GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA FOR2011 John C. Donahue, Susan R. Kibler, and Anthony W. Chumbley GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION WATERSHED PROTECTION BRANCH WATERSHED PLANNING AND MONITORING PROGRAM ATLANTA 2015 CIRCULAR 12Y GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA FOR 2011 John C. Donahue, Susan R. Kibler, and Anthony W. Chumbley The preparation ofthis report was funded in part through a grant from the US. 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 Judson H. T1urner, Director WATERSHED PROTECTION BRANCH James A. Capp, Branch Chief ATLANTA 2015 CIRCULAR 12Y TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................... 1:1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE.............................................................. 1-1 1.2 FACTORS AFFECTING CHEMICAL GROUND-WATER QUALITY..... 1-2 1.3 HYDROGEOLOGIC PROVINCES OF GEORGIA............................. 1-3 1.3.1 Coastal Plain Province............................................................ 1-3 1.3.2 Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province.................... .. ........................... 1-5 1.3.3 Valley and Ridge Province....................................................... 1-6 1.3.4 Appalachian Plateau Province.................................................. 1-6 1.4 REGIONAL GROUND-WATER PROBLEMS.................................... 1-6 CHAPTER 2 GEORGIA GROUND-WATER 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 GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA......................... 3-1 3.1 OVERVIEW...................... ........................................................... 3-1 3.2 CRETACEOUS/PROVIDENCE AQUIFER SYSTEM............................ 3-3 3.2.1 Field parameters....................................................................... 3-3 3.2.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds........ 3-5 3.2.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP)........... 3-5 3.2.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS)........................... ..................... .. ... ..................................... 3-5 3.3 CLAYTON AQUIFER................................................................... 3-6 3.4 CLAIBORNE AQUIFER... ................... .......................................... 3.4.1 Field parameters............................. ....... ............................ ...... 3.4.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds...... 3.4.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP).......... 3.4.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS). ... ... ... .. .... .. ..... ... ............ ... ... .... .. ... ........ ..... ....... ... ......... .... 3.5 JACKSONIAN AQUIFER.......................... .............. ..................... 3.5.1 Field parameters................................. ............................... .. ... 3.5.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds...... 3.5.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP)...... .... 3.5.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS)................................................................. .. .... ...... ............. 3.6 FLORIDAN AQUIFER SYSTEM..................................................... 3.6.1 Field parameters..................................................................... 3.6.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds...... 3.6.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP).......... 3.6.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS).................................................. .......... ..... ..... ........ ............ 3.7 MIOCENE/SURFICIAL AQUIFER SYSTEM...................................... 3.7.1 Field parameters................................................ .... ............. ..... 3.7.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds...... 3.7.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP).......... 3.7.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS)................................................... ... ........ ..... .. ..................... 3.8 PIEDMONT/BLUE RIDGE AQUIFER SYSTEM......................... ...... ... ii 3-6 3-8 3-8 3-10 3-10 3-10 3-10 3-12 3-12 3-12 3-13 3-15 3-15 3-16 3-16 3-17 3-19 3-19 3-19 3-20 3-20 3.8.1 Field parameters..................................................................... 3-21 3.8.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds..... 3-23 3.8.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP)........ 3-23 3.8.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS)......................................................................................... 3-24 3.9 VALLEY AND RIDGE/APPALACHIAN PLATEAU AQUIFERS........... 3-25 3.9.1 Field parameters..................................................................... 3-25 3.9.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds...... 3-27 3.9.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP)......... 3-27 3.9.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS).......................................................................................... 3-27 CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS..................................... 4-1 4.1 PRIMARY MCL VIOLATIONS FOR 2011......................................... 4-1 4.2 SECONDARY MCL VIOLATIONS FOR 2011............... ..................... 4-4 4.3 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS FOR 2011............................... 4-4 4.4 pH........................................ .. ................. ..................... ............ 4-5 CHAPTER 5 LIST OF REFERENCES................................................... 5-1 APPENDIX Laboratory Data............................................................................... A-1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1. The Hydrogeologic Provinces of Georgia.......................... 1-4 Figure 3-1. The Major Aquifers and Aquifer Systems of the Coastal Plain Province.... .............................................................................. 3-2 Figure 3-2. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Cretaceous Aquifer System............................................................................................ 3-4 iii Figure 3-3. Location of the Station Monitoring the Clayton Aquifer...... 3-7 Figure 3-4. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Claiborne Aquifer..... 3-9 Figure 3-5. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Jacksonian Aquifer............. ...................................................... ........... .. ............................ 3-11 Figure 3-6. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Floridan Aquifer System................................... ....................... ...... ..... .... ........... ... ... . 3-14 Figure 3-7. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Miocene/Surficial Aquifer System..................................... ..... .. ... ........ ................... ...... 3-18 Figure 3-8. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Aquifer System................ ................ .. ......... ..... .. ... ......... ..... .... 3-22 Figure 3-9. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Valley and Ridge/ Appalachian Plateau Aquifers................... .... ............. .. ...... ..... ... ..... .. 3-26 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1. Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network, Calendar Year 2011...................................................... ..... .. ...... ........ ... ....... .......... 2-2 Table 4-1. Pollution and Contaminant Incidents, Calendar Year 2011........................... .. .................................................................. 4-3 Table 4-2. VOC Pollution Incidents, Calendar Year 2011...................... 4-6 Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Cretaceous/ Providence Stations......................................... ......... ....................... A-2 Table A-2. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Clayton Stations.......... A-4 Table A-3. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Claiborne Stations....... A-6 Table A-4. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Jacksonian Stations..... A-8 Table A-5. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Miocene/Surficial Stations....................................................................... .. ...... ... ......... A-1 0 Table A-6. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Floridan Stations.......... A-12 iv Table A-7. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Piedmont/Blue Ridge Stations......................................................................................... Table A-8. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Valley-and-Ridge/ Appalachian Plateau Stations........................................................... Table A-9. Analytes, EPA Analytical Methods, and Reporting Limits.......................................................................................... Table A-10. Analytes, Primary MCLs, and Secondary MCLs................. A-18 A-22 A-23 A-27 v CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report, covering the calendar year 2011, is the twenty-fifth of the Circular 12 series. The first 19 reports, Circulars 12A through 12S, summarized the chemical quality of ground water 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 ground-water quality issues: water quality in the Coastal region, water quality available to small public water systems, water quality in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge physiographic province, ground-water uranium in Georgia, and ground-water arsenic in the Gulf Trough area of Georgia. With this report, monitoring the chemical quality of ground water returns to using a static array of stations sampled periodically. These summaries are among the tools used by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) to assess trends in the quality of the State's ground-water resources. EPD is the State organization with regulatory responsibility for maintaining and, where possible, improving ground-water quality and availability. EPD has implemented a comprehensive statewide ground-water management policy of anti-degradation (EPD, 1991; 1998). Four components comprise EPD's current ground-water quality assessment program: 1. The Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network. EPD's Watershed Protection Branch, Source Water Assessment Program, took over the Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network from the Regulatory Support Program when that program disbanded. The Monitoring Network is designed to evaluate the ambient ground-water quality of eight aquifer systems present in the State of Georgia. The data collected from sampling of the Ground-Water Monitoring Network form the basis for this report. 