Ground-water quality in Georgia for 1995 [1997]

\JA
N?..oo. GA $1 C.s
I'LL
GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA FOR 1995
John C. Donahue
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION GEORGIA GEOLOGIC SURVEY
ATLANTA
1997
CIRCULAR 12L

GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA FOR 1995
John C. Donahue
The preparation ofthis report was funded in part through a grant from the U.S. 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
1997
CIRCULAR 12L

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose and Scope 1.2 Factors Affecting Chemical Ground-Water Quality 1.3 Hydrogeologic Provinces of Georgia
1. 3. 1 Coastal Plain Province 1.3 .2 Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province 1. 3. 3 Valley and Ridge Province 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. I 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 LIST OF REFERENCES
APPENDIX Analyses of samples collected during 1995 for the Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 The Hydrogeologic Provinces of Georgia Figure 3-1 The Seven Major Aquifer Systems of the Coastal Plain
Province Figure 3-2 Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Cretaceous Aquifer
System Figure 3-3 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Cretaceous
Aquifer System

Page 1-1 1-1 1-2 1-2 1-4 1-4 1-5 1-5
2-1 2-1 2-1 2-3
3-1 3-1 3-1 3-7 3-7 3-10
3-14 3-18 3-21 3-25 3-30
4-1
5-1
A-1
1-3
3-2
3-3
3-5

LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)

Page

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

Cretaceous Aquifer System

3-6

Figure 3-5 Water Quality of a Well in the Providence Aquifer System

3-8

Figure 3-6 Water Quality for Selected Wells in the Clayton Aquifer

System

3-9

Figure 3-7 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Clayton

Aquifer System

3-11

Figure 3-8 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the

Clayton Aquifer System

3-12

Figure 3-9 Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Claiborne Aquifer

System

3-13

Figure 3-10 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Claiborne

Aquifer System

3-15

Figure 3-11 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the

Claiborne Aquifer System

3-16

Figure 3-12 Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Jacksonian Aquifer

System

3-17

Figure 3-13 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Jacksonian

Aquifer System

3-19

Figure 3-14 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the

Jacksonian Aquifer System

3-20

Figure 3-15 Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Floridan Aquifer

System

3-22

Figure 3-16 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Floridan

Aquifer System

3-23

Figure 3-17 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the

Floridan Aquifer System

3-24

Figure 3-18 Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Miocene Aquifer

System

3-26

Figure 3-19 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Miocene Aquifer

System

3-27

Figure 3-20 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the

Miocene Aquifer System

3-28

Figure 3-21 Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge

Unconfined Aquifers

3-29

Figure 3-22 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue

Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Piedmont Sector

3-31

Figure 3-23 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue

Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Blue Ridge Sector

3-32

Figure 3-24 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/

BlueRidge Unconfined Aquifer System: Piedmont Sector

3-33

Figure 3-25 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/

Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Blue Ridge Sector

3-34

ll

LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) Figure 3-26 Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Valley and Ridge
Unconfined Aquifers Figure 3-27 Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Valley and Ridge
Unconfined Aquifers Figure 3-28 Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Valley
and Ridge Unconfined Aquifers

Page 3-35 3-37 3-38

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1 Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network, 1995

2-2

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

Analysis, Cations

2-4

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

Analysis, Anions

2-5

Table 4-1 Pollution and Contamination Incidents, 1995

4-2

Table A-1 Standard Water Quality Analysis: ICPOES Metals, AAS

Metals, Major Anions, and Other Parameters

A-2

Table A-2 Additional Water Quality Analyses: Organophosphate Pesticides,

Organochlorine Pesticides/PCB' s, Phenoxy Herbicides, Carbamate/

Urea-Derived Pesticides, Semivolatile Organic Compounds,

Volatile Organic Compounds, and Mercury

A-5

Table A-3 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses ofthe Cretaceous Aquifer

System

A-18

Table A-4 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses ofthe Providence Aquifer

System

A-21

Table A-5 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses ofthe Clayton Aquifer

System

A-22

Table A-6 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses ofthe Claiborne Aquifer

System

A-23

Table A-7 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses ofthe Jacksonian Aquifer

System

A-24

Table A-8 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses ofthe Floridan Aquifer

System

A-25

Table A-9 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Miocene Aquifer

System

A-32

Table A-10 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses ofthe Piedmont/Blue

Ridge Unconfined Aquifers

A-33

Table A-ll 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses oftheValley and Ridge

Unconfined Aquifers

A-37

lll

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This report for calendar year 1995 is the twelfth in a series of annual summaries discussing the chemical quality ofground water in Georgia. These summaries are among the tools used by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) to assess trends in the quality ofthe State's ground-water resources. EPD is the State organization with regulatory responsibility for maintaining and, where possible, improving ground-water quality and availability. EPD has implemented a comprehensive statewide ground-water management policy of anti-degradation (EPD, 1991 ). Five components constitute EPD's ground-water quality assessment program:
1. The Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network. The Geologic Survey Branch of EPD maintains this program, which is designed to evaluate the ambient ground-water quality ofnine aquifer systems throughout the State of Georgia. The data collected from sampling on the Ground-Water Monitoring Network form the basis for this report.
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 the residents of Georgia are using.
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 (GDA), (Webb, 1995) are examples of these types of studies. Another special study addressing bacterial contamination of the Floridan aquifer in the aftermath of Tropical Storm Alberto continued into 1995 and concluded that coliformcontaminated water in the aquifer had largely flushed out by early 1995 (McLemore, 1995, letter to Representative Robert Hanner).
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. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved Georgia's WHP Plan on September 30, 1992. The WHP Plan became a part of the Georgia Safe Drinking Water Rules, effective July 1, 1993. The protection of public water supply wells from contaminants is important not
1-1

only for maintaining ground-water quality but also for ensuring that public water supplies meet health standards.
Analyses of water samples collected for the Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network during calendar year 1995 and from previous years form the data base for this summary. The Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network comprises 128 wells and springs. Though sampled at various frequencies in the past, all stations on the network switched to an annual sampling frequency during 1994. In 1995, EPD personnel collected 141 samples from 111 wells and 6 springs. Certain stations not visited in 1994 were visited twice during 1995. A review ofthe 1995 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. Among the more significant controls are the chemical quality ofthe 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 discharged to a surfacewater body (e.g., stream, river, lake, or ocean). The initial water chemistry, the amount of recharge, and the attenuation capacity of soils have a strong influence on the quality of ground water in recharge areas. Chemical interactions between the water and the aquifer host rocks have an increasing significance with longer 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;
1-2

a

10

0

10 20 30 40 MilES

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

1-3

2. the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province, which includes all but the northwest comer of Georgia; and
3. the Valley and Ridge Province of northwest Georgia.
1.3.1 Coastal Plain Province
Georgia's Coastal Plain Province generally comprises a wedge of loosely consolidated sediments that gently dip and thicken to the south and southeast. Ground water in the Coastal Plain 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 of the 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 aquifers are those in which a layer of impermeable material (i.e., clay or shale) holds the top ofthe 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 more permeable sediments of the aquifer tend to be exposed. Many 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 ofthe dip ofthe rocks.
The sediments forming the seven major 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 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. The Floridan aquifer system (primarily carbonates) serves most of south-central and southeastern Georgia. The Miocene aquifer system (primarily sands) is the principal "shallow" unconfined aquifer system occupying much ofthe same broad area underlain by the Floridan aquifer system. It becomes confined in the coastal counties and locally in the Grady, Thomas, Brooks and Lowndes County 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
1-4

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 toward discharge areas along streams. However, during prolonged dry periods or in areas of heavy pumpage, ground water may flow from the streams into the fracture and joint systems.
1.3.3 Valley and Ridge Province
Consolidated Paleozoic sedimentary formations characterize the Valley and Ridge Province. The principal permeable features of the Valley and Ridge Province are fractures and solution voids; intergranular porosity also is important in some places. Locally, groundwater and surface-water systems closely interconnect. Dolostones and limestones of the Knox Group are the principal aquifers where they occur in the axes ofbroad valleys. The greater hydraulic conductivities of the thick carbonate sections in this Province, in part due to 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 to brownish stains on objects.
Only a few occurrences of polluted or contaminated ground waters are known from North Georgia (see Section 4). Aquifers in the outcrop areas of Cretaceous sediments south of the Fall Line typically yield acidic water that may require treatment. The acidity occurs naturally and results both from the inability ofthe 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 southern Georgia are usually 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 ground-water quality besides the karst plain area (Dougherty 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. Here, ground water is typically high in total dissolved solids and contains elevated levels of barium, sulfate, and radionuclides. The second is the coastal area of Georgia, where influx ofwater with high dissolved solids contents presents problems. In the Brunswick area, ground-water withdrawal from the upper Floridan results in up-coning ofwater with high dissolved solids contents from
1-5

deeper parts ofthe aquifer. In the Savannah region, a cone of depression caused by pumping in and around Savannah induces saline ground water to flow down-gradient from the Port Royal Sound area of South Carolina toward Savannah.
1-6

2.0 GEORGIA GROUND-WATER MONITORING NETWORK
2.1 MONITORING STATIONS
Stations ofthe 1995 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 ofthe Piedmont and Blue Ridge Provinces and of the Valley and Ridge Province (Table 2-1 ). Monitoring stations are located in three critical settings:
1. areas of surface recharge; 2. areas of potential pollution related to regional activities (e. g., agricultural and
industrial areas); and 3. areas of significant ground-water use.
Most ofthe monitoring stations are municipal, industrial, and domestic wells that have reliable well-construction data. The Monitoring Network also includes monitoring wells in specific areas where the State's aquifers are recognized to be especially susceptible to contamination or pollution (e.g., the Dougherty Plain of southwestern Georgia and the State's coastal area).
2.2 USES AND LIMITATIONS
Regular sampling ofwells 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 ofthe geologic framework of the aquifer and regional land-use activities on ground-water quality. Temporal trends permit an assessment of the effects of rainfall and drought periods on ground-water 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 ofground-water quality at the locality sampled and at the horizon 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 intentionally are 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
2-1

Table 2-1. Georgia Ground-Water Monitoring Network, 1995

AQl.:IFER SYSTEM
Cretaceous Providence

NUMBER OF MONITORING STATIONS VISITED & SAMPLES TAKEN IN 1995
15 stations (21 samples)
1 station (2 samples)

PRIMARY STRATIGRAPHIC EQUIVALENTS
Ripley Formation, Cusseta Sand, Bluffiown Formation, Eutaw Formation, Tuscaloosa Formation, and Gaillard Formation
Providence Sand

AGE OF AQUIFER FORMATIONS
Late Cretaceous
Late Cretaceous

Clayton

5 stations (8 samples)

Clayton Formation

Paleocene

Claiborne

5 stations (8 samples)

Tallahatta Formation

Middle Eocene

Jacksonian

8 stations (8 samples)

Barnwell Group

Late Eocene

Floridan

47 stations (50 samples)

Miocene

8 stations (8 samples)

Piedmont/Blue Ridge

20 stations (26 samples)

Valley and Ridge

8 stations (10 samples)

Predominantly Suwannee Limestone and Ocala Group

Predominantly Middle Eocene to Oligocene

Predominantly Altamaha Formation and Hawthorne Group

Miocene-Recent

Various igneous and metamorphic complexes
Shady Dolomite, Knox Group, and Chickamauga Group

Predominately Paleozoic and Precambrian
Paleozoic, mostly Cambrian and Ordovician

2-2

may result in point source pollution (e.g., landfills, hazardous waste facilities and land application sites) through its environmental facilities permit programs.
Ground-water quality changes gradually and predictably in the areally extensive aquifers ofthe 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 wide spacing of monitoring stations does not permit equal characterization of water-quality processes in these settings. The quality of water from monitoring wells completed in unconfined aquifers represents only the general nature of ground water in the vicinity of the monitoring wells. 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 141 water samples collected during 1995 from 111 wells and 6 springs. In 1984, the first year of the Ground-Water Monitoring Network, hydrogeologists sampled water from 39 wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge and Coastal Plain Provinces. Two 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 most 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, for instance, volatile organic compounds, are tested. The additional parameters are listed in the Appendix (Table A-2). The pH measurements are performed in the field, whereas, other parameters are measured in the laboratory. Tables 2-2 (cations) and 2-3 (anions) summarize the significance of the common major constituents found in ground water.
The Drinking Water Program ofthe EPD's Water Resources Management Branch has established Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL's) for certain parameters included in the analyses done on Ground-Water Monitoring Network samples (EPD, 1994). Primary MCL's pertain to parameters that may have adverse effects on human health when their values are exceeded. Secondary MCL's pertain to parameters that may give drinking water objectionable, though not health-threatening, properties that may cause persons served by public water systems to cease its use. Foul odor and unpleasant taste are examples of such properties. MCL' s apply only to treated water offered for public consumption, nevertheless,
2-3

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 of water generally increases with decreasing pH. However, excessively alkaline waters may also corrode 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 ofmultiplying 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 promote growth of iron bacteria, but do not endanger health.

*Major metallic ions present in most ground waters.

2-4

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 the chloride content should not exceed 250 ppm.

Nitrate/Nitrite

Excessive amounts of nitrate/nitrite in drinking water or formula water for 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 concentrations up to 500 ppm are not considered unhealthful.

