Ground-water quality in Georgia for 1993 [1996]

G-A
NlOD, G-4
.S'I
cs
llJ GROUND..WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA FOR 1993
John C. Donahue and
Neal D. Hunt
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION GEORGIA GEOLOGIC SURVEY
Atlanta 1996
CIRCULAR 12J

GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA FOR 1993
John C. Donahue and
Neal D. Hunt
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 of
1972, as amended
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES LONICE C. BARRETI, COMMISSIONER
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION HAROLD F. REHEIS, DIRECTOR GEORGIA GEOLOGIC SURVEY
WILLIAM H. McLEMORE, STATE GEOLOGIST
ATLANTA 1996
CIRCULAR 12J

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose and Scope 1.2 Factors Affecting Ground-Water Quality 1.3 Hydrogeologic Provinces of Georgia
1.3.1 Coastal Plain 1.3 .2 Piedmont/Blue Ridge 1.3 .3 Valley and Ridge 1.4 Regional Ground-Water Problems
2.0 GEORGIA GROUND-WATER MONITORING NETWORK 2.1 Monitoring Stations 2.2 Uses and Limitations 2.3 Analyses
3.0 GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA 3.1 Overview 3.2 Cretaceous Aquifer System 3.3 Providence Aquifer System 3.4 Clayton Aquifer System 3.5 Claiborne Aquifer System 3.6 Jacksonian Aquifer System 3.7 Floridan Aquifer System 3.8 Miocene Aquifer System 3.9 Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifers 3.10 Valley and Ridge Unconfined Aquifers
4.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
5.0 REFERENCES
APPENDIX Analysis of samples collected during 1993 for the Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network 1993 Ground-Water Quality Analysis ofthe Cretaceous Aquifer System 1993 Ground-Water Quality Analysis ofthe Providence Aquifer System 1993 Ground-Water Quality Analysis of the Clayton Aquifer System 1993 Ground-Water Quality Analysis ofthe Claiborne Aquifer System 1993 Ground-Water Quality Analysis of the Jacksonian Aquifer System 1993 Ground-Water Quality Analysis of the Floridan Aquifer System 1993 Ground-Water Quality Analysis ofthe Miocene Aquifer System

Page 1-1 1-1 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-4 1-4 1-5
2-1 2-1 2-1 2-2
3-1 3-1 3-3 3-7 3-11 3-15 3-19 3-23 3-28 3-32 3-38
4-1
5-1
A-1 A-12 A-15 A-16 A-17 A-18 A-19 A-25

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analysis ofthe Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifers
1993 Ground-Water Quality Analysis of the Valley and Ridge Unconfined Aquifers

A-27 A-30

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 The Hydrogeologic Provinces of Georgia

1-3

Figure 3-1 The Seven Major Aquifers and Aquifer Systems of the

Coastal Plain Province

3-2

Figure 3-2 Water Quality of the Cretaceous Aquifer System

3-4

Figure 3-3 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Cretaceous Aquifer System 3-5

Figure 3-4 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Cretaceous

Aquifer System

3-6

Figure 3-5 Water Quality of the Providence Aquifer System

3-8

Figure 3-6 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Providence Aquifer System 3-9

Figure 3-7 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Providence

Aquifer System

3-10

Figure 3-8 Water Quality of the Clayton Aquifer System

3-12

Figure 3-9 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Clayton Aquifer System 3-13

Figure 3-10 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Clayton

Aquifer System

3-14

Figure 3-11 Water Quality of the Claiborne Aquifer System

3-16

Figure 3-12 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Claiborne Aquifer System 3-17

Figure 3-13 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Claiborne

Aquifer System

3-18

Figure 3-14 Water Quality of the Jacksonian Aquifer System

3-20

Figure 3-15 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Jacksonian Aquifer System 3-21

Figure 3-16 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Jacksonian

Aquifer System

3-22

Figure 3-17 Water Quality of the Floridan Aquifer System

3-25

Figure 3-18 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Floridan Aquifer System 3-26

Figure 3-19 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Floridan

Aquifer System

3-27

Figure 3-20 Water Quality of the Miocene Aquifer System

3-29

Figure 3-21 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Miocene Aquifer System 3-30

Figure 3-22 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Miocene

Aquifer System

3-31

Figure 3-23 Water Quality of the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifers

3-33

Figure 3-24 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge

Unconfined Aquifer System: Piedmont Sector

3-34

Figure 3-25 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge

Unconfined Aquifer System: Blue Ridge Sector

3-35

Figure 3-26 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue

Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Piedmont Sector

3-36

Figure 3-27 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue

Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Blue Ridge Sector

3-37

Figure 3-28 Water Quality of the Valley and Ridge Unconfined Aquifers

3-39

Figure 3-29 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Valley and Ridge

Unconfined Aquifer System

3-40

Figure 3-30 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Valley

and Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System

3-41

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1 Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network, 1993

2-5

Table 2-2 The Significance of Parameters of a Basic Water Quality Analysis,

Cations

2-6

Table 2-3 The Significance of Parameters of a Basic Water Quality Analysis,

Anions

2-7

Table 4-1 Pollution and Contamination Incidents, 1993

4-3

Table A-1 Standard Water Quality Analysis: Physical Parameters, Major Anions,

Minerals and ICP/AAS Metals Screen

A-2

Table A-2 Additional Water Quality Analyses: Organic Screens #1, #2, #3, #4,

#5, #7, #8, #9, and #10

A-4

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This report for calendar year 1993 is the tenth in a series of annual summaries discussing the chemical quality of ground water in Georgia. 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 state-wide ground-water management policy of anti-degradation (EPD, 1991). Five components constitute EPD's ground-water quality assessment program:
1. The Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network. This program is maintained by the Geologic Survey Branch of EPD and is designed to evaluate the ambient ground-water quality of ten aquifer systems throughout the State of Georgia. The data presented in this report were provided by this program.
2. Sampling of public drinking water wells as part of the Safe Drinking Water Program (Water Resources Management Branch). This program provides data on the quality of ground water that is being used by the residents of Georgia.
3. Special studies addressing specific water quality issues. A survey of nitrite/nitrate levels in shallow wells located throughout the State of Georgia (Shellenberger, et al., 1996; Stuart, et al., 1995) and the operation of a Pesticide Monitoring Network (currently conducted jointly by the Geologic Survey Branch and the Georgia Department of Agriculture) (Webb, 1995) are examples ofthese types of studies.
4. Ground-water sampling at environmental facilities such as municipal solid waste landfills, RCRA facilities, and sludge disposal facilities. The primary agencies responsible for monitoring these facilities are EPD's Land Protection, Water Protection, and Hazardous Waste Management Branches.
5. The development of a wellhead protection program (WHP), which is designed to protect the area surrounding a municipal drinking water well from contaminants. Georgia's WHP Plan was approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) September 30, 1992, and was amended into the Georgia Safe Drinking Water Rules effective June 30, 1993. The protection of public water supply wells from contaminants is important not only for maintaining ground-water quality but also for helping ensure that public water supplies meet health standards.
Analyses of water samples collected for the Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network during calendar year 1993 and from previous years form the data base for this summary. The Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network is comprised of 128 wells and springs which are monitored on a biennial, annual, or semi-annual basis (some stations were sampled twice).
1-1

Representative water samples were collected from 107 wells and 4 springs in 1993, totaling 128 samples. A review of the 1993 data, and comparison of these data with those for samples collected as early as 1984, indicate that ground-water quality at most of the 128 sampling sites generally has changed little and remains excellent.
1.2 FACTORS AFFECTING CHEMICAL GROUND-WATER QUALITY
The chemical quality of ground water drawn for sampling is the result of complex physical, chemical, and biological processes. Some of the more significant controls are the chemical quality of the water entering the ground-water flow system, the reactions of 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 pores and joints in the soils and rocks until it is discharged to a surfacewater body (e.g., stream, river, lake, or ocean). The initial water chemistry, the amount of recharging, 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 has an increasing significance with longer underground residence times. As a result, ground water 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 casings, through compositional breakdown, can contribute metals (e.g., iron from steel casings) and organic compounds (e.g., tetrahydrofuran from PVC pipe cement) to the water. Pumps often aerate the water being discharged. An improperly constructed well can present a conduit that allows local pollutants to enter the ground-water flow system.
1.3 HYDROGEOLOGIC PROVINCES OF GEORGIA
This report defines three hydrogeologic provinces in Georgia by their general geologic and hydrologic characteristics (Figure 1-1 ). These provinces consist of:
1) the Coastal Plain Province of south Georgia; 2) the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province, which includes all but the northwest corner of
Georgia; and 3) the Valley and Ridge Province of northwest Georgia.
1.3.1 Coastal Plain Province
Georgia's Coastal Plain Province is generally composed of a wedge of loosely consolidated sediments that gently dip and thicken to the south and southeast. Ground water in the Coastal Plain Province flows through interconnected pore space between grains in the host rocks and through solution-enlarged voids. The oldest outcropping sedimentary formations (Cretaceous) are exposed along the Fall Line, which is the northern limit ofthe Coastal Plain Province. Successively younger formations occur at the surface to the south and southeast.
The Coastal Plain contains Georgia's major confined (artesian) aquifers. Confined
1-2

84 85"

85" ------- -----

10

10

20

30

40 MILES

82

Figure 1-10 - The Hydrogeologic Provinces of Georgia.
1-3

aquifers are those in which a layer of impermeable material (e.g. clay or shale) holds the top of the water column at a level below that to which it would normally rise. Water enters the aquifers in their up-dip outcrop areas where the permeable rocks of the aquifer are exposed. Many of the Coastal Plain aquifers are unconfined in their up-dip outcrop areas, but become confined in down-dip areas to the southeast, where they are overlain by successively younger rock formations. Ground-water flow through confined Coastal Plain aquifers is generally to the south and southeast, in the direction of the dip of the rocks.
Rocks forming the seven major confined aquifers in the Coastal Plain range in age from Cretaceous to Miocene. Horizontal and vertical changes in the permeability of the rock units that form these aquifers and the quality of ground water they contain determine the thickness and extent of the aquifers. Several aquifers 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 four vertically stacked aquifers (sands and carbonates) for drinking-water supplies: the Providence, Clayton, Claiborne and Floridan aquifer systems. A large area of south-central and southeastern Georgia is served by the Floridan aquifer system (primarily carbonates). The Miocene aquifer system (sands and carbonates) is the principal "shallow" unconfined aquifer system occupying much of the broad area underlain by the Floridan aquifer system. It becomes confined in the coastal counties and locally in the Grady, Thomas, Brooks and Lowndes counties area of south Georgia.
1.3.2 Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province
Crystalline rocks of metamorphic and igneous origin (primarily Precambrian and Paleozoic in age) underlie the Piedmont and Blue Ridge provinces. These two provinces differ geologically, but are discussed together here because they share common hydrologic properties. The principal water-bearing features are fractures, compositional layers and other geologic discontinuities in the rock, as well as intergranular porosity in the overlying soil and saprolite horizons. Thick soils and saprolites are often important as the "reservoir" that supplies water to the water-bearing fracture and joint systems. Ground water typically flows from local highlands towards discharge areas along streams. However, during prolonged dry periods or in areas ofheavy pumpage, ground water may flow from the streams into the fracture and joint systems.
1.3.3 Valley and Ridge Province
The Valley and Ridge Province is underlain by consolidated Paleozoic sedimentary formations. The permeable features of the Valley and Ridge Province are principally fractures and solution voids; intergranular porosity also is important in some places. Ground-water and surface-water systems are locally closely interconnected. Dolostones and limestones of the Knox Group are the principal aquifers where they occur in the axes of broad valleys. The greater hydraulic conductivities of the thick carbonate sections in this Province, in part due to
1-4

solution-enlarged joints, permit development of higher yielding wells than in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge Province. 1.4 REGIONAL GROUND-WATER PROBLEMS
Data from ground-water investigations in Georgia, including those from the GroundWater 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 naturally occurring and do not pose a health risk. Iron and manganese can cause reddish-brown stains on objects.
Only a few occurrences of polluted or contaminated ground waters are known from North Georgia (Section 4). Aquifers in the outcrop areas of Cretaceous sediments south ofthe Fall Line typically yield acidic water that may require treatment. The acidity occurs naturally, and results from the inability of the sandy aquifer sediments to neutralize acidic rainwater and from acid-producing reactions between infiltrating water and soils and sediments. Nitrite/nitrate concentrations in shallow ground water from the farm belt of southeastern Georgia are almost always within drinking-water standards, but are somewhat higher than levels found in other areas of the State.
The Floridan aquifer system contains two areas of naturally occurring reduced groundwater quality in addition to its karstic plain in southwest Georgia. The first is the area of the Gulf Trough, a narrow, linear geological feature extending from southwestern Decatur County through central Bulloch County typically yields water with high total dissolved solids concentrations. Elevated levels of barium, sulfate, and radio nuclides have been reported in ground water from the Gulf Trough. The second is the coastal area of Georgia, where the lower section of the Floridan aquifer system contains water with high dissolved-solid contents. Ground-water withdrawals have allowed up-coning of such water from deeper parts of the aquifer in the Brunswick area.
1-5