2. Sampling of public drinking water wells as part of the Drinking Water- Water Withdrawal Program (Watershed Protection Branch, Water Supply Section). This program provides data on the quality of ground water that the residents of Georgia are using. 3. Ground-water sampling at environmental facilities such as municipal solid waste landfills, RCRA facilities, underground storage tank sites, land application sites, 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 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved Georgia's WHP Plan on September 30, 1992. The WHP Plan became a part of the Georgia Safe Drinking Water Rules, effective July 1, 1993. The protection of public supply wells from contaminants is important not only for maintaining ground-water quality, but also for ensuring that public water supplies meet health standards. Analyses of water samples collected for the Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network during the period March 2011 through December 2011 and from previous years form the database for this summary. The Georgia GroundWater Monitoring Network is presently comprised of 77 wells and springs. Thirteen of the stations are scheduled for quarterly sampling, and, the remainder is scheduled to be sampled yearly. Each sample receives laboratory analyses for chloride, sulfate, nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, 26 metals, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Samples from the minerai spring and the main weii at Indian Springs State Park (stations P12A and P23) also receive analysis for fluoride. 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 March 2011 through December 2011 period, Ground-Water Monitoring staff collected 99 samples from 71 wells and six 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 ground-water quality at most of the 77 stations has remained good. 1.2 FACTORS AFFECTING CHEMICAL GROUND-WATER QUALITY The chemical quality of ground water is the result of complex physical, chemical, and biological processes. Among the more significant controls are the chemical quality of the water entering the ground-water 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 ground-water system in upland recharge areas. Water seeps through interconnected pore spaces and fractures in the soils 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 ground water in recharge areas. Chemical interactions between the water and the aquifer host rocks have an increasing significance with longer residence times. As a result, ground water 1-2 from discharge areas tends to be more highly mineralized than ground water in recharge areas. The well-and-pump system can also have a strong influence on the quality of the well water. Well plumbing, through compositional breakdown, can contribute metals (e.g., zinc from galvanized steel fittings) and organic compounds (e.g., tetrahydrofurans from PVC pipe cement) to the water. Pumps can aerate the water being drawn 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'Biue Ridge Province, which includes all but the northwestern corner of north Georgia; 3. The combined Valley and Ridge and Appalachian Plateau Province of northwest Georgia; 1.3.1 Coastal Plain Province Georgia's Coastal Plain Province generally comprises a wedge of loosely consolidated sediments that gently dip and thicken to the south and southeast. Ground water in the Coastal Plain flows through interconnected pore space between grains and through solution-enlarged voids in 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 a number of 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 1-3 G) Appalachian Plateau Province ~ Valley and Ridge Province Q) Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province @ Coastal Plain Province Figure 1-1. The Hydrogeologic Provinces of Georgia 1-4 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. Ground-water flow is generally to the south and southeast, in the direction of dip of the sedimentary layers. 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. 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. The system is unconfined over most of its inland extent, but becomes locally confined both in the coastal area and in 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 PiedmonU Blue Ridge Province (Daniel and Harned, 1997). The upper part of the system is the regolith aquifer, composed of saprolite and overlying soils and alluvium. The regolith aquifer is unconfined, and, the water resides primarily in intergranular pore spaces (primary porosity). The lower aquifer in the PiedmonUBiue Ridge aquifer system is the bedrock aquifer. This aquifer is developed in metamorphic and igneous bedrock (mostly Paleozoic and Precambrian in age), and, the water resides largely in fractures (secondary porosity). Secondary porosity in some specialized rock types, e.g. marbles, may also include solution voids. 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 offering local confinement. The regolith aquifer also serves as the reservoir that recharges the bedrock aquifer. 1-5 1.3.3 The Valley and Ridge Province Faulted and folded consolidated Paleozoic sedimentary formations exclusive of Mississippian and Pennsylvanian rocks characterize the Valley and Ridge Province. The principal porosity present in aquifer media consists of fractures and solution-enlarged voids; intergranular porosity may be important in some places. Locally, ground-water and surface-water systems closely interconnect. Dolostones and limestones of the Knox Group are the principal aquifers where they occur at the axes 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. 1.3.4 The 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 . 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 of Georgia, at the State's far northwest corner (Dade County and parts of Chattooga and Walker Counties). Due 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 GROUND-WATER PROBLEMS Data from ground-water investigations in Georgia, including those from the Ground-Water Monitoring Network, indicate that virtually all of Georgia has shallow ground water 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 occurring 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 Valley and Ridge Province, interconnection between the surface water systems and the ground-water 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 and require surface-water type treatment if used for public supplies. 1-6 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 contains excessive naturally occurring uranium. Aquifers in the outcrop areas of Cretaceous sediments immediately south of the Fall Line typically yield water sufficiently acidic to 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. Nitrate/nitrite concentrations in shallow ground water 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 ground-water quality occur in the Floridan aquifer. The first is the karstic Dougherty Plain of southwestern Georgia, where, as with the carbonate terranes of northwestern Georgia, surface waters and the pollutants and contaminants they entrain can directly access the aquifer. The second is the Gulf Trough area. The Gulf Trough is a linear subsurface geologic feature extending from southwestern Decatur County through northern Effingham County and may represent a filled-in marine current channel way (Huddlestun, 1993). Floridan ground water in and near the trough is typically high in total dissolved solids and may contain elevated levels of sulfate, barium, radionuclides, and arsenic (Kellam and Gorday, 1990; Donahue et al., 2013). The third is in the coastal area of Georgia, when influx of water with high dissolved solids contents can dramatically raise levels of sodium, calcium, magnesium, sulfate, and chloride . In the Brunswick area, ground-water withdrawal from the upper portions of Floridan results in the upwelling of ground water with high dissolved solids content from the deeper parts of the aquifer (Krause and Clarke, 2001 ). In the Savannah area, a cone of depression caused by pumping in and around Savannah has induced seawater to enter the Floridan aquifer 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 and to flow down-gradient toward Savannah (Foyle et al., 2001; Krause and Clarke, 2001 ). 1-7 CHAPTER 2 GEORGIA GROUND-WATER MONITORING NETWORK 2.1 MONITORING STATIONS For the period March 2011 through December 2011, attempts were made to have sampling stations in the major aquifer systems of the Coastal Plain Province, the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province, and the Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau Provinces {Table 2-1 ). Stations are restricted to wells or springs 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 regional activities (e.g., agricultural and industrial areas) or to hydrogeologic settings (e.g., granitic intrusions, Dougherty Plain); 3. areas of significant ground-water 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 Ground-Water Monitoring Network permits analysis of ground-water 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 ground-water quality. Temporal trends permit an assessment of the effects of rainfall and drought periods on ground-water quality and quantity. Both trends are useful for the detection of non-point source pollution. Non-point source pollution arises from broad-scale phenomena such as acid rain deposition or application of agricultural chemicals on crop lands. It should be noted that the data of the Ground-Water Monitoring Network represent water quality in only limited areas of Georgia. Monitoring water quality at the 77 sites located throughout Georgia provides an indication of ground-water 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 ground waters that are not being monitored. 