2-5

they are useful guidelines for evaluating the quality ofuntreated (raw) water. Tables A-1 and A-2 in the Appendix list the Primary and Secondary MCL's for Ground Water Monitoring Network parameters.
Most ofthe wells originally on the Monitoring Network had in-place pumps. Using such pumps to purge the wells and collect samples reduces the potential for crosscontamination of wells. For those wells that lacked in-place pumps, EPD personnel used portable pumps for purging and sampling. In recent years, however, all wells that lacked inplace pumps were dropped from the Monitoring Network, except for a flowing well tapping the lower Floridan, GWN-PA9C (see Appendix, Table A-8).
Sampling procedures are adapted from techniques used by the USGS and the EPA. Hydrogeologists purge the wells (three to five times the volume of the water column in the well) before 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 30 to 45 minutes of purging before sample collection.
EPD personnel monitor certain water quality parameters prior to sample collection. The personnel observe and record pH, dissolved oxygen content, specific conductivity, and temperature using field instruments. A manifold captures flow at the pump system discharge point before the water is exposed to the atmosphere and conducts it past the instrument probes. With increased purging time, typical trends include a lowering of pH, dissolved oxygen content, and specific conductivity, and a transition toward the mean annual air temperature. The hydraulic flow characteristics of unconfined aquifers, the depth of withdrawai, and 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 the records ofthe field measurements taken during sampling (i.e., pH, dissolved oxygen content, specific conductivity, and temperature). EPD personnel fill the sample bottles and then promptly place them on ice to preserve the water quality. The personnel next transport the samples to the laboratories for analysis on or before the Friday of the week in which they were collected.
During 1995, various laboratories performed the chemical analyses of water samples for the Ground-Water Monitoring Network. EPD laboratories did the following standard water quality tests on all regular samples: a specific conductance test, tests for metals using ICP and AAS, a nitrate/nitrite test (results reported as ppm nitrogen), and an ion chromatography test for chloride, fluoride, and sulfate. EPD laboratories also did optional tests on various samples for semivolatile organic compounds. The conductance test is a standard one listed in Standard Methods for the Evaluation of Water and Waste Water (1995), and the remaining tests used various EPA methods listed in Tables A-1 and A-2 in the Appendix.
2-6

The Cooperative Extension Service Laboratories at the University of Georgia tested for pesticides and PCB's on several samples collected early in January of 1995, using a series oftests called organic screens #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5. During the remainder ofthe year, the Georgia Department of Agriculture laboratory performed analyses for pesticides and PCB's using EPA methods 507.0, 508.1, 515.1, and 531.1. The first three ofthese EPA methods correspond to screens #1, #2, and combined #3 and #4, respectively. EPA method 531. 1 and screen #5 are both used to test for carbamate pesticides. However, while screen #5 can additionally be used for urea-derivative pesticides, it does not give acceptable results for the carbamate, aldicarb (and its oxidation derivatives). EPA has not designated an approved testing method for the urea derivatives. Appendix Table A-2 contains a list of pesticides and test methods.
2-7

3.0 GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA
3.1 OVERVIEW
Georgia's nine major aquifers and aquifer systems are grouped into three hydrogeologic provinces for the purposes of this report.
The Coastal Plain Province comprises seven major aquifers or aquifer systems that are restricted to specific regions and depths within the province (Figure 3-1). These major aquifer systems, in many cases, incorporate smaller aquifers that are locally confined. Ground-Water Monitoring Network wells in the Coastal Plain aquifers are generally located in three settings:
1. Recharge (or outcrop) areas that 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 that 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 ofthe recharge areas.
3. Down-dip, confined areas, located to the south and southeast in the deeper, confined portions ofthe aquifers distal to the recharge areas.
Small-scale, localized ground-water flow patterns characterize the two hydrogeologic provinces of north Georgia, the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province and the Valley and Ridge Province. Deep regional flow systems are unknown in northern Georgia. Geologic discontinuities (such as fractures) and compositional changes within the aquifer generally control ground-water flow in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province. 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 also apply in the Valley and Ridge Province. The Valley and Ridge Province additionally possesses widespread karst features, which significantly enhance porosity and permeability in localized areas and exert a strong influence on local ground-water flow patterns.
3.2 CRETACEOUS AQUIFER SYSTEM
The Cretaceous aquifer system is a complexly interconnected group of aquifer subsystems developed in the Late Cretaceous sands of the Coastal Plain Province. These sands crop out in an extensive recharge area immediately south of the Fall Line in west and central Georgia (Figure 3-2). Overlying Tertiary 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
3-1

or. ,~

10' 'P

'us

10

10 10 .. flilllOitETUS

.,.

B E
MSL FLORIDAN ,~.,..........a.....,r-1
-1000'

JACKSONIAN

B

MIOCENE

C

c

D

Ef1 :-: ::~:m MSL

-1000'

FLORIDAN

FLORIDAN

Figure 3-1.- The Seven Major Aquifer Systems ofthe Coastal Plain Province.

3-2

10

0

10 20 30 4()MILES

//'}General recharge area (from Davis, et al., 1988)

Soft water Moderately hard water

0 Manganese exceeds MCL 0 Iron exceeds MCL

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

east (Clarke, et al., 1985). Aquifer sands thicken southward from the Fall Line, from where they pinch out against crystalline Piedmont rocks, to a sequence of sand and clay approximately 2,000 feet thick at the southern limits ofthe main aquifer-use area (limit of utilization, Figure 3-2). Vertical leakage from overlying members ofthe aquifer system provides significant recharge in down-dip areas.
EPD sampled 15 wells in 1995 to monitor the water quality of the Cretaceous aquifer system, exclusive ofthe Providence aquifer system (Figure 3-2). Two of the sampled wells, GWN-K8 and GWN-K12, are located away from the Cretaceous outcrop and recharge area, while the remainder lie within the general recharge area. Thirteen of the wells yielded soft, acidic water. Well GWN-K13 in Stewart County contained basic water and well GWN-K8 in Laurens County) had moderately hard water. Well GWN-K13, though lying in the general outcrop area, draws water from the deeper parts of the aquifer system (apparently the~ subsystem of Pollard and Vorhis, 1980) and well GWN-K8 taps a downdip portion ofthe aquifer.
Iron concentrations exceeded the State secondary MCL of 300 parts per billion (ppb) in three wells: GWN-K3 in Washington County (420 ppb), GWN-K8 (2600 ppb and 3900 ppb), and GWN-K9 in Macon County (460 ppb). Well GWN-K1 yielded a sample with a manganese concentration of 50 ppb, which equals the applicable secondary MCL of 50 ppb. Figure 3-3 shows trends in iron concentrations for selected wells in the Cretaceous aquifer system.
Aluminum concentrations exceeded the secondary MCL of 200 ppb in samples from three wells: GWN-K1 in Wilkinson County (1800 ppb), GWN-K9 in Macon County (470 ppb), and GWN-K12 in Houston County (350 ppb and 400 ppb). Most samples contained low or undetectable levels of major alkali and alkaline earth metals (potassium, sodium, calcium, and magnesium). The exceptions consisted of samples from wells GWN-K3 and GWN-K8 (elevated calcium) and from well GWN-K13 (elevated sodium). Water samples from various wells also had detectable levels ofthe following trace elements: copper, barium, strontium, zinc, beryllium, yttrium, and fluorine (fluoride).
Water samples from six wells contained detectable levels of nitrite/nitrate, with the highest concentration, 1.4 ppm as nitrogen, occurring in a sample from well GWN-K10. Figure 3-4 shows trends in levels of nitrite/nitrate (reported as parts per million [ppm] nitrogen) for selected wells. All ofthe samples contained detectable chloride; the majority ofthe samples also had measurable sulfate. A sample from well GWN-K5 contained 22.7 ppb of dimethyl phthalate. This compound has not occurred in any previous sample going back to 1984. Table A-3 in the Appendix lists the analytical results for samples collected from the Cretaceous aquifer system.
3-4

1200

.........
Q)
u...........
c 600
.0...
400
200

1991
WeiiiD

1992

1993

1994

K3

K9

K12

1995

Iron levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of 5.1 ppb. A missing bar indicates that data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-3.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Cretaceous Aquifer System.
3-5

z ~
C>
E
0 ...-3 II ...1 ()
6
:z::::!
C>
E

1991
WeiiiD

1992

1993

1994

1995

K2

KS

K10

K16

Nitrate/nitrite levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of0.05 ppm. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
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 (Figure 3-5). At 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. The aquifer system also generally thickens downdip, with an area where the thickness exceeds 300 feet existing in Pulaski County and an area of similar thickness indicated in the Baker/Calhoun/Early county region (Clarke, et al., 1983). Figure 3-5 also shows the down-dip limit ofthe area in which the aquifer system is utilized.
The permeable Providence Formation-Clayton Formation interval forms a single aquifer in the up-dip areas (Long, 1989) and to the east of the Flint River (Clarke, et al., 1983). This same interval is recognized as the Dublin aquifer system to the east of the Ocmulgee River (Clarke, et al., 1985). Outcrop areas and adjacent covered areas to the east ofthe 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.
EPD sampled one well in the Providence aquifer sytem during 1995 (Figure 3-5). The sample water was soft and basic, with an elevated sodium content. Table A-4 in the Appendix gives the analytical results.
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 3-6). 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 from permeable units in the overlying Wilcox confining zone provides significant recharge 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) as well as east of the Flint River (Clarke, et al., 1983). In areas east of the Ocmulgee River, the combination ofthese two aquifers is referred to as the Dublin aquifer system (Clarke, et al., 1985). Figure 3-6 also shows the down-dip limit of the area in which the aquifer system is utilized.
During 1995, EPD used five wells to monitor the water quality in the Clayton aquifer system (Figure 3-6). Three wells (GWN-CTSA, GWN-CT7A, GWN-CT8) are located in or near the recharge area, with the latter two wells being less than 100 feet deep. The other two
3-7

..
\ ! i .,
...\""-.J---1,-- I'
...
General recharge area (from Davis, et al., 1988) Soft water
Figure 3-5. -Water Quality of a Well in the Providence Aquifer System. 3-8

...

...._.._.

...

F?r General recharge area (after Davis, et al., 1988)

Soft water

~ Moderately hard water

D Iron exceeds MCL

Hard water

Figure 3-6.- Water Quality for Selected Wells in the Clayton Aquifer System.

3-9

wells (GWN-CT2A and GWN-CT3) were used to sample downdip portions of the aquifer system.
The hardness class ofthe samples ranged from soft to hard, and, the pH ranged from acidic to slightly basic. Samples from all wells contained sodium and chloride. Calcium and sulfate concentrations were lowest in the samples from the two shallow updip wells (GWNCT7A and GWN-CT8). These same two wells contained detectable nitrate/nitrite, at 7.4 and 0.8 mgN/L. Iron concentrations exceeded the secondary MCL of300 ppb in samples from two wells, GWN-CT2A and GWN-CT7A. The sample from the latter well also contained excessive aluminum (secondary MCL is 200 ppb). The other elements detected in samples from various wells consisted of barium, magnesium, manganese, strontium, and zinc. No samples contained synthetic organic compounds. Figures 3-7 and 3-8, respectively, show trends in iron and nitrate/nitrite concentrations for selected wells in the Clayton aquifer system. Table A-5 in the Appendix lists analyses for water samples from these Clayton wells.
3.5 CLAIBORNE AQUIFER SYSTEM
Sands ofthe Middle Eocene Claiborne Group are the primary units of the Claiborne aquifer system of southwestern Georgia (Figure 3-9). Claiborne Group sands crop out in a belt extending from northern Early County through western Dooly County. Recharge to the aquifer system occurs both as direct infiltration of precipitation in the recharge area and as leakage from the overlying Floridan aquifer system (Hicks, et al., 1981; Gorday, et al., 1997). Discharge boundaries of the aquifer system are the Ocmulgee River, to the east, and the Chattahoochee River, to the west. Figure 3-9 shows the down-dip limit of utilization.
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 generally lies within 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 1995, EPD personnel used five wells to monitor the water quality of the Claiborne aquifer system. Wells GWN-CL4 and GWN-CL8 are relatively shallow (about 90 feet deep) and are located in the recharge area. Well GWN-CL2 is located near the recharge area and is deeper (315 feet). Wells GWN-CL6 and GWN-CL9 are deep and draw from down-dip portions of the aquifer, near the limit of utilization. The two recharge area wells yielded soft, acidic water, while the other wells yielded moderately hard, basic water.
Manganese levels in samples from wells GWN-CL4 and GWN-CL8 and iron in the sample from well GWN-CL8 exceeded the secondary MCL's for these elements (50 ppb for
3-10

600,-----------~--------~----------~----------~----------,
500 +
.-:;:4:! 00
C)
::J 0 0
(")
II ....I ()
6.300
....I
0)
--::J
-Q)
.I.J........
c::
-=0 200
100

1991
WeiiiD

1992

1993

DCT2A CT3

1994

1995

CTSA

CT7A

Iron levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of 5.1 ppb. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-7. - Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Clayton Aquifer System.
3-11

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

8

~7

z

~
o

:
I

"6l

~ I

z:::::! 5 --.'

C>
E

(")

sz,l0Z

4 -i I

I

2

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

WeiiiD

DCT2A CT7A

Nitrate/nitrite levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of0.05 ppm. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-8. -Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Clayton Aquifer System.
3-12

General recharge area (from Davis, et al., 1988) Soft water Moderately hard water 0 Manganese exceeds MCL D Iron exceeds MCL
Figure 3-9. -Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Claiborne Aquifer System.
3-13

Mn, 300 ppb for Fe). The sample from the near down-dip well GWN-CL2 had the highest calcium concentration. The far down-dip well GWN-CL9 yielded the sample with the highest sodium concentration. The calcium concentrations in the down-dip samples are consistent with ground waters derived from limestone. Other metals detected included barium, strontium, zinc, and copper. Figure 3-10 shows trends in iron concentrations for selected wells.
Samples from two wells (GWN-CL2 and GWN-CL4) contained detectable levels of nitrite/nitrate, with the sample from GWN-CL4 having the highest concentration (3.0 ppm as N). Figure 3-11 shows nitrite/nitrate concentrations for selected wells. Samples from all wells contained measurable chloride, with a maximum of 5. 83 ppm in the sample from well GWN-CL4. Samples from all wells except GWN-CL4 contained detectable sulfate. Fluoride was present in samples from three wells. Well GWN-CL4 yielded samples containing two synthetic organic chemicals, benzene and methyl tert-butyl ether. A trace of chloroform was present in a sample from well GWN-CL9. Table A-6 in the Appendix gives the analytical results for the samples from Claiborne wells.
3.6 JACKSONIAN AQUIFER SYSTEM
The Jacksonian aquifer system of central and east-central Georgia comprises predominantly sands ofthe Eocene Barnwell Group, though, locally, isolated limestone bodies are important. Barnwell Group outcrops extend from Macon and Peach Counties eastward to Burke and Richmond Counties (Figure 3-12). Aquifer sands form a northern clastic facies of the Barnwell Group; the sands grade southward into less permeable silts and clays of a transition facies (Vincent, 1982). The water-bearing sands are relatively thin, ranging from 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.
EPD monitored the water quality of eight wells tapping the Jacksonian aquifer system in 1995. Six wells are in the clastic facies (one, GWN-J2A, drawing from an isolated limestone body), and, two wells are in the transition facies. The pH ofthe water samples ranged from 4.80 to 7.82. Water hardness ranged from soft (up-dip wells GWN-17 and GWN-J8) to hard.
Concentrations of iron and aluminum fell below the secondary MCL's for drinking water in samples from all wells. Manganese exceeded the secondary MCL in wells GWN-13 and GWN-J8 (130 ppb and 78 ppb, respectively). Beryllium exceeded the primary MCLin a sample from a domestic well, GWN-J8.
The samples tested generally low in sodium, with the highest concentration occurring in a sample from the transition well GWN-13. Calcium concentrations ranged from 27 ppm
3-14

700.-----------~----------~~----------~----------~----------~

600

500

~

C)

::J 0
'0i 400

...J

(..) ~

-...J

0)

--::J -300 ...,.