2.0 GEORGIA GROUND-WATER MONITORING NETWORK
2.1 MONITORING STATIONS
Stations of the 1993 Ground-Water Monitoring Network are situated in the seven major aquifers and aquifer systems of the Coastal Plain Province and in the unconfined ground-water systems of the Piedmont and Blue Ridge Provinces and of the Valley and Ridge Province (Table 2-1). Monitoring stations are located in three critical settings:
a. areas of surface recharge; b. areas of potential pollution related to regional activities (e.g. agricultural and
industrial areas); and c. areas of significant ground-water use.
The majority of monitoring stations are municipal, industrial, and domestic wells that have reliable well-construction data. Some of the monitoring stations that are located in recharge areas are sampled more than once a year in order to monitor more closely changes in ground-water quality. The Monitoring Network also includes monitoring wells in specific areas where the State's aquifers are recognized to be susceptible to contamination or pollution (e.g. the Dougherty Plain of southwestern Georgia and the State's coastal area). These monitoring wells are maintained jointly by the Geologic Survey Branch and the United States Geological Survey.
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 with respect to the 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 groundwater quantity and quality. 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 and 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 128 sites located throughout Georgia provides an indication of ground-water quality at the localities sampled and at depths corresponding to the screened interval in the well or to the head of the spring at each station in the Monitoring Network. Caution should be exercised in drawing strict conclusions and applying any results reported in this study to ground waters that are not being monitored.
Stations of the Ground-Water Monitoring Network are intentionally located away from known point sources of pollution. The wells 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)
2-1

through its environmental facilities permit programs.
Ground-water quality changes gradually and predictably in the areally extensive aquifers 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 the surface recharge areas of southern Georgia are of comparatively small areal extent and more open to interactions with land-use activities. The wider spacing of monitoring stations does not permit equal characterization of water-quality processes in all of these settings. The quality of water from monitoring wells completed in unconfined north Georgia aquifers represents only the general nature of ground water in the vicinity of the monitoring wells. In contrast, ground water from monitoring wells located in surface recharge areas of Georgia Coastal Plain aquifers may more closely reflect the general quality of water that has entered these aquifers. Ground water in the recharge areas of the Coastal Plain aquifers is the future drinking-water resource for down-flow areas. Monitoring wells in these recharge areas, in effect, constitute an early warning system for potential future water quality problems in confined portions of the Coastal Plain aquifers.
2.3 ANALYSES
Analyses are available for 128 water samples collected during 1993 from 107 wells and 4 springs. In 1984, the first year ofthe Ground-Water Monitoring Network, hydrogeologists sampled water from 39 wells located in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge and Coastal Plain Provinces. Nine ofthese wells have been sampled each year since 1984. Since 1984, the Ground-Water Monitoring Network has been expanded through addition of further wells and springs to cover all three hydrogeologic provinces, with the majority of the monitoring done in the Coastal Plain.
Ground water from all monitoring stations is tested for the basic water quality parameters included in the Monitoring Network's standard analysis. The standard parameters include pH, specific conductivity, chloride, fluoride, sulfate, nitrite/nitrate, and thirty metals (Appendix, Table A-1 ). Where regional land-use activities have the potential to affect ground-water quality in the vicinity of a monitoring station, additional parameters such as chlorinated pesticides (Organics Screen #2), and phenoxy herbicides (Organics Screen #4) are tested. These and additional chemical screens are listed in the Appendix (Tables A-1, A-2, A-3, and A-4). Tables 2-2 (cations) and 2-3 (anions) summarize the significance of the common major constituents of a water-quality analysis.
The Drinking Water Program of the EPD's Water Resources Management Branch has established Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL's) for some of the parameters that are included in the analyses performed on Ground-Water Monitoring Network samples. Primary MCL's are established for parameters that may have adverse effects on the public health when their values are exceeded. Secondary MCL's are established for parameters that may give drinking water an objectionable odor or color and consequently cause persons served by public water systems to discontinue its use. The Primary and Secondary MCL's for Ground Water Monitoring Network parameters are given in the Appendix.
2-2

In-place pumps are used whenever possible to purge wells and collect water samples. Using these pumps minimizes the potential for cross-contamination of wells. Some wells that are included in the Ground-Water Monitoring Network are continuous water-level monitoring stations and do not have dedicated pumps. A two horse-power, trailer-mounted four-inch electric submersible pump and a three-inch, truck-mounted submersible pump are the principal portable purge-and-sampling devices used. A battery-powered, portable Fultz sampling pump and a PVC hand pump are occasionally used at stations that cannot be sampled using the principal sampling pumps. As sampling these continuous water level monitoring wells made heavy demands on staff and time, all but one of these wells were dropped from the GroundWater Monitoring Network during 1993.
Sampling procedures are adapted from techniques used by the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Hydrogeologists purge the wells (3 to 5 volumes of the well column) prior to the collection of a sample to minimize the influence of the well, pump and distribution system on water quality. Municipal, industrial, and domestic wells typically require approximately 45 minutes of purging prior to sample collection. Wells without dedicated pumps often require much longer periods of purging.
Hydrogeologists monitor water quality parameters prior to sample collection. Measurements of pH, dissolved oxygen content, specific conductivity, and temperature are observed using field instruments. The instruments are mounted in a manifold that captures flow at the pump system discharge point before the water is exposed to atmospheric conditions. Typical trends include a lowering of pH, dissolved oxygen content, and specific conductivity, and a transition toward the mean annual air temperature with increased purging time. Both the hydraulic flow characteristics of unconfined aquifers and the pump effects may alter these trends.
Samples are collected once the parameters being monitored in the field stabilize or otherwise indicate that the effects of the well have been minimized. Files at the Geologic Survey Branch contain records of the field measurements. The sample bottles are filled and then promptly placed in an ice water bath to preserve the water quality. After several hours, the bottles are transferred to a dry cooler refrigerated with an ice tray. The hydrogeologists then transport the samples to the laboratories for analysis on or before the Friday of the week in which they were collected.
During 1993, the EPD laboratories performed the following standard water quality tests on all regular samples: pH, specific conductance, an ICP/AAS metals screen, nitrate/nitrite (reported as ppm nitrogen), and an ion chromatography screen (chloride, fluoride, sulfate). The EPD laboratories also performed the following optional tests on various samples: mercury, organic screen #7 (EDB), organic screens #8 and #9 (semivolatile organic compounds), and organic screen #10 (volatile organic compounds). (Organic screen #7 is performed simultaneously with organic screen #10.) Georgia Department of Agriculture (GDA) laboratories and the Cooperative Extension Service laboratories at the University of Georgia (UGA) performed analyses for organic screens #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5 (pesticides and PCB's). Beginning in December, 1992, pesticide analyses were transferred from UGA to GDA as GDA
2-3

continued to install the apparatus necessary to perform the analyses. The transfer was completed in December, 1993.
2-4

Table 2-1. Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network, 1993

AQUIFER SYSTEM

NUMBER OF MONITORING STATIONS & SAMPLES TAKEN IN 1993

PRIMARY STRATIGRAPHIC EQUIVALENTS

Cretaceous

15 stations (21 samples taken in 1993)

Ripley Formation, Cusseta Sand, Blufftown Formation, Eutaw Formation, Tuscaloosa Formation, and Gaillard Formation

Providence

3 stations (3 samples taken in 1993)

Providence Sand

Clayton

4 stations (4 samples taken in 1993)

Clayton Formation

Claiborne

4 stations (4 samples taken in 1993)

Tallahatta Formation

Jacksonian

7 stations (7 samples taken in 1993)

Barnwell Group

Floridan

40 stations (51 samples taken in 1993)

Predominantly Suwannee Limestone and Ocala Group

Miocene

12 stations (12 samples taken in 1993)

Predominantly Altamaha Formation and Hawthorne Group

Piedmont

14 stations (14 samples taken in 1993)

Various igneous and metamorphic complexes

Blue Ridge

3 stations (3 samples taken in 1993)

Various metamorphic complexes

Valley and Ridge

9 stations (9 samples taken in 1993)

Shady Dolomite, Knox Group, and Chickamauga Group

AGE OF AQUIFER FORMATIONS
Late Cretaceous
Late Cretaceous
Paleocene
Middle Eocene
Late Eocene
Predominantly Middle Eocene to Oligocene Miocene-Recent
Predominately Paleozoic and Precambrian Predominately Paleozoic and Precambrian Paleozoic, mostly Cambrian and Ordovician

2-5

Table 2-2. The Significance of Parameters of a Basic Water Quality Analysis, Cations (after Wait, 1960).

PARAMETER(S)

SIGNIFICANCE

pH (Hydrogen ion concentration)

pH is a measure of the concentration of the hydrogen ion. Values of pH less than 7.0 denote acidity and values greater than 7.0 indicate alkalinity. Corrosiveness ofwater generally increases with decreasing pH. However, excessively alkaline waters may also attack metals. A pH range between 6.0 and 8.5 is considered acceptable.

Calcium and magnesium*

Calcium and magnesium cause most of the hardness of water. Hard water consumes soap before a lather will form and deposits scale in boilers, water heaters, and pipes. Hardness is reported in terms of equivalent calcium carbonate. The hardness of a water can be estimated by the sum of multiplying the ppm of calcium by 2.5 and that of magnesium by 4.1.

Water Class
Soft Moderately Hard Hard Very Hard

Hardness (parts per million) Less than 60 60 to 120 121 to 180 More than 180

Sodium and potassium *

Sodium and potassium have little effect on the use of water for most domestic purposes. Large amounts give a salty taste when combined with chloride. A high sodium content may limit the use of water for irrigation.

Iron and manganese

More than 300 ppb of iron stains objects red or reddish brown and more than 50 parts per billion of manganese stains objects black. Larger quantities cause unpleasant taste and favor growth of iron bacteria but do not endanger health.

*Major metallic ions present in most ground waters.

2-6

Table 2-3. The Significance ofParameters of a Basic Water Quality Analysis, Anions (after Wait, 1960).

PARAMETER(S)

SIGNIFICANCE

Chloride

Chloride salts in excess of 100 ppm give a salty taste to water. Large quantities make the water corrosive. Water that contains excessive amounts of chloride is not suitable for irrigation. It is recommended that chloride content should not exceed 250 ppm.

Nitrate/Nitrite

Concentrations much greater than the local average may suggest pollution. Excessive amounts of nitrate/nitrite in drinking or formula water of infants may cause a type of methemoglobinemia ("blue babies"). Nitrate/nitrite in concentrations greater than 10 ppm (as nitrogen) is considered to be a health hazard.

Sulfate

Sulfate in hard water increases the formation of scale in boilers. In large amounts, sulfate in combination with other ions imparts a bitter taste to water. Concentrations above 250 ppm have a laxative effect but 500 ppm is considered safe.

2-7

3.0 GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA 3.1 OVERVIEW
Georgia's ten major aquifers and aquifer systems are grouped into three hydrogeologic provinces for the purposes of this report.
The Coastal Plain Province is comprised of seven major aquifers that are restricted to specific regions and depths within the province because oftheir geometry (Figure 3-1). These major aquifer systems, in many cases, incorporate smaller aquifers that are locally confined. Monitoring wells in the Coastal Plain aquifers are generally located in three settings:
1. Recharge (or outcrop) areas, which are located in regions that are geologically up-dip and generally to the north of confined portions of these aquifers.
2. Up-dip, confined areas, which are located in regions that are proximal to the recharge areas, yet are confined by overlying geologic formations. These areas are generally south to southeast of the recharge areas.
3. Down-dip, confined areas, located to the south and southeast in the deeper, confined portions of the aquifers distal to the recharge areas.
The two hydrogeologic provinces of north Georgia, the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province and the Valley and Ridge Province, are characterized by small-scale, localized ground-water flow patterns. Deep regional flow systems are unknown in northern Georgia. Ground-water flow in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province is generally controlled by geologic discontinuities (such as fractures) and compositional changes within the aquifer. Local topographic features, such as hills and valleys, influence ground-water flow patterns. Many of the factors controlling ground-water flow in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province are also present in the Valley and Ridge Province. Furthermore, widespread development of karst features may significantly enhance porosity and permeability in localized areas and exert a strong influence on local ground-water flow patterns.
3-1

B

E

MSL :~-=-.J.....,-1 FLORIDAN
-1000 I

B

MIOCENE

C

c

D

8F::mmt MSL -1000'

FLORIDAN

FLORIDAN

Figure 3-1.- The Seven Major Aquifers and Aquifer Systems of the Coastal Plain Province.

3-2

3.2 CRETACEOUS AQUIFER SYSTEM
The Cretaceous aquifer system is a complexly interconnected group of aquifer subsystems developed in the Late Cretaceous sands ofthe Coastal Plain Province. These sands crop out in an extensive recharge area immediately south of the Fall Line in west and central Georgia (Figure 3-2). Overlying sediments restrict Cretaceous outcrops to valley bottoms in parts of the northeastern Coastal Plain. 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). Aquifer sands thicken southward from the Fall Line, where they pinch out against crystalline Piedmont rocks, to a sequence of sand and clay approximately 2,000 feet thick at the southern limits of the main aquifer-use area. Leakage from adjacent members ofthe aquifer system provides significant recharge in down-dip areas.
Water quality of the Cretaceous aquifer system, excluding the Providence aquifer system (discussed separately in this report), was monitored in 15 wells. Two of these wells (GWN-K8 and GWN-K12) are located away from the recharge area. The remainder are located in up-dip areas in or adjacent to outcrop and surface recharge areas for the Cretaceous aquifer system. Water from the wells was soft and, in the up-dip area wells, acidic, while water from GWN-K13, a down-dip well, was basic.
Iron concentrations exceeded the State secondary MCL of 300 parts per billion (ppb) in only three wells: GWN-K3 in Washington County yielded 720 ppb, GWN-K8A in Laurens County yielded 4,100 ppb, and GWN-K9 in Macon County yielded 1,200 ppb. Manganese at a concentration equal to the MCL was found in a sample from GWN-K8A. Figure 3-3 shows trends in iron concentrations for selected wells in the Cretaceous aquifer.
Aluminum concentrations exceeded the secondary MCL of 200 ppb in three wells: GWN-K1 (630 ppb), GWN-K9 (470 ppb), and GWN-K12 (420 ppb). Concentrations of major alkali and alkaline earth metals (potassium, sodium, calcium, and magnesium) were generally either low or below detection limits. Other trace metals (copper, barium, strontium, and lead) were present in low concentrations in samples from various wells.
Water samples from ten wells contained detectable levels of nitrite/nitrate. The highest value, 1.8 ppb, was measured from well GWN-K10. Similar values have been measured for this well over the past several years. Figure 3-4 shows trends in levels of combined nitrite/nitrate (reported as parts per million [ppm] nitrogen) for selected wells that have historically yielded water with detectable and non-detectable nitrite/nitrate levels. Detectable chloride was present in all the samples and detectable sulfate and fluoride were present in the majority of the samples. A case of pollution by synthetic organic compounds found in a sample from well GWN-K5 is thought to be spurious, as tests on a follow-up sample found no such substances. Analytical results for samples collected from the Cretaceous aquifer system are given in the Appendix.
3-3

.,.

>i General

recharge area

(from Davis 1

et al. 1

1988)

Soft water A Moderately hard water

0 Manganese exceeds MCL D Iron exceeds MCL

Figure 3-2. -Water Quality of the Cretaceous Aquifer System.

3-4

4500

4000

3500 ..................

--::J'
C)

3000



::::l

0

0

C'?

II
.....1

2500

0

E.

