\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 ::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.