-uQ.)

I ' i

-c:

:

.0....

200

100

1991
WeiiiD

1992
nCL2
LJ

1993

1994

CL4

CL8

1995

Iron levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of 5.1 ppb. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-10.- Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Claiborne Aquifer System.
3-15

10~----------~----------~----------~-----------,-----------,
8+~-i+ +j
~ -z.
C>
E
61 .0,....
II ....J
-(.)
~
z.-....J
C>
E
C")
0z 4
~ N
z 0
2

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

WeiiiD

DCL2 CL4

CL8

Nitrate/nitrite levels below the detection limit are assigned a value ofO.OS ppm. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-11. - Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Claiborne Aquifer System.
3-16

...

10

0

10 20 50 40MIL.E5

U...U...'"----'-----'---'----'

...

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 3-12.- Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Jacksonian Aquifer System.

3-17

to 68 ppm in samples from five ofthe wells but fell below 10 ppm in samples from the up-dip wells GWN-J7 and GWN-J8. Samples from five ofthe wells contained magnesium, with the highest level of 5. 7 ppm occurring in the sample from transition well GWN-13. Other detected metals included barium, strontium, zinc, and cadmium. Higher nitrite/nitrate concentrations occurred in samples from the up-dip wells. Although no data exist for chloride, fluoride, and sulfate concentrations in two samples, these substances were below their respective MCL's in the remaining samples. None of the samples contained any quantifiable synthetic organic chemicals. Figures 3-13 and 3-14 depict trends in iron and nitrite/nitrate concentrations for selected wells. Table A-7 in the Appendix lists the analytical results for all the wells sampled.
3.7 FLORIDAN AQUIFER SYSTEM
The Floridan aquifer system consists predominantly of Eocene and Oligocene limestones and dolostones that underlie most of the Coastal Plain Province. The aquifer is a major source of ground water for much of its outcrop area and throughout its down-dip 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 ofthe Floridan is restricted to units ofEocene 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 ofPaleocene 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 ground-water quality and availability (Kellam and Gorday, 1990). The Gulf Trough is a linear depositional feature in the Coastal Plain that extends from southwestern Decatur County through central Bulloch County.
A ground-water divide separates a smaller southwestwardly flow regime in the Floridan aquifer system in the Dougherty Plain from the larger southeastwardly flow regime in the remainder of Georgia. Rainfall infiltration in outcrop areas and downward leakage from extensive surficial residuum 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).
3-18

--:::::J 160
Cl :::l 0 0 M II
_J
(.)
6120 ~
Cl :::l
-Cl>
lL
-c
.0...
80
40

1991
WeiiiD

1992

1993

1994

JS

J6

1995

Iron levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of 5.1 ppb. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-13. -Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Jacksonian Aquifer System.
3-19

12,-----------~----------~--------~----------~----------~
10

C'?
0 z
sc6 4
z

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

n WeiiiD

UJ1B

J4

J7

J8

Nitrate/nitrite levels below the detection limit are assigned a value ofO.OS ppm. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-14. -Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in .the Jacksonian Aquifer System.
3-20

In 1995, EPD collected 50 samples from 47 wells in the Floridan aquifer system (Figure 3-15). The pH levels in all samples were basic, and, water hardness ranged from moderately hard to very hard. Iron concentrations exceeded the secondary MCL only in samples from GWN-PA9C and GWN-PA15. Trends in iron levels from selected wells in the Floridan aquifer are shown on Figure 3-16. Aluminum concentrations fell below the secondary MCL in all samples. Most wells yielding water with detectable manganese fall within the Gulf Trough area (wells GWN-PA14, GWN-PA18, GWN-PA19, GWN-PA29, GWN-PA32, GWN-PA33, GWN-PA34, GWN-PA35, and GWN-PA36). The manganese concentration in samples from wells GWN-PA9C, GWN-PA18, and GWN-PA34 exceeded the secondary MCL of 50 ppb.
Sodium concentrations ranged from 1.9 to 725 parts per million (ppm), and, magnesium ranged from undetected to 84 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 samples from wells GWN-PA2A and GWN-PA6 to 94 ppm in well GWN-PA9C. Other metals detected in measurable concentrations included potassium, barium, molybdenum, strontium, copper, and zinc. None of these substances exceeded applicable MCL's.
All water samples underwent tests for the anions: chloride, sulfate, fluoride, and nitrate/nitrite. Chloride levels ranged from 1.98 ppm to 1385 ppm. The 1385 ppm level occurred in well GWN-PA9C in the coastal area and was the only value to exceed the secondary MCL (250 ppm) for chloride. Sulfate ranged from undetected to 284 ppm. This high sulfate level occurred in the sample from well GWN-PA9C and exceeds the secondary MCL (250 ppm). The concentrations of fluoride ranged from undetected to 0.88 ppm. Detected synthetic organic compounds consisted of tetrahydrofuran, dimethyl phthalate, chloroform, and bromodichloromethane. None ofthe compounds exceeded any MCL's.
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 ofnitrite/nitrate. The highest level, 4.6 ppm as nitrogen, was in a sample collected from well GWN-PA53 in the Dougherty Plain. Trends in nitrate levels from selected wells in the Floridan Aquifer are presented in Figure 3-16. The Appendix (Table A-8) gives the analytical results for samples from the Floridan aquifer system.
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).
3-21

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

Moderately hard water Hard water
Very hard water

0 Manganese exceeds MCL 0 Iron exceeds MCL

Figure 3-15.- Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Floridan Aquifer System.

3-22

1~0.-----------~----------~----------~----------,----------,
1200
--::;
C)
g:::s 900
(")
IJ ...J
---(.)
~ ...J
C)
:::s
~ 600 _cg :

1991 Well ID

1992
DPA9C

1993

1994

1995

PA21A

PA29

PA34

PASO

Iron levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of 5.1 ppb. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-16. -Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Floridan Aquifer System.
3-23

5.-----------~----------~----------------------~--------~
4

z_J
C>
E
M
0z 2
ces
N
0 z

, I
I I
1 -i j

I i

I I

!

l

I

1991

1992

DPA24 WeiiiD

1993

1994

1995

PA46B

PA51

PA52

PA53

Nitrate/nitrite levels below the detection limit are assigned a value ofO.OS ppm. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-17. - Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Floridan Aquifer System.
3-24

Areas of confinement exist in 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). Here, two principal aquifer units are present (Joiner, et al., 1988). Clarke (et. al, 1990) use the names upper and lower Brunswick aquifers to refer to these two sandy aquifer units.
EPD collected water samples from eight wells to monitor the water quality in the Miocene aquifer system (Figure 3-18). The pH of the samples ranged from 4.26 to 8.03 and hardness from soft to moderately hard. Iron and manganese levels ranged from undetected to 320 and 150 ppb, respectively. The water sample from one well, GWN-MI10B contained iron in excess ofthe secondary MCL (300 ppb). Water samples from three wells, GWN-MI5, GWN-MI8A, and GWN-MI10B, exceeded the secondary MCL (50 ppb) for manganese. Figure 3-19 shows trends in iron concentrations in selected wells. Samples from three wells contained aluminum in excess ofthe secondary MCL, at levels of220 ppb, 760 ppb, and 1400 ppb. Sodium ranged from 1.7 ppm to 8.4 ppm, and, calcium ranged from 3.1 ppm to 24 ppm. Other metals detected were magnesium, barium, strontium, zinc, bismuth, and titanium. None of these exceeded applicable MCL's.
Chloride concentrations ranged from 2.66 ppm to 17.2 ppm, and, sulfate levels ranged from undetected to 3.68 parts per million. The deeper domestic wells (GWN-MI1, GWNMI2, and GWN-MIIOB) yielded samples with the lowest chloride concentrations. Samples from three wells contained quantifiable concentrations of fluoride. Detectable levels of nitrite/nitrate, ranging from 0.1ppm to 14.1 ppm, occurred in samples from five wells (GWNMI5, GWN-MI7, GWN-MI8A, GWN-MI9A, and GWN-MI15). Nitrate/nitrite concentrations in wells GWN-MI7, GWN-M18A, and GWN-MI15 exceeded the primary MCL (1 0 ppm as N). Concentrations of nitrate/nitrite for selected wells are illustrated in Figure 3-20. Two wells yielded samples containing traces of the synthetic organic chemicals: chloroform in well GWN-MI8A and dimethyl phthalate in well GWN-MI2. Table A-9 in the Appendix gives analytical data for samples drawn from Miocene aquifer system wells.
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 saprolite horizons determine the amount of well yield that can be sustained.
EPD used seventeen wells and three springs to monitor water quality in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Province. Figure 3-21 shows the locations of the monitoring stations. Hardness ranged from soft to moderately hard. The pH of the water samples ranged from 4.95 to 7.55, with the majority of the stations yielding acidic water. Iron and manganese
3-25

...

10

0

10 20 50 <IOMIU$

...

Soft water

D Iron exceeds MCL

~ Moderately hard water

0 Manganese exceeds MCL

Figure 3-18.- Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Miocene Aquifer System. 3-26

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

2000 ..,..........................

~
Cl
g::1 1500

('I)

II

...J

---()
~
...J Cl

::1
.......::.

! '

.f1oool

-c:

!

.0....

500

1991

1992

DMI5 WeiiiD

1993

1994

1995

MI10B

Ml13

Ml15

Iron levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of 5.1 ppb. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-19. -Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Miocene Aquifer System.
3-27

20~-----------------------------------------------------------,

18

16

z::::J14
C)
E
0
"12
-u_J
~
:z::::! 10
C)
E
(")
0z 8
oi:S
N
z0 6-'

4
2-,
0 --'------
1991
WeiiiD

1992

1993
MIS A

1994

1995

Nitrate/nitrite levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of 0.05 ppm. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-20. -Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Miocene Aquifer System.
3-28

..
.\..___.)
\
\ .

,\ ( i

j



rt!( "-----L___

10

0

10 20 50 -4QVIU"S

...

Soft water

o Manganese exceeds MCL

& Moderately hard water

D Iron exceeds MCL

Figure 3-21. - Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifers
3-29

ranged from undetected to 81000 ppb and 160 ppb, respectively. Iron exceeded the secondary MCL (300 ppb) in water samples taken at six stations, and, manganese exceeded the secondary MCL (50 ppb) at eight stations. Detectable aluminum occurred in samples from two stations and exceeded the secondary MCL (200 ppb) at one station. Figures 3-22 and 3-33 respectively show trends in iron concentrations for selected stations in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge sectors of the province.
Samples from all stations contained sodium, with concentrations ranging from 1. 7 ppm to 36.0 ppm. All samples except the one from GWN-P14 contained calcium and magnesium. The other metals detected consisted ofbarium, strontium, bismuth, beryllium, cadmium, and zinc. Beryllium exceeded the primary MCL of 4 ppb in a sample from well GWN-PlOA. No other metal concentrations exceeded any MCL's.
Chloride and sulfate concentrations in the water samples ranged from undetected to 17.1 ppm and 65.2 ppm, respectively. Samples from nine stations contained detectable fluoride with the concentration exceeding the primary MCL (4 ppm) in the sample from spring GWN-P12A. Concentrations of nitrite/nitrate, present in water samples from eleven stations, were below the primary MCL (10 ppm as N). Figures 3-24 and 3-25 show nitrite/nitrate concentrations in selected stations from the Piedmont and Blue Ridge sectors, respectively. A sample drawn from well GWN-P16C contained vinyl chloride and 1,1,2trichloroethane in excess ofthe Primary MCL's (2 ppb and 5 ppb, respectively). The well is located in a mixed rural/residential/light industrial setting. An analytical summary for the Piedmont/Blue Ridge sampling stations is in Appendix Table A-10.
3.10 VALLEY AND RIDGE UNCONFINED AQUIFERS
Soil and residuum form low-yield unconfined aquifers across most of the Valley and Ridge Province of northwestern Georgia. Valley bottoms underlain by dolostones and limestones ofthe Cambro-Ordovician Knox Group are the locations of most higher-yielding wells and springs that are suitable for municipal supplies.
EPD collected water samples from five wells and three springs to monitor the water quality in the Valley and Ridge unconfined aquifers (Figure 3-26). Three of these wells and all three springs produced water from Knox Group carbonates. The other wells are representative ofwater from the Ordovician Chickamauga Group in Walker County and the Cambrian Shady Dolomite in Bartow County.
Water from the Valley and Ridge monitoring stations ranged in pH from 7.21 to 7.86 and in hardness from moderately hard to very hard. Two stations (GWN-VR3 and GWNVR4) yielded samples containing detectable iron, and, one station yielded a sample with detectable manganese. Concentrations of these two metals fell below applicable MCL's. Sodium, ranging in concentration from 1.4 ppm to 6.3 ppm, calcium, ranging from 28 to 110 ppm, and magnesium, ranging from 3. 5 to 23 ppm, occurred in samples from all stations. Spring GWN-VR3 yielded the only sample with detectable aluminum. The trace metals
3-30

3000~----------~--------------------~----------~---------.