.....1

0;
::::l

2000

-Q)
LL

c: ,0_

1500

1000

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

c==J K3 ~ KSA 1111 K9 ~ K11

*Iron levels detected below the MDL are represented as 20 ppb. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year.
Figure 3-3.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Cretaceous Aquifer System.
3-5

z::J' 2.5~...................................- ...........- ....... +-"""'""""""'"""--------..~-----------..--..~ffi---......;.....__.,_...................................................+---...............,___........ - ..........................._,.....-l
C)
E
0

dII

2~---------"'"""""'"'"''"''"""'""'"'""'""'""""''"''"'''"'"i"""""''""'""''"-"'"'""""'"'-'""'""""""'+""'"'"""""----~~-~-..............................- .................._,___,,,,+.................._,____,. . . . . . . . . . . _,,,,,,____,......-..--l

~

--_J
z

Ol
E

. 1.5~--- .............--... -.....................-.........j........_____,..,____.......----+-----------.. ~t-......+---------.----------..-..+.-.-.--...... . -~~----- .....-....... ---l

0z"'"

~

~ 1 ................................... .

z

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

c=J K1 ~ K2 . . KS
EHHH K10 ~ K16

*Nitrate/nitrite levels detected below the MDL are represented as 0.1 ppm. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year or that no nitrate/nitrite data are available.
Figure 3-4.- Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Cretaceous Aquifer System.
3-6

3.3 PROVIDENCE AQUIFER SYSTEM Sand and coquinoid limestones of the Late Cretaceous Providence Formation comprise
the Providence aquifer system of southwestern Georgia. Outcrops of the aquifer system extend from northern Clay and Quitman Counties through eastern Houston County. In its up-dip extent, the aquifer system thickens both to the east and to the west of a broad area adjacent to the Flint River. Areas where the thickness of the Providence exceeds 300 feet are known in Pulaski County, and similar thicknesses have been projected in the vicinity of Baker, Calhoun and Early counties (Clarke, et al., 1983).
The permeable Providence Formation-Clayton Formation interval forms a single aquifer east ofthe Flint River (Clarke, et al., 1983). This same interval is recognized as the Dublin aquifer system to the east ofthe Ocmulgee River (Clarke, et al., 1985). Outcrop areas and adjacent covered areas to the east of the Flint River, where the aquifer is overlain by permeable sand units, are surface recharge areas. The Chattahoochee River forms the western discharge boundary for this flow system in Georgia.
Water samples were taken from three wells in the Providence aquifer system in 1993 (Figure 3-5). The pH of two samples was slightly basic and one, acidic. Concentrations of metals were generally low or below detection limits. Sodium, calcium, chloride, strontium, and sulfate were present in low concentrations and were most abundant in the down-dip samples. The only well to yield a sample with detectable nitrate/nitrite, 0.7 ppm nitrogen, was the up-dip well GWN-PD2A. Other inorganic ions detected consisted of barium, magnesium, manganese, fluoride, and aluminum. None ofthese anions or metals exceeded MCL's. No synthetic organic compounds were detected in samples derived from the Providence aquifer. Trends in iron and nitrate/nitrite concentrations for the three Providence wells are shown in Figures 3-6 and 3-7. Analytic results for the samples collected from the Providence Aquifer System wells are summarized in the Appendix.
3-7

...
/\ \
34"+---lf--i---T-~~-__j'-----\-r-"-c.._:_:+-'""/=-=\-:i---,.,-

\'-~i

i !

1.

!

85

-~---- - - - -

10
General recharge area (from Davis, et al., 1988) Soft water Moderately hard water
Figure 3-5.- Water Quality of the Providence Aquifer System.

3-8

350.-----------------,-----------.-r-~------,-----------,-----------------,
300~-------"""""'____,,......_,____. ,_.. _,..,............_.i_,..,_,____,,__,....,._______,__+-t
250
--::::J
Ol ::J 0 0
(Y)
II
_J
0
6
--_J
Ol ::J
-Q)
LL
c: .0....
50 ..............

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

c::J PD2A ~ PD3 . . PD4

*Iron levels detected below the MDL are represented as 20 ppb. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year.
Figure 3-6.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Providence Aquifer System.
3-9

0.9~----------------~----------~r-----------~----------~-----------------,

0.7 ...................................
.0....
II
...J
0
6
---...J
Cl
E ri
0 z
~ N
0 z

0.1-i"""""""""""'"""""""'""""""i

1989

1990

1991

1992

r=J PD2A ~ PD3 . . PD4

1993

*Nitrate/nitrite levels detected below the MDL are represented as 0.1 ppm. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year or that no nitrate/nitrite data are available.
Figure 3-7. - Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Providence Aquifer System.
3-10

3.4 CLAYTON AQUIFER SYSTEM The Clayton aquifer system of southwestern Georgia is developed mainly in the middle
limestone unit ofthe Paleocene Clayton Formation. Limestones and calcareous sands of the Clayton aquifer system crop out in a narrow belt extending from northeastern Clay County to southwestern Schley County (Figure 3-8). Aquifer thickness varies, ranging from 50 feet near outcrop areas to 265 feet in southeastern Mitchell County (Clarke, et al., 1984). Both the Flint River, to the east, and the Chattahoochee River, to the west, are areas of discharge for the aquifer system in its up-dip extent. Leakage from the underlying Providence aquifer system and the overlying Wilcox confining zone is significant in down-dip areas (Clarke, et al., 1984). The Clayton Formation and Providence Formation merge to form a single aquifer unit in up-dip areas (Long, 1989). In areas east of the Ocmulgee River, the combination of these two aquifers is referred to as the Dublin aquifer system (Clarke, et al., 1985).
Four wells in the Clayton aquifer system were used to monitor water quality in 1993. Wells GWN-CT5A and GWN-CT7A are located in or near the recharge area. The pH levels were alkaline in three wells, as expected for limestone aquifers and was acidic in a sample from an up-dip sand well. Iron concentrations range from 24 ppb in well GWN-CT3 to 250 ppb in GWN-CT5A and GWN-CT7A. Barium, sodium, calcium, magnesium, chloride, fluoride, tin, titanium, strontium, and zinc were also detected.
Chloride contents were low in the down-dip wells, at less than 2 ppm. However, up-dip well GWN-CT7A had a somewhat elevated chloride content of 14 ppm. Aluminum was detected at a level of 510 ppb from well GWN-CT7A, in excess of the secondary MCL.
Nitrate/nitrite concentration levels were below detectable limits in down-dip wells, but higher in GWN-CT7A (9.2 ppm nitrogen). Sulfate was limited to the three down-dip wells with a range of 12.4- 19.0 ppm. No synthetic organic chemicals were found. Trends of iron and nitrite/nitrate concentrations in Clayton aquifer wells are shown in Figures 3-9 and 3-10. Analytical results for samples collected from the Clayton aquifer system wells are provided in the Appendix.
3-11

...
\
---\ ,_
---t------fi--i-------'T-,..,.,:.:~-___j'-_--'--:,-_,_:_"--='_4_-_-,'.-~\:c"="~'\'...
\ "'

\( i

i !

.,. '.~-_;-----L. ___!

10

10

20

30

40 MILES

82

(_ General recharge area (after Davis, et al., 1988)
Soft water ~ Moderately hard water Hard water

Figure 3-8.- Water Quality of the Clayton Aquifer System.

3-12

--...J
0>

::l

0

0

C")

II

...J

()

--~
...J

300

0>

::l

Q)
'=-
c:::
..0:: 200

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

c=J CT2A ~ CT3 . . CTSA I3HEfJ CT7A

*Iron levels detected below the MDL are represented as 20 ppb. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year.
Figure 3-9.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Clayton Aquifer System.
3-13

10,-----------------~------------~----------.------------.-----------------.

:-z:-::.1. 7
C)
E
,0....
II
-'
(,)
6
--z-.'.
C)
E
cr)
0 z
~
C\1
0 z

1~ ................................................................-...........,.. _..........._.___,,,.. ;.. -----. ----..-------~---------------;-----l

1989

1990

1991

1992

c:=J CT2 ~ CT7A . . CTSA

1993

*Nitrate/nitrite levels detected below the MDL are represented as 0.1 ppm. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year or that no nitrate/nitrite data are available.
Figure 3-10. -Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Clayton Aquifer System.
3-14

3.5 CLAIBORNE AQUIFER SYSTEM
Sands ofthe Middle Eocene Claiborne Group are the primary members of the Claiborne aquifer system of southwestern Georgia (Figure 3-11 ). Claiborne Group sands crop out in a belt extending from northern Early County through western Dooly County. Limited recharge may be derived down-dip in the vicinity of Albany in Dougherty County by leakage from the overlying Floridan aquifer system (Hicks, et al., 1981 ). Discharge boundaries of the aquifer system are the Ocmulgee River, to the east, and the Chattahoochee River, to the west.
The aquifer generally thickens from the outcrop area towards the southeast, attaining a maximum of almost 300 feet in eastern Dougherty County. In down-dip areas where the Claiborne Group can be divided into the Lisbon Formation above and the Tallahatta Formation below, the Claiborne aquifer system is generally restricted to the Tallahatta Formation, and the Lisbon Formation acts as a confining unit that separates the Claiborne aquifer from the overlying Floridan aquifer (McFadden and Perriello, 1983; Long, 1989). The permeable Tallahatta unit is included in the Gordon aquifer system east of the Ocmulgee River (Brooks, et al., 1985).
During 1993 four wells were used to monitor the water quality of the Claiborne aquifer. The pH of the water samples ranged from acidic in the up-dip area (4.27 for well GWN-CL5 at Shellman in Randolph County) to slightly basic in the down-dip area (7.2 for GWN-CL2 in Dooly County). Manganese levels in samples from wells GWN-CL4, GWN-CL5 and GWNCL8 and the aluminum level from well GWN-CL5 exceeded the secondary MCL's for these elements.
Calcium and sodium concentrations were greatest in the sample from the down-dip well. The calcium concentration in the down-dip well is consistent with ground waters derived from limestone. Other metals detected included iron, barium, strontium, zinc, copper, yttrium, and cobalt. Lead was detected at 37 ppb from well GWN-CL5. Figure 3-12 shows trends in iron concentrations in three wells.
Samples from three of the wells (GWN-CL4, GWN-CL5, and GWN-CL8), all in the recharge area, contained detectable levels of nitrite/nitrate, with the sample from GWN-CL5 containing 9.84 parts per million (as nitrogen). Water samples from this well have historically had high nitrate/nitrite (and manganese) levels. Figure 3-13 shows nitrite/nitrate concentrations for selected wells. Chloride was detected in samples from all wells, with a maximum of 10.4 ppm in well GWN-CL5. Sulfate was detected only in GWN-CL2 at a concentration of7.3 ppm. The recharge area wells contained no detectable sulfate. Traces of fluoride were also found in samples from two wells. No synthetic organic compounds were detected in any of the samples collected. See the Appendix for analytical results of all collected samples.
3-15

...

...

't_ .J

,

I

"-..j_ ______l____ '

o
General recharge area (from Davis, et al., 1988) Soft water Hard water 0 Manganese exceeds MCL
FigureJ-11.- Water Quality of the Claiborne Aquifer System.

3-16

160.-------------------,------------,----------~------------~-------
140+---------------------------~---------------+------------~----------------+--------
120
--....J
0) ::J
0 1
0
C")
II ....J
(.)
--~ 80
....J
0) ::J
(j)
!:!=- 60
c: .0.::
40
20 ..................

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

c=J CL2 ~ CL4 . . CL8

*Iron levels detected below the MDL are represented as 20 ppb. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year.
Figure 3-12.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Claiborne Aquifer System.

3-17

10.-----------------,-----------,----------,-----------,----------------~
z::::J
0>
E .0.-
11
_J
()
6
-z_-J-
0>
E
cr)
0 z
~ C\J
0 z

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

C3 CL4 ~ CL5 . . CLS

*Nitrate/nitrite levels detected below the MDL are represented as 0.1 ppm. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year or that no nitrate/nitrite data are available.
Figure 3-13.- Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Claiborne Aquifer System.

3-18

3.6 JACKSONIAN AQUIFER SYSTEM The Jacksonian aquifer system of central and east-central Georgia is developed
predominantly in sands ofthe Eocene Barnwell Group, though, locally, isolated bodies may be important. Barnwell Group outcrops extend from Macon and Peach counties eastward to Burke and Richmond counties (Figure 3-14). Aquifer sands form a northern clastic facies ofthe Barnwell Group and grade southward into less permeable silts and clays of a transition facies (Vincent, 1982). The water-bearing sands are relatively thin, ranging from ten to fifty 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 Ocmulgee River are eastern and western discharge boundaries respectively for the up-dip flow system of the Jacksonian aquifer system.
Seven Jacksonian aquifer wells were monitored during 1993, five wells in the clastic facies and two wells in the transition facies (one, GWN-J2A, in an isolated limestone body). The pH measurements were, for the most part, near-neutral to slightly basic, ranging from 6.707.81. An exception was up-dip well GWN-17, which yielded water of a pH of 4.82. Iron, aluminum, and manganese concentrations in the samples were below the secondary MCL's for drinking water with the exception of manganese in well GWN-J3 (100 ppb). Sodium concentrations were generally low, with the highest occurring in a sample from the transition well GWN-J3. Calcium concentrations were moderate in samples from six of the wells, but were low in a sample from the up-dip well GWN-J7. Magnesium was detected in four of the wells, with the highest level of 6.0 ppm occurring in the sample from transition well GWN-J3. Other metals detected included barium, strontium, zinc, and copper. Nitrite/nitrate was more abundant in samples from the up-dip wells. Neither fluoride, chloride, nor sulfate exceeded their respective MCVs. See Figures 3-15 and 3-16 for trends in iron and nitrite/nitrate concentrations in selected wells. Well GWN-J2A gave water with traces of hydrocarbons and chloroform, both below primary MCL's. The Appendix contains the analytical results for all the wells sampled.
3-19

...

-.,.

\i i
I\'j_____ 1'

85

-----

General recharge area (from Davis, et al., 1988) ~Facies boundary (from Vincent, 1982)

Soft water

"'Moderately hard water

0 Manganese exceeds MCL

Hard water

Figure 3-14.- Water Quality ofthe Jacksonian Aquifer System.

3-20

200.-----------------.-----------.------,
180 ......
.. 160~ ___ ............... ___....... _ ....._
3 . 140~ ............................,_,___,..........__,............... 0;
:::l 0 0 C')
II
.....J ()
6 100+- ...-......_.._,__1
......._.J_
0)
w:::l . 80~ .......................... _........ ~ !6
c
.0.... 60 ~...........-----.--...........-!
40 ....................
20 .............................

