EPA-600/3-77-012
January 1977
Ecological Research Series
GROUNDWATER POLLUTION PROBLEMS IN THE
SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ada, Oklahoma 74820
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH series. This series
describes research on the effects of pollution on humans, plant and animal spe-
cies, and materials. Problems are assessed for their long- and short-term influ-
ences. Investigations include formation, transport, and pathway studies to deter-
mine the fate of pollutants and their effects. This work provides the technical basis
for setting standards to minimize undesirable changes in living organisms in the
aquatic, terrestrial, and atmospheric environments.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/3-77-012
January 1977
GROUND-WATER POLLUTION PROBLEMS
IN THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
by
John C. Miller
Paul S. Hackenberry
Frank A. DeLuca
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Port Washington, New York 11050
Contract No. 68-03-2193
Project Officer
Marion R. Scalf
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
Ada, Oklahoma 74820
ROBERT S. KERR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ADA, OKLAHOMA 74820
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Robert S. Kerr Environmental
Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names
or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.
11
-------
ABSTRACT
An evaluation of ground-water contamination problems has
been carried out in seven states in the southeast: Alabama,
Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina
and Virginia. Ground water supplies 46 percent of the total
water withdrawn in the region, with the major pumpage in
Florida. At least 90 percent of the population of Florida
and Mississippi are dependent upon ground water for drinking
water supplies.
Natural ground-water quality is good to excellent, except
for the presence of saline water in some coastal aquifers.
The most common natural water-quality problems are high
hardness; high iron content; excessive fluoride concentra-
tions; corrosiveness; and the presence of radionuclides.
Principal sources of man-caused ground-water quality prob-
lems in order of their severity are: surface impoundments,
landfills, underground storage of waste fluids and surplus
water, leaks and spills, agricultural activities, mining
activities, and septic tanks. Other sources that appear to
be of less importance but still must be considered include
land disposal of waste waters, miscellaneous unforeseen
sources, ground-water development, petroleum development
activities, natural bodies of surface water, and highway
deicing.
The findings of the investigation indicate that the cases of
ground-water contamination recorded to date and referenced
in this report represent only a very small percentage of
those that actually exist. Basic research is needed on how
to improve methods to inventory and correct problems of
ground-water contamination and how to prevent future prob-
lems through better management and control of activities
that can affect ground-water quality -
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract 68-03-
2193 by Geraghty & Miller, Inc., under the sponsorship of
the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Work was com-
pleted as of July, 1976.
111
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Abstract iii
List of Figures viii
List of Tables xii
Acknowledgments xvii
Sections
I Conclusions 1
II Recommendations 5
III Introduction 7
Use of Ground Water 9
Projections of Ground-Water Use 17
References Cited 20
IV Description of Project Area 22
Physiography 22
Population 27
Climate 27
Geology and Ground-Water Resources 27
Alabama 31
Florida 33
Georgia 40
Mississippi 44
North Carolina 44
South Carolina 51
Virginia 53
References Cited 60
V Natural Ground-Water Quality 65
Introduction 65
Principal Problems of Natural Ground-
Water Quality 67
Hardness 67
Iron 68
v
-------
V Natural Ground-Water Quality (continued)
Fluoride 68
Corrosiveness 70
Radionuclides 70
Base-Line Ground-Water Quality Conditions 72
Alabama 73
Florida 77
Georgia 79
Mississippi 84
North Carolina 89
South Carolina 93
Virginia 97
References Cited 102
VI Sources of Ground-Water Contamination 113
Definition of the Problem 113
Importance of the Resource 114
Technical and Economic Difficulties 116
Health Hazards and Other Effects
