waters undergoing testing by this method, as with the samples subject to ICP testing, were unfiltered. The EPD laboratory tested for the following trace metals: chromium, nickel, copper, zinc, arsenic, selenium, molybdenum, silver, cadmium, tin, antimony, barium, thallium and lead; uranium testing was performed by the Soll, Plant and Water Analysis Laboratory at the University of Georgia. Silver, cadmium, antimony and tin remained below detection in all samples. Other than uranium, which exceeded its Primary MCL of 30 ug/L in two samples from Piedmont well P21 and one sample from Piedmont well P34, no other metals analyzed under the ICPMS method registered any levels above the Primary or Secondary MCLs or action levels. 4.4. 1 Chromium and Nickel Detectable chromium occurred in one sample from one Piedmont station and detectable Nickel occurred in one sample from one Clayton station and one sample from one Floridan station. These metals do occur naturally occasionally in the sedimentary rocks of the Floridan and Clayton aquifer systems. 4.4.2 Arsenic, Selenium, Uranium and Molybdenum Arsenic was detected in two samples from the Floridan quarterly well PA23. The Floridan samples came from the Gulf Trough area of Grady County, the scene 4-7 of other groundwater arsenic detections, some above the Primary MCL (1 O ug/L) (Donahue et al., 2012). Selenium was found in samples from the Miocene and Piedmont aquifer systems (wells Ml108, P39 and UPS1). The element may accompany uranium in deposits formed from the reduction of oxic groundwaters. Ten samples from three Floridan stations contained detectable molybdenum. The stations - PA23A, PA28, and PA56 - are all Gulf Trough area wells. Like selenium, molybdenum can be associated with uranium in deposits formed through the reduction of oxic groundwaters (Turner-Peterson and Hodges, 1986). Uranium appears to be most abundant in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge, with six stations giving eleven samples containing detectable uranium. Uranium detections were down from previous years due to the reporting limit of the lab going from the previous 1.0 ug/L to 10 ug/L. Uranium minerals, sometimes accompanied by molybdenum and selenium minerals, can precipitate from oxic groundwaters subjected to strong reduction. 4.4.3 Copper, Lead, and Zinc Copper, lead, and zinc detections are more numerous in acidic samples. Copper and lead did not exceed their action level nor zinc its Secondary MCL In any samples. Out of a total of 189 samples taken for the study, 37 samples with pHs below 7.00 contained detectable amounts of at least one of these metals. In contrast, only 26 samples with basic pHs contained detectable amounts of any of these metals. Past experiences where two samples, each drawn from a different spigot, had different copper, zinc, and lead values, suggest that these metals are, at least in part, derived from plumbing. Therefore, the copper, lead, and zinc levels in the samples are not necessarily representative of those in the ambient groundwater. 4.4.4 Barium A possible effect of the sensitivity of the testing method, barium detections occur in almost every sample. Because, perhaps, nearby barite deposits and associated mining and processing activities greatly increased the barium level in groundwater at station VR6A, a sample from that station has caused the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau samples to have one of the highest average barium levels along with samples from the Floridan and Miocene/Surficlal aquifer systems. Groundwater containing excessive barium (Primary MCL of 2,000 ug/L) has not been a problem since the in-town public well field, drawing from the Floridan at Fitzgerald, Ben Hill County, closed in 1995. 4.5 CONTAMINATION OCCURENCES According to the Safe Drinking Water Act (Public Law 93-523, section 1401, Dec. 16, 1974) a "contaminant" is any "physical, chemical, biological, or radiological substance in water'' - almost anything except water itself. Some contaminants can be innocuous or even beneficial; others can be undesirable or harmful. 4-8 Modeled after limits the EPA has established concerning the quality of water offered for public consumption, the State established limits on certain contaminants in water for public use (Table 4-1 ). Some contaminants may endanger health If present in sufficient concentrations. Two types of limits apply to such contaminants. The first, the Primary MCL, imposes mandatory limits applying to treated water at the point of its production. The second, the action level, sets forth mandatory limits that regulate copper and lead contents and apply to water at the point where the consumer can partake of it. Secondary MCLs (Table 4-1) are suggested limits established for substances imparting only unpleasant qualities to water. The unpleasant qualities include bad taste and staining ability as with iron and manganese, and cosmetic effects as with silver. 4. 5. 1 Primary MCL and Action Level Exceedances One well and one spring produced samples with substances that exceeded Primary MCLs or action levels (Table 4-1 ). The Piedmont mineral spring P12A gave four samples that exceeded the Primary MCL for fluoride (4 mg/L). The spring has, in the past, regularly given samples that fall in a range from 4 mg/L to a little above 5 mg/L fluoride. The fluoride is almost certainly natural. Uranium exceeded its Primary MCL of 30 ug/L in one sample from Piedmont well P34 and two samples from Piedmont well P21. 4.5.2 Secondary MCL Exceedances Substances occurring in excess of Secondary MCLs (Table 4-1) consisted of manganese, aluminum, iron, sulfate, and chloride. Manganese, aluminum, and iron are common naturally occurring metals in Georgia's groundwater. Manganese equaled or exceeded its MCL in 31 samples from 23 wells. Three of the wells were quarterly {P25, P35 and P37); two gave four samples and the other gave two out of four samples with excessive manganese. Four wells (quarterly well PA34A, and annual wells PA34B, PA34C and PA34D} in and around McRae gave five samples that exceeded the MCL for manganese. The Secondary MCL for aluminum is established as a range, varying from 50 ug/L to 200 ug/L. The range is designed to accommodate varying ability of water treatment facilities at removing aluminum from treated water. This is a consequence of a tradeoff between introducing into treated water coagulants, which contain soluble aluminum, versus impaired removal of suspended aluminumbearing contaminants. The aluminum present in waters covered by this study is naturally occurring rather than introduced. Of additional note, water in shallow wells may experience an increase in suspended matter (turbidity) during prolonged rain events, which may result in an increased ~luminum value because of suspended 4-9 material. Aluminum excesses, those which exceeded the 50 ug/L level (most groundwater used for public consumption lacks measureable suspended matter) were found in 18 samples from 17 wells. Iron exceeded its Secondary MCL in 19 samples from 19 wells. Iron is another common naturally occurring contaminant in Georgia's groundwater. Well P32 gave four samples with excessive sulfate and well PA9C gave a sample with excessive sulfate and chloride. 4.5.3 Volatile Organic Compounds Trihalomethanes are the most common of the VOCs detected (Table 4-2). Chloroform, the most commonly detected of the voes, was present in six samples from six stations. The next most common trihalomethanes were; bromodichloromomethane with three detections from three stations, bromoform with two detections from two stations and chlorodlbromomethane with one detection from one station. In groundwater, these compounds originate as by-products when halogenous disinfectants react with naturally-occurring organic matter present In the water. The disinfectants are introduced to the water through cleaning processes incident to well maintenance or through leaky check valves or foot valves allowing treated water down a well during normal operation. One station (VR6A) gave a sample containing detectable tetrachloroethylene and 1,1-dichloroethylene. Well VR6A, an industrial process water well, is in an industrial area and is within about two miles of fonner and current landfills. The former landfills utilized unlined exhausted barite pits. Cressler et al. (1979) had warned of the danger of using these sorts of pits for waste disposal in the Cartersville area because of the karstic bedrock. However, the source of the VOCs at station VR6A is uncertain. Well COU4 gave a sample with a detection of MTBE, a fuel additive, and in the past spring PA59 has given a sample with a trichloroethylene detection. Trichloroethylene and 1,2 dichloroethylene are commonly used as solvents or degreasers for metal parts, as dry-cleaning solvents and in the manufacturing of a range of fluorocarbon refrigerants. 