2500

~

--::J2000
0> ::J 0 0
?.
--'
(.)

.........

I

I

I

I

J 6-~~-1' 500

I ! I !

I

(j)

!:!::,

c

0 ..!::::

1000

' -i

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

DP1B WeiiiD P9

P12

P15A

*Iron levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of 12.1 ppb. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-22. -Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Piedmont Sector.
3-31

180,---------------------~----------~----------~---------.

160 + 140

...............................................;........................................ I

~120

g I

~ 100 ~

-()

I

~

i

-Q)
u. c
0
.!:: 60

20

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

WeiiiD

DBR1A BR2A

BR3A

Iron levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of 5.1 ppb. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-23. -Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Blue Ridge Sector.
3-32

3,-----------~----------~--------~----------~----------~

2.5+---------------;..........................................;......................................................; ......................................... l

z::J

Ol 2 1

E

.0....

II

..J

-()
~ ..J

i

z-- .1 5 -t:

OE l

. I

M
z 0
eel N 1
z 0

1991 WeiiiD

1992

1993

P4C

1994

1995

Nitrate/nitrite levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of0.05 ppm. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-24. -Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge UnconfinedAquifer System: Piedmont Sector.
3-33

2.2

2.0

1.8

-- 1.6
...J
z
Cl

.J..5.. 1.4

II
--.u..J
~ 1.2..;
...J
z i

ECl

1.

!
0-:

M
z 0
~ 0.8

C'll
z 0 0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
1991

1992

1993

1994

Well ID

I IBR2A

BR3A

BR4

1995

Nitrate/nitrite levels below the detection limit are assigned a value ofO.OS ppm. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-25. -Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Piedmont/Blue Ridge Unconfined Aquifer System: Blue Ridge Sector.
3-34

...

\\ t i
.,. ''--L...J____l'____

ooi.............Lo--'o_zo_.__....~.>0--'40 MILES

...

Hard water

+ Very hard water

Figure 3-26. -Water Quality of Selected Wells in the Valley and Ridge Unconfined Aquifers.
3-35

present consisted of barium and strontium. The highest barium concentration, 580 ppb, occurred in a sample from well GWN-VR6. This particular well draws water from the Shady Dolomite Group, which contains numerous barite (BaS04) deposits.
Chloride concentrations ranged from 1.23 ppm to 7.77 ppm, and, sulfate ranged from undetectable to 34.3 ppm. Except for station GWN-VR4, samples from all wells and springs contained nitrate/nitrite. The highest nitrate/nitrite concentration (3 .2 ppm as N) occurred in a sample from well GWN-VR5. Figures 3-27 and 3-28 show iron and nitrite/nitrate levels, respectively, for selected sampling stations in the Valley and Ridge aquifers.
The sample from well GWN-VR6, which is located in an industrial setting, contained a non-quantifiable concentration of tetrachloroethylene. Methyl-tert-butyl ether and methyltert-amyl ether occurred in samples from well GWN-VR5, which is located in a rural setting. There are no MCL' s for the ether compounds. Appendix Table A-ll presents the analytical summary for the wells and springs located in the Valley and Ridge unconfined aquifers.
3-36

~I

25001- -

-~J ....

~

I

C)
::I

I '

0

i

0

I

~

I

....J

!

()

!

g, II .~........ 1500

i
-t

....J

'

,........

....

I
!

..............................................................j ........
I I
I

~Ci>

I I

l o

I

..!::: 1000

i
I

, ......................
i
I

........................ i II
I
I
i

I .............................. II
I

I

I

500 -i

....... ... i f

I

i I

a~~~~~~~~~~l~m~~~m~~~~~~~--~~

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

WeiiiD

I IVR2

VR3

VR4

Iron levels below the detection limit are assigned a value of 5.1 ppb. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-27. -Iron Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Valley and Ridge UnconfinedAquifers.
3-37

3.5~----------~----------~----------~----------~-----------,
3.0
2.5
:z::J
Cl
E .0.-
dII 2.0
6.
z::::!
Cl
E
c<) 1.5
0 z
~ N
z 0 1.0 --:
0.5--' .

1991
WeiiiD

1992
I IVR1

1993

1994

1995

VR3 VRS VR6 VR9

Nitrate/nitrite levels below the detection limit are assigned a value ofO.OS ppm. A missing bar indicates data are not available for that year.
Figure 3-28. -Nitrate/Nitrite Concentrations for Selected Wells in the Valley and Ridge UnconfinedAquifers.
3-38

4.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

EPD personnel collected 141 raw water samples from Ill wells and 6 springs on the Ground-Water Monitoring Network in 1995 for inorganic and organic analysis. These wells and springs monitor the water quality of nine 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

Comparisons of analyses of water samples collected in 1995 were made with analyses for the Ground-Water Monitoring Network dating back to 1984, permitting the recognition of temporal trends. Table 4-llists the major contaminants and pollutants detected at the stations ofthe GroundWater Monitoring Network during 1995. Although isolated water quality problems existed during 1995 at specific localities, the quality of water from the majority of the 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 (MI7, l\118A and l\1115), all shallow domestic wells tapping the Miocene aquifer system and located adjacent to or within row crop areas, yielded water samples in 1995 with nitrite/nitrate concentrations exceeding the primary MCL of 10 ppm as nitrogen (Table 4-1). (The owners ofthese wells received notification about the excess nitrate/nitrite.) Spatial and temporal limitations of the Ground-Water Monitoring Network preclude the identification ofthe exact sources ofthe 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 man-made sources. The most common sources of man-made dissolved nitrogen in Georgia usually consist of septic systems, agricultural wastes, and storage or Cl:PPlication of fertilizers (Robertson, et. al, 1993). Dissolved nitrogen also is present in rainwater and can be 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, which commonly develop along the flow path of ground water, foster the denitrification process. However, the lack of denitrifying bacteria in ground water may inhibit this process (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 occurred at some stations, no long-term trends in concentrations ofthese metals were documented for the majority of the wells and springs sampled.

4-1

Table 4-1. Pollution and Contamination Incidents, 1995.

Station

Contaminant/ PoUutant

PrimaryMCL

GWN-Kl

Mn=SOppb Al=l800ppb

GWN-K3

Fe=420ppb

GWN-KS

dimethylphthalate=22. 7 ppb

(noMCL)

GWN-K8

Fe=3900ppb =2600ppb

GWN-K9

Fe=460ppb Al=470ppb

GWN-Kl2

A1=350ppb =400ppb

GWN-CT2A

Fe=320ppb Fe=320ppb

GWN-CT7A

Fe=330ppb A1=290ppb

GWN-CL4

benzene=? .2ppb benzene=tr methyl-tert-butyl ether= 16ppb methyl-tert-butyl ether= 17 .6ppb Mn=59ppb

benzene=S.Oppb benzene=S .Oppb (noMCL) (noMCL)

GWN-CL8

Fe=670ppb Mn=S!ppb

GWN-CL9 GWN-13

CHCI3=tr Mn=130ppb

trihalomethanes= 1OOppb

GWN-J8

Be=4.lppb Mn=78ppb

Be=4.0ppb

GWN-PA9C

Fe=l400ppb Mn=6Jppb S04=398ppm CI=l770ppm tetrahydrofuran=30ppb

(NoMCL)

GWN-PAIS Fe=420ppb

4-2

Secondary MCL Mn=SOppb A1=200ppb Fe=300ppb (noMCL) Fe=300ppb
Fe=300ppb A1=200ppb Al=200ppb
Fe=300ppb
Fe=300ppb Al=200ppb
(noMCL) (no MCL) Mn=SOppb Fe=300ppb Mn=SOppb
Mn=SOppb
Mn=SOppb Fe=300ppb Mn=SOppb S04=250ppm Cl=250ppm (NoMCL) Fe=300ppb

Table 4-1 (continued). Pollution and Contamination Incidents, 1995.

Station

Contaminant/Pollutant

GWN-PAI8 Mn=S9ppb

GWN-PA27 dimethyl phthalate=tr

GWN-PA33A CHC13=8.04ppb CHBrC12=tr
GWN-PA34 Mn=IOOppb

GWN-PA39 GWN-Ml2

CHC13=tr dimethyl phthalate-tr

GWN-MIS

Mn=7Ippb

GWN-Ml7

NOx=I0.8ppm as N A1=760ppb

GWN-Ml8A

NOx=I2.3ppm as N CHC13=tr Mn=62ppb Al=I400ppb

GWN-MIIOB Fe=320ppb Mn=I60ppb

GWN-MIIS

NOx=I3.8ppm as N Al=220ppm

GWN-BR3A Mn=64ppb

GWN-PlB

Fe=2200ppb Fe=2IOOppb Mn=62ppb Mn=60ppb

GWN-P2

Fe=300ppb

GWN-P6B

Mn=99ppb

GWN-P9

Fe=990ppb Mn=ISOppb

PrimaryMCL (noMCL) trihalomethanes= I OOppb
trihalomethanes= I OOppb (noMCL) NOx=IOppm as N NOx=lOppm as N trihalomethanes= I OOppb
NOx=IOppm as N

Secondary MCL Mn=SOppb (noMCL)
Mn=SOppb
(noMCL) Mn=SOppb
A1=200ppb
Mn=SOppb A1=200ppb Fe=300ppb Mn=SOppb
Al=200ppb Mn=SOppb Fe=300ppb Fe=300ppb Mn=SOppb Mn=SOppb Fe=300ppb Mn=SOppb Fe=300ppb Mn=SOppb

4-3

Table 4-1 (continued). Pollution and Contamination Incidents, 1995.

Station GWN-PIOA
GWN-Pl5A GWN-Pl6C
GWN-PI7 GWN-VR5 GWN-VR6

Contaminant!PoUutant
Be=3.4ppb Be =4.3ppb Al=lOOOppb Al=2900ppb Fe=l9000ppb Fe=81000ppb Mn=l20ppb Mn =160ppb
Fe=420ppb Mn=8ippb
vinyl chloride=20 ..2ppb vinyl chloride =n.d. I, 1,2-trichloroethane=8.58ppb I ,1 ,2-trichloroethane =n.d. Fe=830ppb Fe=1600ppb Mn=67ppb Mn=68ppb
Fe=420ppb Mn=l20ppb
methyl-tert-butyl ether=40ppb methyl-tert-butyl ether=40ppb
tetrachloroethylene=tr.

PrimaryMCL Be=4.0ppb Be=4.0ppb
vinyl chloride=2.0ppb vinyl chloride=2.0ppb 1,1 ,2-trichloroethane=S.Oppb I, I ,2-trichloroethane=S.Oppb
(NoMCL) (NoMCL) tetrachloroethylene=Sppb

Secondary MCL
Al=300ppb Al=300pp Fe=300ppb Fe=300ppb Mn=50ppb Mn=50ppb Fe=300ppb Mn=50ppb
Fe=300ppb Fe=300ppb Mn=50ppb Mn=50ppb Fe=300ppb Mn=50ppb (NoMCL) (NoMCL)

Note: Listing ofa substance twice for one station means that the station was sampled twice. tr. =trace.

4-4

Samples from twelve stations contained some amount of synthetic organic compounds. In five instances, the concentration ofthe substance was too small to quantify. Only two wells yielded samples with organic chemical pollutants in excess of primary MCL's, GWN-CL4 with excessive benzene and GWN-P16C with excessive vinyl chloride and trichloroethane. The sporadic nature of the occurrence of such compounds in most of these wells makes defining spatial and temporal trends in levels of organic pollutants indeterminate for the purposes of this study.
4-5

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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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: in R. Arora, ed., Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10,41pl.
Davis, K.R., Donahue, J.C., Hutcheson, R.H., and Waldrop, D.L., 1988, Most Significant Ground-Water Recharge Areas of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 18, 1 pl.
Drever, J. 1., 1988, The Geochemistry ofNatural 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, 1994, Rules for Safe Drinking Water, Section 391-3-5, Rules of the Georgia Department ofNatural Resources Environmental Protection Division, p. 601-728.
Freeze, R.A., and Cherry, J.A., 1979, Groundwater: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 604 p.
Gorday, L.L., Lineback, J,A., Long, A.F., McLemore, W.H., 1997, A Digital Model Approach to Water-Supply Management of the Claiborne, Clayton, and Providence Aquifers of Southwestern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 118, 31 p., Appendix, Supplements I and II.
5-1

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, 93p.
Hicks, D.W., Krause, R.E., and Clarke, J.S., 1981, Geohydrology of the 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 of the Gulf Trough-Apalachicola Embayment Area, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 94, 74 p., 15 pl.
Krause, R.E., 1979, Geohydrology of Brooks, Lowndes, and Western Echols Counties, Georgia: United States Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 78-117, 48 p., 8 pl.
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 ofthe Clayton and Claiborne Aquifers in Southwestern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 55, 59p., 2 pl.
Pollard, L.D., and Vorhis, RC., 1980, The Geohydrology of the 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, 12 p., 1 pl.
Standard Methods for the Evaluation of Water and Waste Water, 1995, Franson, M.A.H., ed.: American Public Health Assn., Washington, D.C., p. 1-1 to 10-157, 35 pl.
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. 284-290.
Vincent, R.H., 1982, Geohydrology ofthe Jacksonian Aquifer in Central and East Central Georgia: Georgia: Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 8, 3 pl.
5-2

Wait, R.L., 1960, Source and Quality of Ground Water in Southwestern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 18, 74 p.
Watson, T., 1982, Aquifer Potential of the Shallow Sediments of the Coastal Area of Georgia: Proceedings, Second Symposium on the Geology of the 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, 52 p.
5-3

ANALYSES OF SAMPLES COLLECTED DURING 1995 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 that includes tests for pH, specific conductance, certain common inorganic anions, and thirty metals (Table A-1 ). 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 consist of those for mercury, agricultural chemicals, semivolatile organic compounds, and volatile organic compounds (Table A-2). In previous editions of Circular 12, the metals analyses and the various organic chemical analyses were referred to as screens.