1989

1990

1991

1992

C]J3~J5 . . J6

1993

*Iron levels detected below the MDL are represented as 20 ppb. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year.
Figure 3-15.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Jacksonian Aquifer System.
3-21

2

--::J'
z
0)
E
0

II 1.5
....J ()
~
--....J
z
0)
E

cr)
0 z

1

~

C\1
0 z

0.5 ''

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

c:::=J J1B ~ J2A . . J7

*Nitrate/nitrite levels detected below the MDL are represented as 0.1 ppm. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year or that no nitrate/nitrite data are available.
Figure 3-16.- Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Jacksonian Aquifer System.
3-22

3.7 FLORIDAN AQUIFER SYSTEM
The Floridan aquifer system (formerly known in Georgia as the Principal Artesian aquifer system) consists predominantly ofEocene and Oligocene limestones and dolostones that underlie most of the Coastal Plain Province. Other units are included locally in the aquifer. 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 a strike to the northeast. In 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 portion 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. The lower Floridan is deeply buried and not widely used, except in several municipal and industrial wells in the Savannah area (Clarke, et al., 1990). From its up-dip limit, defined in the east by clays of the Barnwell Group, the aquifer thickens to well over 700 feet in coastal Georgia. A dense limestone facies along the. trend of the Gulf Trough locally limits groundwater quality and availability (Kellam and Gorday, 1990). The Gulf Trough is a linear depositional feature in the Ocala Group that extends from southwestern Decatur County through central Bulloch County.
A ground-water divide separates a southwestward flow system in the Floridan aquifer in the Dougherty Plain from the Floridan aquifer system's major southeastward flow system in the remainder of Georgia. Rainfall infiltration in outcrop areas and leakage from extensive surficial aquifers provides recharge to 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 and Lowndes counties where the Withlacoochee River and numerous sinkholes breach upper confining beds (Krause, 1979).
In 1993, ground-water samples were collected from 40 wells in the Floridan aquifer system (Figure 3-17). The pH levels for all water samples taken were slightly basic. Iron exceeded the secondary MCLin samples from two wells, GWN-PA9C (370 ppb) in Glynn County and GWN-PA50 (480 ppb) in Laurens County. Trends in iron levels from selected wells in the Floridan aquifer are shown on Figure 3-18. Aluminum exceeded the secondary MCL in samples from two wells, with concentrations of210 ppb and 330 ppb. Most wells yielding water with detectable manganese levels are located in the Gulf Trough area (wells GWN-PA18, GWN-PA29, and GWN-PA32 through GWN-PA36). Manganese concentrations in excess of the secondary MCL were detected in two wells: GWN-PA18 (62 ppb), and GWN-PA34 (100 ppb).
3-23

Sodium concentrations ranged from 1.6 to 690 parts per million, and magnesium ranged from undetected to 94 ppm. Both elements are most abundant in samples from wells in the coastal area, with the highest concentrations of these elements occurring in a sample from well GWN-PA9C in Brunswick. Calcium ranged from 24 ppm in a sample from well GWN-PA2A in Savannah to 170 ppm in well GWN-PA9C. The barium concentration from well GWN-PA33 in the Gulf Trough area was 2200 ppb which exceeds the primary MCL. Other metals and semimetals detected include potassium, zirconium, vanadium, molybdenum, selenium, strontium, iron, and zinc. None of these substances exceeded applicable MCL's.
The water samples were also analyzed for the anions chloride, sulfate, fluoride, and nitrate/nitrite. Chloride levels ranged from below the detection limit to 844.9 ppm. The 844.9 ppm level occurred in well GWN-PA9C in the coastal area and was the only value to exceed the secondary MCL for chloride. Sulfate ranged from undetected to 231.8 ppm. The concentrations of fluoride ranged from undetected to 0.6 ppm. Certain samples were analyzed for synthetic organic chemicals; none were detected.
Most of the samples collected from the confined portions of the Floridan aquifer contained no detectable nitrite/nitrate, whereas most samples in the unconfined portion contained detectable concentrations of nitrite/nitrate. The highest level, 4.8 ppm nitrogen, was collected from well GWN-PA53. Trends in nitrate levels from selected wells in the Floridan Aquifer are presented in Figure 3-19. The Appendix gives the analytical results for samples from the Floridan aquifer system.
3-24

84

83~---

35

'0

>- General recharge area (from Davis, et al., 1988)

Moderately hard water Hard water + Very hard water

D Iron exceeds MCL 0 Manganese exceeds MCL

Figure 3-17.- Water Quality of the Floridan Aquifer System.

3-25

---..........
-.--""'n
Ann
-rvv
-...-...-..
---~nn
---...... n
.,.n...
--- a>
LL
-c: -- .0... 1'""'"'
100
50
n
v

.............

.---

-

i 1--..--

I

i

...

1---

. .

)

i

.

1--

. .

I h.

1988

1989

,:,

1-+- 1--

1990

,.,
1991

.,,

I

1--
><::

'

I?:'.::1--
1-

t--
t~ ' II

~

1992

1993

c=J PA9C ~ PA21A . . PA29
mHfl PA34 ~ PASO

*Iron levels detected below the MDL are represented as 20 ppb. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year.
Figure 3-18.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Floridan Aquifer System.
3-26

5,-------------------~-----------r------------~----------~----------------~
z::::J
Ol
E 0......
II ...J
0
6
z...J
Ol
E
cr)
0 z
~ C\1
0 z

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

c=J PA43 ~ PA46B . . PA51 EHnH! PA52 ~PA53

*Nitrate/nitrite levels detected below the MDL are represented as 0.1 ppm. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year or that no nitrate/nitrite data are available.
Figure 3-19.- Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Floridan Aquifer System.

3-27

3.8 MIOCENE AQUIFER SYSTEM
Much of south-central and southeastern Georgia lies within outcrop areas of the Miocene Altamaha Formation and Hawthorne Group. Discontinuous lens-shaped bodies of sand, 50 to 80 feet thick, are the main permeable units. Miocene clays and sandy clays are thickest, more than 500 feet, in Wayne County (Watson, 1982).
Areas of confinement exist along the coastal counties. Leakage from overlying surface aquifers into the Miocene aquifer system and, in some areas, from the underlying Floridan aquifer system is significant in the coastal counties (Watson, 1982). Two principal aquifer units are present in the coastal area (Joiner, et al., 1988). Clarke (et. al, 1990) use the names upper and lower Brunswick aquifers to refer to these two sandy aquifer units.
Water quality of the Miocene aquifer system was monitored in twelve wells (Figure 320). The pH of the samples ranged from 4.25 to 8.04. Iron and manganese levels ranged from undetected to 2200 and 210 ppb, respectively. Water samples from four wells, GWN-MI5, GWN-MilOB, GWN-MI13, and GWN-MI15, contained iron in excess of the secondary MCL. Water samples from two wells, GWN-MilOB and GWN-MI13, exceeded the secondary MCL for manganese. Figure 3-21 shows trends in iron concentrations in selected wells. Aluminum exceeded the secondary MCLin three samples ranging from 600 to 3400 ppb. Sodium ranged from 1.9 to 24 ppm while calcium ranged from below the detection limit to 71 ppm. Other metals and semimetals detected were potassium, magnesium, barium, strontium, zinc, copper, titanium, arsenic, and zirconium. None of these are present in excess of applicable MCL's.
Chloride ranged from undetected to 38.3 ppm, sulfate levels ranged from undetected to 49.6 parts per million. Both ofthese anions were highest in samples from the coastal well GWN-MB. Chloride concentrations were lowest in the deeper domestic wells (GWN-Mll, GWN-MI2, GWN-MilOB, and GWN-MI13). Fluoride was also detected in samples from 8 wells. Detectable levels of nitrite/nitrate, ranging from 1.4 to 18.4 ppm, were found in samples from five wells (GWN-MI5, GWN-MI7, GWN-MI8A, GWN-MI9A, and GWN-MI15). Wells GWN-MI7, GWN-MI8A, and GWN-MI15 exceeded the primary MCL for nitrate. Concentrations of nitrate/nitrite for selected wells are illustrated in Figure 3-22. No synthetic organic chemicals were found. Analytical data for samples drawn from the Miocene aquifer system are given in the Appendix.
3-28

Soft water Moderately hard water Hard water + Very hard water

D Iron exceeds MCL 0 Manganese exceeds MCL

Figure 3-20.- Water Quality of the Miocene Aquifer System.

3-29

2500.----------------,-----------,----------.----------.--------------~
2000
--::J'
Cl) ::l
0
1 0
C')
II .....1
()
~
--.....1
Cl) ::l
(i) 1000 !:S
c
0
"-

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

c=::J MIS ~ Ml108 ~ Ml13 ~ Ml14

*Iron levels detected below the MDL are represented as 20 ppb. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year.
Figure 3-21. -Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Miocene Aquifer System.
3-30

18

1

:-z:-J-' 1
0)
E
0

II 12
....J (.)
~

---z....J 10
0)
E

C')-
0 z

8

~

C\J
0 z

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

CJ Ml15 ~ Ml7 . . MISA mti MI9A

*Nitrate/nitrite levels detected below the MDL are represented as 0.1 ppm. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year or that no nitrate/nitrite data are available.
Figure 3-22.- Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Miocene Aquifer System.
3-31

3.9 PIEDMONT/BLUE RIDGE UNCONFINED AQUIFERS
Georgia's Piedmont and Blue Ridge Physiographic Provinces are developed on metamorphic and igneous rocks that are predominantly Precambrian and Paleozoic in age. Soil and saprolite horizons, compositional layers, and openings along fractures and joints in the rocks are the major water-bearing features. Fracture density and interconnection provide the primary controls on the rate of water flow into wells completed in crystalline rocks. The permeability and thickness of soils and shallow saprolite horizons determine the amount of discharge that can be sustained.
Ground-water samples were collected from sixteen wells and two springs in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge Provinces. Figure 3-23 shows locations of the monitoring stations. Water from wells and springs in the crystalline-rock aquifers was acidic, the exception being water from well GWN-P6B, with a pH of7.61. Iron and manganese ranged from undetected to 13,000 (GWN-P10A) and 180 ppb (GWN-P9), respectively. Iron exceeded the secondary MCL in water samples from five of the sampling stations. Figure 3-24 shows trends in iron concentrations for selected wells in the Piedmont sector. Figure 3-25 illustrates iron concentrations for selected wells in the Blue Ridge sector. Manganese exceeded the secondary MCL in samples from six stations. Aluminum exceeded the secondary MCL in a sample from well GWN-P10A (1100 ppb). Sodium was detected at relatively low concentrations in samples from all stations. Calcium and magnesium were detected in samples from all stations except well GWN-P14. Potassium, barium, strontium, molybdenum, vanadium, zinc, and beryllium were other metals detected at concentrations below any applicable MCL.
Chloride and sulfate concentrations in the water samples ranged from undetected to 12.6 and 69.0 ppm, respectively. Sulfate levels were below 15 ppm in all but three wells, GWN-P1B, GWN-P9, and GWN-P10A. Fluoride was detected in samples from 8 wells. Nitrite/nitrate was present in water from ten stations, all at levels well below the MCL. Figures 3-26 and 3-27 show nitrite/nitrate concentrations in selected wells from the Piedmont and Blue Ridge aquifers, respectively. No synthetic organic chemicals were detected. An analysis summary for Piedmont/Blue Ridge wells and springs is found in the Appendix.
3-32

Soft water Moderately hard water

0 Manganese exceeds MCL D Iron exceeds MCL

Figure 3-23.- Water Quality of the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifers.

3-33

2500.------.-,-------,-----------,----------,----------,----------------.

:::J 0;
:J
g0 1500 ..... .......
II
_J
0
5
--_J
0> :J
Q) 1000 -l...------1 !:S
c
.0...
500-t------i

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

c::J P1B ~ P9 1111 P12 ~ P15A

*Iron levels detected below the MDL are represented as 20 ppb. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year.
Figure 3-24.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Piedmont Sector.
3-34

180

1

1

--::J'
1 0)

::J

0

0

C")

II
....J

1

()

6
--....J
0)

::J

Q)
!:S
c:
0....

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

[=:J BR1A ~ BR2A . . BR3A

*Iron levels detected below the MDL are represented as 20 ppb. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year.
Figure 3-25.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Blue Ridge Sector.
3-35

z:::J'
C)
E
0
II ....I
-()
:2
z....I
C)
E
cr)
0 z
~ C\1
0 z

1989

1990

1991

1992

I> I P2 ~ P4C 1111 P12 EI P14

*Nitrate/nitrite levels detected below the MDL are represented as 0.1 ppm. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year or that no nitrate/nitrite data are available.
Figure 3-26.- Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Piedmont Sector.
3-36

z::J'
Ol
E ,0....
II
_J
()
6
--_J
z
Ol
E
cr)
0 z
~ C\1
0 z
CJ BR1A ~ BR2 . . BR3A
*Nitrate/nitrite levels detected below the MDL are represented as 0.1 ppm. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year or that no nitrate/nitrite data are available.
Figure 3-27. -Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Blue Ridge Sector.
3-37

3.10 VALLEY AND RIDGE UNCONFINED AQUIFERS
Soil and residuuril form low-yield unconfined aquifers across most of the Valley and Ridge Province of northwestern Georgia. Valley bottoms underlain by dolostones and limestones of the Cambro-Ordovician Knox Group are the locations of most higher-yielding wells and springs that are suitable for municipal supplies.
Water quality in the Valley and Ridge unconfined aquifers was monitored in six wells and three springs (Figure 3-28). Three of these wells and all three springs produced water from Knox Group carbonates. The other wells were used to sample water in the Ordovician Chickamauga Group in Walker County and the Cambrian Shady Dolomite in Bartow County. Water from the Valley and Ridge monitoring stations was typically basic, with pH ranges of 6.8 to 7.9. Iron and manganese concentrations were below detection limits for seven of the stations sampled and exceeded secondary MCL's in only one ofthe wells sampled (GWN-VR2). Calcium ranged from 29 to 83 parts per million and manganese was detected in samples from all stations. Barium and strontium were commonly detected trace metals. The highest barium concentration, 590 ppb, was detected in a sample from well GWN-VR6. This particular well draws water from the Shady Dolomite Group which contains an abundance of barite (BaS04) deposits. Chloride ranged in concentration from 1.1 to 21.7 ppm, while sulfate ranged from undetectable to 47.1 ppm. Detectable fluoride was found in samples from 2 wells. Detectable nitrite/nitrate was present in samples from all wells and springs except GWN-VR2, and GWNVR4. The highest nitrate/nitrite concentration occurred in a sample from well GWN-VR5 with a level of 3.0 ppm as nitrogen. Figures 3-29 and 3-30 show iron and nitrite/nitrate levels, respectively, for selected wells in the Valley and Ridge aquifers.
Volatile organic compounds were detected in samples from three wells (GWN-VR2, GWN-VR4, and GWN-VR6), all located in urban or industrial settings. The sample from well VR2 contained motor fuel constituents. The benzene concentration in the sample exceeded the primary MCL of 5 ppb (Section 4). The major ground-water bearing strata in the Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province are commonly associated with Karst development. Therefore, due to the susceptibility of karst to surface pollution, testing for volatile organic compounds has been instituted for all sampling stations in this Province.
3-38

...