4-10 I Table 4-1. Contaminant Exceedances, Calendar Year 2020. I Station Contaminant MCL Type Source Date Sampled Primary MCL and Copper/Lead Action Level Exceedances P12A P12A P12A P12A P34 P21 P21 WAY1 COU3 COU4 WAS3 SUM2 COU1 HAS1 MAD1 P35 P35 P35 P35 PA34B PA34B PA34A PA34D Fluoride = 4.7 mg/L 4 mg/L mineral spring 05/05/20 Fluoride= 4.6 mg/L = Fluoride 4.6 mg/L Fluoride = 4.5 mg/L = Uranium 34.6 ug/L = Uranium 33.9 ug/L = Uranium 30.2 ug/L 4mg/L 4mg/L 4mg/L 30 ug/L 30 ug/L 30 ug/L mineral spring mineral spring mineral spring public well public well public well 02/20/20 11/03/20 08/19/20 05/19/20 11/03/20 02/20/20 Secondary MCL Exceedances Manganese = 370 ug/L Manganese =31 Oug/L Manganese = 280 ug/L 50 ug/L 50 ug/L 50 ug/L public well public well public well - 09/01/20 06/18/20 06/18/20 Manganese = 250 ug/L 50 ug/L public well 02/05/20 Manganese= 210 ug/L 50 ug/L public well 01/09/20 Manganese = 160 ug/L 50 ug/L public well 06/18/20 Manganese = 140 ug/L Manganese = 130 ug/L 50 ug/L public well I 50 ug/L public well 02/06/20 01/22/20 Manganese = 130 ug/L 50 ug/L domestic well 04/07/20 Manganese = 120 ug/L 50 ug/L domestic well 10/08/20 Manganese = 120 ug/L = Manganese 110 ug/L 50 ug/L 50 ug/L domestic well domestic well 07/09/20 01/08/20 Manganese= 96 ug/L 50 ug/L public well 12/15/20 Manganese = 95 ug/L 50 ug/L public well 03/03/20 Manganese = 91 ug/L Manganese = 85 ug/L 50 ug/L 50 ug/L public well public well 09/16/20 I 06/03/20 4-11 Table 4-1. Contaminant Excaadances, Calendar Year 2020. Station Contaminant MCL Type Source PA34C P37 P37 JS P25 Ml10B P20 P25 P25 P25 PA18 CL4A JEF1 PA16 CL8 VR13 SUM2 PA29 THO2 PA57 P25 PA18 PA29 J1B K12 Secondary MCL Exceadances Continued Manganese = 82 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese = 82 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese = 80 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese = 77 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese = 74 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese= 71 ug/L 50 ug/L domestic well Manganese = 70 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese = 64 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese = 62 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese = 61 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese = 57 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese = 55 ug/L 50 ug/L public well Manganese = 54 ug/L I Manganese= 51 ug/L Manganese = 50 ug/L 50 ug/L 50 ug/L 50 ug/L publlc well public well public well Aluminum = 2,900 ug/L 50-200 ug/L domestic well Aluminum = 1,200 ug/L 50-200 ug/L public well Aluminum = 960 ug/L 50-200 ug/L public well Aluminum= 810 ug/L 50-200 ug/L public well Aluminum = 530 ug/L 50-200 ug/L public well Aluminum = 520 ug/L 50-200 ug/L public well Aluminum = 480 ug/L 50-200 ug/L public well Aluminum= 470 ug/L 50-200 ug/L public well Aluminum = 460 ug/L 50-200 ug/L domestic well Aluminum = 390 ug/L 50-200 ug/L public well Date Sampled 06/03/20 01/08/20 10/08/20 01/23/20 05/05/20 10/22/20 08/06/20 02/20/20 08/19/20 11/03/20 03/03/20 01/22/20 01/23/20 02/19/20 01/22/20 09/01/20 01/09/20 01/09/20 06/16/20 07/08/20 08/19/20 03/03/20 07/08/20 07/21/20 01/08/20 4-12 Table 4-1 Continued. Contaminant Exceedances, Calendar Year 2020. Station K9A WAS1 GLY3 WHl1 BUR2 PA34B Ml2A P47 COU3 CHT1 STW1 PA9C Ml10B COU1 MAC1 SUM2 HAL1 MAD1 STW2 K3 WH11 GLY2 K11A K9A P47 Contaminant MCL Type Source Date Sampled Secondary MCL Exceedances Continued Aluminum = 320 ug/L Aluminum = 270 ug/L Aluminum = 220 ug/L Aluminum = 200 ug/L Aluminum= 160 ug/L Aluminum= 120 ug/L = Aluminum 120 ug/L = Aluminum 11 Oug/L Iron= 2,300 ug/L Iron = 1,700 ug/L Iron = 1,400 ug/L Iron= 1,300 ug/L Iron= 1,300 ug/L Iron = 960 ug/L Iron = 870 ug/L Iron = 770 ug/L Iron = 670 ug/L Iron= 610 ug/L Iron = 570 ug/L = Iron 560 ug/L Iron = 510 ug/L Iron= 470 ug/L Iron = 380 ug/L Iron = 370 ug/L Iron = 320 ug/L 50-200 ug/L public well 50-200 ug/L public well 50-200 ug/L public well 50-200 ug/L public well 50-200 ug/L publlc well 50-200 ug/L public well 50-200 ug/L domestic well 50-200 ug/L domestic well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L . 300 ug/L public well public well 300 ug/L former test 300 ug/L domestic well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L public well 300 ug/L domestic well 01/08/20 07/21/20 09/02/20 06/03/20 11/17/20 12/15/20 10/22/20 09/02/20 06/18/20 11/19/20 11/19/20 09/01/20 10/22/20 - 06/18/20 05/18/20 01/09/20 09/15/20 01/22/20 05/05/20 02/19/20 06/03/20 09/02/20 07/22/20 01/08/20 09/02/20 4-13 Table 4-1 Continued. Contaminant Exceadances, Calendar Vear 2020. Station COU4 P35 PA9C P32 P32 P32 P32 PA9C P32 P32 P32 Contaminant MCL Type Source Date Sampled Secondary MCL Exceedances Continued Iron= 320 ug/L Iron= 310 ug/L Chloride = 680 mg/L Sulfate = 660 mg/L Sulfate = 650 mg/L Sulfate = 330 mg/L Sulfate = 320 mg/L Sulfate =250 mg/L Fluoride = 2.2 mg/L Fluoride = 2.1 mg/L Fluoride = 2.0 mg/L 300 ug/L 300 ug/L 250 mg/L 250 mg/L 250 mg/L 250 mg/L 250 mg/L 250 mg/L 2 mg/L 2 mg/L 2mg/L public well domestic well former test domestic well domestic well domestic well domestic well former test domestic well domestic well I domestic well 06/18/20 10/08/20 09/01/20 04/07/20 01/08/20 10/08/20 07/22/20 09/01/20 01/08/20 04/07/20 07/22/20 (The alphabetic prefix In a station number Indicates the aquifer/aquifer system tapped: CL=Claibome, J=Jacksonian, K=Cretaceous, P=Piedmont/Blue Ridge, PA=Florldan, CT=Clayton, VR=Va/ley and Ridge, M=Mlocene) 4-14 Station PD2A PA17 J4 Ml2A PA32 PA36 GLY4 COU4 UPS1 VR6A Table 4-2. voe Detection Incidents, Calendar Year 2020. Constituents Primary MCL Type Source chloroform= 0.60 ug/L chloroform = 1.1 ug/L bromodichloromethane = 0.74 UQ/L bromoform = 0.99 uQ/L chlorodibromomethane = f.2 ug/L bromodlchloromethane = 0.60 UQ/L chloroform = 1.4 ug/L chloroform = 24 ug/L chloroform= .51 ug/L bromodichloromethane = 0.53 ug/L bromoform = 6.80 ug/L See note (Page A-31) See note (PageA-31 ) See note {Page A-31) See note (Page A-31 ) See note {Page A-31) See note {Page A-31) See note (Page A-31 ) public public public domestic domestic domestic domestic MTBE = 1.2 ug/L chloroform = 1.2 ug/L 1,1 dichloroethylene = 1.3 ug/L tetrachloroethylene = 2.0 ug/L NoMCL See note (PaAe A-31 ) 7 ug/L 5 ug/L public public industrial Date Sampled 01/22/20 02/19/20 01/23/20 10/22/20 06/17/20 06/03/20 09/02/20 06/18/20 04/21/20 03/04/20 4-15 4.8 GENERAL QUALITY A review of the analyses of the water samples collected during calendar year 2020 indicates that the chemical quality of groundwater sampled for most of the Groundwater Monitoring Network stations is quite good. However, as mentioned in Chapter 1, areas of elevated risk for low-quality groundwater exist: 1) Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau Province - surface influence; 2) Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province - in areas excluding the eastern metavolcanic terranes- uranium: 3) Coastal Plain agricultural areas - high nitrate/nitrite; 4) Coastal Plain, Dougherty Plain - surface influence; 5) Coastal Plain, Gulf Trough - high total dissolved solids, especially sulfate - high radionuclides, high barium, high arsenic; 6) Coastal Plain, Atlantic coast area - saline water influx. 4-16 CHAPTER 5 LIST OF REFERENCES Applied Coastal Research Laboratory, Georgia Southern University, 2002, Gulf Trough and Satilla Line Data Analysis, Georgia Geologic Survey Project Report 48, 14 p., 1 pl. Brooks, R., Clarke, J.S. and Faye, R.E., 1985, Hydrology of the Gordon Aquifer System of East-Central Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 75, 41 p., 2 pl. Clarke, J.S., Faye, R.E., and Brooks, R., 1983, Hydrogeologyofthe Providence ofSouthwest Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 11, 5 pl. Aquifer Clarke, J.S., Faye, R.E., and Brooks, R., 1984, Hydrogeology of the Clayton Aquifer of Southwest Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 13, 6 pl. Midville Aquifer Systems of East Central Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey lnfom,ation Circular 74, 62p., 2 pl. Clarke, J.S., Brooks, R., and Faye, R.E., 1985, Hydrogeology of the Dublin and Midville Aquifer Systems of East Central Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 74, 62 p., 2 pl. Clarke, J.S., Hacke, C.M., and Peck, M.F., 1990, Geology and Ground-Water Resources of the Coastal Plain of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 113,116 p., 12 pl. Clarke, J.S., Falls, W.F., Edwards, L.E., Fredriksen, N.0.1 Bybell, L.M., Gibson, T.G., Gohn, G.S., and Fleming, F., 1996, Hydrogeologic Data and Aquifer Interconnection in a Multi-Aquifer System in Coastal Plain Sediments Near Millhaven, Screven County, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 99, 49 p., 1 pl. Cressler, C.W., Franklin, M.A., and Hester, W.G., 1976, Availability of Water Supplies in Northwest Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 91, 140 p. Gressler, C.W., Blanchard, Jr., H.E., and Hester, W.G., 1979, Geohydrology of Bartow, Cherokee, and Forsyth Counties, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey lnfom,ation Circular 50, 45 p., 5 pl. Crews, P.A. and Huddlestun, P.F., 1984, Geologlc Sections of the Principal Artesian Aquifer System, in Hydrogeologic Evaluation for Underground Injection Control in the Coastal Plain of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, 41 pl. 5-1 Davis, K.R., Donahue, J.C. Hutcheson, R.H., and Waldrop, D.L., 1989, Most Significant Ground-Water Recharge Areas of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 