EPA has set forth a series of (serially numbered) analytical methods officially recognized as suitable for environmental purposes. As the EPD laboratory and the Georgia Department of Agriculture laboratory use these methods and now cite EPA method numbers along with analysis results, Tables A-1 and A-2 list the EPA method number appropriate for the substance being tested. For the majority ofthe organic analyses, the screens coincide with the EPA methods. Screen #5, done by the Cooperative Extension Service laboratory at the University of Georgia, is effective for most carbamates and urea-derivative pesticides. EPA method 531.1 is effective for carbamates but not urea-derivatives. EPA has not designated an official method for analyzing the urea derivative pesticides. Table A-2 makes note of this situation.

Other than the two physical parameters, four of the major anions, and nine of the metals, other parameters are listed in the following analytical results tables A-3 through A11only if they were detected.

For this appendix, the following abbreviations are used:

AAS

= atomic absorbtion spectrophotometry

su

= standard units

mg!L

=milligrams per liter (parts per million)

mg!LasN =milligrams per liter (parts per million), as nitrogen

ug!L

=micrograms per liter (parts per billion)

ICPOES

= ion coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy

umho/cm
u

= micromhos per centimeter = less than (below detection limit)

a

=EPA method 507.0 (organophosphate pesticides)

b

=EPA method 508.1 (organochlorine pesticides and PCB's)

c

=EPA method 515.2 (chlorinated phenoxy herbicides)

d

= EPA method 531.1 (carbamate pesticides)

s

=EPA method 8270B (semivolatile organic compounds)

v

=EPA method 8260A (volatile organic compounds)

(Note: detection limits may change due to temporary differences in the performance of instruments and apparatus.)

A-1

Table A-1. Standard Water Quality Analyses: ICPOES Metals, AAS Metals, Major Anions, and Other Parameters.
ICPOES METALS TEST

Parameter
Silver (Ag) Aluminum (AI)
Gold (Au) Barium (Ba) Bismuth (Bi) Calcium (Ca) Cobalt (Co) Chromium (Cr) Copper (Cu)
Iron (Fe) Potassium (K) Magnesium (Mg) Manganese (Mn) Molybdenum (Mo) Sodium (Na)
Nickel (Ni) Lead (Pb) Tin (Sn) Strontium (Sr) Titanium (Ti) Vanadium (V) Yttrium (Y) Zinc (Zn)

Test Method EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7 EPA200.7

Typical Detection Limit 30 ug/L 50 ug/L 10 ug/L 10 ug/L 30 ug/L
1.0 mg/L 10 ug/L 20 ug/L 20 ug/L 20 ug/L 5.0 mg/L 1.0 mg/L 10 ug/L 10 ug/L l.Omg/L 20 ug/L 50 ug/L 90 ug/L 10 ug/L 10 ug/L 10 ug/L 10 ug/L 20 ug/L

Max. Contaminant Level
100 ug/L2 200 ug/L2
None 2000 ug/L1
None None None 100 ug/L1 1000 ug/L2 300 ug/L2 None None 50 ug/L2 None None 100 ug/L1 None None None None None None 5000 ug/L2

A-2

ICPOES METALS TEST (continued)

Parameter Zirconium (Zr)

Test Method
EPA200.7

Typical Detection Limit
10 ug!L

Max. Contaminant Level
None

Parameter
Arsenic (As) Beryllium (Be) Cadmium (Cd) Antimony (Sb) Selenium (Se) Thallium (Tl)

AAS METALS TESTS

Test Method EPA 206.2 EPA 210.2 EPA213.2 EPA204.2 EPA270.2 EPA279.2

Typical Detection Limit 25 ug!L 2 ug!L
2.5 ug!L 3 ug!L 25 ug!L 1 ug!L

Max. Contaminant Level
50 ug/L1 4 ug/L1 5 ug/L1 6 ug/L1 50 ug/L1 2 ug/L1

Parameter
Chloride (Cn Sulfate (S04=) Nitrate/Nitrite
(Nox-) Fluoride (F-)

MAJOR ANIONS TESTS

Test Method EPA300.0 EPA300.0 EPA 353.1

Typical Detection Limit
0.1 mg!L 2.0 mg!L 0.1 mg!L as N

Max. Contaminant Level
250 mg/L2 250 mg/L2 10 mg!L as N 1

EPA300.0

0.1 mg!L

4.0 mg/L1, 2.0 mg!L2

A-3

OTHER PARAMETERS

Parameter
pH Conductivity

Units
0.01 su
1.0 mho/em

Maximum Contaminant Level
None
None

*pH is measured in the field (see Chapter 2); conductivity is measured according to Standard Methods ofWater Quality Analysis method 2510B. (Franson, ed., 1995).
1=Primary Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL). 2=Secondary MCL.
MCL 's from Georgia Rules for Safe Drinking Water, March 1994 edition (EPD, 1994).

A-4

Table A-2.

Additional Water Quality Analyses: Organophosphate Pesticides, Organochlorine Pesticides/PCB's, Phenoxy Herbicides, Carbamate/Urea-Derived Pesticides, Semivolatile Organic Compounds, Volatile Organic Compounds, and Mercury.

ORGANOPHOSPHATE PESTICIDES (Screen #1)

Parameter

Test Method

Typical Detection Primary Maximum

Limit

Contaminant Level

Alachlor

EPA 507.0

1.0 ug/L

2.0 ug/L

Atrazine

EPA 507.0

0.3 ug/L

3.0 ug/L

Azodrin

EPA 507.0

l.Oug/L

None

Chloropyrifos

EPA 507.0

0.8 ug/L

None

Cyanazine

EPA 507.0

l.Oug/L

None

DCPA

EPA 507.0

0.01 ug/L

None

Dasanit

EPA 507.0

0.6 ug/L

None

Demeton

EPA 507.0

l.Oug/L

None

Diazinon

EPA 507.0

l.Oug/L

None

Dimethoate

EPA 507.0

0.5 ug/L

None

Disyston

EPA 507.0

l.Oug/L

None

Eptam

EPA 507.0

0.5 ug/L

None

Ethoprop

EPA 507.0

0.5 ug/L

None

Fonophos

EPA 507.0

0.5 ug/L

None

Guthion

EPA 507.0

2.0 ug/L

None

Isopropalin

EPA507.0

1.0 ug/L

None

Malathion

EPA 507.0

1.4 ug/L

None

Metolachlor

EPA 507.0

l.Oug/L

None

Metribuzin

EPA507.0

1.25 ug/L

None

Mevinphos

EPA 507.0

1.4 ug/L

None

Parathion (E)

EPA 507.0

0.08 ug/L

None

A-5

ORGANOPHOSPHATE PESTICIDES (continued) (Screen #1)

Parameter

Test Method

Typical Detection Primary Maximum

Limit

Contaminant Level

Parathion (M)

EPA 507.0

0.1 ug/L

None

Pebulate

EPA 507.0

0.6 ug/L

None

Pendimethalin

EPA 507.0

0.8 ug/L

None

Phorate

EPA 507.0

l.Oug/L

None

Profluralin

EPA 507.0

0.9 ug/L

None

Simazine

EPA507.0

0.9 ug/L

4.0 ug/L

Sutan

EPA 507.0

0.7 ug/L

None

Terbufos

EPA 507.0

3.0 ug!L

None

Trifluralin

EPA 507.0

1.0 ug/L

None

Vernam

EPA 507.0

0.5 ug/L

None

ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES/PCB'S (Screen #2)

Parameter

Test Method

Typical Detection Primary Maximum

Limit

Contaminant Level

Chlordane

EPA 508.1

2.0 ug/L

2.0 ug/L

Dicofol

EPA 508.1

0.1 ug/L

None

Endrin

EPA 508.1

0.03 ug/L

2.0 ug/L

Methoxychlor

EPA 508.1

0.3 ug/L

40.0 ug/L

gamma-HCH (lindane)

EPA 508.1

0.008 ug/L

0.2 ug/L

PCB's

EPA 508.1

0.6 ug/L

0.5 ug/L

Permethrin

EPA 508.1

0.3 ug/L

None

Toxaphene

EPA 508.1

1.2ug/L

3.0 ug/L

A-6

Parameter
2,4-D Acifluorfen Chloramben
Dalapon Dinoseb Pichloram Silvex Trichlorofon

PHENOXY HERBICIDES (Screens #3 and #4)

Test Method

Typical Detection Limit

EPA 515.1

5.2 ug/L

EPA 515.1

l.Oug/L

EPA 515.1

0.2 ug/L

EPA 515.1

0.2 ug/L

EPA 515.1

0.1 ug/L

EPA 515.1

500 ug/L

EPA 515.1

0.1 ug/L

EPA 515.1

2.0 ug/L

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
70.0 ug/L None None
200 ug!L 7ug/L
500 ug/L 50.0 ug/L
None

CARBAMATEIUREA-DERIVATIVE PESTICIDES

Parameter
Aldicarb Aldicarb Sulfone Aldicarb Sulfoxide
Baygon
Carbaryl
Carbofuran
Diuron Fluometron
Linuron

Test Method EPA 531.1
EPA 531.1
EPA 531.1
EPA 531.1 Screen #5
EPA 531.1 Screen #5
EPA 531.1 Screen #5
Screen #5
Screen #5
Screen #5

Typical Detection Limit l.Oug/L
2.0 ug/L 2.0 ug/L l.Oug/L

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
None None None None

2.0 ug/L

None

l.Oug/L

40.0 ug/L

l.Oug/L l.Oug/L l.Oug/L

None None None

A-7

CARBAMATE/UREA-DERIVATIVE PESTICIDES (continued)

Parameter Methomyl Methiocarb Monuron
Oxamyl

Test Method
EPA 531.1 Screen #5
EPA 531.1 Screen #5
Screen #5
EPA 531.1 Screen #5

Typical Detection Limit
l.Oug!L

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
None

4.0 ug!L

None

1.0 ug!L 2.0 ug!L

None 200 ug!L

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (Screens #8 and #9)

Parameter

Test Method

Method Detection Primary Maximum

Limit

Contaminant Level

N-Nitrosodimethyl- EPA 8270B amme

10.0 ug!L

None

2-Picoline

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

Methylmethanesul- EPA 8270B fonate

10.0 ug!L

None

Ethylmethanesulfonate

EPA 8270B

20.0 ug!L

None

Aniline

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

Phenol

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

Bis(2-Chloroethyl) EPA 8270B ether

10.0 ug!L

None

2-Chlorophenol EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

1.3-Dichlorobenzene EPA8270B (m)

10.0 ug!L

None

1,4-Dichlorobenzene EPA 8270B (p)

10.0 ug!L

75.0 ug!L

Benzyl Alcohol EPA 8270B

20.0 ug!L

None

A-8

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (continued) (Screens #8 and #9)

Parameter

Test Method

Method Detection Primary Maximum

Limit

Contaminant Level

1,2-Dichlorobenzene EPA 8270B (o)

10.0 ug/L

600.0 ug/L

2-Methylphenol EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) Ether

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Acetophenone

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

4-Methylphenol EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

N-Nitrosodi-NPropylamine

EPA8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Hexachloroethane EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Nitrobenzene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

N-Nitrosopiperidine EPA 8270B

20.0 ug/L

None

Isophorone

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

2-Nitrophenol

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

2,4-Dimethylphenol EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Bis(2-Chloroethoxy) EPA 8270B Methane

10.0 ug/L

None

Benzoic Acid

EPA 8270B

50.0 ug/L

None

2,4-Dichlorophenol EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

1,2,4Trichlorobenzene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

A,a-Dimethylphenylethylamine

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Naphthalene

EPA8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

4-Chloroaniline EPA 8270B

20.0 ug/L

None

2,6-Dichlorophenol EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

A-9

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (continued) (Screens #8 and #9)

Parameter

Test Method

Minimum

Primary Maximum

Detection Limit Contaminant Level

Hexachlorobutadi- EPA 8270B ene

10.0 ug!L

None

N-Nitroso-Di-NButylamine

EPA8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

4-Chloro-3methylphenol

EPA 8270B

20.0 ug/L

None

2-Methyl Naphthalene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

1,2,4,5-

EPA 8270B

Tetrachlorobenzene

10.0 ug/L

None

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

50 ug/L

2,4,6Trichlorophenol

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

2-Chloronaphthalene EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

2,4,5Trichlorophenol

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

1-Chloronaphthalene EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

2-Nitroanaline

EPA 8270B

50.0 ug/L

None

Dimethylphthalate EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Acenaphthylene EPA8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

2,6-Dinitrotoluene EPA8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

3-Nitro aniline

EPA 8270B

50.0 ug/L

None

Acenaphthene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

2,4-Dinitrophenol EPA 8270B

50.0 ug/L

None

4-Nitrophenol

EPA 8270B

50.0 ug/L

None

Dibenzofuran

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Pentachlorobenzene EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

A-10

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (continued) (Screens #8 and #9)

Parameter

Test Method

Minimum

Primary Maximum

Detection Limit Contaminant Level

2,4-Dinitrotoluene EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

1-Naphthylamine EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

2-Naphthylamine EPA8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

2,3,4,6-

EPA8270B

tetrachlorobenzene

10.0 ug!L

None

Diethylphthalate EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

Fluorene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

4-Nitro aniline

EPA 8270B

20.0 ug!L

None

Diphenylamine

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

4,6-Dinitro-2methyl phenol

EPA 8270B

50.0 ug!L

None

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

I ,2-diphenylhydrazine

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

4-Bromophenyl-Phe- EPA 8270B nyl Ether

10.0 ug!L

None

Phenacetin

EPA 8270B

20.0 ug!L

None

Hexachlorobenzene EPA8270B

10.0 ug!L

I ug!L

4-Aminobiphenyl EPA8270B

20.0 ug!L

None

Pentachlorophenol EPA8270B

50.0 ug!L

l.Oug!L

Pronamide

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

Pentachloronitrobenzene

EPA8270B

20.0 ug!L

None

Phenanthrene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug!L

None

A-11

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (continued) (Screens #8 and #9)

Parameter

Test Method

Minimum

Primary Maximum

Detection Limit Contaminant Level

Anthracene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Di-N-Butyl Phthalate

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Fluoranthene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Benzidine