\'' j i

i .

""--- 1

85

- - - - -

Hard water + Very hard water

0 Manganese exceeds MCL D Iron exceeds MCL

Figure 3-28.- Water Quality of the Valley and Ridge Unconfined Aquifers.

3-39

--:::J'
Cl :I 0 0
C')
II
...J
0
6
--...J
Cl :I

Q)

!:S

c
.0...

1000

500~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-------+-------------+---------------+--l

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

c::::J VR2 ~ VR4

*Iron levels detected below the MDL are represented as 20 ppb. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year.
Figure 3-29.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Valley and Ridge Aquifer System.
3-40

z::::1
Cl
E
0
II
....J () ~
-....J
--z
Cl
E
C')
0 z
~ C\1
0 z
c=Jl VR1 ~ VR3 . . VR5
6EVR6 ~ VR9
*Nitrate/nitrite levels detected below the MDL are represented as 0.1 ppm. An absent column of data indicates that the well was not sampled during that particular year or that no nitrate/nitrite data are available.
Figure 3-30. -Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Valley and Ridge Aquifer System.
3-41

4.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

One hundred and twenty-eight raw water samples were collected for analysis from 107 wells and 4 springs for the Ground-Water Monitoring Network in 1993. These wells and springs are used to sample ten aquifer systems in Georgia:

~

Cretaceous aquifer system

~

Providence aquifer system

~

Clayton aquifer system

~

Claiborne aquifer system

~

Jacksonian aquifer system

~

Floridan aquifer system

~

Miocene aquifer system

~

Piedmont/Blue Ridge unconfined aquifers

~

Valley and Ridge unconfined aquifers

Analyses of water samples collected in 1993 were compared with analyses for the Ground-Water Monitoring Network dating back to 1984, permitting the recognition oftemporal trends. Table 4-1 lists the major contaminants and pollutants that were detected at the stations of the Ground-Water Monitoring Network during 1993. New MCL's that became effective in 1993 are also noted. Although isolated water quality problems were documented during 1993 at specific localities, the quality of water from the majority ofthe Ground-Water Monitoring Network stations remains excellent.

Nitrate/nitrite are the most common substances present in ground water in Georgia that can have adverse health effects. Three wells, all shallow domestic wells tapping the Miocene aquifer system (MI7 and MI8A, and MI 15) yielded water samples in 1993 with nitrite/nitrate concentrations exceeding the primary MCL of 10 ppm as nitrogen (Table 4-1 ).

Spatial and temporal limitations of the Ground-Water Monitoring Network preclude the identification of the exact sources of the increasing levels of nitrogen compounds in some of Georgia's ground water. Nitrite/nitrate originates in ground water from direct sources and through oxidation of other forms of dissolved nitrogen, deriving from both natural and manmade sources. The most common sources of man-made dissolved nitrogen in Georgia usually are derived from septic systems, agricultural wastes, and storage or application of fertilizers (Robertson, et. al, 1993). Dissolved nitrogen is also present in rainwater, derived form terrestrial vegetation and volatilization of fertilizers (Drever, 1988). The conversion of other nitrogen species to nitrate occurs in aerobic environments such as recharge areas. Anaerobic conditions in ground water, as are commonly developed along the flow path of ground water, foster the denitrification process. However, this process may be inhibited by the lack of denitrifying bacteria in ground water (Freeze and Cherry, 1979).

Iron, manganese, and aluminum are the three naturally occurring substances responsible for the greatest incidence of ground-water quality problems in Georgia (Table 4-1 ). Although minor increases or decreases in iron, manganese, and aluminum were noted for some stations,

4-1

no long-term trends in concentrations of these metals were documented for the majority of the wells and springs sampled.
The presence of synthetic organic compounds was again documented in water from a few of the wells sampled in the Valley and Ridge. Because of the sporadic nature of the occurrence of such compounds in most of these wells, spatial and temporal trends in levels of organic pollution cannot be defined at this time.
4-2

Table 4-1. Pollution and contamination incidents, 1993.

Station Contaminant/ Pollutant**

Primary MCL

GWN-Kl Al=630ppb

GWN-K3 Fe=720ppb

GWN-K8A Fe=4100ppb Mn=50ppb

GWN-K9

Fe=l200ppb Al=470ppb

GWN-Kl2 Al=420ppb

GWNCT7A

Al=510ppb

GWN-CL4 Mn=56ppb

GWN-CLS Mn=680ppb Al=440ppb

GWN-CL8 Mn=l20ppb

GWN-J2A

CHC1 3 =tr CxHx=tr

CHC13 =100ppb
MCL varies with compound

GWN-J3 Mn=lOOppb

GWNPA9C

Fe=370ppb Al=330ppb Cl=844ppm

GWNPAlOB

Al=210ppb

GWNPA18

Mn=62ppb

GWNPA33

Ba=2200ppb

GWNPA34

Mn=lOOppb

GWNPASO

Fe=480ppb

GWN-MIS Fe=690ppb Al=3400ppb

GWN-MI7 N0x=l3. 3ppm as N Al=840pb

Ba=2000ppb NOx=lOppm as N

Secondary MCL
Al=200ppb Fe=300ppb Fe=300ppb Mn=50ppb Fe=300ppb Al=200ppb Al=200ppb Al=200ppb
Mn=50ppb Mn=50ppb Al=200ppb Mn=50ppb
Mn=50ppb Fe=300ppb Al=200ppb Cl=250ppm
Al=200ppb
Mn=50ppb
Mn=50ppb
Fe=300ppb
Fe=300ppb Al=200ppb
Al=200ppb

4-3

Table 4-1. (continued)

Station Contaminant/ Pollutant**

GWNMIBA

N0x=13.5ppm as N Al=1300ppb

GWNMilOB

Fe=520ppb Mn=150ppb

GWNMI13

Fe=2200ppb Mn=210ppb

GWNMilS

Fe=310ppb Nox=18. 4ppm as N Al=600ppm

Primary MCL NOx= 10ppm as N
NOx= 10ppm as N

Secondary MCL
Al=200ppb Fe=300ppb Mn=SOppb Fe=300ppb Mn=50ppb Fe=300ppb Al=200ppb

GWNBR3A GWN-P1B
GWN-P6B GWN-P9
GWNP10A
GWN-P12

Mn=83ppb
Fe=2400ppb Mn=63ppb
Mn=93ppb
Fe=1200ppb Mn=180ppb
Fe=13000ppb Mn=120ppb Al=llOOppb
Fe=2300ppb

Mn=SOppb
Fe=300ppb Mn=50ppb
Mn=SOppb
Fe=300ppb Mn=50ppb
Fe=300ppb Mn=SOppb Al=200ppb
Fe=300ppb

GWNP15A GWN-VR2
GWN-VR4 GWN-VR6

Fe=970ppb Mn=140ppb
Fe=2600ppb Mn=2000ppb benzene=350ppb toluene=610ppb xylenes=480ppb ethlybenzene=160ppb
1,1,1trichloroethane=trace
tetrachloroethylene= trace

benzene=Sppb toluene=1000ppb xylenes=10000ppb ethlybenzene=700ppb
1,1,1trichloroethane=200ppb
tetrachloroethylene= Sppb*

Fe=300ppb Mn=SOppb
Fe=300ppb Mn=SOppb

*effective July 30, 1992 **highest value reported if multiple samples taken

4-4

5.0 LIST OF REFERENCES
Brooks, R., Clarke, J.S., and Faye, R.E., 1985, Hydrology of the Gordon Aquifer System of East-Central Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 75, 41 p., 2 pl.
Clarke, J.S., Brooks, R., and Faye, R.E., 1985, Hydrogeology of the Dublin and Midville Aquifer Systems of East Central Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 74, 62 p., 2 pl.
Clarke, J.S., Faye, R.E., and Brooks, R., 1983, Hydrogeology of the Providence Aquifer of Southwest Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 11, 5 pl.
Clarke, J.S., Faye, R.E., and Brooks, R., 1984, Hydrogeology of the Clayton Aquifer of Southwest Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 13, 6 pl.
Clarke, J.S., Hacke, C.M., and Peck, M.F., 1990, Geology and Ground-Water Resources of the Coastal Area of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 113, 116 p., 12 pl.
Crews, P.A., and Huddlestun, P.F., 1984, Geologic Sections of the Principal Artesian Aquifer System, in Hydrogeologic Evaluation for Underground Injection Control in the Coastal Plain of Georgia, R. Arora, ed., Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, 5 p., 41pl.
Drever, J. I., 1988, The Geochemistry of Natural Waters: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 437 p.
EPD, 1991, A Ground-Water Management Plan for Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 11, 100 p.
EPD, 1992, Rules for Safe Drinking Water, Section 391-3-5, Rules ofthe Georgia Department ofNatural Resources Environmental Protection Division, p. 601-730.
Freeze, R.A., and Cherry, J.A., 1979, Groundwater: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 604 p.
Hayes, L.R., Maslia, M.L., and Meeks, W.C., 1983, Hydrology and Model Evaluation ofthe Principal Artesian Aquifer, Dougherty Plain, Southwest Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 97, 93 p.
Hicks, D.W., Krause, R.E., and Clarke, J.S., 1981, Geohydrology ofthe Albany Area, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 57, 31 p.
Joiner, C.N., Reynolds, M.S., Stayton, W.L., and Boucher, F.G., 1988, Ground-Water Data for Georgia, 1987: United States Geological Survey Open-File Report 88-323, 172 p.
Kellam, M.F., and Gorday, L.L., 1990, Hydrogeology ofthe Gulf Trough-Apalachicola Embayment Area, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 94, 74 p., 15 pl.
Krause, R.E., 1979, Geohydrology of Brooks, Lowndes, and Western Echols Counties, Georgia: United States Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 78-117, 48 p., 8 pl.
5-1

Long, A.F., 1989, Hydrogeology ofthe Clayton and Claiborne Aquifer Systems: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 19, 6 pl.
McFadden, S.S., and Perriello, P.D., 1983, Hydrogeology of the Clayton and Claiborne Aquifers in Southwestern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 55, 59p., 2 pl.
Pollard, L.D., and Vorhis, R.C., 1980, The Geohydrology ofthe Cretaceous Aquifer System in Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 3, 5 pl.
Robertson, S.J., Shellenberger, D.L., York, G.M., Clark, M.G., Eppihimer, R.M., Lineback, J.A., 1993, Sampling for Nitrate Concentrations in North Georgia's Ground Water: 1993 Georgia Water Resources Conference 364-365, 1 p.
Shellenberger, D.L., Barget, R.G., Lineback, J.A., and Shapiro, E.A., 1996, Nitrate in Georgia's Ground Water: Georgia Geologic Survey Project Report 25.
Stuart, M.A., Rich, F.J., and Bishop, G.A., 1995, Survey ofNitrate Contamination in Shallow Domestic Drinking Water Wells in the Inner Coastal Plain of Georgia: Ground Water, Vol. 33, No.2, p. 284290.
Vincent, R.H., 1982, Geohydrology ofthe Jacksonian Aquifer in Central and East Central Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 8, 3 pl.
Wait, R.L., 1960, Source and Quality of Ground Water in Southwestern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 18, 74p.
Watson, T., 1982, Aquifer Potential of the Shallow Sediments of the Coastal Area of Georgia: Proceedings, Second Symposium on the Geology ofthe Southeastern Coastal Plain, Arden, D.D., Beck, B.F., Morrow, E., eds., Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 53, p. 183-194.
Webb, G.L., 1995, Pesticide Monitoring Network 1993-1994: Georgia Geologic Survey Project Report 22.
5-2

APPENDIX

ANALYSES OF SAMPLES COLLECTED DURING 1993 FOR THE GEORGIA GROUND-WATER MONITORING NETWORK

All water quality samples that are collected for the Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network

are subjected to a Standard Analysis which includes tests for pH, specific conductance, certain common

inorganic anions, and thirty metals. Analyses for additional parameters may be included for samples

that are collected from areas where the possibility of ground-water pollution exists due to regional

activities. These optional tests or screens include tests for agricultural chemicals, coal-tar creosote,

phenols and anilines and volatile organic compounds (Tables A-I and A-2). Because parameters other

than the two physical parameters, three ofthe major anions, and eight of the metals of the Standard

Analysis were detected less commonly or rarely, other parameters are listed in the following analytical

results table only if they were detected.

For this appendix, the following abbreviations are used:

su
mg!L mgN!L
ug/L umho/cm
u

= standard units =milligrams per liter (parts per million) =milligrams per liter (parts per million), as
nitrogen = micrograms per liter (parts per billion) = micromhos per centimeter =less than (below detection limit). Where this
abbreviation is used for a figure that is a calculated average, the average is below the typical detection limit for the parameter

(Note: detection limits may change due to temporarily improved instrument performance or to use of different analytical methods by different laboratories)

A-1

Table A-1. Standard Water Quality Analysis: Physical Parameters, Major Anions, Minerals and ICP/AAS Metals Screen.

Parameter METALS
Silver (Ag) Aluminum (Al) Arsenic* (As)
Gold (Au) Barium (Ba) Beryllium (Be) Bismuth (Bi) Cobalt (Co) Chromium (Cr) Cadmium (Cd) Copper (Cu)
Iron (Fe) Manganese (Mn) Molybdenum (Mo)
Nickel (Ni) Lead (Pb) Antimony (Sb) Selenium* (Se) Tin (Sn) Strontium (Sr) Titanium (Ti) Thalliurn (Tl) Vanadium (V) Yttrium (Y)

Typical Detection Limit

Max. Contaminant Level

30 ug/L 50 ug/L 25 ug/L 10 ug/L 10 ug/L 2 ug/L* 1 25 ug/L 10 ug/L 10 ug/L 2.5 ug/L 20 ug/L 20 ug/L 10 ug/L 10 ug/L 20 ug/L 30 ug/L 3 ug/L 25 ug/L 110 ug/L 10 ug/L 10 ug/L 1 mg/L 10 ug/L 10 ug/L

100 ug/L 2 200 ug/L 2 50 ug/L 1
NA 2000 ug/L1
NA NA NA 100 ug/L 1 5.0 ug/L1 1000 ug/L2 300 ug/L2 50 ug/L 2 NA NA NA NA 50 ug/L 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA

A-2

Table A-1 (continued):
Parameter Zinc (Zn) Zirconium (Zr) Mercury*** (Hg) ANIONS Chloride (CI-) Sulfate (SOt) Nitrate/Nitrite (NOx-) Fluoride (FI-) MINERALS Calcium (Ca) Potassium (K) Magnesium (Mg) Sodium (Na)

Typical Detection Limit 20 ug/L 10 ug/L 0.2 ug/L

Max. Contaminant Level 5000 ug/L 2 NA 2.0 ug/L1

0.1 mg/L 2.0mg/L 0.1 mg/L 0.1 mg/L

250 mg/L 2 250 mg/L2 10.0 mg/L as N1 4.0 mg/L 1, 2.0 mg/L 2

1.0 mg/L

NA

5.0 mg/L

NA

1.0 mg/L

NA

1.0 mg/L

NA

OTHER PARAMETERS

pH

0.01 su

NA

Conductivity

1.0 mho/em

NA

*Analyzed by atomic absorption spectrophotometry (AAS) using graphite furnace. **Analyzed by AAS beginning sometime in 1993. ***Analyzed by manual cold vapor. ,=Primary Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL). 2=Secondary MCL. NA=No MCL established.
MCL'sfrom Georgia Rules for Safe Drinking Water, July, 1993, (EPD, 1993).