2-1 Table 2-1.Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network, Calendar Year 2011. Aquifer/Aquifer System Cretaceous/ Providence Number of Stations Visited (Samples Taken) 12 stations (12 samples) Primary Stratigraphic Equivalents Age of Aquifer Rock Units Ripley Formation, Cusseta Sand, Blufftown Formation, Eutaw Formation, Tuscaloosa Formation, Providence Sand, Steel Creek Formation, Gaillard Formation, Pio Nono Formation Late Cretaceous Clayton 1 station (1 sample) Clayton Formation Paleocene Claiborne 3 stations (3 samples) Claiborne Group Middle Eocene Jacksonian Floridan Miocene/ Surficial Piedmont/Blue Ridge Valley and Ridge/Appal achian Plateau 3 stations (3 samples) 28 stations (48 samples) 6 stations (6 samples) 18 stations (19 samples) 6 stations (7 samples) Barnwell Group Late Eocene Ocala Group, Suwanee Limestone Middle Eocene to Early Oligocene Hawthorne Group, Miccosukee Formation, Cypresshead Formation Miocene to Recent Various igneous and metamorphic complexes Shady Dolomite, Knox Group, Conasauga Group, Ft. Payne Chert, Bangor and unnamed Missippian limestones, Pottsville Formation Precambrian, Paleozoic, Mesozoic Cambrian and Ordovician; Mississippian and Pennsylvanian 2-2 Stations of the Ground-Water Monitoring Network are intentionally located away from known point sources of pollution. The stations are intended to provide baseline data on ambient water quality in Georgia. EPD requires other forms of ground-water 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. Ground-water 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 ground water in the vicinity of the stations. Ground water in the recharge areas of the Coastal Plain aquifer systems is a future drinking-water resource. Monitoring stations in these recharge areas, in effect, constitute an early warning system for potential future water quality problems in confined portions of the Coastal Plain aquifer systems. 2.3 ANALYSES AND DATA RETENTION Analyses are available for 99 water samples collected from 77 stations (71 wells and 6 springs) during the period March 2011 through December 2011. In 1984, the first year of the Ground-Water 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 Coastal Plain Province. Ground water from all monitoring stations is tested for chloride, sulfate, nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, metals by inductively coupled plasma spectrometry (ICP) and inductively coupled plasma spectrometry/mass spectrometry (ICPMS), and VOCs. Water from stations P12A and P23 also receives testing for fluoride. Testing for aluminum, beryllium, calcium, cobalt, iron, potassium, magnesium, manganese, sodium, titanium, and vanadium was undertaken using the ICP method. Silver, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead, antimony, selenium, thallium, and zinc were also analyzed using ICP, although inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICPMS) gives better results for these metals. A high reporting limit attends the lab's current procedure for 2-3 analyzing potassium and is the reason for the lack of potassium detections. The ICPMS method was used to analyze chromium, nickel, copper, zinc, arsenic, selenium, molybdenum, silver, cadmium, tin, antimony, barium, thallium, lead, and uranium. This method generally works better for trace metals. The results of the chemical tests are reported in this Circular. For metals for which both methods were employed, the ICPMS results are reported. Before collecting a sample, EPD personnel also observe certain field measurements pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and temperature. This Circular also reports these measurements. Pursuant to the Georgia Safe Drinking Water Act of 1977, EPD has established MCLs for certain parameters included in analyses performed on Ground-Water Monitoring samples (EPD, 2009). Primary MCLs pertain to parameters that may have adverse effects on human health if their values are exceeded. 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 capability to cause stains are examples of such properties. MCLs apply only to treated water offered for public consumption; nevertheless, they are useful guide lines for evaluating the quality of untreated (raw) water. Table A-1 0 in the Appendix lists the Primary and Secondary MCLs for Ground-Water Monitoring Network parameters. Most wells currently on the Monitoring Network have in-place pumps. Using such pumps to purge wells and collect samples reduces the potential for cross-contamination that would attend the use of portable pumps. Two wells, PA9C and Ml17, are flowing, which dispenses altogether with pumps and negates the effects of the pump-well system on sample water. The pump on well MI9A, a shallow bored well formerly used for garden watering, is now out of operation, and, a bailer is used for sampling. Sampling procedures are adapted from techniques used by USGS and USEPA. For all wells except PA9C, MI9A, 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 for readings of pH, conductivity, temperature, and dissolved oxygen to stabilize and for 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 the 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 2-4 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 freeflowing branch. As a rule, trends for field measurements with increasing purge time include a lowering of pH, conductivity, and dissolved oxygen. For shallower wells, the temperature tends to approach the mean atmospheric temperature. For deeper wells, geothermal heating may raise the water temperature above the mean atmospheric level. 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 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 or not any MCLs were exceeded. The Drinking Water Program's Compliance and Enforcement Unit receives notification of Primary MCL exceedances involving public water supplies. 2-5 CHAPTER 3 GROUND-WATER 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 major aquifers and aquifer systems are restricted to specific regions and depths within the Province (Figure 3-1 ). These major aquifer systems commonly incorporate smaller aquifers that are locally confined. Ground-Water 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 aquifers and aquifer systems; 2. Updip, confined areas that are located in regions that are proximal to the recharge areas, yet are confined by overlying geologic formations. These are generally south to southeast of 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 consists of fractures -- but can be very permeable as fractures can transmit water rapidly. Despite the regional scale of these two aquifers, flow systems are small-scale and localized, unlike those of the Coastal Plain. Sedimentary formations characterize the 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. Whereas extensive regional aquifers characterize the Coastal Plain Province, faulting and folding has resulted in the creation of numerous localized flow systems in the Valley and Ridge Province. The major water-bearing units in this province are carbonate rocks. Faulting and fracturing of the carbonates has led to the 3-1 CRETACEOUS FLORIDAN OJ CRETACEOUS CLAIBORNE FLORIDAN FLORIDAN Figure 3-1. The Major Aquifers and Aquifer Systems of the Coastal Plain Province (after Davis, 1990). 3-2 widespread development of karst features, which significantly enhance porosity and permeability and exert a strong influence on local flow patterns. 3.2 CRETACEOUS/PROVIDENCE AQUIFER SYSTEM The Cretaceous aquifer system is a complexly interconnected group of aquifer subsystems developed in the late Cretaceous sands of the Coastal Plain Province. These sands crop out 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 system, 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 utilization, Figure 3-2). 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 permeable interval is termed the Dublin aquifer (Clarke et al., 1985). EPD used 12 wells to monitor the Cretaceous/Providence aquifer system. Reported depths ranged from 128 feet (K7) to 1025 feet (PD6). All except well K6 are local government-owned public supply wells. Well K6 produces process water for a kaolin mill. All wells are sampled yearly. Table A-1 in the Appendix reports field and laboratory results. 3.2.1 Field parameters The pHs of sample waters from all 12 wells ranged from 3.07 (K12) to 8.40 (PD6). As a rule, pHs of waters from the deeper wells are basic, while those from shallower wells are acidic. Well PD3 seems to be the exception, a well with a moderate reported depth of 456 feet, giving water with a pH of 8.37, characteristic of waters from wells twice its depth. Conductivities are available for all 12 wells and ranged from 10 uS/em (K19) to 362 uS/em (PD3), with a median of 34 uS/em. As a rule, the deeper wells gave water with the higher conductivities. Again, well PD3 was the exception. The temperatures measured should be viewed as approximations of the temperature of the water in the aquifer. Temperatures for all12 wells ranged 3-3 0 General recharge area (from Davis et al., 1989) e Sampling station Figure 3-2. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Cretaceous Aquifer System. 3-4 from 17.6 C (K7) to 28.6 C (K20). A review of the well depths shows that the deeper wells yield water with higher temperatures. Dissolved oxygen measurements are available for eight of the 12 wells. Concentrations ranged from 8.90 mg/L (Marshallville #2, K9A) down to 0.59 mg/L (Fort Gaines #2, PD3). Dissolved oxygen measurements can suffer from various interferences, processes that can expose the ground water to oxygen. An inadequately purged well may deliver water that has been in contact with air in the well bore. Pumping the water level in the well below a recharging horizon allows the water to "cascade" or fall freely down the well bore, splash, and aerate. 