19, 1 pl. Davis, K.R., 1990, Water Quality in Georgia for 1988: Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 12E, 99 p. Daniel Ill, C.C., and Hamed, 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, J.C., Kibler, S.R., and Chumbley, A.W., 2012, An Investigation of the Occurrence of Uranium in Ground Water in Georgia: Watershed Protection Branch Circular 12W, 105 p. Donahue, J.C., Kibler, S.R., and Chumbley, A.W.,2013, An Investigation of the Occurrence of Arsenic in Ground Water in the Gulf Trough Area of Georgia: Watershed Protection Branch Circular 12X, 69 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, 2009, State of Georgia Environmental Rule 391-3-5: Rules for Safe Drinking Water. Foyle, A.M., Henry, V.J., and Alexander, C.R., 2001, The Miocene Aquitard and the Floridan Aquifer of the Georgia/South Carolina Coast: Geophysical Mapping of Potential Seawater Intrusion Sites: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 132, 61 p.1 4 pl. Gaskin, J., Vendrell, P. F., and Atiles, J. H., 2003, Your Household Water Quality: Nitrate in Water. University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service Circular 858-5, 1 p. Gordey, LL., Lineback, J.A., Long, A.F., and Mclemore, W.H., 1997, A Digital Model Approach to Water-Supply Management of the Claibom,Clayton, and Providence Aquifers in Southwestern Georgia, Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 118, 31 p., Appendix, Supplements and II. Hayes, L.R., Maslia, M.L., and Meeks, W.C, 1983, Hydrology and Model Evaluation of the Principal Artesian Aquifer, Dougherty Plain, Southwest Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 97, 93 p. 5-2 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. Hetrick, J.H., 1990, Geologic Atlas of the Fort Valley Area: Georgia Geologic Survey Geologic Atlas 7, 2 pl. Hetrick, J.H., 1992, Geologic Atlas of the Wrens-Augusta Area: Georgia Geologic Survey Geologic Atlas 8, 3 pl. Hicks, D.W., Krause, Clarke, J.S., 1981, Geohydrology of the Albany Area, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 57, 31 p. Huddlestun, 1988, A Revision of the Lithostratigraphic Units of the Coastal Plain of Georgia: The Miocene through Holocene, Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 104, 162 p., 3 pl. Huddlestun, P.F., 1993, A Revision of the Lithostratigraphic Units of the Coastal Plain of Georgia: the Oligocene: Georgia Geologic-Survey Bulletin 104, 152 p. 5 pl. Huddlestun, P.F., and Summerour, J., H., 1996, The Lithostratigraphic Framework of the Uppermost Cretaceous and Lower Tertiary of Burke County, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 127, 94 p., 1 pl. Kellam, M.F., and Gorday, LL., 1990, Hydrogeology of the Gulf Trough- Apalachicola Embayment Area, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 94, 74 p., 15 pl. Krause, R.E., 1979, Geohydrology of Brooks, Lowndes, and Western Echols Counties. Georgia: United States Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 78-117, 48 p., 8 pl. Krause, R.E., and Clarke, J.S., 2001, Coastal Ground Water at Risk - Saltwater Contamination at Brunswick, Georgia, and Hilton Head Island, South Carolina: United States Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4107, 1 pl. Long, A.F., 1989, Hydrogeology of the Clayton and Claiborne Aquifer Systems: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydro logic Atlas 19, 6 pl. McFadden, S.S., and Perriello, P.D., 1983, Hydrogeology of the Clayton and Claiborne Aquifers of Southwestern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 55, 59 p., 2 pl. 5-3 Madison, R.J., and Brunett, J.O., 1984, 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: United States Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2275, p. 93-105. O'Connell, D.B., and Davis, K.R., 1991, Ground-Water Quality in Georgia for 1989: Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 12F, 115 p. Turner-Peterson, C.E. and Hodges, C. A.,1986, Descriptive Model of Sandstone U, Model 30c, in Mineral Deposit Models: Deposits in Clastic Sedimentary Rocks, Cox, D.P. and Singer, D. E., eds., USGS Bulletin 1693, on-llne pdf. publication. Pollard, L.D., and Vorhis, R.C., 1980, The Geology of the Cretaceous Aquifer System in Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 3, 5 pl. Summerour, J.H., Shapiro, E.A., Lineback, J.A., Huddlestun, P.F., and Hughes, A.C., 1994, An Investigation of Tritium in the Gordon and Other Aquifers in Burke County, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 95, 93 p. Tuohy, M. A., 1984, lsopach Map of the Claiborne Aquifer, in Hydrogeologic Evaluation for Underground Injection Control in the Coastal Plain of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, 41 pl. Vincent, R.H., 1982, Geohydrology of the Jacksonian Aquifer in Central and East Central Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 8, 3 pl. Williams, L.J., 2007, Hydrology and Potentiometric Surface of the Dublin and Midville Aquifer Systems in Richmond County, Georgia, January 2007: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 2983, 1 sheet. 5-4 LABORATORY AND STATION DATA Tables A-1 through A-8 list the values for both laboratory parameters and field parameters for each well or spring. The following abbreviations are used on these tables: Parameters and Units of Measure Cl = chloride cond. = conductivity diss 02 = dissolved oxygen F = fluoride ICP = inductively coupled plasma (emission) spectroscopy ICPMS = Inductively coupled plasma/mass spectrometry mg/L = milligrams per liter mgN/L = mllligrams per liter as nitrogen NA - not available; not analyzed ND NG NOx p S04 Temp. ug/L uS/cm voe - not detected = not given = nitrate/nitrite = total phosphorus = sulfate = temperature = micrograms per liter = microSiemenses per centimeter = volatile organic compound Volatile O~ganic Compounds 1, 1dce bdcm dbcm pee cb MTBE TTHM = 1,1-dichloroethylene = bromodichloromethane = dibromoch/oromethane = tetrachloroethylene = chlorobenzene =methyl tert-butyl ether =total trihalomethanes mdcb odcb pdcb tbm tcm tee dcm = m-dichlorobenzene = o-dlchlorobenzene = p-dichlorobenzene = bromoform = chloroform =trichloroethylene =dichloromethane Table A-9 gives the reporting limits for the various analytes. The abbreviations used for Tables A-1 through A-8 also apply to Table A-9. A-1 Tabla A-1. Groundwalar Quality Analyaes for Cratac:eousJProYlclenca stations. Part A:. Station Identification, Data ofSampling, Flald Paramalara, VOC., Anions, and Non-Mtals. ~vtr.unNo. IWalNll!m 1-:1ce.:.~1w::-1 ~~ IpH I: -- l"::IT~ I GWN-f OWN-K15" Qullma, Geoiymw,1 Wal a NG NG NG 8l20t3l2D 9Jl9 47D 0.32 311.211 ND N GWN-K19 ~ 4114 NG NG 11/17flm11 4Jl5 24 7.31 111.83 ND Rll:IIIIDIII SbvatWal ....... GWN--!<20 "'--Walff 1000 NG NG 1/22a020 7.60 117 1.20 28.211 ND GWN-8UR2 Burtm ~#1 GWN-CHT1 Ca'nplJallyWal Cllallll!NXLlwe GWN-GI.A1 --Glaacocll GWN-MAC1 GWN-IIAR.1 MIIIDII r.act1811a WNIBwallr098kPK#1 Unnm#'I 8WN-STW1 a...t Lauvala CGrmulll,y Wal GWN-f'l)2A Early PnaunWalM NG NG NG 11/17fl020 4.87 17 8.118 2D.D4 NG NG NG 11111112121> 6..112 50 0.46 21.23 NG NG NG 211IW202D 4..116 40 8.47 18.81 NG NG NG &1111120211 6..83 s, 0.32 111.114 1&11 NG NG &Mlll202II 5.19 180 D.51 20.28 NG NG NG 11/18'2020 4.79 31 OJi2 18..84 205 NG NG 1fD/2020 5.48 41 8..37 19.112 ND ND ND ND ND ND c:1u11F41.8 ND ND ND 0.60 ND ND 12 ND 11..48 D.28 ND ND ND 0.72 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND M) 0.74 ND ND ND ND 1.0 NI) ND ND ND M) O.D3 ND ND D.48 ND om ND ND ND 0.42 ND ND ND 11.211 o.oe 0.18 ND ND ND 0.08 M) ND ND ND ND o.oe ND ND ND 2.0 NO ND ND M) ND D.28 ND 47 ND 0.28 Nb NO ND ND N) O.D2 ND ND ND 2A 0.D3 Table lr1. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Cretaceous Stations. Part B: Metals. GWwNi~-.- ND ND 9.1 17 ND ND ND ND NO ND ND 8.8 ND N) NA ND ND 5,500 ND Ill ND ND ND 2.&00 ND ND GWN-1<3 ND ND 8.3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 24 ND ND NA ND ND 20.000 ND 580 ND 1,700 30 3,100 ND ND Washlnglon GWN-K7 --J- GWN4<9A GWN-K10B P9IICII ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND NO 20 ND NO NA ND NO 2,500 ND 130 ND ND 22 2,500 ND NO ND ND NO ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND 3.3 ND UI NA 320 NO ND ND 370 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND .a ND NO NA NO ND NO ND ND ND ND NO 1,200 ND NO GWN-K11A HoialDn ND ND 18 28 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 8.5 NO 1.7 NA ND NO ND ND 3811 ND ND 21 2,100 NO NO GWN-1<12 HOURIII ND ND 23 48 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 5.3 ND 1.7 NA 390 ND 1,200 ND 1311 ND ND 10 1,100 ND ND => GWN-K1M ND NO ND ND ND ND NO NO ND ND NO NO NO ND NA ND ND 1,200 ND ND ND ND ND 11.000 ND ND (.,) Qulblal GWN-K19 R~ ND ND ND ND NO NO ND ND ND ND ND 7.9 NO 1.0 NA NO ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 1,400 ND NO GWN~0 SIIIIIIW ND ND NO ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NA ND ND 3,600 NO ND NO ND NO 24,000 ND NO GWN-8UR2 lkll1la ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 9.1 ND ND NA 180 ND ND NO 33 ND ND ND 1,300 ND NO GWN-CHT1 ND ND ND 12 ND ND NO ND ND ND ND 711 ND NO NA ND ND 2.9011 ND 1,700 ND 1.000 21 1,300 ND ND Cllalt:ahuacllee o . - . GWN-GLA1 NO ND 6.4 12 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 10 ND ND NA ND ND 1,200 ND ND ND ND ND '4,200 ND ND GWN-MAC1 IINOn ND ND NO ND ND ND NO ND NO ND ND -411 ND ND NA ND ND 8,300 ND 870 ND IC) 16 2,800 ND ND GWN-MAR1 MalDft ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 2.7 NO ND NA ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 33,000 ND ND GWN..sTW1 8--t ND ND NO 13 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 38 ND ND NA ND ND ND ND 1,400 ND ND 18 1,500 ND ND GWN-PDZA Wllbatlr ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 20 ND ND NA 100 ND 2,000 ND ND ND 1,-400 ND 4,400 ND ND Table A-1. Groundwater Quality Analyses for CretaceouslProvldence Stallons. Part A:. Station Identification, Date of Sampllng, Fleld Parametars, voes, Anions, and Non-Metals. Slalio~No. C.,ur.tv IWalNana 1Wel.:f-:.