A-3

Table A-2. Additional Water Quality Analyses: Organic Screens #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #7, #8, #9, and #10.

ORGANIC SCREEN #1 (organophosphates/herbicides)

Parameter
Alachlor Atrazine Azodrin Chloropyrifos Cyanazine DCPA Dasanit Demeton Diazinon Dimethoate Disyston Eptam Ethoprop Fonophos Guthion Isopropalin Malathion Metolachlor Metribuzin Mevinphos Parathion (E) Parathion (M)

Minimum Detection Limit
1.0 ug/L 0.3 ug/L 1.0 ug/L 0.8 ug!L 1.0 ug!L 0.01 ug!L 0.6 ug/L 1.0 ug/L 1.0 ug/L 0.5 ug!L 1.0 ug!L 0.5 ug/L 0.5 ug/L 0.5 ug/L 2.0 ug/L 1.0 ug/L 1.4 ug/L 1.0 ug!L 1.25 ug/L 1.4 ug/L 0.08 ug/L 0.1 ug/L

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
2.0 ug/L 3.0 ug!L
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

A-4

Parameter
Pebulate Pendimethalin
Phorate Profluralin Simazine
Sutan Terbufos Trifluralin Vernam

ORGANIC SCREEN #1 (continued) (organophosphates/herbicides)

Minimum Detection Limit

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level

0.6 ug/L

NA

0.8 ug/L

NA

1.0 ug/L

NA

0.9 ug/L

NA

0.9 ug/L

NA

0.7 ug/L

NA

3.0 ug/L

NA

1.0 ug/L

NA

0.5 ug/L

NA

Parameter

ORGANIC SCREEN #2 (organochlorine pesticides!PCB 's)
Minimum Detection Limit

Dicofol Endrin Methoxychlor gamma-HCH (lindane) PCB's Permethrin Toxaphene

0.1 ug/L 0.03 ug/L 0.3 ug/L 0.008 ug/L 0.6 ug/L 0.3 ug/L 1.2 ug/L

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
NA
0.2 ug/L 40.0 ug/L 0.2 ug/L 0.5 ug/L
NA
3.0 ug/L

A-5

Parameter
2,4-D Acifluorfen Chloramben
Dinoseb Silvex Trichlorofon

ORGANIC SCREENS #3 AND #4 (dinoseb/phenoxy herbicides) Minimum Detection Limit
5.2 ug!L 1.0 ug/L 0.2 ug/L 0.1 ug/L 0.1 ug/L 2.0 ug/L

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
70.0 ug!L NA NA NA
50.0 ug!L NA

Parameter
Carbaryl Carbofuran
Diuron Fluometron
Linuron Methomyl Monuron

ORGANIC SCREEN #5 (carbamate pesticides)
Minimum Detection Limit
2.0 ug/L 1.0 ug/L 1.0 ug!L 1.0 ug/L 1.0 ug/L 1.0 ug/L 1.0 ug/L

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
NA 40.0 ug!L
NA NA NA NA NA

A-6

Parameter

ORGANIC SCREEN #7* (volatile organic compound)
Minimum Detection Limit

EDB

5.0 ug/L

*currently analyzed along with Organic Screen #10.

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
0.05 ug/L

Parameter

ORGANIC SCREENS #8 AND #9 (semivolatile organic compounds)
Minimum Detection Limit

1,2-Dichlorobenzene (o) 1.3-Dichlorobenzene (m) 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (p) Bis(2-Chloroethyl) Ether
Hexachloroethane N-Nitrosodi-N-Propylamine
Nitrobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Napthalene Bis(2-Chloroethoxy)
Methane Isophorone Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2-Chloronaphthalene Acenaphthylene Acenaphthene

10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L
10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
600.0 ug/L NA
75.0 ug/L NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA NA

A-7

ORGANIC SCREENS #8 AND #9 (continued) (semivolatile organic compounds)

Parameter

Minimum Detection Limit

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level

Dimethyl Phthalate

10.0 ug/L

NA

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

10.0 ug/L

NA

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

10.0 ug/L

NA

4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether

10.0 ug/L

NA

Fluorene

10.0 ug/L

NA

Diethyl Phthalate

10.0 ug/L

NA

N-Nitrosodimethylamine

10.0 ug/L

NA

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine

10.0 ug/L

NA

Hexachlorobenzene

10.0 ug/L

NA

4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether

10.0 ug/L

NA

Phenanthrene

10.0 ug/L

NA

Anthracene

10.0 ug/L

NA

Di-N-Butyl Phthalate

10.0 ug/L

NA

2-Methyl Naphthalene

10.0 ug/L

NA

Dibenzofuran

10.0 ug/L

NA

Bis(2-Chloroisopropyl)Ether

10.0 ug/L

NA

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

10.0 ug/L

NA

Fluoranthene

10.0 ug/L

NA

Pyrene

10.0 ug/L

NA

N-Butyl Benzyl Phthalate

10.0 ug/L

NA

Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)Phthalate

10.0 ug/L

NA

Chrysene

10.0 ug/L

NA

Benzo (a) Anthracene

10.0 ug/L

NA

A-8

ORGANIC SCREENS #8 AND #9 (continued) (semivolatile organic compounds)

Parameter

Minimum Detection Limit

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level

Di-N-Octyl Phthalate

10.0 ug/L

NA

Benzo-(B )Fluoranthene

10.0 ug/L

NA

Benzo-(K)Fluoranthene

10.0 ug!L

NA

Benzo-A-Pyrene

10.0 ug/L

NA

Indeno(l ,2,3-CD)Pyrene

10.0 ug/L

NA

1,2,5,6-Dibenzanthracene

10.0 ug/L

NA

Benzo(GHI)Perylene

10.0 ug!L

NA

2-Chlorophenol

10.0 ug!L

NA

2-Nitrophenol

10.0 ug!L

NA

Phenol (GC/MS)

10.0 ug!L

NA

2,4-Dimethylphenol

10.0 ug/L

NA

2,4-Dichlorophenol

10.0 ug/L

NA

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

10.0 ug/L

NA

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

200.0 ug!L

NA

2,4-Dinitrophenol

50.0 ug!L

NA

4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol

50.0 ug!L

NA

Pentachlorophenol

50.0 ug!L

1.0 ug/L

4-Nitrophenol

50.0 ug!L

NA

Benzidine

80.0 ug!L

NA

3,3-Dichlorobenzidine

20.0 ug/L

NA

2-Methyl phenol

10.0 ug!L

NA

4-Methylphenol

10.0 ug/L

NA

A-9

Parameter

ORGANIC SCREEN #10 (volatile organic compounds)
Minimum Detection Limit

Methylene Chloride T richlorofluoromethane
1,1-Dichloroethylene 1, 1-Dichloroethane Trans 1,2-Dichloroethylene
Chloroform 1,2-Dichloroethane 1,1, 1-Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Dichlorobromomethane 1,2-Dichloropropane Trans-1 ,3-Dichloropropene Trichloroethylene
Benzene Chlorodibromomethane
1,1 ,2-Trichloroethane Cis-1 ,3-Dichloropropene
Bromoform 1,1 ,2,2,-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene Toluene
Chloro benzene Ethylbenzene

5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
NA NA
7.0 ug/L
NA
100.0 ug/L 100.0 ug/L*
5.0 ug/L 200.0 ug/L
5.0 ug/L 100.0 ug/L*
5.0 ug/L
NA
5.0 ug/L 5.0 ug/L 100.0 ug/L*
NA NA
100.0 ug/L*
NA
5.0 ug/L 1000.0 ug/L 100.0 ug/L 700.0 ug/L

A-10

ORGANIC SCREEN #10 (continued) (volatile organic compounds)

Parameter

Minimum Detection Limit

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level

Acetone

100.0 ug/L

NA

Methyl Ethyl Ketone

100.0 ug/L

NA

Carbon Disulfide

5.0 ug/L

NA

Vinyl Chloride

10.0 ug/L

2.0 ug!L

2-Hexanone

50.0 ug!L

NA

Methyl Isobutyl Ketone

50.0 ug!L

NA

Styrene

5.0 ug!L

100.0 ug/L

Xylenes (total)

5.0 ug!L

10,000.0 ug!L

Chloroethane

10.0 ug/L

NA

1,2-Dibromoethane

5.0 ug/L

NA

Vinyl Acetate

50.0 ug/L

NA

Chloromethane

10.0 ug/L

NA

Bromomethane

10.0 ug/L

NA

NA indicates that a Maximum Contaminant Level has not yet been established. *indicates a trihalomethane compound The primary MCLfor total trihalomethanes is 100 ug/L.

A-11

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Cretaceous Aquifer System

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe

Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

su UNITS

mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

Other Screens Tested

GWN-K1

4.68 1.4 5U 1.3 1U 10U 10U 20U 17 630 1.9 0.2 7.3 0.2

33

Well Name: Englehard Kaolin Company #2

County:

Wilkinson

Date Sampled: 1993/04/13

GWN-K2

4.67 1.4

5U

1.4

1U 10U 10U 48 10U 45U 1.9 0.1

3.7 0.2

26

Well Name: Irwinton #2

County:

Wilkinson

Date Sampled: 1993/04/13

2,4 2,4,10

GWN-K3

6.11 1.9 5U

18

1.4

63

22 720 32 45U 2.3 0.1

7.8 0.1U

97

Well Name: Sandersville #78

County:

Washington

Date Sampled: 1993/04/12

2,4, 10

GWN-K5

4.97 1.4 5U 1U 1U 10U 10U 20U 10U 45U 1.4 0.1U 2U 0.6

18 bis-2-ethylhexyl-

2,4,8,9,Hg

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

Well Name: County:

Richmond County #1 01 Richmond

phthalate=11 0? fatty acids=310?

Date Sampled: 1993/06/24

GWN-K5

4.88 (special follow-up)

Well Name: Richmond County #1 01

County:

Richmond

Date Sampled: 1993/09/23

GWN-K5

5.24 2.1

5U

1U

sou 1U 10U 10U 20U 10U

1.5 0.1U 2U

0.6

Well Name: Richmond County #101

County:

Richmond

Date Sampled: 1993/12/30

bis-2-ethylhexylphthalate=U fatty acids=U
18

8,9 only 2,4,8,9,Hg

GWN-K6

5.64 3.5 5U 4.5 1U

59

16 20U 10U 45U 2.6 0.1 4.4 0.1U

42

10

Well Name: J.M. Huber #6

County:

Twiggs

Date Sampled: 1993/04/14

GWN-K7

5.23 1.7 5U 2.1

1U

14

15 20U 10U 45U 2.5 0.1

2U 0.1U

21

2,4

Well Name: Jones County #4

County:

Jones

Date Sampled: 1993/04/13

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Cretaceous Aquifer System (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe

Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected
UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-K8A

6.88 2.0 5U

28

1.2 120 81 4100 50

52 2.0 0.1

12 0.1U 157

Well Name: Mohawk Carpet #4

County:

Laurens

Date Sampled: 1993/11/29

GWN-K9

4.1

1.2

5U

1U

1U 10U 10U 1200 10U 470 1.4 1.0 9.2 0.1U

47

Well Name: Marshallville #1

County:

Macon

Date Sampled: 1993/04/26

GWN-K10

4.9 4.8 5U 1.7 1U 10U 10U 20U 10U 45U 4.8 0.1U 2U 1.8

39

Well Name: Fort. Valley #1

County:

Peach

Date Sampled: 1993/04/26

)>

I

GWN-K10

5.01 3.0 5U 1.3 1U 10U 10U 20U 10U 51

3.3 0.1U 2U 1.2

32

~

c.>

Well Name: Fort. Valley #1

County:

Peach

Date Sampled: 1993/11/30

GWN-K11

5.0 1.4

5U

1U

1U 10U 10U 230 10U 45U 1.1 0.1U 2U

0.2

16

Well Name: Warner Robins #1A

County:

Houston

Date Sampled: 1993/04/26

GWN-K11

5.00 1.1

5U

1U

1U 10U 10U 210 10U 50U 1.1 0.1U 2U

0.2

16

Well Name: Warner Robins #1A

County:

Houston

Date Sampled: 1993/11/30

GWN-K12

4.1

1.4

5U

1U

1U 10U 10U 190

12 420 4.8 0.1U 8.0 0.1U

44

Well Name: Perry/Holiday Inn Well

County:

Houston

Date Sampled: 1993/04/27

GWN-K12

4.22 1.1

5U

1U

1U 10U 10U 190

13 400 1.4 0.1U 8.1 0.1U

48

Well Name: Perry/Holiday Inn Well

County:

Houston

Date Sampled: 1993/11/30

Other Screens Tested 10
10 2,4,10 10 2,4,10 5,10 1,2,3,4,5, 10

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Cretaceous Aquifer System (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe

Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-K13

9.04 46

5U

2.2

1U

40 10U 20U 10U 45U 9.4 0.3 8.0 0.1U 171

Well Name: Omaha #1

County:

Stewart

Date Sampled: 1993/04/28

GWN-K16

5.4

5.4

5U

1U

1U 10U 10U 20U 10U 45U 2.1 0.1U 6.4 0.3

27

Well Name: Packaging Corp. Amer. North Well

County:

Bibb

Date Sampled: 1993/04/28

GWN-K16

5.41 4.9

5U

1U

1U 10U 10U 20U 10U 50U 2.2 0.1U 2.4

0.3

29 Pb=32

Well Name: Packaging Corp. Amer. North Well

County:

Bibb

Date Sampled: 1993/11/30

)>

_'_..