3.2.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds Testing for chloride, sulfate, combined nitrate/nitrite, total phosphorus, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) was done for samples from all 12 wells. Detectable chloride, at a concentration of 12 mg/L, occurred in a sample from only one well (PD3). Sulfate was detected in samples from five wells, with concentrations at or below 14 mg/L. Nitrate/nitrite, detected in samples from eight wells, ranged up to 2.0 mg/L. Samples from six wells contained detectable phosphorus, with concentrations ranging up to 0.99 mg/L. 3.2.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP) Testing for metals was performed on samples from all 12 stations using the ICP method. All 12 samples contained detectable sodium, which ranged from 1,000 ug/L (K9A) to 82,000 ug/L (PD3). Three wells - K20, PD3, and PD6 - gave samples with sodium contents far higher than the remainder of the wells. Two of these, K20 and PD6, were also the two deepest wells. Eight wells gave samples with detectable aluminum, with concentrations up to 460 ug/L (K12). Seven samples contained detectable calcium, and, seven contained detectable iron. Calcium levels ranged up to 22,000 ug/L. Iron levels ranged up to 320 ug/L (K12) with only well K12 exceeding the Secondary MCL of 300 ug/L. Samples from four wells contained detectable magnesium, with a maximum value of 3,800 ug/L. Two wells gave samples with detectable manganese, and, one with detectable vanadium. Beryllium, cobalt, potassium, and titanium were undetected. 3.2.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) ICPMS analysis found only copper, zinc, barium, lead, and uranium. Barium was detected in 11 samples, with a maximum concentration of 23 ug/L (K3). Lead was detected in samples from seven wells, with a concentration range 3-5 up to 330 ug/L (K9A). The concentration in the sample from well K9A far exceeded the action level of 15 ug/L and seems to be due to entrainment from a corrosion film on a little-used spigot into the sample water. Copper was detected in six samples and ranged in concentration up to 120 ug/L (K9A). Zinc was detected in three samples, at levels up to 64 ug/L (K9A). Copper, lead, and zinc are commonly introduced into sample water from plumbing and are not necessarily present naturally. Uranium was detected in one sample (K6) at a level of 1.3 ug/L. 3.3 CLAYTON AQUIFER The Clayton aquifer of southwestern Georgia is developed mainly in the middle limestone unit of the Paleocene Clayton Formation. Limestones and calcareous sands of the Clayton aquifer 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). 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 zones are called the Dublin aquifer. Only one well (CT8), an 80-foot deep domestic well, was available to monitor the Clayton aquifer system (Figure 3-3) (Appendix Table A-2). The well is sampled yearly. The well water had a pH of 4.22, an electrical conductivity of 41 uS/em, and a temperature of 18.00 C. Dissolved oxygen was 8.00 mg/L and nitrate/nitrite registered at 1.8 mg/L as nitrogen. The water contained sodium at 2,800 ug/L, potassium at a level of 1,100 ug/L, aluminum at a level of 100 ug/L, and manganese at a level of 25 ug/L. Copper at a concentration of 8 ug/L and barium at a concentration of 20 ug/L were the two trace metals detected. 3.4 CLAIBORNE AQUIFER 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; Gorday et al., 1997). The 3-6 0 General recharge area (from Davis et al., 1989) Sampling station Figure 3-3. Location of the Station Monitoring the Clayton Aquifer. 3-7 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 is more than 350 feet thick near its downdip limit of utilization (Figure 3-4) (Tuohy, 1984). The aquifer generally thickens to the southeast. The clay-rich upper portion of the Claiborne Group, the Lisbon Formation, acts as a confining layer and separates the Claiborne aquifer system 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 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 system (Figure 3-4) (Appendix Table A-3). 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, and, CL4A is 230 feet deep. The depth of CL8 is not known precisely, but is in the vicinity of 100 feet. 3.4.1 Field parameters The pHs of sample waters from two wells was mildly acidic (CL8 at 5.96 and CL4A at 6.86) while the third was mildly basic (CL2 at 7.29). Conductivities registered at 84 uS/em (CL8), 151 uS/em (CL4A), and 200 uS/em (CL2); and, temperatures registered at 20.0 C (CL4A), 20.2 C (CL2), and 21.4 C (CL8). The somewhat higher temperature for sample water from well CL8 is likely due to the fact that the well was sampled at a point about 200 feet from the well head during warm weather (springtime, late afternoon), whereas the sampling points for the other two wells are at the wellheads. Dissolved oxygen contents measured at 0.58 mg/L (CL8), 3.18 mg/L (CL2), and 10.00 mg/L (CL4A). The CL4A sampling point was a small spigot that would not accommodate the sampling apparatus. Thus the sample water was well exposed to air and entrained much oxygen. 3.4.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds None of the samples contained detectable chloride or VOCs. Samples from wells CL4A and CL8 contained, respectively, 12 mg/L and 10 mg/L sulfate. Well CL2 gave a sample with a nitrate/nitrite concentration of 0.39 mg/L as nitrogen. Samples from all three wells contained detectable phosphorus (CL2 at 0.03 mg/L, CL4A at 0.35 mg/L, CL8 at 0.51 mg/L). 3-8 D General recharge area (from Davis et al., 1989) e Sampling station Figure 3-4 . Locations of Stations Monitoring the Claiborne Aquifer. 3-9 3.4.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP) Well CL2 was the only well to give a sample with detectable aluminum (60 ug/L). Wells CL4A and CL8 both gave samples containing detectable iron and manganese. With iron levels of 1,900 ug/L for the CL4A sample and 850 ug/L for the CL8 sample and waters from both wells exceeded the 300 ug/L Secondary MCL for iron. Likewise, the manganese levels of 69 ug/L for CL4A and 56 ug/L for CL8 both exceeded the Secondary MCL for that metal of 50 ug/L. 3.4.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) ICPMS analyses found no trace metals other than barium in any of the samples. Barium levels were 11 ug/L for the CL2 sample, 15 ug/L for the CL4A sample, and 36 ug/L for the CL8 sample. 3.5 JACKSONIAN AQUIFER The Jacksonian aquifer of central and east-central Georgia is developed primarily 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 most significant Jacksonian recharge areas. Aquifer sands form a northern clastic 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 form a southern carbonate facies and are included in the Floridan aquifer system. The Savannah River and the Ocmulgee River are the eastern and western discharge boundaries for the updip parts of the Jacksonian aquifer. The Jacksonian aquifer is equivalent to the Upper Three Runs aquifer as used in Summerour et al. (1994 ). Three wells were available to monitor the Jacksonian aquifer (Figure 3-5, Appendix Table A-4). Wells J1B and J8 are domestic wells, while well J6 is a public supply well. Well J8 is a shallow bored well in the up-dip outcrop area, whereas J1 B (approximately 100 feet deep) and J6 (200 feet deep) are deeper drilled wells. All wells are sampled yearly. 3.5.1 Field parameters The pHs for wells J1B and J6 were slightly basic, at 7.07 and 7.08 respectively; pH of J8 was acidic at 4.74. Conductivities were higher for J1B and J6 at 283 uS/em and 260 uS/em respectively. The conductivity for well J8 was 74 uS/em. Temperatures for all three well waters were nearly the same at 19.2 C for J1B, 19.6 C for J6, and 19.4 C for J8. Dissolved oxygen concentrations were highest 3-10 D General recharge area (from Davis et al., 1989) Sampling station Figure 3-5. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Jacksonian Aquifer. 3-11 at 8.14 mg/L in water from the shallow well J8 and lowest at 0. 71 mg/L in municipal well J6. Water from domestic well J1B registered a dissolved oxygen content of 5.13 mg/L. 3.5.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds Chloride was detected in sample waters from well J1 B (11 mg/L) and well J8 (10 mg/L). Sample water from well J6 contained detectable sulfate (14 mg/L). Nitrate/nitrite was detected in samples from wells J1 B and J8. The content in the J1 B sample at 2.4 mg/L as nitrogen was within the presumably natural range of 3.0 mg/L or less. The content in the J8 sample at 4.8 mg/L as nitrogen was in the human-influenced range of greater than 3 mg/L (Daniels and Messner, 201 0). Phosphorus was detected in water from well J1 B (0.04 mg/L) and in water from well J6 (0.15 mg/L). No VOCs were detected. 3.5.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP) Waters from all three wells contained detectable aluminum, with the J1B sample registering 310 ug/L, the J6 sample registering 67 ug/L, and the J8 sample registering 110 ug/L. The Secondary MCL for aluminum is a range from 50 ug/L to 200 ug/L, depending on the ability of a treatment system to remove aluminum. Only well J6 is a public well with a treatment system. All three wells gave waters with detectable calcium, with well water from J18 containing 54,000 ug/L, well water from J6 containing 47,000 ug/L, and well water from J8 containing 6,800 ug/L. Waters from all three wells also contained sodium, with water from J1 B containing 4,200 ug/L, from J6 containing 1,800 ug/L, and from J8 containing 3,700 ug/L. Magnesium was detected in samples from two wells, J6 (1 ,400 mg/L) and J8 (1 ,200 ug/L). Well J6 gave a sample containing 76 ug/L iron; and, well J8 gave a sample containing 51 ug/L manganese, which exceeds the Secondary MCL of 50 ug/L. 3.5.