EPA 8270B

80.0 ug/L

None

Pyrene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

P-Dimethylaminoazobenzene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

N-

EPA 8270B

butylbenzylphthalate

10.0 ug/L

None

Benzo (a) Anthracene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

3,3-

EPA 8270B

Dichlorobenzidine

20.0 ug/L

None

Chrysene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Bis(2-Ethyl-hexyl) EPA 8270B Phthalate

10.0 ug/L

6 ug/L

Di-N-Octyl Phthalate

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Benzo ( B)Fluoranthene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Benzo (K)Fluoranthene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

7, 12-Dimethylbenz EPA 8270B (A)Anthracene

10.0 ug/L

None

Benzo (A)Pyrene EPA8270B

10.0 ug/L

0.2ug/L

3-Methylcholanthrene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Dibenz(A,J)Acridine EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

A-12

SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (continued) (Screens #8 and #9)

Parameter

Test Method

Minimum

Primary Maximum

Detection Limit Contaminant Level

Indeno(l ,2,3-CD)Pyrene

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Dibenz(A.H)Anthra- EPA 8270B cene

10.0 ug/L

None

Benzo(GHI)Perylene

EPA8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

a-BHC

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

'Y-BHC (Lindane) EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

0.2 ug/L

5-BHC

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

~-BHC

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Heptachlor

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

0.4ug!L

Aldrin

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Heptachlor Epoxide EPA 8270B

25.0 ug/L

0.2ug/L

Endosulfan 1

EPA 8270B

50.0 ug/L

None

Dieldrin

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

P,P'-DDE

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Endrin

EPA 8270B

20.0 ug/L

2.0 ug!L

Endosulfan 2

EPA 8270B

50.0 ug/L

None

P,P'-DDD

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Endrin Aldehyde EPA8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

Endosulfan Sulfate EPA 8270B

25.0 ug/L

None

P,P'-DDT

EPA 8270B

10.0 ug/L

None

A-13

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (Screens #7 and#JO)

Parameter

Test Method

Method Detection Primary Maximum

Limit

Contaminant Level

Dichlorodifluoromethane

EPA8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

Chloromethane EPA 8260A

10.0 ug/L

None

Bromomethane EPA 8260A

10.0 ug/L

None

Chloroethane

EPA 8260A

10.0 ug/L

None

Vinyl Chloride

EPA 8260A

10.0 ug/L

2.0 ug/L

Diehloromethane EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

5.0 ug/L

Trichlorofluoromethane

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

Acetone

EPA 8260A

100 ug/L

None

Dibromomethane EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

Trans-1,2Dichloroethylene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

100 ug/L

Iodomethane

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

Carbon Disulfide EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

1, 1-Dichloroethylene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

7.0 ug/L

1, 1-Dichloroethane EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

Cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethylene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

70.0 ug/L

2,2-Dichloropropane EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

Bromochloromethane

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

Chloroform

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

100 ug/L*

1, 1-Dichloropropylene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

1,2-Dichloroethane EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

5.0 ug/L

A-14

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (continued) (Screens #7 and#JO)

Parameter

Test Method

Method Detection Primary Maximum

Limit

Contaminant Level

Methyl Ethyl Ketone EPA 8260A

100 ug/L

None

I, I, 1-Trichloroethane

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

200 ug/L

Carbon Tetrachloride EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

5.0 ug!L

Vinyl Acetate

EPA 8260A

50 ug!L

None

Bromodichloromethane

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

100 ug/L*

I,2-Dichloropropane EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

5.0 ug!L

Trichloroethylene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

5.0 ug!L

Benzene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

5.0 ug!L

2-Chloroethyl Vinyl EPA 8260A Ether

5.0 ug/L

None

Cis- I,3-

EPA 8260A

Dichloropropylene

5.0 ug/L

None

Trans-1,3-

EPA 8260A

Dichloropropylene

5.0 ug/L

None

Chlorodibromomethane

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

IOO ug!L*

1, I,2.:. Trichloroethane

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

5.0 ug!L

Bromoform

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

100 ug/L*

I,2,3-Trichloropropane

EPA8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

Methyl Isobutyl Ketone

EPA 8260A

50 ug!L

None

Methyl N-butyl Ketone

EPA8260A

50 ug!L

None

Tetrachloroethylene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

5.0 ug!L

A-15

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (continued) (Screens #7 and# 10)

Parameter

Test Method

Method Detection Primary Maximum

Limit

Contaminant Level

1,2-Dichloropropane EPA8260A

5.0 ug!L

5.0 ug!L

1,1 ,2,2,-Tetrachloroethane

EPA8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

Toluene

EPA8260A

5.0 ug!L

1000 ug!L

I,2-Dibromoethane EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

Ethylene dibromide EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

0.05 ug!L

Chlorobenzene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

100 ug!L

Ethylbenzene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

700 ug!L

I, I, I,2-Tetrachloroethane

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

Styrene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

100 ug!L

Xylenes (total)

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

10,000 ug!L

Isopropylbenzene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

Bromobenzene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

N-Propylbenzene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

2-Chlorotoluene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

4-Chlorotoluene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

Tert-Butylbenzene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

Sec-Butylbenzene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

1,3-Dichlorobenzene EPA 8260A (m)

5.0 ug!L

None

1,4-Isopropyltoluene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug!L

None

A-16

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (continued) (Screens # 7 and# 10)

Parameter

Test Method

Method Detection Primary Maximum

Limit

Contaminant Level

1,4-Dichlorobenzene EPA 8260A (p)

5.0 ug!L

75.0 ug/L

N-Butylbenzene EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

1,2-Dichlorobenzene EPA 8260A (o)

5.0 ug/L

600 ug/L

1,2-Dibromo-3Chloropropane

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

0.2ug/L

1,2,4Trichlorobenzene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

70.0 ug!L

Hexachlorobutadi- EPA 8260A ene

5.0 ug!L

None

Naphthalene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

1,2,3Trichlorobenzene

EPA 8260A

5.0 ug/L

None

* Indicates a trihalomethane compound. The primary MCL for total trihalomethanes zs 100
ug!L.

Parameter Mercury (Hg)

MERCURY

Test Method

Method Detection Limit

EPA 245.2

0.2 ug/L

Primary Maximum Contaminant Level
2.0 ug/L

A-17

Table A-3. 1995 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

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 mgNIL mho/em ugll

WeiiiD#

GWN-K1
GWN-K2
GWN-K3
)>
...I ....
(X) GWN-K5
GWN-K6
GWN-K7
GWN-K8
GWN-K8

4.30 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

2.6

5U

2.9

1.1

Englehard Kaolin Company #2

Wilkinson

1995/05/10

4.53

1.9

5U

1.3

1U

Well Name:

Irwinton #2

County:

Wilkinson

Date Sampled: 1995/05/11

5.99

2.3

5U

17

1.4

Well Name:

Sandersville #76

County:

Washington

Date Sampled: 1995/05/10

3.80

2.0

5U

1U

1U

Well Name:

Richmond County#101

County:

Richmond

Date Sampled: 1995/05/20

5.44

3.3

5U

4.1

1U

Well Name:

J.M. Huber#6

County:

Twiggs

Date Sampled: 1995/05/11

4.93

1.9

5U

1.8

1U

Well Name:

Jones County #4

County:

Jones

Date Sampled: 1995/05/10

6.41

2.5

5U

30

1.3

Well Name:

Mohawk Carpet #3

County:

Laurens

Date Sampled: 1995/02/23

6.87

2.9

5U

39

1.7

Well Name:

Mohawk Carpet #3

County:

Laurens

Date Sampled: 1995/12/19

19

13

77

50

1800

2.4

0.1U 19.65 0.3

69 Be=0.8

Y=26

Zn=39

10U

10U

43

10U

67

2.04 0.1U 3.71

0.3

29

55

24

420

33

sou

2.29

0.1U

7.51

0.2U

105

10U

10U

20U

10U

sou

1.73 0.1U

2U

0.9

20 dimethyl

phthalate=22.7

50

15

20U

10U

sou

2.51

0.1U 4.26 0.2U

45 Zn=26

11

13

20U

10U sou 2.38 0.1U

2U

0.2U

23

120

79

3900

48

sou

1.93 0.103 11.5 0.2U

179

170

78

2600

32

130

2.00

0.12 13.14 0.2U

269

Other Tests
b,c b,c,v a,b,c,d,v b,c,s,v v b,c v v

Table A-3 (Continued). 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Cretaceous Aquifer System.

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Sa

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-K9

4.40

1.2

su

1U

Well Name:

Marshallville #1

County:

Macon

Date Sampled: 199S/OS/11

GWN-K10

4.33

3.2

su

1.3

Well Name:

Fort. Valley #1

County:

Peach

Date Sampled: 199S/02/22

GWN-K10

4.8S

3.8

su

1.3

Well Name:

Fort. Valley #1

)>
..I....

County: Date Sampled:

Peach 199S/11/02

<.0 GWN-K11A

4.1S

1.7

su

1U

Well Name:

Warner Robins #2

County:

Houston

Date Sampled: 199S/02/22

GWN-K11A

4.91

2.0

su

1U

Well Name:

Warner Robins #2

County:

Houston

Date Sampled: 199S/11/02

GWN-K12

4.77 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

1.7

su

1U

Perry/Holiday Inn Well

Houston

199S/02/22

GWN-K12

4.0S Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

1.S

su

1U

Perry/Holiday Inn Well

Houston

199S/11/02

GWN-K13

9.13

44

su

2.2

Well Name:

Omaha#1

County:

Stewart

Date Sampled: 199S/01/06

1U

10U

10U

460

10U

470

1.S3 0.1U 7.99 0.2U

46

1U

10U

10U

20U

10U

sou

3.18 0.1U

2U

1.4

33

1U

10U

10U

20U

10U

sou

3.3S 0.1U

1.27

1.4

30

1U

10U

10U

20U

10U

sou

1.S8 0.1U

2U

0.7

20

1U

10U

10U

71

10U

sou

1.S4 0.1U 1.14

0.8

17

1U

10U

10U

240

12

3SO

1.69 0.1U 7.87 0.2U

44 Zn=110

1U

10U

10U

160

11

400

1.S8 0.1U 8.6S 0.2U

4S Cu=29

Zn=27

1U

39

10U 20U

10U sou

8.9

0.1U

10U 0.2U

202

Other Tests
b,c,v b,c,v b,c,v b,c a,b,c,d,v a,b,c,d,v

Table A-3 (Continued). 1995 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 Con d. 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

9.03

46

su

2.3

1U

Well Name:

Omaha#1

County:

Stewart

Date Sampled: 199S/OS/11

GWN-K16

S.62 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

4.4

su

1U

1U

Packaging Corp. Amer. North Well

Bibb

199S/02/22

GWN-K16

S.27

4.7

su

1U

1U

Well Name:

Packaging Corp. Amer. North Well

County:

Bibb

)>
I

Date Sampled: 199S/11/02

1\.)

0

GWN-K18A

4.98

1.4

su

1.3

1U

Well Name:

Buena Vista #6

County:

Marion

Date Sampled: 199S/OS/11

GWN-K19

4.88

1.4

su

1U

1U

Well Name:

Hephzibah Murphy St. Well

County:

Richmond

Date Sampled: 1995/06/21

42

10U 20U

10U

10U 20U

10U

10U

140

10U

10U

3S

10U

10U

20U

sou 10U

8.2S 0.1U 6.68 0.2U 202

10U

sou

2.1S 0.1U 2.49

0.4

27 Zn=24

10U sou 2.0S 0.1U 2.12

0.4

22 Cu=36

10U sou

1.48 0.1U 3.S7 0.2U

24

10U sou 1.64 0.1U

2U

0.2U

17

other Screens Tested
b,c,v b,c,v b,c,v b,c,v

Table A-4. 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Providence Aquifer System.

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe

Mn

AI

Cl

F

504 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-PD3

8.37

79

SU

6.1

1.0

97

10U 20U 10U sou

9.7

O.SU

10U 0.2U

368

Well Name:

Ft. Gaines#2

County:

Clay

Date Sampled:

199S/01/06

GWN-PD3

8.S2

81

SU

6.2

1U

96

10U

20U

10U

sou

9.86

0.61

9.96

0.2U

334

Well Name:

Ft.Gaines#2

County:

Clay

Date Sampled:

199S/09128

)>
I
"'--"

Other Screens Tested

Table A-5. 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Clayton Aquifer System.