GWN-K18

4.53 1.4

5U

1.6

1U 10U 10U 160 10U 66

3.1 0.1U 4.5 0.1U

27 Cu=23

~

Well Name: Buena Vista #6

County:

Marion

Date Sampled: 1993/04/28

GWN-K19

4.90 2.0

5U

1U

1U 10U 10U 20U 10U 45U 1.5 0.1

2U 0.1U

17

Well Name: Hephzibah Murphy St. Well

County:

Richmond

Date Sampled: 1993/06/24

Other Screens Tested
Hg
10
2,3,4,10
2,3,4, 1O,Hg
2,3,4, 10,Hg

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Providence Aquifer System

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected
UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-PD2A

5.57 1.7 5U

3.8

1U 10U 13

34 10U 53

1.8 0.5 3.3 0.7

Well Name: Preston #2

County:

Webster

Date Sampled: 1993/08/25

40 Pb=38

GWN-PD3

8.44 81

5U 6.4

Well Name: Ft. Gaines#2

County:

Clay

Date Sampled: 1993/09/09

100 10U 25 10U 50U 10.2 0.7 9.9 0.1U 263

GWN-PD4

7.50 2.4

5U

34

Well Name: Americus #3

County:

Sumter

Date Sampled: 1993/08/25

2

170 10U 71

14 45U 1.3 0.1U 11.9 0.1U 193 Pb=32 Zn=22

)>
..'...
01

Other Screens Tested 10
10

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Clayton Aquifer System

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe

Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

su UNITS

mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-CT2A

7.76 6.1

su

42

sou 2.9 270 10U 170 10U

1.3

0.1 19.0 0.1U 227 Zn=29

Well Name: Burton Thomas Residence Well

County:

Sumter

Date Sampled: 1993/10/27

GWN-CT3

7.88 7.4

su

40

4.1

sou 410 10U 24 10U

1.8 0.1 13.8 0.1U 237

Well Name: Dawson Crawford St. Well

County:

Terrell

Date Sampled: 1993/04/13

GWN-CTSA

7.92 2.3

su

4S

3.8

1SO

16

2SO

33

sou

1.8 0.1U 12.4 0.1U

226 Sn=10S

Well Name: Cuthbert #3

County:

Randolph

Date Sampled: 1993/10/27

)>

GWN-CT7A

4.67 2.0 su

s.o 6.0

77

29 2SO 14 S10 . 14 0.1U 2U 9.2

11S Ti=14

..'....

Well Name: St. John Farm Well

0)

County:

Sumter

Date Sampled: 1993/10/27

Other Screens Tested
1,2,3,4,S
10
1,2,3,4,S
1,2,3,4,S, 10

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Claiborne Aquifer System

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected
UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-CL2

7.47 1.4 5U

44

1U 100 12

22 10U 45U 1.4 0.2 7.3 0.1U 197

Well Name: Unadilla #3

County:

Dooly

Date Sampled: 1993/08/27

GWN-CL4

4.93 4.2 5U 2.1

1.2 14

16

22

56

85 6.5 0.1U 2U 3.1

Well Name: Plains #3

County:

Sumter

Date Sampled: 1993/08/25

56 Cu=47 Zn=49

GWN-CL5

4.27 3.1

5U 6.6 2.6

39

63 20U 680 440 10.4 0.1

2U 9.8

124 Co=28

Well Name: Shellman #2

Pb=37

County:

Randolph

Y=77

Date Sampled: 1993/10/05

Zn=33

)>
_'_..
-...!

GWN-CL8

4.86 2.6 5U 5.9 3.1

Well Name: Flint River Nursery office well

51

110 160 120 140 5.98 0.1U 2U

7.0

87 Y=14

County:

Dooly

Date Sampled: 1993/08/25

Other Screens Tested
3,4
1,2,3,4,5, 10
2,4,10
1,2,3,4,5

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Jacksonian Aquifer System

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected
UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-J1B

7.27 3.4 5U

59

1U

25

19 20U 10U 45U 8.1

0.1

2U 1.8

265

Well Name: Hudlow house well

County:

Burke

Date Sampled: 1993/06/23

GWN-J2A

7.46 1.3 5U

53

1U

57

56

36 10U 45U 1.7 0.1U 2U 0.4

229 Zn=22ppb

Well Name: Oakwood Village Mobile Home Park #2

CHCI3=tr.

County:

Burke

CxHx=tr.

Date Sampled: 1993/06/23

GWN-J3

7.81 11

5U

36

Well Name: Black house well

County:

Emanuel

Date Sampled: 1993/06/21

6.0 290 670 170 100 45U 7.3 0.1

2U 0.1U 237

)>

..I....

GWN-J4

7.70 4.0

5U

49

2.3 180 10U 20U 10U 45U 2.4 0.1U 6.5 0.1U 248

(X)

Well Name: Wrightsville #4

County:

Johnson

Date Sampled: 1993/06/21

GWN-J5

7.43 3.3 5U

68

2.4 220 10U 70

35 45U 2.3 0.1 11.9 0.1U 344

Well Name: Cochran #3

County:

Bleck ley

Date Sampled: 1993/06/21

GWN-J6

6.70 1.5 5U

30

1U

36

12 160 13 45U 1.5 0.1

7.6 0.1U 139

Well Name: Wrens#3

County:

Jefferson

Date Sampled: 1993/06/23

Note: In previous editions of Circular 12,

this well has been incorrectly labeled Well #4.

GWN-J7

4.82 3.3 5U 2.7 1.4

16

22

70

21 45U 6.4 0.1

2U 2.3

Well Name: Templeton livestock well

County:

Burke

Date Sampled: 1993/06/24

50 Cu=27 Zn=160

Other Screens Tested
1,2,3,4,5
1,2,3,4,5, 10
1,2,3,4,5, 10
1,2,3,4,5, 10
1,2,3,4,5, 10
1,2,3,4,5, 10, Hg
1,2,3,4,5

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan Aquifer System

PARAMETER

pH

WeiiiD#

UNITS su

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L

Ba ug/L

Fe ug/L

Mn ug/L

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

GWN-PA1

7.99 31

5U

28

Well Name: Thunderbolt #1

County:

Chatham

Date Sampled: 1993/06/22

GWN-PA2

8.02 11

5U

24

Well Name: Savannah #6

County:

Chatham

Date Sampled: 1993/06/22

11 380 10U 20U 10U 45U 56.4 0.4

7.9 290 11

25 10U 45U 3.9 0.3

9.5 0.1U 360 5.2 0.1U 212

GWN-PA4

7.98 50

5U

33

Well Name: Tybee Island #1

County:

Chatham

Date Sampled: 1993/06/22

23 1200 10U 20U 10U 35U 48.1 0.6 146.8 0.1U 543

)>
..I....
(C)

GWN-PA9C

7.6 690 14 170

Well Name: Miller Ball Park TW25

94 2700 67

370 10U 330 844.9 0.6

2U 0.1U 4960 V=19

County:

Glynn

Date Sampled: 1993/01/19

GWN-PA10B

7.3

Well Name:

County:

Date Sampled:

67

5U

78

Gilman Paper #11

Camden

1993/01/20

GWN-PA14

8.00 6.9

5U

36

Well Name: Statesboro #7

County:

Bulloch

Date Sampled: 1993/04/12

39 820 38

29 10U 210 0.1U 0.5 231.8 0.1U 872

5.2 230 30 20U 10U 78 2.7 0.3 5.5 0.1U 207

GWN-PA15

7.9 9.1

5U

29

8.8 440 10U 43 10U 75

2.3 0.2 7.3 0.1U 221

Well Name: King Finishing Co. fire well

County:

Screven

Date Sampled: 1993/01/06

GWN-PA16

7.6 5.6 5U

49

3.2 210 10U 32

37 130 6.2 0.1U 8.7 0.1U 256

Well Name: Millen #1

County:

Jenkins

Date Sampled: 1993/01/06

Other Screens Tested
10
10 10 10

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan Aquifer System (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe

Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

su UNITS

mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-PA17

7.5 4.1

su

51

Well Name:

Swainsboro #7

County:

Emanuel

Date Sampled: 1993/01/07

1.8 150 180 36 10U 190 3.7 0.1

2U 0.1U 234 Cr-13

GWN-PA18

7.7

11

su

33

3.4 270 25 20U 62

85

4.2 0.1

4.0 0.1U 210

Well Name: Metter#1

County:

Candler

Date Sampled: 1993/01/06

GWN-PA20

7.6 5.2 su

48

17

23

28 20U 10 110 3.0 0.2 74.3 0.1U 342

Well Name:

Lakeland#2

County:

Lanier

Date Sampled: ; 1993/02118

_~' ,

GWN-PA20

7.87 4.6 su

46

15 180 25

25 10U 45U 3.0 0.3 62.7 0.1U 350 Zn=93

><<0

Well Name:

Lakeland#2

County:

Lanier

Date Sampled: 1993/08/26

GWN-PA21A

7.7 3.2 su

36

7.7 10U 14

99

18

81

2.5 0.2 16.6 0.1U 214

Well Name: Valdosta New #4

County:

Lowndes

Date Sampled: ; 1993/01118

GWN-PA21A

8.03 2.5

su

38

8.1 110 14 210

11 45U 2.8 0.2 37.3 0.1U 251 Pb=39

Well Name: Valdosta New #4

County:

Lowndes

Date Sampled: 1993108/26

GWN-PA22

7.8 7.6 5U

47

21

Well Name: Thomasville #6

County:

Thomas

Date Sampled: 1993/02117

39

24 20U 10U 110 6.3 0.4 78.1 0.1U 376 V=13

GWN-PA23

7.8

12

5U

38

17

40 140 20U 10U 89 5.6 0.3 39.7 0.1U 321 Mo=39

Well Name:

Cairo#8

County:

Grady

Date Sampled: 1993/02117

Other Screens Tested
10

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan Aquifer System (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH Na

K

Ca Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-PA24

7.98 2.1

5U

41

3.5

42 10U 20U 10U 83 2.8 0.1U 2U

1.4

219

Well Name: Bainbridge #1

County:

Decatur

Date Sampled: 1993/03/23

GWN-PA24

7.78 2.3

5U

39

3.3

35 10U 20U 10U 50U 3.0 0.1

2U

1.2

197

Well Name: Bainbridge #1

County:

Decatur

Date Sampled: 1993/09/08

GWN-PA25

7.86 4.1

5U

60

1U

28 10U 20U 10U 120 4.3 0.1U 2U

1.3

268

Well Name: Donalsonville 7th Street Well

County:

Seminole

Date Sampled: 1993/03/23

)>

GWN-PA25

7.53 4.2

5U

57

1U

25 10U 20U 10U 50U 4.6 0.1U 2U

1.3

253

1'\)

Well Name: Donalsonville 7th Street Well

0

County:

Seminole

Date Sampled: 1993/09/09

GWN-PA26

7.75 2.8

5U

48

1U

21

10U 20U 10U 120 2.8 0.1U 2U

1.4

217

Well Name: Colquitt #3

County:

Miller

Date Sampled: 1993/03/23

GWN-PA26

7.68 2.6 5U

46

1U

19 10U 20U 10U 62

3.3 0.1U 2U

1.8

203

Well Name: Colquitt#3

County:

Miller

Date Sampled: 1993/09/09

GWN-PA27

7.82 1.6 5U

47

1.2 43

10 20U 10U 89 2.1 0.1U 2U 0.2

220

Well Name: Camilla New Well

County:

Mitchell

Date Sampled: 1993/03/23

GWN-PA27

7.68 2.2

5U

45

1.2

36 10U 20U 10U <50 2.3 0.1U 2U 0.1U

2U

Well Name: Camilla New Well

County:

Mitchell

Date Sampled: 1993/09/08

Other Screens Tested
2,3,4,10
1,2,3,4,5, 10
2,3,4,10
1,2,3,4,5, 10
2,3,4,10
1,2,3,4,5, 10
2,3,4,8,9, 10
1 ,2,3,4,5,8,9, 10

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan Aquifer System (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected
UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-PA28

7.8

29

5U

41

Well Name: Moultrie #1

County:

Colquitt

Date Sampled: 1993/02/17

22 250 95 20U 10U 100 10.4 0.6 141 0.1U 443

GWN-PA29

7.81 3.7 5U

46

15 310 15

73

37

120 3.1

0.3

53 0.1U 317 Zr-15

Well Name: Adel #6

County:

Cook

Date Sampled: 1993/03/23

GWN-PA29

8.02 4.5 5U

44

14 260 15

65

31 45U 2.9 0.2

46 0.1U 300 Zn=630

Well Name: Adel #6

County:

Cook

Date Sampled: 1993/08/26

)>

GWN-PA30

7.8 5.5 5U

45

17

28

57 20U 24 110 0.1U 0.3 2U 0.1

334 Zr-10

.N.'...