~1w::1~ I pH 1:1~1T:: GWN-PD3 Fmt Gllnell Wal.:! 4511 NG NG 2Hl2D2D 8.311 358 0.34 21.42 ND Cllly GWN-PD8 Ealy llllllllllyWal #4 1025 NG NG Vl/2020 8.211 300 0.30 25.48 ND GWN-STW2 ~ Cai,a, SPWel NG NG NG lil5l'2020 8.511 154 0.30 21.18 ND ----.i GWN-WEB1 WlllllnWal~ NG NG NG 5'18'21D211 7.24 310 2.17 1927 ND Aqu..,. u. Ranga 3.90 17 0.30 111.411 AQurw High Rmage 11.1111 470 11.19 30.211 Aq..,_llad_, (ND=GJ &.19 53 1.28 19.87 Aq. . .llan(ND=O) &.76 118 3.21 20.87 ).> .p. ND ND NA ND O.D3 ND 13 NA ND O.D2 ND 11 ND ND 0.14 ND ND ND 0.40 0.115 0 0 0 47 0 0 0 4 0 0 2.4 0.28 o.oe o.m 0.43 0.1)5 Tabla A.-1. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Cretaceous Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-PD3 ca., ND NO ND NO ND NO ND NO ND NO ND 4.5 NO ND NA ND ND 5.1100 ND ND NO 1,000 ND 78,000 ND ND GWN-PDII Early NO ND NO NO ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 7.4 NO ND NA ND ND 7J'ilXJ NO ND NO 3,500 ND 112,000 ND ND GWN-STW2 81-at ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6.8 ND ND NA NO ND 22,000 ND 570 ND 1,100 18 9,400 ND ND GWK-WEB1 w.... ND ND ND ND ND NO ND NO NO ND ND 18 ND ND NA ND ND 83.000 NO ND ND 1,500 ND 1,700 ND ND Aquifer.__ Range Aquifer High Range Aqde, lladlan (ND=O) AqulW ..... (ND.i) 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 83,000 1,700 3,500 311 76,000 8.5 2,000 33 0 0 2,.l!OO 16.4 11,IIIIO 'RI 533 7 11.12a ),> u, Tabla A,.2. Groundwatar Quality Analyses for Clayton Stations. Part A: Station ldentiflca11on, Dale of Sampling, Flald Parameters, voe., Anlom, and Non-Metals. IOC'f'! No. c.i,.,111 GWN-CT3 Tarrall GWN-CT?iA Randalpll Sch.., GWN-Clll GWN-alM1 Slllllls ....... GWN-SUM2 W.. Nama ea-, CIBllfanl 8lreet Wei C..imtw.113 WaalhanlbyHcMe Wal ~ ...PWal#'I ,,,.. . . . . .#1 -Depll C..VOaplh WelSIZII Dia faal faal n;tim ~m pH cnnd. . dl9s 02 T81111 -USll:m Ill "c 387 NG NG 1lll'l2/2D20 7Jl1 281 OA& 21.116 35li NG NG 1ot22J2020 1!16 266 5.78 19.87 80 NG NG 1Rr.lD20 4.41 41 11.38 111.21 NG NG NG 1S2020 4.113 84 ll.30 111.65 230 NG 8 1Jl!t2D20 4.2& 249 2.23 19.34 Aqull'Wl.o.R8rlg9 Aq....,Hlllb Range Aq. . . .lledlanlND"G) ,,,... . . . . . . . .CMD=G) 4.26 41 0..48 18.21 7.86 281 6.36 21.Dli 4.83 2411 s:111 19.66 5.117 174 4.23 19Jl2 voes ii ll., ND ND ND ND ND =!> 0) ND 13 ND ND ND ND 12 ND ND O.D3 ND ND ND 1.4 ND ND ND ND 1.9 ND ND 92 0.33 0.37 ND 0 0 0 92 0 12 0 23 0 0 1JI 0.IJ3 0.37 0 0.73 0,01 Table A-2. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Clayton Stations. Part B: Metals. L L ,~11()f)Ho Co..rty lm2 I@hL Iffi IW1 Ll*lro LJ 9& IY9% L, I@J l GWN-C13 Ten'C!II ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND &7 ND ND NA ND ND 39,000 ND 22 ND 4,300 ND 6,900 ND ND GWN-cT5A Rando(lllt ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 111 ND ND NA ND ND 43,000 ND ND ND 3,800 11 1,000 N0 ND GWN-cT8 Schley NO ND 8.1 14 NO ND ND ND NO l'I> ND 18 ND 1.7 NA NO ND NO ND ND ND ND 20 2.800 ND ND GWN-SUM1 Sumlar ND NO NO 15 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 14 NO M> NA ND ND ND NO ND ND NO 111 9,100 ND ND GWN-sl.1112 Sumlllr ND 10 ND 36 NO ND ND ND ND ND ND 111 ND 10 NA 1,200 NO 20.000 ND 770 ND 9,100 210 2,400 ND ND Aquihlr Law Range Aqulfw Hlgll Range Aqulw llalllul (No-I)) Aqull!I' lleml(NO=O} 11.7 0 0 0 0 1,800 81 43.000 7111 11,100 210 11,100 111 20.000 0 3,800 18 2,,800 27.1 20,100 158 3,440 64 4.580 ~ .....i Tabla A-3. Groundwater QualttyAnalyses for Clalbome Stations. =th 1- :1ea.:.Da!Mh1~::-1~=-- [ I PartA:. Station Identification, Date ofSampling, Field Paramalars, voes, Anions, and Non-Metals. !WalName pH ucSxnb1n 11111s02 I m:i;l. T"acq, GWN-Cl..2 DaolY Unaclla Wal #3 315 316 24 7llQMIJ 7.13 202 3.43 19.911 ND GWN-Cl.41\ PlanWtlltlB 230 NG NG 1.12212m11 11.58 1411 NA 20.17 ND Bllffllar GWN-CL.a ~River......,, Office 911 NG NG 1fDJ2020 6.117 70 0.34 19.83 ND bDOIJ Wal Aquilar Law Range Aqulfw High Rmga Aqulfw adlln CNl)oG) Aqulfs - IND=OI 8.07 70 0.34 19.1111 7.13 202 3A3 20.17 11.58 148 1.88 111.83 11.511 138 1.811 19.911 ND ND ND II.fill O.G2 ND 12 ND ND D.311 ND ND M> ND 0.511 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 4 0 o.oz 0.511 0.511 0 0.311 0.2 D.31 t Table A-3. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Claiborne Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-Cl.2 Dooly ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND 10 ND ND NA ND ND 40,000 ND ND ND ND ND GWN-Cl.4A Sum18r ND ND ND ND ND ND NO NO NO ND ND 11 ND ND NA ND ND 21,000 NO 2JJOD NO :Z.900 55 GWN-Cl..8 Dooly ND ND ND 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 35 ND ND NA ND ND 12,000 ND 510 ND 1,200 511 Aquffw I.ow Rainge Aqulfllr lllgh Rmige Aqulfw edllln (NO,,O) Aqulfw11-(ND-G) 10 12.000 0 0 0 35 40.000 :Z.000 2,900 55 11 21.000 510 1,200 511 19 24,333 837 1,367 35 1,400 ND ND 1,700 ND ND 1,800 ND NO 1,400 1,800 1,700 1,1133 ).> A14A Bullach S1mmbunlWei #4 .~...... I\) GWN-PA18 ~Wa1#1 ~ GWN-PA17 Eman. . . S-llboiuWel#7 413 NG NG 3/3/2020 7.86 248 NA 23.114 ND lll3l202III 7.84 243 NA 23.44 ND 8'18'2020 7.115 247 NA 23.49 ND 11Jl&lm20 7.94 761 NA 23.13 ND ND ND D.23 ND D.04 ND ND 0.24 ND D.113 ND ND 0.24 ND 0.03 ND ND 0.24 ND O.D4 500 NG NG 1Jltr202D 7.48 300 0.35 21.18 ND ND ND ND ND O.D2 260 NG NG 2/111t2.031 7.62 248 6.42 18.80 ctllala.'ann=1.1 ND ND D.113 D.04 D.02 ll1111IDClcllb1111..a-.G.74 GWN-PA18 candi... Mellar WalIR. 540 NG NG 3l3l2020 7.119 219 D.17 21.7~ ND GWN-PA20 lllnlar l.alllllllnd Wal#2 340 NG N8 llfl7l2020 7.48 380 0.311 22.02 ND GWN-PA22 na... ~Well& 400 NG NG 8118'2020 7.46 425 2:t1B 22.58 ND GWN-PA23A Gladr Cail0#11 4115" NG NG 1'81211211 7.72 3119 0.30 22.45 ND 7/8/202D 7.119 'YB 0.31 22.57 ND 10/1/l!D20 7Jl8 331 0.17 22.79 ND ND ND 0.21 ND 0,02 ND 84 0.33 ND o.oa ND 72 0.38 D.24 D.02 ND 30 0.40 ND 0.112 ND 211 0.38 ND ND ND 211 0.40 ND ND GWN-PA25 Dllllllllc:ida / 711 174 NG NG 2/1Bl2ll20 7.40 308 4.1111 21.22 ND Semlnullt Slnla!Wel 5i'!i/202D 7.21 SI 4.49 21.42 ND 8l20l'l020 7.19 3118 4.83 21.38 ND 11/1W2020 7.30 323 4..83 21.311 ND ND ND ND 1.8 ND ND ND ND 1.8 ND ND ND ND 1.8 ND ND ND ND 1.8 ND Table A-5. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Floridan Stations. Part B: Metals. ldonNo. a - Nici< nun el Cop,per -... Zinc Mien- SelM- Mol)ble: ~ \. GWN-PAZ Chdlan ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND 9.a ND ND NA ND ND 24,000 ND ND ND 8,IIOO ND 17,000 ND ND GWN-PM Chatham ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND IC) ND 8.1 ND ND NA ND ND 38,000 ND N) 5,300 311,000 N) 58.000 NO NO GWN-PAS LIMrty ND ND ND NO ND NO NO ND ND NO ND 31 ND ND NA ND ND 27,000 ND ND ND 17,000 NO 18,000 N) ND GWN-PA8 llbertr ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND NO ND ND 22 ND NO NA ND ND 25.000 ND ND ND 12,000 ND 14,000 ND ND GWIII-PAIIC Glynn ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 65 ND ND NA ND ND 98.IIOO NO 1,300 7,300 1111,000 17 350,000 ND ND GWN-PA13 w... ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO NO Nti ND 72 NO ND NA ND ND 43,000 ND ND ND 18,000 ND 18,000 N) ND GWN-PA14A ND ND 7.4 ND ND NO ND ND NO NO NO 4.4 ND ND NA ND NO 34,000 ND ND NO 6,300 N) 7,200 NO NO Bulloch NO ND ND NO ND NO ND NO ND ND ND 3.7 ND ND NA ND ND 34.000 ND N) NO 8,900 ND 7,500 ND NO ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 4.2 NO ND NA NO NO 35,IIIIO NO 3S NO 8,500 NO 7,300 ND ND ).> ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6.0 ND ND NA ND ND 34,000 ND ND ND 11,200 ND 7,200 ND ND ~ c,., GWN-PA1& ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND 4.8 ND ND NA ND ND 55,llOO NO 42 ND 4,000 51 S,IIOO ND ND Jenkins GWN-PA17 Emanuel ND NO 9.9 NO ND ND ND NO NO ND ND 170 NO 5.8 NA ND ND 50,IJOO ND 100 ND 2.000 13 3,100 ND ND GWN-PA18 Candlar GWN-PA20 Lanllr GWN-PA22 'lbomas GWN-PA23A Grady ND NO ND 14 ND NO ND NO ND ND NO 211 ND ND NA 480 NO 31.000 NO ND NO 3.400 57 10.000 NJ NO NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 25 ND ND NA ND ND 47,000 ND 180 NO 17,000 12 4,700 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO NO ND ND ND 23 ND ND NA NO ND 48,000 ND ND ND 22,000 IC) 7,800 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND 5.3 ND ND NO ND ND 5.4 ND 18 ND NO NO ND 140 ND ND NA ND ND 32,000 NO ND 13 ND ND ND ND 140 NO ND NA ND ND 33.oDO ND ND 13 ND NO ND NO 140 ND ND NA ND ND 32.CIIO ND NO ND 18,000 ND ND 16,000 ND NO 18.000 ND 11,000 ND ND 11,000 ND ND 11,000 ND NO GWN-PA25 Seminole ND NO ND ND ND NO NO NO ND ND ND 8.8 1.2 ND NA ND ND 81,000 ND ND ND ND NO 3,300 ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO NO ND 7JJ ND ND NA NO NO 64,000 ND NO NO NO NO 3,600 ND ND NO ND NO NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 7Ji NO ND NA ND ND 81.000 ND ND NO NO ND 3,600 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND 8.0 ND ND NA ND ND 110,000 ND ND ND NO ND 3.liOO ND ND Tabla A-5, Continued. Groundwater QualityAnalyses for Florldan Stations. Part A:. Station ldantlftcatlon , Date of Sampllng, Flald Parametars. voca, Anions, and Non-Metals. alNana GWN-PA27 Mllchall GWN-PA28 Colqult Camlla lndualrlal P.it Wal MalataWa1#1 Wdl'IIII C81g D8iJ11 Walstze D8llt feal feel lnl:ha Bllm.'l!l!ad pH Clllld. clas02 Tamp uSkm m L "c 360 NG NG 6118tl020 1.48 238 0.84 20.33 150 NG NG 1.w2020 1.84 "'311 NA Zl81 118/2D2D 1.90 381 NA 23..64 11117/2020 7.91 4311 NA 'a.11 voes Ill) ND ND ND GWN-PA28 Coak Ad81Wfilt8 405 NG NG 182020 1.lill 359 0.38 22..116 ND 1A!W020 1.44 384 0.31 22.07 ND ND 1\1) ND 0..38 Ill) 10 110 0.81 ND 0.03 ND B2 0.81 ND ND ND 91 0.83 ND ND 1\1) 13 D.28 ND OJl5 ND 1-4 0.28 ND OJJ& GWN-PA31 11ft 1lllanWal 18 GWtM>A32 lrwfn OlilaWal'3 GWN-PA34A Mc:RaeWel,S ).> Telfalr ....... .,:i. GWN-PA318 Telfu GWN-PA3-4C Telfu T..,_ GWN-PA34D GWN-PA38 TOOllllla Mc:RaaWll#1 111;RaeWaH2 MGREWal#4 YldlllaWal#1 GWN-PA38 Dadgll GWN-PA311 Worth GWN-PM1A TUrnlr Eallna! Wal M Syh,...wel#I Allan.. 852 NG NG 1111112020 7A1 275 0.70 21.83 837 NG NG 8117/2020 761 220 0.28 2-4..24 IIIXI NG NG W,8'2020 7.33 341 0.46 23.12 ND ctbclui11....2..J ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.57 ND ND ND ND 0.02 NG NG NG 3r.V2020 7.32 331 0.13 22.38 ND 1::lfllil2020 7AO 3M O.fi8 22.38 ND NG NG NG lll3l2020 7.21 330 0.211 22JR ND NG NG NG lll3l2020 7.19 338 0..38 22.13 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.03 ND ND ND ND 0.21 ND NO Ill) ND ND 808 NG NG 3r.V2020 7.70 230 0.27 23.10 lll3l2020 7.23 228 0.37 2-4.29 ND cllboi'omF0.51 ND ND 0.33 ND 0.112 ND ND 1.3 ND 0.25 bi011iUdchlamnalla...o.63 llt11112020 7.30 Z33 D.53 23.37 1\1) ND ND 1.8 1\1) 0.03 -410 NG NG 71112f120 7.30 2211 -4.110 211.81 ND 1\1) M) ND 0.211 o.m 198 NG NG 8'18'2020 7.38 300 D.811 22.11 ND euo NG NG 7llDD:ID 7.83 157 0..2-4 22.80 ND ND ND ND O.D3 0.114 ND ND O.AO ND ND Table A-5, Continued. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Floridan stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-PAZ7 Mlll:hall GWN~A211 Colquitt GWN-PA29 Coak ND NO ND NO ND NO ND ND ND ND ND 13 ND ND NA ND ND -48.000 ND ND ND 1,-400 ND 1,800 ND ND ND 15 ND ND ND ND 20 ND ND ND NO 1111 NO ND NA ND ND 35,000 ND ND ND ND ND NO ND NO &.O ND ND ND NO 94 NO ND NA ND ND 27,IIOO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 13 ND ND ND ND 115 NO ND NA ND ND 32,000 ND ND NO 20,000 ND ND 16,000 ND NO 18,000 ND 28,000 ND ND 26,000 ND ND 26,000 ND ND ND ND ND 18 ND ND NO ND ND ND ND 21 ND ND NA 9IIO NO 51,IIOO NO 48 ND NO NO NO ND ND NO ND NO ND ND 13 ND ND NA 470 ND 51,000 ND 47 ND 17,000 13 ND 17.000 14 3,400 ND ND 3,500 ND ND GWN.PA31 Tift ND ND ND NO NO NO NO ND ND ND ND 116 ND ND NA ND ND 48,llOO ND ND ND 8,200 ND 2.600 ND ND GWN.PA32 Irwin ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 67 ND ND NA ND ND 35.(JOO ND 190 ND 4,100 27 8,300 NO ND GWN-PA34A ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 1li0 ND ND NA ND ND 510,000 ND 270 ND 1:Z.000 111 4,100 ND ND )....>.. Tlfalr 01 GWN~A348 Telfair GWN-PA34C Telfalr GWN-PA340 Tlhllr GWN-PA38 Toombs ND ND NO NO ND ND NO ND ND ND ND 210 ND ND NA ND ND 48,000 ND 130 NO ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2211 ND ND NA 120 NO 60.000 ND 120 ND NO ND ND ND NO ND ND NO ND ND 120 ND ND NA ND ND 49,000 NO 110 ND 9,700 85 ND 9,800 1111 ND 11,000 82 4,400 4,800 5,20D ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND NO NO ND ND NO ND NO 21D ND ND NA ND ND 50.000 ND 240 ND 11,000 85 4,800 ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND NO NO NO ND 140 ND ND NA ND ND 28,000 NO ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND 130 ND ND NA ND ND 28,000 ND 31 ND ND 13 NO ND NO ND NO ND ND ND 140 ND ND NA ND ND 29,000 ND 38 ND 5,300 34 ND 5.800 33 ND 5,500 35 11,000 ND ND 11,000 ND ND 11,0DD ND ND GWN~A38 Dodge GWN-PA311 Worth GWN-PM1A Tumar ND ND NO NO ND ND ND ND NO ND ND 1111 ND NO NA ND ND 46,000 ND ND ND 1,400 ND 1,900 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 200 ND ND NA ND NO 50,000 ND NO ND 1.500 ND 3,800 ND ND ND ND ND NO ND NO ND ND ND NO ND ST ND ND NA ND ND 21.000 ND ND ND 7,000 ND 1,800 ND NO Table A-5, Continued. Groundwater Quallty Analyses for Floridan Stations. voes, Part A: Slation Identification , Date ofSampling, Fleld Paramatars. Anions, and Non-Metals. ~ n ND. tnlt IWalNane IYM:J~~[w.=[sa~ I pH I: 1=rT~ GWN-PM4 Syamara Wal 12 501 NG NG 1All2020 7.75 187 3.14 21.38 ND TUnw- 71W0211 7.55 191 3.21 21..41 ND 1a/712112D 7.118 188 3.13 21.54 ND GW.WA68 Wl!WBn/DIMIA- 11114 NG NG 211812112D 7.78 416 1.111 22.811 ND Gndy Wal Mil202D 7.83 41D 0.98 22.91 NO lll20/2mD 1.ff1 415 1.113 22.811 ND 11/18'2020 7.85 4111 1.G3 22.114 ND GWN-PA57 Caffall AmbnJaa Wal 12 eoo 4115 10 1illr.lD20 7.113 238 1.15 22.27 ND 7/8/20'JIJ 7.73 251 OJl2 22.711 ND 111.'22120211 161 254 0.53 22.911 ND GWN-PA58 Dougllmty RecunSpl,g 0 NA NA 2/18/2020 7.01 313 NA 19.97 ND GW.WMID SIIIIIII Homa Wdl ).> s.n11111111 NG NG NG 2l4f.l02IJ 7.116 'IJJ7 8.43 20.114 ND ~ O> GWN-Gl.Y2 HahrillllaallleldWal NG NG NG ll/2/2020 7.71 5li8 0.38 26..66 ND Glynn GWN-GLY3 Olym, Jek\'I 1llm1d 115 850 NG NG llm.!020 7.85 42& 0..43 23.32 ND GWN-Gl.Y4 Glynn H8fflllllln River....... 750 NG NG lll'llm2D 7.74 61111 8.S8 211.04 GWN-LIBZ Lll8lty FoltManlaWal 600 NG NG Mi/2020 1.1!11 3311 0..42 %US ND GWN-MC:11 S81111DGallansSO_, 11811 NG NG lllil'lD20 7.78 423 0..42 26.211 ND cl1tmh GWN-TH02 w-i, FourCClmenl 11 1100 NG NG 8Mfll2020 7.80 257 0.18 25.811 ND Thuma Jlqulfar l..&M Range Jlqulw High Range Aqu.,. -n.J(N~) Aqul'w -l(JDIII) 7.01 167 0.13 111L80 6.1111 2Al86 IIJi8 28.o4 7.85 309 OA8 22.1111 7.80 382 1A8 22.78 ND ND 0.23 0..211 o.m ND ND ND 0.211 o.m ND ND ND 0..211 ND 34 21 0.2& 0.08 ND 311 20 D.2li 0.GB ND 'SI 20 G.23 D.07 DJl:2 34 19 D.2& om ND ND ND D..211 ND o.m ND ND 0.27 ND ND ND ND D.25 ND ND ND ND ND 2.3 0.D3 ND ND ND 1.0 0.112 28 110 0.113 ND O.G3 16 78 0.&7 ND D.G3 V 118 0.82 NO D..48 ND 40 0Ji& ND DJJ2 12 111 0.&6 ND 0.012 ND ND D.37 ND ND 0 0 680 2flO D 0 111 27 D 0 2.3 0.51 0 o.m 0.21 0.D4 Table A-5, Continued. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Floridan Stations. Part B: Metals. dun No. -ct-Nido-Capel per n,c Arie,,. Solen- le h.m d......., GWN.Pi\44 T....- ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1-40 ND ND NA ND ND 31.000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 130 ND ND NA ND NO 32.,000 NO ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1li0 ND ND NA 100 ND 31,000 ND ND Sodu ND 4.200 ND ND 4,300 ND ND 4,200 Ml _JI \ , 2,200 ND ND 2,200 ND ND 2,200 ND ND GWN-PA56 GraclY GWN-PA57 Coffee ND ND ND 28 ND ND 8.8 ND NO ND ND 150 ND ND NA ND ND 33,0IIO ND ND ND NO ND 19 ND NO 9.0 ND ND ND NO 180 ND ND NA ND ND 34.000 ND ND NO ND NO 18 ND ND 0.2 ND ND ND ND 150 ND ND NA ND ND 33,000 ND ND ND ND ND 17 ND ND 8.8 ND ND ND ND 150 ND ND NA ND ND 32,000 ND ND ND 20,000 ND ND 22.000 ND ND 21,000 ND ND 18,000 NO 21,000 ND ND 22.000 ND ND 22,000 ND ND 21,000 NO ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND NO NO ND 150 NO ND NA NO ND 24.000 ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND 150 NO ND NA 530 NO Z'l.000 NO NO ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 180 NO ND NA NO ND 24,000 NO NO ND 14.000 ND ND 14,000 ND ND 13,000 ND 7.500 ND NO 7,800 ND ND 7,400 ND NO GWN-PA58 Doughq ND ND ND ND ND NO ND NO ND ND ND 24 ND ND NA ND ND 61.000 ND 31 ND 1,500 NO 2,700 ND ND GWN.PAIJO ND ND ND 110 ND ND NO ND NO ND ND 3.2 NO ND NA ND ND 39,000 ND ND NO ND ND 2.600 ND ND :..p.....o..., lemlnale GWN-GLY2 ND NO NO NO ND ND NO NO ND ND ND 46 NO ND NA NO ND 44.000 NO 470 ND 25.000 NO 26.000 ND ND Gt,nn GWN-GLY3 Glynn ND NO ND ND NO ND NO ND ND ND ND 38 ND ND NA 220 ND 36.000 ND 65 ND 22,000 ND 14,000 ND ND GWN-Ol.Y4 Glynn ND NO ND 17 ND NO NO ND ND NO NO 31 ND ND NA ND ND 40,000 NO 32 ND 25,000 ND 22,000 ND NO GWN-LIB2 Llbmly M) ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 26 NO ND NA ND NO 28,000 NO 130 ND 18,IIOO ND 18,IIOO ND NO GWN-MCl1 Mdntnalt ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND li8 NO NO NA ND NO 34.000 ND 83 ND 24,000 N> 20,000 ND ND GWN-rno2 Thomas ND ND ND NO ND NO ND ND ND ND NO 130 ND ND NA 810 NO 24.000 ND 120 NO 14,000 ND 11,000 NO NO Aqulfw Law R9ng,, AqulfwHigh Rana Aquifer --n (NDaG) Aquifer --I (NO=O) 3.2 21.000 0 0 0 1,800 22D ae.ooo 1,300 ea.ooo 1111 3!50,000 ffT 35,000 0 11,000 0 7,500 83.1 39,8115 84 12,307 13 16,405 Table A-8. Groundwater Quality Analyaas for Miocene Stations. Part A:. Station ldenancation , Data ofSampllng, Field Paramelers,, voes, Anions. and Non-Metals. No. C:\111'1j . WelNama """ w.11 c . q D1p11 wa1 Size Dae faal feat lnc:tme ~ttt pH cand. dllB02 T811"41 uSlan rt. "C voes LI (l GWfH.111 Coal! GWN-MIZA Lownda GWN-Ml10B Colqullt AdallMc:M"-' BollwelHcueWal Cllllalm Hal.lie wen 2211 NG NG 10/'Zll'l020 7.73 241 1.36 22.115 70 NG NG 10l'Zll'l020 4.28 171 6.65 '22J11 1fi0 NG NG 10Q2J2020 6.37 118 1.311 22.38 I'll> dilllluta,11i-l-' ND GWN-Ml18 L--.,Caully EastDis- -400 NG NG 8lliQQ2I) 7.fR 328 0.811 22.811 ND l..bll1y lrlct Fn S18lori DeapWel GWN-Ml17 Spmglleld EalRo9II 120 NG NG lllllr.lll20 7.74 257 NA 19.34 ND Ellqliam TestWal GWN-WAY1 RaneTPMaln WIii 400 NG NG 9/112020 1.13 221 OM 22.15 IC) Wa,na Aqul'arl..19Range Aq.._,Hlgll Range ~ Aqull'wlledlan IND=OJ All""-...,.