PARAMETER

pH

Na

K

Ca

Mg

Sr

Ba

Fe

Mn

AI

Cl

F

504 Nitrate/ Spec. Other

Nitrite Con d. 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-CT2A

7.93 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

6.7

SU

40

3.0

Burton Thomas Residence Well

Sumter

199S/01/06

GWN-CT2A

7.90 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

6.1

SU

39

2.9

Burton Thomas Residence Well

Sumter

199S/10/18

GWN-CT3

7.80

7.7

SU

39

4.2

Well Name:

Dawson Crawford St. Well

County:

Terrell

)>
I

Date Sampled: 199S/01/04

1\)

1\) GWN-CT3

7.77

7.3

SU

38

4.1

Well Name:

Dawson Crawford St. Well

County:

Terrell

Date Sampled: 199S/10/18

GWN-CTSA

7.68

2.6

SU

4S

3.9

Well Name:

Cuthbert#3

County:

Randolph

Date Sampled: 199S/01/04

GWN-CTSA

7.68

2.0

SU

42

3.8

Well Name:

Cuthbert#3

County:

Randolph

Date Sampled: 199S/10/18

280

10U

320

260

10U

320

410

10U

37

400

10U

32

1SO

16

110

1SO

1S

170

10U sou

3.4

O.SU 10U 0.2U 243 Zn=31

10U

sou

1.34

0.1U 17.26 0.2U

229 Zn=30

10U sou

4.0

O.SU 14.7 0.2U 2SO

10U

sou

1.78

0.1U 12.S8 0.2U

232

3S

sou 1.87 0.1U 11.2 0.2U 247

33

sou

1.72 0.1U 11.61 0.2U

231

GWN-CT7A

4.60

2.2

SU

4.6

S.8

71

Well Name:

St. John Farm Well

County:

Sumter

Date Sampled: 199S/10/18

30

330

1S

290 10.40 0.2U

2U

7.4

108

GWN-CT8

4.78

2.6

SU

1U

1U

10U

10U 20U

13

sou 3.23 0.1U

2U

0.8

2S

Well Name:

Weathersby house well

County:

Schley

Date Sampled: 199S/09/26

Other Tests
a,b,c screenS a,b,c,d,v
v
v
a,b,c screenS b,c,d,v
b,c,d,v
b,c,d,v

Table A-6. 1995 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 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

1.5

5U

41

1U

96

Unadilla#3

Dooly

1995/04/18 (special followup for excessive F)

12

20U

10U

sou

1.70 0.1U

7.33

0.2

213

GWN-CL2

7.42

1.6

5U

42

1U

100

12

20U

10U

sou

1.73

0.21

8.34

0.2U

194

Well Name:

Unadilla#3

County:

Dooly

Date Sampled: 1995/09/27

GWN-CL4

5.28

52 C6H6=7.20

Well Name:

Plains#3

methyl tert-butyl

County:

Sumter

ether-16

)>
I

Date Sampled: 1995/03/06 (special followup for excessive C6H6)

I\)

w GWN-CL4

4.81

4.2

5U

1.9

1.2

14

17

20U

59

sou 5.83 0.1U

2U

3.0

52 Cu=53

Well Name:

Plains#3

Zn=62

County:

Sumter

C6H6=tr

Date Sampled: 1995/09/27

methyl tert-butyl

GWN-CL6

ether-17.6

7.86

21

su

34

7.6

430

10U

75

10U sou

5U

0.5U

5.2

0.2U

308

Well Name:

Georgia Tubing Company Well

County:

Early

Date Sampled: 1995/01/05

GWN-CL6

7.72

21

5U

34

7.7

430

10U

68

10U

sou

3.71

0.11

3.76 0.2U

283

Well Name:

Georgia Tubing Company Well

County:

Early

Date Sampled: 1995/09/28

GWN-CL8

6.25

2.2

su

11

1.1

41

Well Name:

Flint River Nursery Office Well

County:

Dooly

Date Sampled: 1995/09/27

37

670

51

sou

1.52

0.1U

7.74

0.2U

78 Zn=43

GWN-CL9

7.95

23

5U

24

6.5

350

10U

23

10U

sou

2.43

0.14

6.75

0.2U

227 CHCI3=tr

Well Name:

Newton#3

County:

Baker

Date Sampled: 1995/10/19

Other Tests
c vonly a,b,c,d,v
b,c,v b,c,d,v

Table A-7. 1995 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

7.60

5.1

5U

55

1U

25

Well Name:

Quick house well

County:

Burke

Date Sampled: 1995/08/03

GWN-J2A

6.75

1.5

5U

31

1U

37

Well Name:

Oakwood Village Mobile Home Park #2

County:

Burke

Date Sampled: 1995/06/21

GWN-J3

7.82

9.3

5U

36

Well Name:

Black house well

County:

Emanuel

)>

Date Sampled: 1995/06/21

I

1\)

~ GWN-J4

7.31

3.4

5U

47

Well Name:

Wrightsville #4

County:

Johnson

Date Sampled: 1995/06122

5.7

270

2.3

170

GWN-J5

7.11

3.2

5U

68

2.3

200

Well Name:

Cochran#3

County:

Blackley

Date Sampled: 1995/06/21

GWN-J6

6.07

1.7

5U

27

1U

90

Well Name:

Wrens#3

County:

Jefferson

Date Sampled: 1995/06/22

GWN-J7

4.80

3.9

5U

2.8

1.7

18

Well Name:

Templeton livestock well

County:

Burke

Date Sampled: 1995/06/21

22

37

35

240

650

98

10U

56

10U

110

12

160

27

20U

10U sou 8.Q3 0.1U

2U

2.3

29 sou

0.4

130

sou 6.89 0.1U

2U

0.2U

sou 10U

2.50 0.14 7.11 0.2U

28

sou 2.45

0.2

8.23 0.2U

11

sou 1.81 0.1U 8.23 0.2U

15

sou 6.92 0.1U 2U

3.2

266 Zn=21 146 Zn=220 245 245 329 143 60

GWN-J8

5.9

5U

9.9

1.7

22

45

20U

78

58

Well Name:

Kahn house well

County:

Jefferson

Date Sampled: 1995/08/03

8.7

Be=4.1

Cd=1.8

Zn=55

Other Tests
a,b,c,d,v a,b,c,d,v a,b,c,d,v a,b,c,d a,b,c,d,v a,b,c,d,v a,b,c,d
a,b,c,d

Table A-8. 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan 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#

Other Tests

GWN-PA1

7.96

110

5.1

34

Well Name:

Thunderbolt #1

County:

Chatham

Date Sampled: 1995/09/14

GWN-PA2A

8.11

11

5U

24

Well Name:

Savannah#6

County:

Chatham

Date Sampled: 1995/09/14

GWN-PA4

7.96

56

5U

36

Well Name:

Tybee Island #1

County:

Chatham

)>
~

Date Sampled: 1995/09/14

01 GWN-PA5A

7.99

17

5U

25

Well Name:

Interstate Paper #2

County:

Liberty

Date Sampled: 1995/03/21

GWN-PA6

7.89

15

5U

24

Well Name:

Hinesville#5

County:

Liberty

Date Sampled: 1995/03/22

GWN-PA7

7.98

25

5U

44

Well Name:

Darien #2 South

County:

Mcintosh

Date Sampled: 1995/03/21

GWN-PA8

7.97

18

su

31

Well Name:

ITT Rayonier #4D

County:

Wayne

Date Sampled: 1995/03121

GWN-PA9C

8.67 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

725

15

94

Miller Ball Park TW25

Glynn

1995/03/21

19

410

13

20U

10U

sou 182.56 0.39 24.33 0.2U

857

7.8

280

12

20U

10U

sou

3.99

0.36

5.54

0.2U

225

27

1300 10U

20U

10U

sou 48.57 0.66 148.22 0.2U

662

14

400

30

20U

10U

sou

5.34

0.47

35.3 0.2U

311

v

12

360

24

20U

10U

sou

4.36

0.45

22.6

0.2U

267

v

27

700

53

190

10U

sou

22.2

0.56

127

0.2U

548

v

17

530

75

20U 10U sou

6.8

0.4

51.7

0.2U

359

v

84

2100

53

1400

61

sou 1385 5U

284

0.2U 4800 Zn=50

v

tetrahydrofuran=30

Table A-8 (Continued). 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan 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-PA10B

7.S4

67

su

78

44

Well Name:

Gilman Paper #11

County:

Camden

Date Sampled: 199S/03/22

GWN-PA11

7.67

24

su

72

38

Well Name:

St. Marys#2

County:

Camden

Date Sampled: 199S/03/22

GWN-PA12

7.S1

23

su

68

30

Well Name:

Folkston #3

County:

Charlton

)>

Date Sampled: 199S/03/22

"'0>

GWN-PA13

7.7S

17

su

Well Name:

Waycross#3

42

17

County:

Ware

Date Sampled: 1995/03/22

GWN-PA14

7.92

6.2

su

34

4.9

Well Name:

Statesboro #7

County:

Bulloch

Date Sampled: 199S/06/22

GWN-PA1S

7.88

8.4

su

26

8.S

Well Name:

King Finishing Co. fire well

County:

Screven

Date Sampled: 199S/03/21

GWN-PA16

7.74 s.s

su

4S

3.0

Well Name:

Millen#1

County:

Jenkins

Date Sampled: 199S/03/21

GWN-PA17

7.S7

4.S

su

60

1.9

Well Name:

Swainsboro #7

County:

Emanuel

Date Sampled: 199S/03/21

780

42

20U

10U

sou

116

O.SO

177 0.2U 1016

6SO

37

33

10U

sou

29.9

O.SO

166 0.2U

704

S10

36

71

10U

sou

26.8

0.72

116

0.2U

621

340

7S

20

10U

sou

13.2

0.32

S1.3 0.2U

393

180

28

20U

11

sou 2.72 0.23 S.87 0.2U 219

390

10U

420

10U

sou

2.S4 0.27

7.34 0.2U 236 Zn=120

190

10U

20U

3S

sou 4.79 0.12 8.0S 0.2U 264

170

190

240

26

170 2.74 0.78

2U

0.2U

2S1 Cu=23

Other Tests
v v v v v

Table A-8 (Continued). 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan 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-PA18

7.88

11

5U

30

3.3

Well Name:

Metter #2

County:

Candler

Date Sampled: 1995/03/22

GWN-PA19

7.86

11

5U

45

19

Well Name:

Douglas#4

County:

Coffee

Date Sampled: 1995/04/05

GWN-PA20

7.96

4.8

5U

44

16

Well Name:

Lakeland#2

County:

Lanier

1>

Date Sampled: ; 1 1995/04/04

1...\_.). GWN-PA21A

7.95

2.9

5U

36

8.6

Well Name:

Valdosta New #4

County:

Lowndes

Date Sampled: ; 1995/04/04

GWN-PA22

7.86

7.6

5U

44

20

Well Name:

Thomasville #6

County:

Thomas

Date Sampled: 1995/04/04

GWN-PA23

7.72

14

5U

35

1.6

Well Name:

Cairo#8

County:

Grady

Date Sampled: 1995/04/04

GWN-PA24

8.26

2.1

5U

38

3.5

Well Name:

Bainbridge #1

County:

Decatur

Date Sampled: 1995/04/18

GWN-PA25

7.94

3.9

5U

55

1U

Well Name:

Donalsonville 7th Street Well

County:

Seminole

Date Sampled: 1995/04/18

240

25

20U

59

50U

3.50

0.19

3.98

0.2U

217

450

56

63

27

50U

7.40

0.30

78.0 0.2U

357

190

28

20U

10U

50U

3.32

0.27

61.0 0.2U

406

120

15

20U

20

50U

2.87

0.20

30.9 0.2U

256

330

24

20U

10U

50U

6.56

0.40

71.0 0.2U

396

370

130

60

10U

50U

6.99

0.31

45.3 0.2U

354 Mo=29

37

10U

20U

10U

50U

3.03 0.1U

2U

1.3

182

23

10U

20U

10U

50U

4.43 0.1U

2U

1.4

235

Other Tests
v v v
a,b,c,d,v a,b,c,d,v

Table A-8 (Continued). 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan 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-PA26

8.09

2.3

5U

44

Well Name:

Colquitt#3

County:

Miller

Date Sampled: 1995/04/18

GWN-PA27

8.02

1.9

5U

42

Well Name:

Camilla New Well

County:

Mitchell

Date Sampled: 1995/04/19

GWN-PA28

8.06

27

5U

38

Well Name:

Moultrie#1

County:

Colquitt

)>
I

Date Sampled: 1995/04/04

"'(X) GWN-PA29

7.81

3.4

5U

42

Well Name:

Adel#6

County:

Cook

Date Sampled: 1995/04/04

GWN-PA30

7.88 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

4.9

5U

40

Amoco/Nashville Mills #2

Berrien

1995/04/04

GWN-PA31

7.35

2.6

5U

42

Well Name:

Tifton #6

County:

Tift

Date Sampled: 1995/04/05

GWN-PA32

7.87

2.5

5U

33

Well Name:

Ocilla#3

County:

Irwin

Date Sampled: 1995/04/05

GWN-PA33A

7.90

2.6

5U

32

Well Name:

Fitzgerald Well G

County:

Ben Hill

Date Sampled: 1995/04/05

1U

17

10U

20U

10U

sou

3.17 0.1U

2U

1.7

188

1.1

32

10U

20U

10U

sou

2.36 0.1U

2U

0.2

180 dimethyl

phthalate=tr

21

2100

93

20U

10U

sou

9.11

0.52

118

0.2U

484

14

280

13

66

33

sou 3.17 0.24 45.3 0.2U 325

16

220

54

35

sou 10U

4.10 0.29 62.1 0.2U 338

8.0

260

66

20U 10U sou 2.24 0.15

2U

0.2U

267

4.8

150

77

130

28

sou 2.31 0.10

2U

0.2U 196

5.9

180

330

20U

10U sou 3.10 0.45

2U

0.2U 208 CHC13=8.04

CHBrCI2=tr

Other Tests a,b,c,d,v a,b,c,d,s,v v v
v v

Table A-8 (Continued). 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan 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-PA34 GWN-PA35

7.33 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:
7.64 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

5.2

su

49

McRae Telfair Ave. Well

Telfair

1995/02/23

6.0

su

29

MI. Vernon New Well

Montgomery

1995/02/23

GWN-PA3S

7.94

6.1

SU

27

Well Name:

Mt. Vernon New Well

County:

Montgomery

)>
I

Date Sampled: 199S/12/20

I'V

<0 GWN-PA36

7.90

13

SU

27

Well Name:

Vidalia#1

County:

Toombs

Date Sampled: 199S/02123

GWN-PA36

8.06

11

SU

27

Well Name:

Vidalia#1

County:

Toombs

Date Sampled: 199S/12120

GWN-PA38

7.49

2.2

SU

43

Well Name:

Eastman#4

County:

Dodge

Date Sampled: 199S/02/23

GWN-PA38

7.76

2.1

SU

42

Well Name:

Eastman#4

County:

Dodge

Date Sampled: 199S/12/20

GWN-PA39

7.68

3.S

SU

46

Well Name:

Sylvester #1

County:

Worth

Date Sampled: 199S/04/17

9.7

660

260

180

100 sou 4.91

0.2

3.94

0.2U

324

12

440

90

63

30

sou

3.37

0.36

7.64 0.2U

191

12

460

89

60

29

sou

3.37

0.34

7.73

0.2U

277

S.1

340

1SO

24

32

sou

4.78

0.88

3.91

0.2U

231

S.1

3SO

140

21

36

sou

3.66

0.27

3.70

0.2U

261 Cu=29

1.3

8S

110

20U

10U sou 2.23 0.1U

2U

0.3

227

1.3

89

110

20U

10U

sou

2.21

0.1U 1.33

0.3

202 Cu=30

7.1

3SO

190

20U

10U sou

2.44

0.19

2.06

0.2U

306

Other Tests v
v a,b,c,d,v

Table A-8 (Continued). 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan 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-PA40