Well Name: County:

Amoco/Nashville Mills #2 Berrien

Date Sampled: 1993/02/18

GWN-PA30

7.84 4.5 5U

43

15 220 49 20U 10U 45U 4.2 0.3 55.6 0.1U 328

Well Name: Amoco/Nashville Mills #2

County:

Berrien

Date Sampled: 1993/08/26

GWN-PA31

7.6

2.6

5U

47

8.5

31

Well Name: Tifton #6

County:

Tift

Date Sampled: 1993/02/17

67 20U 10U 100 2.0 0.4 2U 0.1U 260

GWN-PA32

7.7 2.5 5U

37

5.1

18

81

130 27

87 2.1

0.1

2U 0.1U 197

Well Name: Ocilla #3

County:

Irwin

Date Sampled: 1993/02/17

GWN-PA33

8.0 3.3 5U

24 8.7

31 2200 20U 14

61

2.1

0.2 2U 0.1U 171

Well Name: Fitzgerald Well C

County:

Ben Hill

Date Sampled: 1993/02/17

Other Screens Tested 10
10

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan Aquifer System (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected
UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-PA34

7.39 4.9 5U

48

10 740 260 180 100 50U 5.2 0.1 3.2 0.1U 309

Well Name: McRae Telfair Ave. Well

County:

Telfair

Date Sampled: 1993/12/29

GWN-PA35

7.85 6.6 5U

29

13 490 95

57

31 50U 3.2 0.3 6.8 0.1U 254

Well Name: Mt. Vernon New Well

County:

Montgomery

Date Sampled: 1993/12/29

GWN-PA36

7.98 11

5U

28

5.3 370 150 23

37 50U 3.6 0.3 3.1 0.1U 214

Well Name: Vidalia #1

County:

Toombs

Date Sampled: 1993/12/29

)>
1'\J
1\J

GWN-PA38

7.56 2.1

5U

43

1.4

96

120 20U 10U 50U 2.0 0.1U 2U 0.1U 217

Well Name: Eastman #4

County:

Dodge

Date Sampled: 1993/12/29

GWN-PA39

7.50 3.7 5U

52

7.3 430 190 20U 10U 110 2.5 0.3 2U 0.1U 278 V=10

Well Name: Sylvester #1

Zn=56

County:

Worth

Zr-15

Date Sampled: 1993/03/22

GWN-PA39

7.51 3.4

5U

48

7.7 364 175 20U 10U 50U 2.2 0.2

2U 0.1U 265

Well Name: Sylvester #1

County:

Worth

Date Sampled: 1993/09/08

GWN-PA40

7.56 2.7 5U

64

1.2 59

17 20U 10U 140 3.1 0.16 2U 1.5

271 Zn=28

Well Name: Merck and Co. #8

County:

Worth

Date Sampled: 1993/03/22

GWN-PA40

7.45 2.9 5U

59

1.1

51

Well Name: Merck and Co. #8

County:

Worth

Date Sampled: 1993/09/08

16 20U 10U 50U 3.4 0.1U 2U

1.5

263

Other Screens Tested 10
10 10 10 10 10

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan Aquifer System (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe

Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

su UNITS

mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-PA43

7.76 2.9

5U

49

1U

45 10U 20U 10U 99

3.1 0.1U 2U

1.7

229

Well Name: Newton #1

County:

Baker

Date Sampled: 1993/03/23

GWN-PA43

7.59 3.5

5U

47

1.0

43

sou 5U 20U 10U

3.2 0.1U 2U

1.7

215

Well Name:

Newton #1

County:

Baker

Date Sampled: 1993/09/08

GWN-PA44

7.8 2.4 5U

33

4.3

33

150 20U 10U 85

1.6 0.2

2U

0.1

180

Well Name: Sycamore #2

County:

Turner

Date Sampled: 1993/02/17

GWN-PA45A

7.5 1.8 5U

57

1.1 10U 70 20U 10U 140 2.1 0.1U 2U

0.2

250

)>

Well Name: Abbeville#1

I

w1\)

County:

Wilcox

Date Sampled: 1993/02116

GWN-PA46B

7.7 2.9 5U

48

1.0 10U 40 20U 10U 110 6.0 0.1

2U 4.4

226

Well Name: Wenona Mobile Home Park well

County:

Crisp

Date Sampled: 1993/02/16

GWN-PA49

7.8 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

1.8

5U

42

Harmony Church well

Dooly

199312/2

GWN-PA50

7.36

Well Name:

County:

Date Sampled:

3.4

5U

57

Reynolds house well

Laurens

1993/12/28

1U 10U 20 20U 10U 94

2.1

0.1

2U

1.1

sou 1.4 170 43 480 19

4.0 0.1U 4.5 1.1

194 Zn=34 281

GWN-PA51

7.75 3.0 5U

49

1U

26 10U 20U 10U 100 3.6 0.1

2U

1.6

228 Zn=31

Well Name: J.L. Adams house well

County:

Mitchell

Date Sampled: 1993/03/23

Other Screens Tested 2,3,4,10 1,2,3,4,5, 10 10
1,2,3,4,5,10 1 ,2,3,4,5 1 ,2,3,4,5 2,3,4,5

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan Aquifer System (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

WeiiiD#

UNITS su

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L

Ba

Fe

ug/L ug/L

Mn ug/L

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

GWN-PA52

7.92 2.3

5U

42

1U

28 10U 20U 10U 90

3.6 0.1

2U

3.0

201 Se=7.2

Well Name: J. Simmons house well

Zn=27

County:

Mitchell

Date Sampled: 1993/03/23

GWN-PA53

7.82 3.0 5U

39

1U

24

11 20U 10U 50U 5.6 0.1U 2U 4.8

197 Zn=50

Well Name: L. Cato house well

County:

Decatur

Date Sampled: 1993/10/28

GWN-PA55

7.74 3.1

5U

52

2.3 220 150 48 10U 45U 2.1

0.2 4.5 0.1U 243

Well Name: W. Holland house well

County:

Burke

Date Sampled: 1993/06/23

)>
I
1\)
_.::.

Other Screens Tested
2,3,4,5
1,2,3.4
1,2,3,4,5

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Miocene Aquifer System

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected
UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-MI1

8.04 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

7.3

5U

24

McMillan house well

Cook

1993/04/27

13 120 20 110 28

69 2.9 0.5 4.2 0.1U 223 Zn=190, Zr-11

GWN-MI2

6.06 2.5 5U 3.2 1.0 10U 10U 20U 10U 45U 2.7 0.5 2U 0.1U 40

Well Name: Boutwell house well

County:

Lowndes

Date Sampled: 1993/04/27

GWN-MI3

7.5

24

5U

71

Well Name: Coffin Park TW 3

County:

Glynn

Date Sampled: 1993/01/20

11 480 11 230 18 180 38.3 0.3 49.6 0.1U 475

)>

GWN-MI5

6.0 4.5

5U

9.4

1.3

40

47 690 37 3400 6.7 0.1

3.7 1.4

88 Ti=140

I

1\)

Well Name: Carter house well

01

County:

Appling

Date Sampled: 1993/02/01

GWN-MI7

4.27 5.3 5U

6

5.2

58

93

28

17 840 16.3 0.2 2U 13.3 153 Zn=33

Well Name: Chaudoin house well

County:

Irwin

Date Sampled: 1993/10/25

GWN-MIBA

4.25 4.2 5.4 6.9 5.2

61

140 44

48 1300 15.9 0.1

2U 13.5 162 Zn=42

Well Name: Barry house well

County:

Colquitt

Date Sampled: 1993/10/26

GWN-MI9A

5.35 4.8 5U 4.7 3.1

31

Well Name: Murphy garden well

County:

Thomas

Date Sampled: 1993/10/26

34 140 35 170 7.7 0.1U 2U 7.5

84 Cu=25 Zn=48

GWN-MI10B

6.57 7.1 5.1U 9.5 6.2

89 210 520 150 50U 2.8

0.4

2U 0.1U 122 Zn=120

Well Name: Calhoun house well

County:

Colquitt

Date Sampled: 1993/10/26

Other Screens Tested
1,3,4,5, 10, Hg 1 ,3,4,5,8,9, 10,Hg 2,3,4,10
1,2,3,4
1,2,3,4
1,2,3,4,5
1,2,3,4
1,2,3,4,5

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Miocene Aquifer System (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

WeiiiD#

UNITS su

Na

K

Ca Mg

Sr

mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L

Ba

Fe

ug/L ug/L

Mn ug/L

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

GWN-MI12

7.61 2.3 5U

46

1.2 36

11 270 17 <50 4.2 0.1 2U 0.1U 231 Zn=34

Well Name: Herzog nursery well

County:

Brooks

Date Sampled: 1993/10/26

GWN-MI13

7.5 2.5

5U

54

1U

52

24 2200 210 140 3.0 0.1U 2U 0.1U 232 As=17.4

Well Name: Meeks rental house well

County:

Screven

Date Sampled: 1993/01/06

GWN-MI14

4.7 8.2

5U

1U

1U

11

12 140 <10 170 8.8 0.1U 2U 0.1U 74 Zn=20

Well Name: Thomas rental house well

County:

Bulloch

Date Sampled: 1993/01/06

~ .

GWN-MI15

5.0 1.9 5U

11

8.7 110 61

310 19 600 10.4 0.1U 2U 18.4 156 Ti=12

I\)

Well Name: Aldrich house well

Zn=61

OJ

County:

Bulloch

Date Sampled: 1993/01/06

Other Screens Tested
1,2,3,4,5
1,2,3.4
1,2,3,4,5
1,2,3,4,5

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifers

PARAMETER

pH

WeiiiD#

UNITS su

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L

Ba ug/L

Fe ug/L

Mn ug/L

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

GWN-BR1A

6.65 2.4 5U

17

1U

94

16

100

13 45U 1U 0.1U 3.7 0.1U

98 Zn=93

Well Name: Hiawassee #7

County:

Towns

Date Sampled: 1993/07/20

GWN-BR2A

5.62 3.4 5U

3.6

1.4

38

43 20U 10U 45U 3.1 0.1U 2U

1.2

51

Well Name: Notla Water Auth. #3

County:

Union

Date Sampled: 1993/07/20

GWN-BR3A

5.79 4.5 5U 3.3 1.5 24

26

25

83

93 5.2 0.1U 2U 1.5

Well Name: Dawsonville City Spring

County:

Dawson

Date Sampled: 1993/07/20

72 Zn=29

)>
I

GWN-P1B

6.47 10

5.6

8.3

2.6 100

11 2400 63 45U 5.7 0.1U 19.2 0.1U 111 V=10

1\)

Well Name: Luthersville New Well

Zn=34

"'-1

County:

Meriwether

Date Sampled: 1993/04/29

GWN-P2

6.70 11

5.0

15

1.5

83

24

58

16

50

2.5 0.2

2U

1.1

118 Mo=12

Well Name: Riverdale Delta Drive Well

V=17

County:

Clayton

Zn=26

Date Sampled: 1993/05/20

GWN-P4C

6.11 7.8

5U

6.8

1.1

69

21

20U 10U 45U 1.4 0.4

2U

1.4

81 V=10

Well Name: Barton Brands #3

County:

Fulton

Date Sampled: 1993/05/20

GWN-P5

6.94 1.6 5U

22

3.7 84

28 20U 10U 50U 1.4 0.1U 2U 0.4

143

Well Name: Flowery Branch #1

County:

Hall

Date Sampled: 1993/11/23

GWN-P6B

7.61 8.4 5U

17 2.5 45 10U 76

93

69 2.1 0.3 5.8 0.1U 137

Well Name: Shiloh #1

County:

Harris

Date Sampled: 1993/04/29

Other Screens Tested
10
10,Hg
10 Hg

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifers (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe

Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected

UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-P7

6.52 9.0 5.5

13 5.0

75

54 20U 10U 54 2.3 0.1U 4.3 0.2

124 Mo=13

Well Name: Hampton #6

V=26

County:

Henry

Date Sampled: 1993/05/20

GWN-P8

6.80 8.3

5U

27

8.3

74 10U 21

Well Name: Wayne Poultry #4

County:

Jackson

Date Sampled: 1993/11/23

25 50U 12.6 0.2 6.1 0.1U 222

GWN-P9

6.25 17

5U

23

10 180 49 1200 180 56 8.7 0.2 69.0 0.1U 252

Well Name: Gray #4

County:

Jones

Date Sampled: 1993/04/13

)>
I

GWN-P10A

6.26 7.8

5U

6.8

3.9

83

17 13000 120 1100 4.2 0.1 33.3 0.1U 114 Be=2.2

1\)
CXl

Well Name: Franklin Springs #4

County:

Franklin

Zn=94

Date Sampled: 1993/11/23

GWN-P11A

6.59 7.1

5U

11

5.0

32

10

110 21

50U 2.6

0.2 6.1

0.2

120 Zn=150

Well Name: Danielsville #3

County:

Madison

Date Sampled: 1993/11/23

GWN-P12

6.33 13

5U 9.0 2.2

70

41 2300 10 45U 11.4 0.1U 3.5 4.0

132 Zn=93

Well Name: Specialty Brands #1

County:

Meriwether

Date Sampled: 1993/04/29

GWN-P13A

5.81 7.0 5.4 4.8 1.2 40

29 20U 10U 45U 8.7 0.1U 2U

0.7

Well Name: Covington Academy Spring

County:

Newton

Date Sampled: 1993/05/20

71 Mo=13 V=18

GWN-P14

5.12 1.8

5U

1U

1U 10U 29 20U 10U 45U 1.5 0.1U 2U

0.3

23

Well Name: Upson County Sunset Village well

County:

Upson

Date Sampled: 1993/04/28

Other Screens Tested 10,Hg 8,9,10
10
Hg 10 Hg

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifers (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected
UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-P15A

7.24

Well Name:

County:

Date Sampled:

8.8 6.7 22 Bolton garden well DeKalb 1993/05/20

4.8 100 65 970 140 61

8.0 0.2 6.5 0.1U 176 V=11 Zn=270

Other Screens Tested
10

)>
I
c1o\J

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Valley and Ridge Unconfined Aquifers

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe

Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected
UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

Other Screens Tested

GWN-VR1

7.85 1.3 5U

29

14

16 10U 20U 10U 45U 1.7 0.1U 2U 0.4

229

10

Well Name: Floyd County Kingston Rd, Well

County:

Floyd

Date Sampled: 1993/07/14

GWN-VR2

6.8

15

5U

65

22 10U 36 2600 2000 170 21.7 0.1U 14.1 0.1U 469 Cu=31

10

Well Name: Hucheson Medical Center cooling well

Zn=51

County:

Catoosa

benzene=350

Date Sampled: 1993/02/09

toluene=61 0

ethylbenzene=160

trimethylbenzene=980

xylenes=480

GWN-VR3

7.53 1.1 5U

33

13

25

72 20U 10U 45U 1.4 0.1U 2U 0.5

245

10

Well Name: Chickamauga Crawfish Spring

)>
c'.>
0

County:

Walker

Date Sampled: 1993/07/13

GWN-VR4

7.28 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

14

5U

83

Coats-American #3

Walker

1993/07/13

18 680 110 69

20 45U 11.9 0.2 47.1 0.1U 542 111-trichloroethane=t 10

GWN-VR5

7.17 53

5U

79

3.6 170 96 20U 10U 35U 8.2 0.1U 3.3 3.0

404

Well Name: Chattooga County #4

County:

Chattooga

Date Sampled: 1993/08/04

GWN-VR6

7.80 5.4

5U

31

16 240 590 20U 10U 45U 4.6 0.1U 4.6 0.6

Well Name: Chemical Products Corp. East Well

County:

Bartow

Date Sampled: 1993/07/14

278 tetrachloroethylene=tr 10

GWN-VR7

7.94 1.1 5U

32

14

23

29 20U 10U 45U 1.1 0.1U 2U 0.3

238

10

Well Name: Adairsville Lewis Spring

County:

Bartow

Date Sampled: 1993/07/13

1993 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Valley and Ridge Unconfined Aquifers (Continued)

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe Mn

AI

Cl

F S04 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Cond. Parameters

Detected
UNITS su mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgN/L mho/em ug/L

WeiiiD#

GWN-VR8

7.67 1.5 5U

35

14

20

11 20U 10U 45U 1.6 0.2 2U 0.4

250

Well Name: Cedartown Spring

County:

Polk

Date Sampled: 1993/07/14

GWN-VR9

7.61 1.2

5U

40 12.0 24

10U 20U 10U 45U 1.9 0.1U 2U

0.5

257

Well Name: Polk County #2

County:

Polk

Date Sampled: 1993/07/14

Other Screens Tested
10
10

)>
I
(_o_).

Editor and Cartographer: Donald L. Shellenberger
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.