(Nl>aO) ...a. 00 4.28 911 OM 19.34 U7 328 5.55 22.97 7.73 231 1.35 22.&2 8.116 219 1.88 22.oe ND IC) 0.48 IC) O..D3 25 I'll> ND 7.9, NP ND ND OA5 o.oe 0.27 ND 33 ND ND 0.02 ND ND ND ND IC) ND M> 0.20 M> O.D7 0 0 25 33 0 0 4 8 0 0 7.9 0.27 0 O.D3 1.33 0111 Table A-8. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Miocene stations. Part B: Metals. E~ t~t~~ GWN-Ml1 Coak GWN-Ml2A Lowndes GWN-Ml108 Colquttt ND ND NO 34 ND ND NO NO NO ND ND 18 ND ND NA ND ND 23,000 NO NO ND 13.000 10 8.400 ND ND ND NO 8.3 21 ND ND ND NO NO NO ND 25 NO ND NA 12D NO 4,300 ND ND 6,100 2,600 13 15,000 ND ND ND NO ND 100 ND 16 NO NO ND NO ND 140 NO NO NA ND ND 7,000 ND 1,300 NO 4,600 71 6,000 ND ND GWN-Ml18 liberty ND ND ND 15 ND ND ND ND ND N) ND 26 ND ND NA ND ND 26,000 ND ND NO 111,000 ND 111,000 NO ND GWN-Ml17 Elllnghmn GWN.WAY1 W11Jn9 ND NO NO ND ND ND NO ND NO ND NO 22 NO ND NA ND ND 46.000 NO ND ND NO ND 118 ND ND NO ND NO ND NO 38 ND ND NA NO ND 23,000 NO 73 NO 2.200 12 8.900 NO ND NO 7,900 370 11,000 ND ND Aquifer LDlr Range Aqulfar High Range Aquifer llldan (ND=O) ~ Aquifer Mean (ND=O) ....II, (0 18 140 4,300 46,000 0 1,300 2.200 0 6,000 111,000 370 18,000 25 23.000 0 6.250 13 9,950 44 21,560 228 7,717 79 10.883 Table A-7. GroundwaterQualityAnalyses for Piedmont-Sim Ridge stations. voes. Part A: Station Identification, Data of Sampllng. Field Paramatans, Anions, and Non-Metals. , Sla:IOll No. ~1..A ...... WelNmna Luthamlle W e i 1 3 ...-Deplll Ca&lrlg[)eplli WelSlm Dale faet lnctm Eam T~I pH GUIid. dlas02 uS.vn 185 NG NG 4121/2020 6.52 99 11.211 17.30 GWM-1'5 HII GWN-P12A Bulls FIIMmy llnn:h Well #1 lndlanSpfng 2-40 NG NG Mll20.20 8JIO 1113 8.54 18.42 0 NG NG 2l2W2020 7.24 273 NA 18.33 Mil2020 7A8 273 NA 17.22 8MW211211 7.35 270 NA 19.87 1113121120 7.83 280 NA 17.01 GWN-P20 Glmnalt GWtU'21 Jona ~m Gra,ffllaggWel eoo NG NG Ml,l2i020 7.71 381 0.1111 17.li6 405 NG NG 2l2W2020 IJ.87 301 8.55 17.46 litW20ZO 8.81 2811 OJIII 19.IM 1113/21120 7.D5 321 2.37 18.118 \l0CS n. ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NP ND ND ~ GWN-P22 RIIN&'Wel 200 NG NG 8l'lll2020 6.30 40 8.08 17.88 ND N Fullan 0 ~ hla18pmgsSIBIB NG NG NG mar.mo 8.46 1-42 2.28 17.83 ND Butlll Pak New MainWei &'5/2020 8.A9 148 Ul8 18.112 ND 8Ma'al20 6..64 150 1.AII 18.14 ND 11/3/202II 8.74 142 U17 17.72 ND GWN-P24 111110..Welm 705 NG NG 11'1tl/al2D 7.22 224 1.78 111.211 ND Cawat,, GWN-PZ5 Jona Jarall Plaullan S18ffHouae Wei NG NG NG 2l20t'202D 11.19 204 4.84 17.83 ND &N2D2II 8.33 217 3.04 18..30 ND 11118/al20 11.18 207 2.79 111.42 ND 111312020 IIJi4 208 2.112 18..03 ND GWN-P28 Canlll WlkMCamtWel NG NG NG W111/Z12D 8.17 144 3.21 17.28 ND GWN-P30 u-~ FlmrHameWel 220 NG NG lif1912D211 6.119 li09 1.05 111.93 ND GWN-P32 Ca:dtiDllllpWall 400 NG NG 111112112D 1.lt'l 971 1.DII 16..61 ND Ea.rt 4/1/1D20 7.511 982 1.75 17.79 ND 7/'l2/207lJ 1.17 917 0.54 20.24 ND 1IIIIL'2020 8.111 8114 0.48 1aM ND a mall ND ND ND D.115 om ND ND ND 1.3 D-03 11 24 4.11 ND O.D2 ND 25 4.7 ND 0.112 ND 2" 4.5 ND O.D2 ND 28 4.11 ND O.Q2 ND 11 ND O.li3 ND ND 28 ND 0.28 0,03 ND 21 ND 0.28 0,03 ND 23 ND 0.111 0.114 ND ND ND 1.0 ND ND ND 0.85 021 om ND ND 1.1 0.22 om ND ND 1.2 0.1a O.DII ND ND 0.88 0.28 om ND 12 0.42 0.38 0.06 ND 14 ND 0.13 0.12 ND 15 ND 0.12 D.11 NO 14 ND 0.14 0.11 ND 16 ND 0.13 0.11 ND ND ND 1.9 om 28 22 ND 2.7 0.04 ND 850 2..2 ND ND ND IIIIO 2.1 ND ND ND 320 2.0 ND ND ND 330 NA ND ND Table A-7. Groundwater Quality Analy9es for Piedmont-Bl. . Ridge stations. Part B: lletals. GWN-P1A Meriwetlw' GWN-PS Hal GWN-12A Bulls ND NO NO ND ND NO ND ND ND ND NO ,45 NO ND ND ND ND 9,!500 ND ND ND 2,400 ND 4,400 ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND NO NO ND NO 311 NO ND NA ND NO 28,000 NO ND NO 5,700 ND 4,400 ND NO ND NO NO ND NO ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND NA ND ND 17.000 ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND NA ND ND 17.000 NO NO ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NA ND ND 16.000 NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND NO NA ND NO 16,000 ND ND ND 2.800 22 ND 2.1100 28 ND 2.800 21 ND 2,.liOO 20 37,000 ND ND 39,000 M> ND 38,000 ND ND 311,000 ND ND GWN-P20 Gwlnnlltt :y> GWN-P21 Jon I\) ..a. ND ND ND 12 ND ND ND N) ND ND ND 220 ND ND NA ND NO 56,000 ND ND ND 11,000 70 12,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 9.11 2.0 1.li 30.2 ND ND 36.DOO ND ND ND ND NO NO ND NO ND ND ND ND ND 12 ND 1.8 22.5 ND ND 33,000 ND 28 ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 15 ND NO 33.9 ND NO 38.000 ND ND ND 8.tlOO NO 14,000 ND ND ND 8,800 20 14,000 ND NO NO 8,000 38 14,000 ND ND GWIIM'22 FullDn GWN-P23 Butts ND ND 18 ND ND ND ND N) ND ND ND 28 NO 1.7 NO ND ND 1,600 ND ND ND 1,700 ND 3,000 NO ND ND ND NO 110 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6.8 ND ND NA ND ND 11,000 ND ND ND 3.600 ND 12,000 ND ND ND ND ND 21 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 7.1 ND ND NA ND ND 12,000 ND ND ND 3JIOO ND 13.000 ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND NO 5.8 NO ND NA ND ND 12.000 ND 60 ND 4,000 ND 14,000 ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 8.8 ND ND ND ND ND 11,000 ND ND ND 3,200 ND 12,000 ND ND GWN-24 Coweta G\W-P25 Jones ND ND ND 20 ND NO ND ND ND ND ND 7.3 ND ND NA ND ND 30,000 ND ND ND 4JiOO NO 10,000 ND ND NO ND ND NO ND NO ND ND ND ND ND 22 ND ND ND ND ND 18,000 ND 180 ND 5,800 64 115,000 ND ND ND NO NO NO NO ND ND ND ND ND NO 22 ND ND NO ND ND 17,000 ND 170 NO 8,300 74 17,00D ND NO ND ND ND 11 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 22 NO ND ND 620 ND 1S,OOO ND 1511 ND 11,000 112 111,000 NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 21 ND ND 11.15 ND ND 15,000 ND 171) ND 6,200 151 16,000 ND ND GWN-P28 coweca GWN-P3D Uncoln GWN-P32 Elbe,t ND ND ND ND ND ND NO NO NO ND NO 24 ND NO NA NO ND 12,000 NO -ND NO 3.800 NO 10,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND 2.0 ND ND ND ND ND 37,000 ND NO ND 36,DOO ND 20.000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND 3.0 ND ND NA ND NO 250,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 3.6 NO ND NA ND NO 280,000 NO ND ND ND NO NO ND NO NO ND ND NO ND 2.6 ND ND NA ND NO 220,000 ND t,I) 16 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND NO ND ND ND NO 160,000 ND ND ND 1,100 13 ND 1,200 15 ND 1,700 17 NO 2,100 16 31,000 ND ND 36,000 ND NO 31,000 ND ND 24,000 ND ND Table A-7 Continued. GroundwaterQualltyAnalysesfor Piedmont-Blue Ridge stations. voes, Part k. Station lclenllflcallon, Dala ofSampling, Field Parametara. Anions, and Non-Metals. :- No. alNane WIIII Dlpll ca.ig Dapll WalSile D11111 flllll fllllt lncta S37 Mt.N,ytatfHal WIii 500 NG NG 1M/2020 8.88 325 5.53 11l61 ND H. . . . . . . . 411l'JITJJJ 5.71 232 8.118 18.53 ND 7/9/'lD'JIJ 8.07 274 9..44 18.72 ND 10i'll/2020 8..64 2119 8.88 18..62 ND :r- N N GWN-P38 ~W81#1 .......Can-all GWN-P39 GayWal.-, 230 NG NG 41211211120 4..85 45 7.80 18.12 ND 800 NG NG 4Q1r.!020 8.81 117 NA 15.118 ND GWN-f>40 ~ Sloam~G 300 NG NG liflllml20 6..113 87 8.82 19..19 ND GWN-P'43 ReewasHalaaWal NG NG NG 5,l5l'2020 5.78 55 3.12 17.18 ND ~ ........ GWN-f'44 WamSpmg at FD Romallllll8P 0 NG NG a/2020 1.2D 1112 NA 28..14 ND GWN-P45 Wlllan FedJWel 80 NG NG 7/9'2020 8.18 103 tl.05 18.81 ND Ft1lnkal GWN-P48 lladlNn WIQ!tou.Wall -4CJO NG NG 7IZ2l'IIIZIJ 7.98 194 4.88 17.19 GWN-f'47 Cllal1lllae Vtuly.__Wel 525 NG NG lll2l2020 7.38 180 1.114 17.AO GWN-COU1 WindyAmis MclllaHome 1811 NG NG 6'18/Z020 7.30 124 0.511 19.21 Columllfll Pa1tWel#1 GWN-COU3 Columllla HafllmWel#1 2liO NG NG 8118/Z020 8.80 184 3.57 211.18 GWN-COU4 Columlllll T1111111Mnd11 Mam Well NG NG NG 811M!0211 7.11 372 1.88 18.411 ND ND ND ND MTBE=t.2 ND ND ND 11.44 0.10 ND 25 ND 11.34 0.18 ND 18 ND 0.43 G.17 ND ND ND o.aa O.D7 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 28 ND ND O.D2 ND ND NA ND ND 311 2& ND 0.62 ND 20 23 ND 2.5 ND 311 2& ND 1.4 ND 28 28 NA 0A5 ND ND ND ND 1.3 ND ND ND ND 0JIII 0.118 ND ND 0.30 1.4 0.10 ND ND ND 0.51 ND ND ND ND 0.28 O.D2 ND ND ND 0.23 o.oe ND ND 1.8 ND ND ND ND o.a ND O.D2 ND ND ND ND 0.18 ND ND ND ND 0.15 ND ND 0.38 o.52 0.07 Table A-7 Continued. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Piedmont-Slue Ridge Stations. Part B: Metals. : ~r=l l*lLfL I,I:1~16~:1 ~I~ I~~ lmla1 L~I I~I~ IC!; GWN-P34 Columbia ND NO NO 28 NO NO NO ND NO ND NO Z7 NO 1.0 ND r> ND 4.700 ND r> ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 10 ND ND 34.tl ND ND 18.000 ND ND ND ND ND 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 13 ND ND NA t> ND 13.000 ND M> ND ND 5.8 111 ND ND NO ND ND ND ND 34 ND 2.0 ND ND ND 2,400 ND ND NO 2.800 10 ND 7,100 ND NO ll.300 ND ND 1.700 18 11,700 ND ND 14.000 ND ND 12.000 ND ND 5.200 ND ND GWN-1'35 Ftanldin ND ND ND 18 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND NO ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND so ND ND NO ND ND 38 ND ND NO ND ND 33 ND NO ND NO NO 31 NO NO ND ND ND 20,DOD ND ND ND ND ND ND 22.UOO ND ND ND ND ND ND 21,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND 21,000 ND 120 6,600 8,100 110 f11 6,000 8,300 130 200 8,700 8,200 120 31D 8,'700 8.300 120 8,100 7,100 1.800 8,000 NO ND ND ND Ill) ND ND ND ~37 Habersham ND ND ND 14 ND ND NO ND ND ND NO 13 12 ND NA ND NO 41.000 ND 45 ND 7.100 82 ND NO ND 54 NO ND ND ND ND ND ND 42 ND 1.3 NA ND NO 15.000 NO 111D ND a.uoo -43 ND NO ND 23 NO ND ND ND ND ND ND 28 ND 1.0 NA ND ND 30.000 ND 110 ND 1,llOO 46 ND ND ND ND NO ND NO ND ND ND ND 13 ND ND NA ND ND 38,000 ND 270 ND 7,400 80 8,400 9,400 7,200 8,500 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO GWN-P:38 C8mlll ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 23 ND 2.1 NA ND ND 1.300 ND ND ND ND 22 4,700 ND ND ~ GWN-P39 ND NO 9.9 ND NO 8.0 NO ND ND ND NO 34 ND NO NA ND ND 4.8011 ND ND ND 1,100 ND 23,000 ND ND w N Martwathw GWN-P40 ND NO ND 38 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 21 ND ND ND NO ND 5,800 NO 111D ND 1.100 ND 8,600 ND ND Greene GWN--P-43 lama, ND NO ND 14 NO ND NO ND ND ND ND 22 NO ND NO NO ND 8,300 NO 190 NO NO 17 2,700 ND ND GWN~44 lle.......U. ND NO ND NO NO NO ND ND NO NO ND 62 ND NO NA ND ND 18,000 ND 25 NO 9,800 ND 1,900 ND ND GWN-P-45 FrankRn ND ND 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 18 NO ND NA ND ND 9,900 ND NO NO 3JJOO ND 7.000 ND ND GWN~ lladlllon GWN.P47 Cherokee GWM-OOU1 Columbia GWN-COU3 Columbia GWN-eaM Columbla ND ND NO 111 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 17,000 ND 32 ND 1.000 ND 18,000 ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND NO NO ND ND 12 ND ND 10.4 110 ND 21,000 ND 321) NO 4.200 34 9,200 ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND 30 ND ND ND ND ND 9.811D ND 1180 NO 3,500 1611 7,300 M> ND NO ND NO 210 ND Ill) NO ND ND ND ND 9.7 NO ND ND ND ND 17,000 ND 2,31111 ND 1,700 310 14,000 Ill) ND ND ND ND 19 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 9.1 ND ND ND ND ND "'8,000 ND 3211 ND tl,000 280 18,000 ND ND Table Ar7 Continued. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Piedmont-Blue Ridge stations. Part A:. Station ldanHflcation, Data of Sampllng, Flald Paramamrs, VOCa, Anions. and Non-Metals. stalonNo. f;gi_: WalNana WIIDlplh C8ulgDeplh WIIIISlm D11111 felt faal_ meta pm 1 pH c:ond. 11111102 Taqi US/Im - fll!lll. "C GWN-ELEl1 Baa.edli11 Mable Home 2511 NG NG 1/22/21121J 6.42 1119 3.02 18.48 ND Elbmt ParkW&11 ...,... GWN-FAY118.II LonaOakWtll NG NG NG 11118'2020 7.34 248 2..89 18.51 ND .......... GWN-RA1 Vlc:IDlia llry,n S.. P.ic Wal#101 NG NG NG 112212t12!J 5.84 NA 18.33 ND GWN-ffAl.1 LlllanlBIIIWllga 380 NG NG Wl5/2D20 8.51 11i6 3.09 29.118 ND ....HIii GWN-HAS1 WeH1 Valllyh!Wal NG NG NG 2Alt202II IL57 189 1.27 18.87 IE GWN-HAS2 FD~Stalal'mk 0 NA NA 2Alf2020 4.52 13 NA 111.AO ND Hanlll Spmg GWN-MAD1 adllan IIJWa1#1 =!> ....,_ GWN-Sn:1 lBIII HBllxlr8horas Wtlll~ I\) .Sil,. GWN-UPS1 Cc:ullryVlllllga UPIOl'l We1#13 860 NG NG 1fZ2/'JITJ!fJ 7.40 186 5.57 17.43 3711 NG NG 1/22/2020 6.33 142 3.38 17.12 NG NG NG 4121/2020 7.89 177 4.811 18.17 ND ND d1Dilll'oi11pal.2 GWN-WAS3 Hanlug Slala ~ 200 NG NG :lJlil'2020 7.88 2311 0.&8 18.115 ND w.hlnglon GWN-WHM s.-...... CdfwHouse NG NG NG 8/3/2020 8.27 1111 3.82 18.01 -Whb GWN-WKE1 Ra,ia#1 NG NG NG 8118'2020 8.67 158 IUl4 18.48 ND IE GWN-8R1B Yaung._,..., 2115 NG NG 3l5l'2020 NA 188 NA 15.llB ND T- S..-.RaadWal 8/3/2020 8..118 175 3.38 15.40 ND IWfl020 8.87 178 11.91 15.53 ND 12/21211211 7.32 184 0.82 15.38 ND GWN-8R5 111111Y GWN-BR8 T_,. GWN-BR8A T-- Chal&wolH NlxSpmg YIUIII Hanis CGl8g9Wal YIUIIIHenlll ManShal:Wel 0 NA NA 3l4l2020 5.11 32 NA 13.23 Ill) NG NG NG 8/3/2020 6..30 83 3.53 20.21 ND NG NG NG W1t.t02D 11.31 177 6JJ7 15.11 ND ND 211 0.24 1.& OJl9 ND 38 0.58 ND O.D3 Ill) ND ND 0.&I) ND ND ND ND 4.6 0.04 ND ND ND 0.02 O.D3 ND ND ND ND ND ND 12 0.38 ND 0.113 ND ND ND 0.30 O.D3 Ill) ND 0.33 o.oa o.oa 12 ND 0.22 ND ND ND ND ND 0.80 OJl7 11 ND ND 3A 0.10 ND 23 ND O..Q4 ND ND 21 ND OJl7 ND ND 22 ND O..Q4 ND ND 22 ND 0.114 ND ND ND ND 0.33 0.03 ND ND 0.2& 1.5 ND ND 28 ND 0.86 0.D3 Table Ar-7 Continued. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Piedmont-Blue Ridge Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-ElB1 Elbert GWN~AY118.II F~ ND ND NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 44 ND ND NO ND ND 22.000 ND N) NO ND ND ND NO ND ND NO ND ND NO 17 ND NO NA ND ND 30,000 ND 240 ND 3.201) ND 12,000 M> ND ND 3,tlOO 24 17,000 NO NO GWN-FRA1 Franklin ND ND ND 240 ND ND NO ND NO ND ND 14 ND ND ND ND ND 2,200 ND 220 ND NO ND 3,600 NO NO GW~L1 Hal ND NO 9.6 17 ND NO NO NO NO NO NO 81 ND 2.2 NA NO NO 17,000 NO 870 NO 8,700 43 6.liO() ND ND GWN4-IA$1 Harris ND ND NO NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 12 NO ND NA ND ND 21.000 ND 33 ND 2,400 140 11,700 ND ND GWN-HAS2 H1nta NO ND ND NO ND NO NO ND NO NO ND 12 ND ND NA ND NO NO NO 24 NO ND ND NO NO NO GWN-MA01 Madison ND ND NO 110 ND ND ND ND ND NO ND 6.3 ND ND NA ND ND 22,000 ND 610 ND 4,.2.00 130 9.800 NO ND :po GWN-STE1 ND ND ND 12 ND ND ND NO ND ND ND 42 ND NO NA ND ND 13,000 ND 44 NO 5,200 ND 7,IIOO ND ND I'\) 8taphena CJ'I GWN-UPS1 ND ND NO ND NO 11 ND NO ND ND ND 4.0 NO ND NA NO ND 23,000 NO NO NO 3JIOO ND 11,100 NO NO Upson GWN-WAS3 WahlnglDn NO ND ND NO ND NO NO ND ND ND NO 114 ND ND ND ND NO 26.000 ND 78 NO 2.800 250 17.000 NO NO GWN-WHl1 Whla ND NO NO NO NO NO NO ND NO ND NO 58 NO ND NO 200 ND 8,400 ND 510 NO 1.800 13 8,500 NO ND GWN-WKE1 Willuls ND ND ND ND NO , ND ND ND NO ND NO 68 ND ND ND ND NO 14,000 ND ND ND 1.800 ND 12,000 ND NO GWN-8R1B T-n ND ND ND NO ND ND NO ND NO NO ND 76 ND ND 19.3 ND NO 23,000 ND ND NO 4,IIOD 19 4,000 NO ND ND NO ND NO ND ND NO NO ND ND NO 78 ND ND 15.9 ND ND 22,000 NO NO ND 5,200 12 4,000 ND NO ND NO NO ND ND NO NO ND ND ND ND 78 ND ND 20.1 ND ND 22,000 NO NO ND 4,IIOO 13 3.800 NO ND NO ND NO NO NO ND ND ND ND ND ND 87 NO ND 12.0 ND ND 22.000 ND 80 NO 4.800 14 4,000 ND NO GWN-8R5 IIISIIIY GWN-tiRS Towra GWN-eR6A T-na ND ND NO NO ND ND ND NO ND ND ND 10 ND NO ND ND ND 2,300 ND ND NO NO ND 2,100 NO ND ND ND 6.6 ND NO NO ND NO ND NO ND 49 NO 1.4 ND ND ND 6,000 NO NO ND 2,400 37 6,400 ND ND ND NO ND ND ND NO ND NO NO ND NO 34 ND ND 12.8 ND ND 23,000 ND "ST ND 2,300 28 IS,100 NO ND Table Ar7 Continued. Groundwatar Quallty Analyses for Piedmont-Blue Ridge Stallons.. Part A:. station Identification, Date of Sampllng, Flald Paramatars, voe.,, Anions, and Non-Metals. $1p11011 No. C:m~,i- GWN-8R7 Pldlena --~WalNmne -Depll C a q ~ WelSlm Dllbl feel flllll lnchaB ' 9!1111 ~d 0 NG NG 8.I.W020 pH Cllllll ...02 T-. uSbn IL "c 5.57 88 NA 16.115 GWN-aR8 Rabun GokbN l.alll'VW.. NG NG NG 1111lil2D2D 5.83 23 7.911 14.10 GWN-8R9 G..,_ .--HOUNWal NG NG NG 12/2/202D 8.75 186 0.118 13.211 ~TOW1 TIM er.eiuw,,Bal~ 0 NA NA sn;,amo 4.74 15 NA 9.72 GWN-UNl1 Union BtyatCuveWal'2 II05 ,48 NG 3l5.'2020 NA 108 NA 15.78 Aqulfar l..09Range AqulfW High Ranga Aqull'wllNlan(NDoG) Aqu..... _ (Nl)o,G) 4.62 13 0..48 9.72 8.75 971 1Ui6 28.14 6.117 184 3.11 17.66 8.66 220 3.66 17.51 voes l ND ND ND ND ND ).> I\) 0) p 11 mall ND ND ND 1-3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.43 ND ND ND ND ND 0:0 ND ND ND ND ND 0.113 0 0 30 8IIO 0 0 2 35 0 0 4.5 0.19 0.23 0.D3 D.53 0.04 Table A-7 Continued. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Piedmont-Blue Ridge Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-8R7 Pic:kllns GWH-BR8 Rabun GWN-8R9 GIimer ~TCM1 Towns GWN-UNJ1 Union NO NO NO NO ND ND NO ND ND NO ND NO NO ND NO ND NO ND ND ND Aquifer loll Range Aqu.,_Hlgll Ranga Aqulw .._.._. (Nl),,Q) Aquifer MNn.tM~) NO NO NO ND NO NO ND ND ND NO ND NO NO ND NO 25 NO NO NA ND NO ND ND ND 7.9 ND ND NA ND ND ND ND NO 5.1 ND ND NO NO NO NO NO NO 13.2 ND NO NA ND ND NO ND ND 12 ND NO ND 0.0 220 11 27.2 NO ND 8,100 NO NO ND ND 2,300 NO ND NO ND 20,000 ND 25 ND NO NO NO ND NO ND 12,000 ND ND 0 280.000 17,000 29,025 0 2,300 0 118 NO 3,800 11 ND ND ND NO 2,700 18 NO ND 19 ND 1,400 ND 0 0 35,000 310 3,11110 111 4,300 40 2,900 NO ND 1,800 ND ND 8,500 ND ND ND ND ND 8,900 ND ND 0 311,000 11,800 11,804 :po N ~ Table A-8. GroundWater Quallty Analyses for Valley-and-Rldge/Appalachlan Plataau Stations. Part A: Station Identification, Date of Sampling, Fleld Parameters, voes. Anions, and Non-Metals. ~ nl)II No. C(.lll! WelNama Welllllpll Casmg DIICJII Wal SIZB faat faat lncta Dallt ad pH COlld. clls02 Tamp USlcm rn "C GWN-'IIR1 F1oydea...ty 280 NG NG IIW2020 1.1111 a, 6.37 18.31 ND Fia,d KqslanRaadWel GWN-VR2A Wa._p LIIFa,alla~ Blg&pmg 0 NG NG 6l4l2D20 7.31 314 NA 15.28 ND 1\1) Ill) M> 0.79 Ill) ND ND ND 1.11 ND GWN-VR3 cticlmna.lga CrlMfi9II 0 NG NG 8'4/2020 72D 272 NA 11i.07 Ill) Wall8r Spmg ND ND ND 0.95 ND GWN-\IRIIA 11am. CIBIKIIIP!mids Cap.Scx.-!Wel GWN-IIR8 Poll Ced8IIIMn Spmg ~ I\) QC) GW"-"R10 ElanSpmg Murray 300 NG NG 3{4l.2mO 7.51 319 5.18 17.70 1,1 Clc:lalllllll)lenu ~ 1.3 1\1) 11 ND OJJT 0,112 .,.a.JoalhJ&W 2.0 0 NG NG 31412112D 7.35 277 NA 111.33 ND 6l4l2D20 7.58 288 NA 18.30 ND 111112112D 7.53 279 NA 111.44 Ill) 12111211211 7.44 279 NA 18.33 Ill) ND ND ND D.82 ND ND ND ND o.81 ND ND ND 1\1) 0.77 ND ND Ill) Ill) 0.73 Ill) 0 NG NG 3l4l2ll20 7.D3 288 4.19 18.02 ND ND ND ND 1.7 ND GWN-'\IR12 FJard GWN-VR13 CIIIIIDQgs cava&pmg 1Jwe1J Hume W e i 0 NG NG 6l4l2D20 7.1/S 212 NA 15.87 1\1) 337 NG NG 1111/2020 7.21 371 6JJ7 111..64 Ml Aqulfar.