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) All three wells contained detectable barium, with the sample from J1 B registering 23 ug/L, the sample from J6 registering 8.5 ug/L, and the sample from J8 registering 30 ug/L. The sample from J8 contained a variety of trace metals besides barium: nickel (11 ug/L), zinc (30 ug/L), cadmium (0.96 ug/L), and lead 2.9 ug/L). Samples from the other two wells contained no detectable trace metals other than barium. The cadmium content did not exceed the Primary MCL of 5 ug/l. The lead and zinc and, possibly, the cadmium and nickel were probably leached from materials used to construct the well and its plumbing. 3-12 3.6 FLORIDAN AQUIFER SYSTEM The Floridan aquifer system is developed predominantly in Eocene and Oligocene limestones and dolostones that underlie most of the Coastal Plain Province. The aquifer is a major source of ground water 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 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 part of the Floridan is restricted to units of Eocene age (Clarke et al., 1990). The lower permeable zone of the Floridan consists mainly of dolomitic limestone of middle and early Eocene age and pelletal, vuggy, dolomitic limestone of Paleocene age but extends into the late Cretaceous in Glynn County. From its up-dip limit, defined by clays of the Barnwell Group, the aquifer system thickens to well over 700 feet in coastal Georgia. A dense limestone facies along the trend of the Gulf Trough locally limits ground-water quality and availability (Kellam and Gorday, 1990; Applied Coastal Research Laboratory, 2002). The Gulf Trough probably is a filled marine-current channel that extends from southwestern Decatur County through northern Effingham County. A ground-water divide separates a smaller southwestward flow regime in the Floridan aquifer system in the Dougherty Plain from the large southeastward flow regime in the remainder of Georgia. 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 to the east is recharged by leakage from the Jacksonian aquifer system 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 made use of 28 wells, with 18 scheduled for sampling on a yearly basis and 10 on a quarterly basis (sampled three times during 2011) (Figure 3-6). The total number of samples collected from the wells was 48. All 28 wells are drilled wells. Twenty four of the wells are local-government owned public supply wells. Two of the wells supply industrial process water. One of the wells is a domestic-type well supplying a church and a pastorium, and, another is a former USGS test well. Depths range from 97 feet (PA49, church well) to 1,211 feet (PA9C, test well). Table A-6 in the Appendix gives field and laboratory results. 3-13 D General recharge area (from Davis et aL, 1989) Sampling station Figure 3-6. Locations of Stations Monitoring the Floridan Aquifer System. 3-14 3.6.1 Field parameters Measurements of pH are available for all samples and ranged from 7.01 (PA39) to 8.49 (PA30). Conductivities are also available for all samples and ranged from 142 uS/em (PA36) to 488 uS/em (PA28). Temperatures are available for all sampling events and ranged from 20.3 De for well PA27 to 28.1 De for well PA9C. Well PA9C is the deepest of the Floridan wells at 1,211 feet, so the high temperature reflects the geothermal effect. Thirty seven dissolved oxygen measurements are available from 23 wells. At some stations, dissolved oxygen measurements were not taken because of equipment problems. At well PA14A, the raw water outlet is such that exposure of monitoring water and sampling water to air cannot be avoided. 3.6.2 Major Anions, Non-Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds Of the 10 wells scheduled for quarterly sampling, wells PA23, PA28, and PA56 gave eight samples with detectable chloride out of a total of nine samples collected. Levels ranged from undetected to 36 mg/L (PA56). Four wells (PA2, PA4, PA9C, PA13) of the 18 scheduled for annual sampling gave samples with detectable chloride, with concentrations ranging from 11 mg/L (PA2) to 730 mg/L (PA9C) (Secondary MCL of 250 mg/L). The 730 mg/L level occurred in well PA9C and is more than 16 times the next highest concentration of 44 mg/L in the sample from well PA4. Well PA9C derives water from the lower permeable zone of the Floridan aquifer. The remaining 21 wells and 39 samples contained no detectable chloride. Four of the 10 quarterly wells (PA23, PA28, PA29, PA56) gave 12 samples containing detectable sulfate, with concentrations ranging from 19 mg/L (PA6) to 170 mg/L (PA28). Eight of the 18 annual wells gave samples containing detectable sulfate. Levels ranged from 23 mg/L (PA6) to 170 mg/L (PA9C). The remaining six quarterly wells and 10 annual wells gave samples with no detectable sulfate. Wells PA23, PA25, PA28, PA44, and PA56 of the 10 quarterly sampled wells gave 13 samples with detectable nitrate/nitrite. Levels ranged from undetected to 1.7 mg/L (PA25) as nitrogen. Eight annually sampled wells gave samples with detectable nitrate/nitrite. Levels ranged from 0.02 mg/L as nitrogen (PA2) to 2.2 mg/L as nitrogen (PA49). The remaining 15 wells gave samples with no detectable nitrate/nitrite. There is some tendency for shallower wells to give samples with higher levels of nitrate/nitrite. Nitrate/nitrite levels in the samples from each quarterly well tend, as a rule, to be similar to one another. Phosphorus was detected in 41 of 48 samples from 26 of 28 wells. Fourteen of 16 annual wells gave samples with detectable phosphorus. All 10 quarterly wells gave samples with detectable phosphorus, with five giving one sample with no detectable phosphorus. Phosphorus levels ranged up to 0.07 mg/L (PA20, annual) as total phosphorus. Volatile organic compounds were detected in one sample each from wells PA28 (Moultrie #1) and PA44 (Sycamore #2) and in all three samples from well PA23 (Cairo #8). All VOCs detected were from the trihalomethane family of compounds. 3-15 3.6.3 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Spectrometry (ICP) ICP analyses found detectable levels of potassium, aluminum, manganese, iron, calcium, magnesium, and sodium. Detectable potassium occurred in only one sample (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 aluminum was found in three samples (PA6, PA13, PA20). The levels lie within the 50 ug/L to 200 ug/L Secondary MCL range. Detectable manganese occurred in 12 samples from six wells. Three of the six are sampled quarterly and all samples from each of the three contained detectable manganese. The manganese concentrations in the sample from one of the annually sampled wells (PA18) and in all three samples from one of the quarterly sampled wells (PA34A) 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. Iron was detected in 17 samples from nine wells, six of them quarterly wells and three annual wells. Two samples from two wells, annually sampled PA9C and quarterly sampled PA23, exceeded the Secondary MCL of 300 ug/L. The iron contents of samples from two quarterly wells (PA34A and PA36) varied within restricted ranges, while iron contents of samples from two other quarterly wells (PA23 and PA29) varied considerably, with order-of-magnitude differences. Detectable magnesium was found in 27 samples from the 10 quarterly sampled wells and in 17 samples from the 18 annually sampled wells. Magnesium concentrations ranged up to 76,000 ug/L. The three samples from quarterly well PA25 and the sample from annual well PA49 lacked detectable magnesium. Both wells are Floridan recharge area wells. Magnesium levels in samples from the quarterly wells seem to vary within relatively narrow limits. Calcium was detected in all samples from the 28 Floridan wells. Concentrations ranged from 22,000 ug/L (PA2) to 100,000 ug/L (PA9C). For samples from quarterly wells, calcium concentrations seem to fall within narrow ranges. 3.6.4 Metals by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS) ICPMS analysis found detectable chromium, copper, zinc, arsenic, molybdenum, ba'rium, and lead in the Floridan samples. The single chromium detection occurred in a sample taken shortly after quarterly well PA44 and its associated plumbing underwent maintenance. The sample also contained some trihalomethanes, presumably from post-maintenance disinfection of the well and its plumbing. Three samples contained detectable copper. Two were from quarterly wells PA14A and PA23, and, one from annual well PA9C. Wells PA9C and PA23 also gave the only two samples containing detectable zinc. Arsenic, at levels below the Primary MCL, was found in two samples from quarterly well PA23 but in no others. Molybdenum was detected in all six samples from two quarterly wells PA23 and PA56. Barium was detected in all samples from all wells and ranged in concentration from 3.9 ug/L to 200 ug/L. Barium seems to be 3-16 more abundant in samples from wells of a 400-foot to 700-foot depth range. Lead was detected in 10 samples from nine wells, with four of the wells being quarterly. All detections were below the action level of 15 ug/L. Eleven samples from seven wells contained detectable uranium. Quarterly wells PA44 and PA56 always gave samples with detectable uranium, while quarterly wells PA23 and PA29 did so occasionally. No samples exceeded the 30 ug/L Primary MCL for uranium. 3.7 MIOCENE/SURFICIAL AQUIFER SYSTEM 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 Palin. The Hawthorne Group covers most of the Coastal Plain 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 Atlantic coastal area (from the coast to about 45 miles inland). The sand layers in the two lowermost of the sequences host the lower and upper Brunswick aquifers, which are included in the Miocene/Surficial aquifer system of this report. The Cypresshead Formation overlies the Hawthorne Group in the Atlantic coastal area and consists, in up-dip areas, predominantly of fine- to coarse- grained quartz sand and, in down-dip areas, interbedded fine sand and clay (Huddlestun, 1988). In the Coastal Plain of far south central and southwestern Georgia, the Miccosukee 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 interbedded 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 wells-- Ml1, MI2A, MI9A, MI10B, Ml16, and Ml17 --were used to monitor the Miocene/Surficial aquifer system (Figure 3-7). Wells Ml1, MI2A, MI9A, and Ml1 OB are private domestic wells, with MI9A and Ml1 OB no longer being used as drinking water sources. Ml16 is used for general purposes at a fire station. Ml17 originated as a geologic bore hole that became a flowing well. It is currently used both as a domestic water source and as an augmentation well for maintaining a pond. MI2A and MI9A are bored wells. The remainder are drilled wells. Depths are known for three wells, with MI9A at about 25 feet, Ml17 at 120 feet, and Ml16 at 400 feet. All wells are sampled yearly. 