7.79

2.6

su

57

1.1

Well Name:

Merck and Co. #8

County:

Worth

Date Sampled: 1995/04/19

GWN-PA43A

7.70

2.4

su

48

1U

Well Name:

Pineland Fish Farm office well

County:

Baker

Date Sampled: 1995/10/19

GWN-PA44

7.73

2.4

su

30

4.1

Well Name:

Sycamore#2

County:

Turner

)>
w I

Date Sampled: 1995/04/05

0

GWN-PA45A

7.61

1.9

su

52

1U

Well Name:

Abbeville#1

County:

Wilcox

Date Sampled: 1995/04/05

GWN-PA49

7.58

1.9

su

40

1U

Well Name:

Harmony Church well

County:

Dooly

Date Sampled: 1995/04/05

GWN-PASO

7.43

3.2

su

59

1.3

Well Name:

Reynolds house well

County:

Laurens

Date Sampled: 1995/08/02

GWN-PA51

7.68

2.6

su

45

1U

Well Name:

J.L. Adams house well

County:

Mitchell

Date Sampled: 1995/09128

GWN-PA52

8.14

2.4

su

38

1U

Well Name:

James Simmons house well

County:

Mitchell

Date Sampled: 1995/04120

48

16

sou 20U

10U

3.37 0.1U

2U

1.6

313

31

10U

20U

10U

sou

5.04

0.1U

1.20

2.3

246

270

140

20U

10U sou 1.98 0.18

2U

0.2U 188

63

68

20U

10U sou

2.41

0.1U

2U

0.4

267

24

19

20U

10U

sou

2.58 0.1U

2U

1.7

209 Zn=56

160

39

36

sou 10U

4.11 0.1U 5.10

1.3

248

19

10U

20U

10U

sou

3.09 0.1U

2U

1.0

210

22

10U 20U

10U sou 3.94 0.1U

2U

3.3

205 Zn=45

Other Tests
v a,b,c,d,v v v a,b,c,d a,b,c,d,v a,b,c a,b,c,d

Table A-8 (Continued). 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Floridan 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-PA53 GWN-PA55

7.82 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:
7.93 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

2.8

su

39

Lorene Cato house well

Decatur

1995/09/28

4.0

su

48

W.A. Holland house well

Burke

1995/08/03

1U

24

11

20U

10U 50U 3.09 0.1U

2U

4.6

195 Zn=34

2.3

220

160

20U

10U

sou

2.26 0.1U

4.71

0.2U

242

other Tests
a,b,c
a,b,c,v

Table A-9. 1995 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 Con d. 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 GWN-MI2

8.03

6.9

5U

24

Well Name:

McMillan house well

County:

Cook

Date Sampled: 1995/05/10

5.79

2.6

5U

3.1

Well Name:

Boutwell house well

County:

Lowndes

Date Sampled: 1995/05/10

14

120

20

20U

25

sou

2.66

0.35

3.64

0.2U

235 Bi=35

1U

10U 10U 20U

10U sou 2.85 0.1U

2U

0.2U

36 dimethyl

phthalate=tr

GWN-MI5

5.31

5.4

5U

4.5

1.2

21

Well Name:

Carter house well

County:

Appling

)>
w I

Date Sampled: 1995/06122

1\.) GWN-MI7

4.26

6.3

5U

5.8

5.1

57

Well Name:

Chaudoin house well

County:

Irwin

Date Sampled: 1995/11/21

57

22

71

50 11.30 0.1U 2.73

1.7

74 Zn=40

93

20U

16

760

12.8 0.12

1U

10.8

142

GWN-M18A

4.33

5.3

5U

6.8

6.4

69

160

66

Well Name:

Barry house well

County:

Colquitt

Date Sampled: 1995/11121

62

1400 17.2 0.1U

1U

12.3 168 Ti=12

Zn=49

CHCI3=tr

GWN-M19A

5.64

6.2

5U

7.3

4.2

52

42

87

16

140

7.72 0.1U 3.68

7.7

110

Well Name:

Murphy garden well

County:

Thomas

Date Sampled: 1995/11/21

GWN-M110B

8.4

5U

9.3

6.3

90

210

320

150

sou 2.81

0.34 2.12 0.2U 122

Well Name:

Calhoun house well

County:

Colquitt

Date Sampled: 1995/11/21

GWN-MI15

4.52

1.7

5U

10

7.7

92

Well Name:

Aldrich house well

County:

Bulloch

Date Sampled: 1995/06/22

53

20U

13

220 8.77 0.1U

2U

13.8 138

Other Tests
a,b,c,d,v a,b,c,d,s,v a,b,c a,b,c,v a,b,c,d,v a,b,c a,b,c,d,v a,b,c,d

Table A-1 0. 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Piedmont/Blue 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#

GWN-BR1B

6.82

3.1

su

10

3.3

46

110

20U

20

sou

1U

0.1U 14.07 0.2U

96 Zn=150

Well Name:

Young Harris New Well

County:

Towns

Date Sampled:

1995/08/25

GWN-BR2A

5.70

3.8

5U

3.4

1.4

36

46

35

19

sou 3.25 0.1U

2U

1.2

48

Well Name:

Notla Water Auth. #3

County:

Union

Date Sampled:

1995/07/20

GWN-BR3A

5.33

4.4

5U

2.6

1.2

20

24

20U

64

84

4.94 0.1U

2U

1.7

50

Well Name:

Dawsonville City Spring

County:

Dawson

)>
wwI

GWN-BR4

Date Sampled: 6.12

1995/07/20

6.7

5U

10

2.1

85

10U

20U

10U

sou

3.84

0.06

1.65

2.0

108

Well Name:

Morganton Old Well

County:

Fannin

Date Sampled:

1994/08/02

GWN-P1B

6.39

9.3

5U

7.8

2.5

96

10U 2200

62

sou 5.08 0.133 16.7 0.2U 118

Well Name:

Luthersville New Well

County:

Meriwether

Date Sampled: 1995/01/03

GWN-P1B

6.24

9.3

5U

7.6

2.4

93

10U 2100

60

sou 5.61 0.1U 15.64 0.2U 114

Well Name:

Luthersville New Well

County:

Meriwether

Date Sampled: 1995/05/24

GWN-P2

6.51

9.6

5U

12

1.6

90

Well Name:

Riverdale Delta Drive Well

County:

Clayton

Date Sampled: 1995/05/23

GWN-P4C

6.34

7.7

5U

7.2

1.2

70

Well Name:

Barton Brands #3

County:

Fulton

Date Sampled: 1995/05/23

30

300

23

50U

3.2

0.1U

2U

19

20U

10U sou

1.6

0.4

2U

1.8

113 Zn=28

1.6

86

Other Tests v v
v

Table A-10 (Continued). 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the PiedmonUBiue 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#

GWN-PS

7.07

1.9

su

23

Well Name:

Flowery Branch #1

County:

Hall

Date Sampled: 199S/02/08

GWN-PS

6.94

3.3

su

24

Well Name:

Flowery Branch #1

County:

Hall

Date Sampled: 199S/12/06

GWN-P6B

7.39

8.0

su

18

Well Name:

Shiloh #1

County:

Harris

)>
w I

Date Sampled: 199S/OS/12

~

GWN-P7

6.22

7.6

su

11

Well Name:

Hampton#6

County:

Henry

Date Sampled: 199S/OS/24

GWN-P8

6.6S

9.S

su

31

Well Name:

Wayne Poultry #4

County:

Jackson

Date Sampled: 199S/02/08

GWN-P8

6.81

11.0

su

30

Well Name:

Wayne Poultry #4

County:

Jackson

Date Sampled: 199S/12/06

GWN-P9

6.33

1S

su

19

Well Name:

Gray#4

County:

Jones

Date Sampled: 199S/OS/10

GWN-P10A

6.34

8.2

su

13

Well Name:

Franklin Springs #4

County:

Franklin

Date Sampled: 199S/02/08

4.0

8S

29

20U 10U sou

0.4

141

3.9

8S

28

20U

10U sou 1.36 0.1U 1.87

O.S

1SO

2.S

44

10U

120

99

sou

1.88

0.4S

S.60

0.2U

143 Bi=38

4.1

63

48

21

10U sou

2.1

0.1U

4.0

0.3

116

9.8

84

10U 20U 10U sou

0.2U 244

9.3

80

10U 20U

10U sou 17.1 0.1S S.7S

0.3

2S3

8.6

140

46

990

1SO

sou

8.08

0.1U 38.S4 0.2U

239 Zn=41

6.1

140

11

19000 120 1000

0.2U

1S0.8 Be=3.4 Zn=320

Other Tests
v v
v v v
10

Table A-10 (Continued). 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Piedmont/Blue 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 Tests

GWN-P10A

6.37

7.8

5U

12

5.3

120

15 81000 160 2900 4.12 0.28 65.2 0.2U 162 Be=4.3

v

Well Name:

Franklin Springs #4

Cd=0.3

County:

Franklin

Zn=650

Date Sampled: 1995/12/05

GWN-P11A

6.43

6.8

5U

12

5.8

34

11

140 23 sou

Well Name:

Danielsville #3

County:

Madison

Date Sampled: 1995/02/08

0.2

126

GWN-P11A

6.72

6.8

5U

11

5.4

33

10

170

22

sou

2.72 0.1U 6.89

0.3

132

)>

Well Name:

Danielsville #3

w I
01

County: Date Sampled:

Madison 1995/12/05

GWN-P12A

7.16

36

5U

15

2.4

150

10U

20U

20

sou

9.80

4.15 24.11 0.2U

238 Zn=21

Well Name:

Indian Spring

County:

Butts

Date Sampled: 1995/05/25

GWN-P13A

5.60

6.7

5U

4.4

1.1

38

30

20U 10U sou 7.99 0.1U

2U

0.7

69

Well Name:

Covington/Academy Spring

County:

Newton

Date Sampled: 1995/05/25

GWN-P14

4.95

1.7

5U

1U

1U

10U

29

20U 10U sou 1.70 0.1U

2U

0.4

20

Well Name:

Upson County Sunset Village well

County:

Upson

Date Sampled: 1995/05/24

GWN-P15A

6.79

8.1

5U

19

4.4

94

56

420

81

sou 6.70

0.1

6.86 0.2U 179 Cd=0.5

v

Well Name:

Bolton garden well

Zn=320

County:

DeKalb

Date Sampled: 1995/05/23

GWN-P16C

6.46

2.8

5U

8.2

1.6

48

10U

830

67

sou

1U

0.1U 7.32 0.2U

64 Zn=55

v

Well Name:

Mt. Airy#4

vinyl chloride=20.2

County:

Habersham

1,1 ,2-trichloro-

Date Sampled: 1995/07/19

ethane=8.58

Table A-1 0 (Continued). 1995 Ground-Water Quality Analyses of the Piedmont/Blue 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#

GWN-P16C

6.36

3.6

SU

7.7

1.6

Well Name:

Mt.Airy#4

County:

Habersham

Date Sampled: 199S/12/0S

GWN-P17

7.SS

8.2

SU

2S

2.1

Well Name:

Oconee County Hillcrest #2

County:

Oconee

Date Sampled: 199S/12/0S

49

10U 1600

68

sou 0.98 0.1U 7.76 0.2U

68

130

10U

420

120

sou

2.7S

0.10 12.80 0.2U

168 Zn=34

)>
I
~

Other Tests
v
a,b,c,d,v

Table A-11. 1995 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#

GWN-VR1

7.83 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

1.9 su

29

14

Floyd County Kingston Rd, Well

Floyd

1995/07/27

1S

10U

20U

10U sou 1.82 0.1U

2U

0.6

190

GWN-VR3

7.S2

1.8

su

29

12

24

74

74

10U

140

1.60 0.1U 2.6S

0.7

202

Well Name:

Chickamauga Crawfish Spring

County:

Walker

Date Sampled: 199S/07/28

GWN-VR4

7.21

6.3

su

110

23

6SO

180

1SO

29

sou

Well Name:

Coats-American #3

County:

Walker

)>

Date Sampled: 199S/07128

w..I.... GWN-VRS

7.21

Well Name:

Chattooga County #4

County:

Chattooga

Date Sampled: 199S/03/07 (special, screen #10 only)

34.3

0.2U

83S

methyl-tert-butyl ether=40 methyl-tert-amyl ether-2.4

GWN-VRS

7.2S

S.S

su

83

3.7

170

100

20U

10U

sou

7.77 0.1U 3.84

3.2

345 methyl-tert-butyl

Well Name:

Chattooga County #4

ether-26.7

County:

Chattooga

Date Sampled: 1995/07/27

GWN-VRS

7.26

5.4

su

69

3.S

160

97

20U

10U

sou

7.34 0.1U 4.68

3.1

38S

Well Name:

Chattooga County #4

County:

Chattooga

Date Sampled: 1995/12/07

GWN-VR6

7.86 Well Name: County: Date Sampled:

5.7

su

30

16

Chemical Products Corp. East Well

Bartow

1995/07127

160

580

20U

10U

sou

3.7S 0.1U 4.99

0.8

218 tetrachloroethylene=tr

GWN-VR7

7.71

1.4

su

28

13

23

34

20U

10U sou

1.23 0.1U

2U

0.3

200

Well Name:

Adairsville/Lewis Spring

County:

Bartow

Date Sampled: 199S/07/27

other Tests
v v v v v v v v

Table A-11 (Continued). 1995 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

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-VR8

7.SS 1.7 SU

28

13

17

sou 12 20U 10U

1.S6 0.1U 2.11 0.6

21S

Well Name:

Cedartown Spring

County:

Polk

Date Sampled: 199S/07/26

GWN-VR9

7.S7 1.6 SU

34

12

22

11

sou 20U 10U

1.96 0.1U 2.13 0.7

218

Well Name:

Polk County #2

County:

Polk

Date Sampled: 199S/07/26

)>
w I
(X)

Other Tests
v
v

Copies: 100 Cost: $579.00
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.