__ Range . . . A q u l f w H l g h R - . i Aqulfar npm,,,o) Allulfw - CN~I 7.D3 212 4.19 1li.07 7.88 371 5.37 17.70 7.44 277 5.12 16.31 7.43 284 4.95 16.18 ND ND ND 11.311 ti) ND ND Ml 0.88 O.D4 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0.311 0 1.7 0..04 0.111 0 0.92 0..01 Table M. Groundwater Quality Analyses for Valley-and-Rldga/AppalachlanPlateau Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-VR1 Floyd ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND NO 9.2 ND ND NA ND ND 30,000 ND NO NO 18,000 ND 1,900 ND ND GWN-VR2A Wal...,. NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 76 ND ND NA NO ND 45,000 ND ND ND 14.000 ND 1,700 ND ND GWN-VR3 Wdwr ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NI> NO 11 ND ND NA ND ND 34,000 ND ND ND 111,000 ND 1,300 ND ND GWN-IIRIIA Bartow ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 4311 ND ND NA ND ND 30,000 ND ND NO 17,000 ND 11,000 NO ND GWN-VR8 ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 12 ND ND NA ND NO 34,000 ND 24 ND 18,000 ND 1,81111 ND ND Po ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND 11 ND ND NA NO ND 32,000 ND NO ND 18,000 ND 1,400 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND 13 ND ND NA ND ND 34,000 NO 30 ND 15,000 ND 1,500 ND ND t NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 13 ND ND NA ND ND 34,000 ND 26 ND 15.IIO0 ND 1,400 ND ND I\) co GWN-VR10 ND ND ND 16 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 46 NO ND NA ND ND 31.000 NO ND ND 14,0110 ND 2,100 ND ND urny GWN-VR12 Floyd ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 11 ND ND NA ND ND 25,000 ND ND ND 13.000 ND ND ND ND GWN-VR13 Cllllttooga ND ND ND 44 ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 311 ND 1.3 NA 2,900 ND 67,000 ND 73 ND 11,000 ND 1,900 ND ND Aquiferl.a9 Range Aquifer Hlglt Range Aqulfw Medlln lNDcQ) Aquifer MaM (NO=O) 92 25.000 0 11.000 0 0 430 67.000 73 18,.IIOO 0 11,000 13 34.000 0 15,000 0 1,600 67 36,000 14 15,000 0 2,318 Table A-9. Analytes, EPA Analytlcal Methods, and Reporting Limits. Analyte Reporting Limit/ EPA Method Analyte Reporting Limit/ I EPA Method Vinyl Chloride 1, 1-Dlchloroethylene Dichloromethane Trans-1,2Dichloroethvtene Cls-1,2Dichloroethvlene 1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Benzene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 1,2-Dlchloroethane 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Dichlorodifluoromethane Chloromethane 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Bromomethane 0.5 ug/L / .524.2 Chloroethane Fluorotrichloromethane 1, 1-Dichloroethane 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 2,2-Dichloropropane 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Bromochloromethane 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Chloroform 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Trichloroethylene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 1,1-Dichloropropene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 1,2-Dichloropropane 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Toluene 1, 1,2-Trichloroethane Tetrachloroethylene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Chlorobenzene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Ethylbenzene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Total Xylenes 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Styrene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 p-Dichlorobenzene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 o-Dichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trlchlorobenzene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Dibromomethane 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Bromodlchloromethane Cis-1,3-Dichloropropene Trans-1,3Dichloropropene 1 ,3-Dichloropropane Chlorodibromomethane 1,2-Dibromoethane 1, 1, 1,2Tetrachloroethane Bromoform 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 lsopropylbenzene 1, 1,2,2Tetrachloroethane 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Table A-9, Continued. Analytes, EPA Analytical Methods, and Reporting Limits. I Analyte Reporting Limit/ Analyte EPA Method I I Reporting Limit/ EPA Method Bromobenzene 1,2,3-Trichloroorooane n-Propylbenzene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.6 ug/L / 524.2 o-Chlorotoluene 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene p-Chlorotoluene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 5,24.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 Tert-Butylbenzene 1,2,4-Trimethyl- benzene Sec-Butylbenzene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 p-lsopropyltoluene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 m-Dichlorobenzene 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 n-Butylbenzene 1,2-Dibromo-3chlorooropane Hexachlorobutadi- ene Naphthalene 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene Methyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) Chloride 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 0.5 ug/L / 524.2 10 mg/L / 300.0 Sulfate* Nitrate/nitrite* 10 mg/L / 300.0 0.02 mg/Las Nitroa.en / 353.2 Total Phosphorus Fluorlde Silver Aluminum Arsenic Barium Beryllium Calcium Cadmium Cobalt Chromium Copper Iron Potassium Magnesium Manganese Sodium Nickel Lead Antimony 0.02 mg/L / 365.1 0.20 mg/L / 300.0 10 ug/L / 200.7 (ICP) 60 ug/L / 200.7 80 ug/L / 200.7 10 ug/L / 200.7 10 ug/L / 200.7 1000 ug/L / 200.7 10 ug/L / 200.7 10 ug/L / 200.7 20 ug/L / 200.7 20 ug/L / 200.7 20 ug/L / 200.7 5000 ug/L / 200.7 1000 ug/L / 200.7 10 ug/L / 200.7 1000 ug/L / 200.7 20 ug/L / 200.7 90 ug/L / 200.7 120 ug/L / 200. 7 A-31 Table A-9, Continued Analytes, EPA Analytical Methods, and Reporting Limits. Analyte Reporting Limit/ EPA Method Analyta Reporting Limit/ EPA Method Selenium Titanium Thallium Vanadium Zinc Chromium Nickel Copper Zinc Arsenic 190 ug/L / 200.7 10 ug/L / 200.7 200 ug/L / ~00. 7 10 ug/L / 200.7 20 ug/L / 200. 7 5 ug/L / 200.8 OCPMS) 10 ug/L / 200.8 5 ug/L / 200.8 10 ug/L / 200.8 5 ug/L / 200.8 Selenium Molybdenum Silver Cadmium Tin Antimony Barium Thallium Lead Uranium 5 ug/L / 200.8 5 ug/L / 200.8 5 ug/L / 200.8 0. 7 ug/L / 200.8 30 ug/L / 200.8 5 ug/L / 200.8 2 ug/L / 200.8 1 ug/L / 200.8 1 ug/L / 200.8 1 ug/L / 200.8 * Note: Reporting limits for sulfate and nitrate/nitrite are subject to change. A sample with a concentration of either analyte greater than certain ranges may need to be diluted to bring the concentration within the analytical ranges of the testing Instruments. This dilution results in a proportlonal Increase in the reporting limlt. A-32 Table A-10. Analytes, Primary MCLs (A), and Secondary MCLs (B). . Analyte Primary I Second- MCL ary MCL Analyte Primary Second- MCL ary MCL Vinyl Chloride 1, 1-Dichloroeth_ylene Dichloromethane Trans-1,2Dichloroethylene Cis-1,2Dichloroethylene 1,1, 1 -Trichloroethane 2 ug/L 7 ug/L 5 ug/L None None None 100 ug/L None 70 ug/L None 200 ug/L None Carbon Tetrachloride 5 ug/L None Benzene 1,2-Oichloroethane 5 ug/L 5 ug/L None None Trichloroethylene 5 ug/L None 1,2-Dichloro-propene 5 ug/L Toluene 1, 1,2-Trlchloroethane Tetrachloroethylene 1,000 ug/L 5 ug/L 5 ug/L None None None None Chlorobenzene 100 ug/L None Ethyl benzene Total Xylenes Styrene 700 ug/L 10,000 ug/L 100 ug/L None None None p-Dichlorobenzene 75 ug/L None o-Dichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene Chloroform (1) Bromodichloromethane (2} Chlorodibromomethane (3} Bromoform (4} Chloride Sulfate Nitrate/nitrite Fluoride 600 ug/L None 70 ug/L None Total 1,2,3,4 = 80 ug/L Total 1,2,3,4 = 80 ug/L Total 1,2,3,4 = 80 ug/L Total 1,2,3,4 = 80 ug/L None None 10 mg/L as Nitrogen None None None None 250 mo/L 250 mg/L None 4 mg/L 2 mg/L Aluminum Antimony None 6 ug/L 50 -200 ug/L None Arsenic Barium Beryllium 10 ug/L 2000 ug/L 4 ug/L None None None Cadmium 5 ug/L None Chromium 100 ug/L None A-33 Table A-10, Continued. Analytes, Primary MCLs (A), and Secondary MCLs (B). Analyte Primary MCL Secondary MCL Analyte Primary Second- MCL ary MCL Copper Iron Lead Manganese Nickel Action level= 1,300 ugtl(C) 1000 ug/L Selenium None Action level= 15 ug/L(C) None 300 ug/L Sliver None Thallium 50 ug/L Zinc 100 ug/L None Uranium 50 ug/L None None 100 ug/L 2 ug/L None None 30 ug/L 5,000 ug/L None Notes: (A) Primary MCL = Primary Maximum Contaminant Level, a maximum concentration of a substance (other than lead or copper) allowed in public drinking water due to adverse health effects. (B) Secondary MCL = Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level, a maximum concentration of a substance suggested for public drinking water due solely to unpleasant characteristics such as bad flavor or stain-causing ability. (C) Action Level = the maximum concentrations of lead or copper permitted for public drinking water as measured at the user's end of the system. Water issuing from at least ninety percent of a representative sample of user's end outlets must contain copper or lead concentrations at or below their respective action levels. mg/L = milligrams per liter. ug/L = micrograms per liter. A-34 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.