3-17 o!._.__ __.. I GWN-K9A Macon Marshallville Well #2 560 NG 1\J GWN-K10B Fort Valley Well #6 Peach 600 NG GWN-K11A Warner Robins Well #2 540 NG Houston GWN-K12 Perry/Holiday Inn Well 350 NG Houston GWN-K19 Richmond Hephzibah/Murphy Street Well 484 NG GWN-K20 Sumter Plains Well #7 1000 NG GWN-P02A Preston Well #4 Webster 205 NG GWN-P03 Fort Gaines Well #2 456 NG Clay GWN-P06 Early Blakely Well #4 1025 NG NG 5/26/2011 6.22 91 NA 20.8 NO NO 13 0.28 0.99 NG 12/21/2011 5.98 29 NA 19.8 NO NO NO 0.04 NO NG 5/25/2011 4.76 25 6.33 17.6 NO NO NO 0.4 NO NG 9/28/2011 3.07 34 8.90 21.3 NO NO 11 0.04 NO NG 5/25/2011 4.07 14 8.87 18.6 NO NO NO 0.69 NO NG 4/27/2011 4.72 18 6.78 19.3 NO NO NO 0.88 NO NG 4/27/~~011 4.05 47 0.71 20.0 NO NO 10 NO NO NG 5/26/2011 4.81 10 NA 20.2 NO NO NO 0.12 0.02 NG 12/14/2011 7.56 109 2.15 28.6 NO NO NO NO 0 .20 NG 4/28/2011 5.26 34 6.09 19.8 NO NO NO 2.0 0.03 NG 4/28/2011 8.37 362 0.59 21.6 NO 12 10 NO 0.03 NG 5124/2011 8.40 338 NA 26.6 NO NO 14 NO 0.03 Table A-1. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Cretaceous/Providence Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-K3 Washington NO NO NO NO NO NO 5.9 NO NO NO NO 23 NO NO NO 73 NO 22,000 NO 190 NO 1,400 27 4,300 NO 19 GWN-K6 Twiggs NO NO 23 35 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 18 NO 2.3 1.3 NO NO 4,300 NO 320 NO NO NO 3,100 NO NO GWN-K7 Jones NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 19 NO 4.2 NO 64 NO 2,300 NO NO NO NO NO 1,900 NO NO GWN-K9A Macon NO NO 120 64 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 8.8 NO 330 NO 170 NO NO NO 160 NO NO NO 1,000 NO NO GWN-K10B Peach }> I GWN-K11A VJ Houston NO NO 5.4 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 5.5 NO 2.6 NO 74 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 1,200 NO NO NO NO 7.5 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 6.3 NO 3.2 NO 290 NO 1,200 NO 220 NO NO NO 1,800 NO NO GWN-K12 Houston NO NO 14 32 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 5.2 NO 8.5 NO 460 NO NO NO 180 NO NO 13 1,200 NO NO GWN-K19 Richmond NO NO 6.9 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 6.4 NO 1.5 NO 150 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 1,300 NO NO GWN-K20 Sumter NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 2,900 NO 22 NO NO NO 26,000 NO NO GWN-P02A Webster NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 18 NO NO NO 75 NO 3,400 NO NO NO 1,100 NO 1,400 NO NO GWN-P03 Clay NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 4.4 NO NO NO NO NO 6,200 NO 24 NO 1,100 NO 82,000 NO NO GWN-P06 Early NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 7.2 NO NO NO NO NO 8,100 NO NO NO 3,800 NO 70,000 NO NO Table A-2. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Clayton Stations. Part A: Station Identification, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals. Well Name GWN-CT8 Weathersby house well 80 NG NG 4/27/2011 4.22 41 8 .00 18.0 ND ND ND 1.8 ND Schley )> I .J::>. Table A-2. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Clayton Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-CT8 Schley NO NO 8.0 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 20 NO NO NO 100 NO NO NO NO 1,100 NO 25 2,800 NO NO )> I 01 Table A-3. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Claiborne Stations. Part A: Station Identification, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals. County Well Name I GWN-CL2 Dooly Unadilla Well #3 315 315 24 4/27/2011 7.29 200 3.18 20.2 NO NO NO 0.39 0.03 GWN-CL4A Plains Well #8 Sumter 230 NG NG 12/14/2011 6.86 151 10.00 20.0 NO NO 12 NO 0.35 GWN-CL8 Flint River Nursery Office NG NG NG 4/27/2011 5.96 84 0.58 21.4 NO NO 10 NO 0.51 Dooly Well )> I (j) Table A-3. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Claiborne Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-CL2 Dooly GWN-CL4A Sumter GWN-CLB Dooly ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 11 ND ND ND 60 ND 43,000 ND ND ND ND ND 1,500 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 15 ND ND ND ND ND 26,000 ND 1,900 ND 3,500 69 2,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 36 ND ND ND ND ND 12,000 ND 850 ND 1,300 56 1,900 ND ND )> I --.J Table A-4. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Jacksonian Stations. Part A: Station Identification, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals. GWN-J1B Burke GWN-J6 Jefferson GWN-J8 Jefferson Well Name McNair House Well Wrens Well #4 Kahn House Well I I- feet feet 100 NG I I I Inches sam~led I uS/em NG 4/14/2011 7.07 283 I I I I I I m~/L "c u~/L mq/L m~/L m~ N/L m~/L 5.13 19.2 ND 11 ND 2.5 0.04 200 NG 8 4/14/2011 7.08 260 0.71 19.6 ND ND 14 ND 0.15 40 NG 30 4/14/2011 4.74 74 8.14 19.4 ND 10 ND 4.8 ND )> I CXl Table A-4. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Jacksonian Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-J1B Burke GWN-J6 Jefferson GWN-J8 Jefferson NO ND ND ND ND NO NO ND ND ND ND 23 ND NO NO 310 ND 54,000 NO ND ND ND NO 4,200 ND ND ND NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 8.5 NO NO NO 67 NO 47,000 NO 76 NO 1,400 ND 1,800 NO ND NO 11 NO 36 NO ND NO NO 0.96 NO NO 30 NO 2.9 NO 110 NO 6,800 NO ND NO 1,200 51 3,700 ND ND )> cI.o Table A-5. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Miocene Stations. Part A: Station Identification , Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals. Well Name GWN-MI1 Cook Adei/McMillan NG NG GWN-MI2A Boutwell House well NG NG Lowndes GWN-MI9A Murphy garden well 25 NG Thomas )> GWN-MI10B Calhoun house well NG NG ...I..... Colquitt 0 GWN-MI16 Liberty County East Dis- 400' NG Liberty trict Fire Station deep well. GWN-MI17 Springfield Egypt Road 120' NG Effingham Test Well NG 3/16/2011 7.73 235 1.61 22.5 ND ND ND ND 0.03 NG 3/30/2011 4.44 115 5.94 20.4 ND 15 ND 6.10 ND NG 12/20/:2011 7.62 147 NA 21.1 ND 11 ND 7.50 0.12 NG 8/9/2011 6.47 71 0.54 22.3 ND ND ND 0.02 0.45 NG 12/15/2011 8.05 197 0.81 23 .6 ND NO 35 NO 0.03 NG 12/15/2011 7.88 162 0.04 19.0 ND ND NO NO 0.02 Table A-5. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Miocene Stations. Part B: Metals. Coun GWN-MI1 Cook NO NO NO 39 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 20 NO NO NO NO NO 25,000 NO 25 NO 15,000 NO 6,800 NO NO GWN-MI2A lowndes NO NO 7.1 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 29 NO 11 NO 200 NO 4,600 NO 22 NO 3,500 14 4,500 NO NO GWN-MI9A Thomas NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 62 NO NO NO NO NO 35,000 NO NO NO 3,900 NO 5,200 NO NO GWN-MI10B Colquitt NO NO NO 96 ND 14 NO NO ND NO ND 190 NO 3.7 NO NO ND 8,600 NO 3,000 NO 5,700 97 6,700 NO NO GWN-MI16 Uberty NO NO ND NO ND ND NO NO NO NO ND 17 ND NO NO NO NO 31,000 NO NO NO 17,000 NO 18,000 NO NO )> GWN-MI17 I ~ Effingham ~ NO ND NO NO NO ND NO NO NO NO NO 24 NO NO ND NO NO 52,000 NO NO NO 1,900 14 8,800 NO NO Table A-6. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Floridan Stations. Part A: Station Identification , Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals. Well Name GWN-PA2 Savannah Well #13 1004 NG Chatham GWN-PA4 Tybee Island Well #1 402 NG Chatham GWN-PAS Interstate Paper Well #1 810 NG Liberty )> I GWN-PA6 Hinesville Well #5 --" 1\.) Liberty 806 NG GWN-PA9C Miller Ball Park North 1211 NG Glynn East Well GWN-PA13 Waycross Well #3 Ware 775 NG GWN-PA14A Statesboro Well #4 413 NG Bulloch GWN-PA16 Millen Well #1 Jenkins 500 NG GWN-PA17 Swainsboro Well #7 260 NG Emanuel GWN-PA18 Metter Well #2 Candler 540 NG GWN-PA20 Lakeland Well #2 Lanier 340 NG GWN-PA22 Thomasville Well #6 400 NG Thomas uc NG 5/10/2011 7.94 237 0.57 23.2 ND 11 ND 0.02 0.02 NG 8/24/2011 8.09 407 NA 22.9 ND 44 120 ND 0.03 NG 5/10/2011 7.82 310 0.52 24.4 ND ND 33 ND 0.04 NG 5/25/2011 7.79 176 NA 24.7 ND ND 23 ND 0.03 NG 5/25/2011 8.15 307 NA 28.1 ND 730 260 ND 0.03 NG 4/13/2011 7.55 391 0.58 25.2 ND 15 50 ND ND NG 5/11/2011 7.82 250 NA 23.5 ND 8/24/2011 8.21 154 NA 23.9 ND 11/17/:1011 8.06 153 NA 22.9 ND NG 5/11/2011 7.12 284 0.59 21.5 ND ND ND ND 0.02 ND ND ND 0.03 ND ND ND 0.04 ND ND ND 0.03 NG 5/11/2011 7.15 257 3.83 21.0 ND ND ND 0.04 ND NG 5/11/2011 7.89 217 0.58 21.9 ND ND ND ND 0.03 NG 4/13/2011 7.65 349 0.66 22.3 ND ND 64 ND 0.07 NG 3/31/2011 7.67 401 4.05 21.9 ND ND 67 0.18 0.03 Table A-6. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Floridan Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-PA2 Chatham NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 11 NO NO NO NO NO 22,000 NO NO NO 8,300 NO 15,000 NO NO GWNPA4 Chatham NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 9 NO NO NO NO NO 35,000 NO NO NO 28,000 NO 55,000 NO NO GWN-PA5 Liberty NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 31.0 NO NO NO NO NO 24,000 NO NO NO 14,000 NO 16,000 NO NO GWN-PA6 Liberty NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 23.0 NO NO NO 65 NO 26,000 NO NO NO 13,000 NO 16,000 NO NO GWN-PA9C Glynn NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 56 NO NO NO NO NO 100,000 NO 330 8,400 76.000 NO 400,000 NO NO )> ...I .... w GWN-PA13 Ware NO NO 17 17 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 71 NO 1.2 NO 72 NO 41 ,000 NO NO NO 18,000 NO 16,000 NO NO GWN-PA14A Bulloch NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 3.9 NO NO NO NO NO 12 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 4.3 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 4.8 NO NO NO NO NO 30,000 NO NO NO NO 33,000 NO NO NO NO 34,000 NO NO NO 5,700 NO 6,200 NO 6,500 NO 6,700 NO NO NO 7,000 NO NO NO 7,300 NO NO GWN-PA16 Jenkins NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 4.5 NO NO NO NO NO 45,000 NO NO NO 3,200 45 4,900 NO NO GWN-PA17 Emanuel NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 160 NO NO NO NO NO 45,000 NO NO NO 2,000 NO 2.900 NO NO GWN-PA18 Candler NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 25 NO NO NO NO NO 27,000 NO NO NO 3,000 55 9,500 NO NO GWN-PA20 Lanier NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 28 NO NO NO 69 NO 43,000 NO NO NO 17,000 NO 4,600 NO NO GWN-PA22 Thomas NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 24 NO 1.3 NO NO NO 43,000 NO NO NO 21,000 NO 6,900 NO NO Part A: Station Identification, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals. Count~ Well Name I GWN-PA23 Cairo #8 Grady 465' NG GWN-PA25 Donalsonville I 7th Street 174 NG )> Seminole Well ...I..... ~ GWN-PA27 Camilla Industrial Park 360 NG Mitchell Well GWN-PA28 Moultrie Well #1 Colquitt 750 NG GWN-PA29 Adel Well#6 Cook 405 NG GWN-PA30 Propex/Nashville Mills 410' NG Berrien Well#2 GWN-PA31 Tifton Well #6 Tift 652 NG GWN-PA32 OcillaWell#3 Irwin 637 NG NG 3/17/2011 7.66 375 2.05 22.9 tcm=1.1 11 bdcm=1 .2 dbcm=1.4 8/10/2011 7.82 224 1.49 23.0 tcm=1.3 10 bdcm=1.0 dbcm=1.1 10/27/2011 7.62 347 2.78 23.1 tcm=2.3 NO bdcm=1.4 dbcm=1.2 NG 3/31/2011 7.35 290 5.05 21 .1 NO NO 8/10/2011 7.55 186 5.00 21 .1 NO NO 11/16/2011 7.59 287 NA 21 .1 NO NO NG 3/31/2011 7.58 238 3.49 20.3 NO NO 49 0.02 0.02 43 NO 0.02 41 0.03 NO NO 1.70 0.03 NO 1.70 0.02 NO 1.60 NO NO 0.49 0.03 NG 3/17/2011 7.84 438 0.53 23.4 NO 11 96 NO 0.03 8/9/2011 7.43 388 0.59 25.3 tcm=1.2 16 170 NO 0.03 tbm=1.8 bdcm=1.3 dbcm=2.0 10/27/2011 7.76 488 8.20 22.9 NO 12 120 0.02 NO NG 3/16/2011 7.34 353 0.67 22.1 NO NO 64 NO 0.05 8/9/2011 8 .38 223 0.01 22 .1 NO NO 60 NO 0.05 10/26/2011 7.54 347 0.63 22 .1 NO NO 62 NO 0 .05 NG 8/9/2011 8.49 218 0.04 23.6 NO NO 62 NO 0.03 NG 3/16/2011 7.36 270 1.15 22.0 NO NO NO 0.02 0.03 NG 3/30/2011 7.82 195 3.25 20.9 NO NO NO NO 0.04 Table A-6. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Floridan Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-PA23 Grady ND ND ND ND ND ND 20 ND ND ND ND 110 ND ND ND ND ND 38,000 ND 320 ND 18,000 ND 15,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND 5.2 ND 20 ND ND ND ND 120 ND ND ND ND ND 33,000 ND 41 ND 16,000 ND 14,000 ND ND GWN-PA25 Seminole GWN-PA27 )> Mitchell ...I..... CJl GWN-PA28 Colquitt GWN-PA29 Cook GWN-PA30 Berrien GWN-PA31 Tift GWN-PA32 Irwin ND ND 25 22 5.0 ND 26 ND ND ND ND 110 ND ND 1.8 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 8.2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 8.5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 8.6 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 12 ND ND ND ND ND 37,000 ND 120 ND 18,000 ND 14,000 ND ND ND ND 57,000 ND ND ND ND ND 3,100 ND ND ND ND 59,000 ND ND ND ND ND 3,700 ND ND ND ND 57,000 ND 73 ND ND ND 3,500 ND ND ND ND 46,000 ND ND ND 1,400 ND 1,300 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 96 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 19 ND NO ND ND 83 ND ND ND ND ND 36,000 ND ND ND ND 58,000 ND 65 ND 20,000 ND 27,000 ND ND ND 28,000 ND 28,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 83 ND ND ND ND ND 38,000 ND ND ND 22,000 ND 26,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 12 ND ND ND ND ND 52,000 ND 100 ND 18,000 23 3,900 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 13 ND 1.1 1.5 ND ND 46,000 ND 39 ND 16,000 17 3,300 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 11 ND ND ND ND ND 45,000 ND 34 ND 16,000 16 3,100 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 58 ND 3.2 1.4 ND ND 43,000 ND 110 ND 17,000 ND 5,100 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 69 ND 1.1 1.6 ND ND 47,000 ND ND ND 8,900 ND 2,500 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 76 ND ND ND ND ND 33,000 ND 92 ND 6,000 29 1,900 ND ND Table A-6, Continued. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Floridan Stations. Part A: Station Identification, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals. Well Name GWN-PA34A McRae Well #3 Telfair 600 NG NG 5/12/2011 7.45 318 0.57 22.4 ND ND ND ND ND 8/9/2011 7.37 31 5 0.54 22 .6 ND ND ND ND 0 .03 11/17/201 1 7.64 206 NA 22.3 ND NO NO NO 0.02 GWN-PA36 Vidalia #1 Toombs 808 NG NG 5/26/2011 7.98 142 NA 23.2 ND ND ND NO 0.03 8/9/2011 7.54 215 0.53 23.9 ND NO NO ND 0.03 11/17/.2011 8.17 142 NA 22.9 NO ND NO NO 0.02 GWN-PA38 Eastman Well #4 )> Dodge I e--n" GWN-PA39 SylvesterWell #1 Worth 410 NG NG 5/12/2011 7.61 225 4 .73 20.7 ND NO ND 0.28 0.03 196 NG NG 5/24/2011 7.01 278 1.57 22.0 ND NO NO 0.04 0.02 GWN-PA44 Sycamore Well #2 Turner 501 NG NG 4/13/201 1 7.81 187 4.78 21 .3 NO NO NO 0.2 NO 8/9/2011 7.75 185 4.25 22.0 ND NO NO 0.2 0.02 10/26/2011 7.35 208 8.67 23.3 tcm=6.6 ND ND 0.04 0.02 tbm=0.62 GWN-PA49 Harmony Church Well 97 Dooly NG NG 5/12/2011 7.55 204 8.02 20.9 ND ND NO 2.2 0 .03 GWN-PA56 Whigham I Davis Avenue 604' NG NG 3/17/2011 7.70 380 1.07 22 .9 NO 31 19 0.05 0.02 Grady Well 8/10/2011 7.84 254 0.51 22.8 NO 36 21 0.07 0.03 11/16/2011 8.06 250 NA 22 .8 NO 34 20 0.05 0.02 GWN-PA57 Ambrose Well #2 Coffee 600 465 10 . 3/30/2011 7.89 231 6.57 22.1 ND 8/9/2011 7.79 237 0.70 22.8 NO 10/26/2011 7.54 237 0.60 21 .6 ND NO NO ND 0.03 NO NO NO 0.02 ND NO NO 0.02 Table A-6. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Floridan Stations. Part B: Metals. GWNPA34A Telfair GWNPA36 Toombs GWN-PA38 Dodge GWN-PA39 Worth GWN-PA44 )> Turner I -" -....j GWN-PA49 Dooly GWN-PA56 Grady GWN-PA57 Coffee ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 180 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 180 ND 1.3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 180 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 140 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 130 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 130 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 100 ND ND ND ND ND 44,000 ND 220 ND 9,800 88 ND ND 47,000 ND 240 ND 10,000 98 ND ND 49,000 ND 240 ND 11,000 97 4,200 ND ND 4,300 ND ND 4,600 ND ND ND ND 28,000 ND 32 ND ND 28,000 ND 24 ND ND 29,000 ND 25 ND 5,700 ND 5,500 ND 5,800 38 12,000 ND ND 38 11,000 ND ND 39 12,000 ND ND ND ND 41,000 ND ND ND 1,300 ND 1,800 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 200 ND 1.7 2.4 ND ND 48,000 ND ND ND 7,000 ND 3,800 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 150 ND ND 1.4 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 140 ND 3.0 1.3 7.4 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 140 ND ND 1.2 ND ND 28,000 ND ND ND ND 30,000 ND ND ND ND 34,000 ND ND ND 4,100 ND 4,300 ND 5,200 ND 2,400 ND ND ND 2,400 ND ND ND 3,500 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 17.0 ND ND ND ND ND 37,000 ND ND ND ND ND 1,600 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 8.1 ND ND ND ND 150 ND ND 2.8 ND ND ND ND ND ND 9.3 ND ND ND ND 150 ND ND 4.1 ND ND ND ND ND ND 9.3 ND ND ND ND 160 ND ND 3.1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 190 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 180 ND 1.0 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 160 ND 1.0 ND ND ND 31,000 ND 23 ND 19,000 ND 21,000 ND ND ND ND 32,000 ND ND ND 20,000 ND 24,000 ND ND ND ND 31,000 ND ND ND 19,000 ND 22,000 ND ND ND ND 25,000 ND ND ND 16,000 ND 7,300 ND ND ND ND 25,000 ND ND ND 14,000 ND 7,100 ND ND ND ND 25,000 ND ND ND 15,000 ND 7,400 ND ND Table A-7. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Piedmont-Blue Ridge Stations. Part A: Station Identification, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals. Well Name GWN-P1A Luthersville Well #3 185 NG NG 9/29/2011 6.47 52 NA 17.5 ND ND ND 1.00 0.07 NA Meriwether GWN-P5 Flowery Branch Well #1 161 NG NG 9/28/2011 6.50 105 5.06 16.5 ND ND ND 0.91 0.03 NA Hall GWN-P12A Indian Spring Butts 0 NG NG 6/22/2011 7.27 162 NA 18.3 ND 12 26 ND 0.03 4.4 9/28/2011 7.27 264 10.50 19.6 ND 12 25 ND ND 4.6 GWN-P21 Gray/Bragg Well )> Jones ...I .... co GWN-P22 Rahbarwell Fulton 405 NG NG 6/22/2011 6.49 197 5.33 19.4 ND 10 36 0.14 0.04 NA 9/28/2011 5.81 335 0.77 19.1 ND 11 50 0.20 0.03 NA 200 NG NG 6/23/2011 4.71 17 6.39 16.7 ND ND ND 0.86 0.02 NA GWN-P23 Indian Springs State Pari NG NG NG 6/22/2011 6.03 92 1.64 18.3 ND ND ND 0.23 0.09 1.1 Butts New Main Well 9/28/2011 6.07 140 3.36 18.4 ND ND ND 0.28 0.09 1. 1 GWN-P24 Coweta The Gates Well #1 705 NG NG 6/23/2011 7.44 132 2.66 18.7 ND ND 15 0.22 0.06 NA GWN-P29 Rockdale Cook well 310 NG NG 9/29/2011 6.10 90 NA 17.9 ND ND ND 1.3 0.06 NA GWN-P32 Elbert Cecchini deep well 400 NG NG 10/26/2011 8.31 382 NA 18.0 ND ND 220 ND ND NA GWN-P33 Cecchini bored well 47 NG NG 10/26/2011 6.29 52 NA 17.8 ND ND ND 0.23 0.04 NA Elbert GWN-P34 Mistletoe State Park NG NG NG 11/30/2011 5.69 91 8.46 18.6 ND ND ND 0.65 0.16 NA Columbia Cottage Area Well GWN-P35 Franklin O'Connor well 150 NG NG 10/26/2011 7.65 113 NA 17.1 ND ND ND 0.02 0.02 NA Table A-7. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Piedmont-Blue Ridge Stations. Part B: Metals. GWN-P1A Meriwether GWN-P5 Hall GWN-P12A Butts GWN-P21 Jones GWN-P22 Fulton )> GWN-P23 I ....>. Butts <.0 GWN-P24 Coweta GWN-P29 Rockdale GWN-P32 Elbert GWN-P33 Elbert GWN-P34 Columbia GWN-P35 Franklin ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 44 ND ND ND ND ND 9,200 ND ND ND 1,900 ND 4,300 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 35 ND ND ND ND ND 25,000 ND ND ND 4,700 ND 2,400 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 14 . ND ND 7.1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 11 ND 3.7 12 ND ND 12 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 16 ND ND ND ND ND 15,000 ND ND ND ND 15,000 ND ND ND ND 37,000 ND ND ND ND 36,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2,300 ND 2,500 ND 3,200 ND 9,500 ND ND 19 35,000 ND ND 19 38,000 ND ND 78 15,000 ND ND 93 14,000 ND ND ND 2,100 ND ND ND ND ND 47 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 4.3 ND ND 2.1 ND ND ND 66 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 7.1 ND 7.5 2.1 ND ND ND 100 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 3.7 ND ND 1.4 ND ND 12,000 ND 130 ND 3,600 ND 13,000 ND ND ND ND 11,000 ND 430 ND 3,400 ND 13,000 ND ND ND ND 26,000 ND ND ND 3,800 ND 10,000 ND ND ND ND 28 170 ND ND 18 ND ND ND ND 4.1 ND 14 200 ND ND 13,000 ND ND ND 1,400 23 11,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2.4 ND ND 13.0 ND ND 160,000 ND ND ND 1,900 14 23,000 ND ND ND ND 23 40 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 25 ND 1.5 ND 530 ND 13,000 ND 530 ND ND 35 3,800 ND ND ND ND 19 35 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 20 ND 2.8 9.1 ND ND 5,800 ND ND ND 3,000 ND 8,000 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 38 ND ND 2.6 ND ND 19,000 ND 130 ND 6,000 110 7,300 ND ND Table A-7, Continued. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Piedmont-Blue Ridge Stations. Part A: Station Identification, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals. Well Name GWN-P37 Mt. Airy/City Hall Well 500 NG Habersham GWN-P38 Carroll Roopville Well #1 230 NG GWN-P39 GayWell#1 Meriwether 600 NG )> GWN-P40 Siloam Well #2 300+ NG I N Greene 0 GWN-BR1B Young Harris/ 265 NG Towns Swanson Road Well GWN-BR5 Murray Chatsworth I Nix Spring 0 NG NG 10/26/2011 6.85 326 1.08 16.6 tern= 0.77 100 24 0.22 0.02 NA NG 12/01/2011 4.70 26 NA 18.0 ND ND ND 1.60 ND NA NG 12/01/2011 6.07 46 NA 17.4 ND ND ND 1.00 0.07 NA NG 11/30/2011 5.46 84 7.85 19.3 ND ND ND 1.70 0.09 NA NG 8/10/2011 6.97 158 1.50 15.7 ND 11/16/2011 7.04 160 1.01 15.7 ND NG 11/15/2011 6.90 49 10.69 14.9 ND ND 22 0.04 0.02 NA ND 21 0.03 0.02 NA ND ND 0.58 0.10 NA Table A-7. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Piedmont-Blue Ridge Stations. Part 8: Metals. GWN-P37 Habersham GWN-P38 Carroll GWN-P39 Meriwether GWN-P40 Greene GWN-BR1B Towns :t> I GWN-BRS Murray N ->. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 110,000 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 30 NO 1.1 NO 62 NO 1,100 NO NO NO NO 24 4,900 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 39 NO NO NO NO NO 4,700 NO NO NO 1,100 NO 8,400 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 17 NO 1.2 7.5 NO NO 7,000 NO NO NO 1,400 NO 9,400 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 74 NO NO 8.7 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 78 NO NO 8.6 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 13 NO NO NO NO NO 21,000 NO NO NO NO 20,000 NO NO NO NO 4,200 NO NO NO 4,600 NO 4,400 NO NO 21 3,900 NO NO 22 3,800 NO NO NO 4,200 NO NO Table A-8. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Valley and Ridge/Appalachian Plateau Stations. Part A: Station Identification, Date of Sampling, Field Parameters, VOCs, Anions, and Non-Metals. Well Name GWN-VR1 Floyd Floyd County I Kingston Rd. Well 280 NG NG 8/25/2011 7.13 243 7.29 16.4 NO NO NO 0.63 NO GWN-VR2A LaFayette I Lower Walker Big Spring 0 NG NG 11/15/2011 6.85 301 6.50 15.7 NO NO NO 1.70 0.02 GWN-VR3 Chickamauga I Crawfish 0 NG NG 8/10/2011 7.10 253 8.81 15.7 NO NO NO 0.79 NO )> Walker Spring I ""'' GWN-VR6A Chemical Products Corp. 300 Bartow South Well NG NG 8/25/2011 7.15 280 5.58 17.8 1,1dce=2.0 NO pce=2. 8 NO 0.90 0.02 pdcb=0 .71 odcb=2.7 GWN-VR8 Polk Cedartown Spring 0 NG NG 8/25/2011 7.52 262 NA 16.9 NO NO NO 0.67 NO 11/15/2011 7.54 255 7.75 16.7 NO NO NO 0.69 NO GWN-VR10 Eton Spring Murray 0 NG NG 11/15/2011 7.20 250 4 .76 16.3 ' NO NO NO 1.70 NO Table A-8. Ground-Water Quality Analyses for Valley-and-Ridge Stations. Part B: Meta!s. GWN-VR1 Floyd GWN-VR2A Walker GWN-VR3 Walker GWN-VR6A Bartow ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 9.7 ND ND ND ND ND 28,000 ND ND ND 16,000 ND 1,600 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 93 ND ND ND 100 ND 41,000 ND 130 ND 14,000 11 1,500 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 80 ND ND ND ND ND 32,000 ND ND ND 14,000 ND 1,100 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 500 ND ND ND ND ND 29,000 ND ND ND 17,000 ND 5,900 ND ND ::t> GWN-VR8 I 1\.) Polk w GWN-VR10 Murray ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 14 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 12 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 45 ND 7.2 ND ND ND 34,000 ND ND ND 16,000 ND 1,400 ND ND ND ND 31,000 ND ND ND 15,000 ND 1,300 ND ND ND ND 30,000 ND 120 ND 12,000 ND 2,300 ND ND Table A-9. Analytes, EPA Analytical Methods, and Reporting Limits. Analyte Reporting Limit/ EPA Method Analyte Reporting Limit/ EPA Method Vinyl Chloride 1I 1-Dichloroethylene Dichloromethane Trans-1 12Dichloroethylene Cis-1 ~2Dichloroethylene 1I 1I 1-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Benzene 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 112-Dichloroethane 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Dichlorodifluoromethane Chloromethane 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Bromomethane 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Chloroethane Fluorotrichloromethane 1I 1-Dichloroethane 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 212-Dichloropropane Bromochloromethane 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Chloroform 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Trichioroethyiene 0.5 ug/L i 524.2 1I 1-Dichioropropene 0.5 ug/L i 524.2 1~2-Dichloropropane 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Toluene 1I 1~2-Trichloroethane Tetrachloroethylene 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Chlorobenzene 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Ethylbenzene 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Total Xylenes 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Styrene 0.5 ugll I 524.2 p-Dichlorobenzene a-Dichlorobenzene 112,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Dibromomethane 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Bromodichloromethane Cis-1 13-Dichloropropene Trans-1 ~3Dichloropropene 1 ~3-Dichloropropane Chlorodibromomethane 112-Dibromoethane 111 11 12Tetrachloroethane Bromoform 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Isopropyl benzene 111 1212Tetrachloroethane 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 A-24 Table A-9, Continued. Analytes, EPA Analytical Methods, and Reporting Limits. Analyte Reporting Limit/ EPA Method Analyte Reporting LimiU EPA Method Bromobenzene 1,2,3-Trichloropropane n-Propylbenzene 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 o-Chlorotoluene 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene p-Chlorotoluene 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 Tert-Butylbenzene 1,2,4-Trim ethylbenzene Sec-Butylbenzene 0.5 ug/L I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 p-lsopropyltoluene 0.5 ugll I 524.2 m-Dichlorobenzene 0.5 ugll I 524.2 n-Butylbenzene 1,2-Dibromo-3chloropropane Hexachlorobutadiene Naphthalene 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene Methyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) Chloride 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ug/L I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 0.5 ugll I 524.2 10 mgll I 300.0 Sulfate* Nitrate/nitrite* 10 mgll I 300.0 0.02 mg/L as Nitrogen I 353.2 Total Phosphorus Fluoride Silver Aluminum Arsenic Barium Beryllium Calcium Cobalt Chromium Copper Iron Potassium Magnesium Manganese Sodium Nickel Lead Antimony Selenium 0.02 mg/L I 365.1 0.20 mgll I 300.0 10 ugll I 200.7 (ICP) 60 ug/L I 200.7 80 ugll I 200.7 10 ugll I 200.7 10 ugll I 200.7 2000 ug/L I 200.7 10 ug/L I 200.7 20 ugll I 200.7 20 ug/L I 200.7 20 ug/L I 200.7 5000 ugll I 200.7 1000 ugll I 200.7 10 ugll I 200.7 1000 ugll I 200.7 20 ugll I 200.7 90 ugll I 200.7 120 ug/L I 200.7 190 ugll I 200.7 A-25 Table A-9, Continued. Analytes and Reporting Limits. Analyte Reporting Limit/ EPA Method Analyte Reporting Limit/ EPA Method Titanium Thallium Vanadium Zinc Chromium Nickel Copper Zinc Arsenic Selenium 10 ugll I 200.7 200 ugll I 200.7 10 ugll I 200.7 20 ugll I 200.7 5 ugll I 200.8 (ICPMS) 10 ugll I 200.8 5 ugll i 200.8 10 ugll I 200.8 5 ugll I 200.8 5 ugll I 200.8 Molybdenum Silver Cadmium Tin Antimony Barium Thallium Lead Uranium 5 ugll I 200.8 5 ug/L I 200.8 0.7 ugll I 200.8 30 ugll I 200.8 5 ugll I 200.8 2 ugll I 200.8 1 ugll i 200.8 1 ugll I 200.8 1 ugll I 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 proportional increase in the reporting limit. A-26 Table A-1 0. Analytes, Primary MCLs*, and Secondary MCLs*. Analyte Primary MCL Secondary MCL Analyte Primary Second- MCL ary MCL Vinyl Chloride 1, 1-Dichloroethylene 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-Dichloroethane 5 ug/L 5 ug/L None None Trichloroethylene 5 ug/L None 1,2-Dichloro-propane 5 ug/L Toluene 1,1 ,2-Trichloroethane 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 o-Dichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene Chloroform (1) Bromodichloromethane (2) Chlorodibromomethane (3) Bromoform (4) Chloride Sulfate Nitrate/nitrite Fluoride Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Chromium 75 ug/L None 600 ug/L None 70 ug/L None Total = 1,2,3,4 None 80 ug/L Total = 1,2,3,4 None 80 ug/L Total = 1,2,3,4 None 80 ug/L Total = 1,2,3,4 None 80 uq/L None 250 mg/L None 250 mg/L 10 mg/L as None Nitroqen 4 mg/L 2 mg/L None 50-200 ug/L 6 ug/L None 10 ug/L 2000 ug/L 4 ug/L None None None 5 ug/L None 100 ug/L None A-27 Table A-1 0, Continued. Analytes, Primary MCLs*, and Secondary MCLs*. Analyte Primary MCL Secondary MCL Analyte Primary Second- MCL ary MCL Copper Iron Lead Manganese Nickel Action level= 1,300 ug/L None Action level= 15 ug/L None 1000 ug/L Selenium 300 ug/L Silver None Thallium 50 ug/L Zinc 100 ug/L None 50 ug/L None None 100 ug/L 2 ug/L None None 5,000 ug/L *Primary MCL = Primary Maximum Contaminant Level, a maximum concentration of a substance allowed in public drinking water due to adverse health effects. *Secondary MCL = Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level, a maxi-mum concentration of a substance suggested for public drinking water due solely to unpleasant characteristics such as bad flavor or stain-causing ability. mg/L ug/L = milligrams per liter. =micrograms per liter. A-28 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 .