of Contamination 119
The Relationship of Ground Water to
Surface Water 130
The Problem of Monitoring 133
Summary 140
Principal Sources of Ground-Water
Contamination 140
Surface Impoundments 148
Landfills 163
Underground Storage of Waste Fluids and
Surplus Waters 176
Leaks and Spills 186
Agricultural Activities 200
Mining Activities 218
Septic Tanks 236
Land Disposal of Waste Water 252
Miscellaneous Sources 270
Ground-Water Development 275
Petroleum Exploration and Development 290
Natural Bodies of Surface Water 297
vx
-------
VI Highway Deicing Salt 305
References Cited 308
VII Research and Other Needs 330
Ground-Water Contamination Trends 330
General Research Needs 332
Specific Needs 335
References Cited 346
VIII Appendix A - Glossary of Terms 347
Appendix B - Abbreviations 356
Appendix C - Conversion Factors 358
Appendix D - Water-Quality Standards 360
Vll
-------
FIGURES
No. Page
1 Location of States in the Southeast Project
Area and Previous EPA Investigations 8
2 Use of Ground Water in 1970 13
3 Comparison of Ground-Water Use to Surface-
Water Use in 1970 14
4 Percent of Total Population Relying on Ground
Water Versus Surface Water for Drinking Water
Supply 16
5 Physiographic Provinces of the Southeastern
States 23
6 Ground-Water Regions in the Southeast
United States 24
7 Hydrogeologic Map of the Southeast United States 26
8 Average Annual Precipitation 29
9 Average Annual Evaporation from Open Water
Surfaces 30
10 Generalized Geologic Map of Alabama 32
11 Generalized Geologic Map of Florida 36
12 Principal Sources of Potable Ground Water in
Florida 37
13 Generalized Geologic Map of Georgia 42
14 Generalized Geologic Map of Mississippi 45
15 Generalized Geologic Map of North Carolina 49
16 Generalized Geologic Map of South Carolina 52
17 Generalized Geologic Map of Virginia 56
18 Depth to Mineralized Ground Water in Major
Aquifers in the Southeast United States 66
-------
FIGURES (Continued)
No. Page
19 Dissolved Solids in Water from the Upper
Part of the Floridan Aquifer in Florida 80
20 Base of the Fresh Ground Water in Aquifers
in Mississippi 88
21 Schematic Drawing of Routes for Ground-
Water Contamination 120
22 Flow Pattern Showing Downward Leaching of
Pollutants from a Stockpile and Movement
Toward a Pumped Well 122
23 Contaminated Ground Water as Caused by Leakage
from a Lagoon and a Basin into a Water-Table
Aquifer Discharging into a River 123
24 Downward Movement of Contaminated Water from
a Leaky Sewer into the Bedding Planes and
Fractures of a Rock Aquifer 124
25 Contaminated Ground Water in Bedding Planes
and Fractures in a Rock Aquifer, Caused by
Leachate from a Landfill 125
26 Movement of Light-Density Fluid in the Ground-
Water System. Contamination Caused by a Spill
of Hydrocarbons 126
27 Diagram Showing Flood Water Entering a Well
Through a Missing or Improperly Installed
Seal on a Well 127
28 Diagram Showing Movement of Contaminants from
a Recharge or Drainage Well and Surface Water
Body to a Nearby Pumping Well 128
29 Diagrams Showing Reversal of Aquifer Leakage
by Pumping 129
30 Plan View and Generalized Hydraulic Profile
Associated with a Landfill 135
31 Diagram Showing an Ineffectual Ground-Water
Monitoring Program Using Only Deep Wells 136
IX
-------
FIGURES (Continued)
No. Page
32 Distribution of Total Industrial Waste Water
Treated in Ponds and Lagoons in the Southeast
Study Area and Associated River Basins, 1968 152
33 Extent of Contaminant Plume in 1972 in the
Sand-and-Gravel Aquifer, Pensacola, Florida 159
34 Schematic Diagram of Well Construction and
Hydrogeologic Section, Belle Glade, Florida 181
35 Major Citrus and Agricultural Areas in
Florida, 1966 209
36 Major Phosphate Rock Mining and Milling Sites
in the Southeast 223
37 Flowsheet, Florida Phosphate Rock Mining and
Benefication 225
38 Flowsheet, Wet-Process Phosphoric Acid
Manufacture 226
39 Idealized Geologic Section thru the Lee Creek
Mine, Beaufort County, North Carolina 231
40 Map Showing the Piezometric Surface of the
Limestone Member of the Castle Hayne Aquifer,
June 1965 232
41 Map Showing the Piezometric Surface of the
Limestone Member of the Castle Hayne Aquifer,
January 1968 233
42 Density of Housing Units Using On-Site
Domestic Waste Disposal Systems 238
43 Disposal of Household Wastes Through a
Convention Septic Tank-Soil Absorption System 241
44 Soil Reactions That Occur When Nitrogen is
Added to Soil 244
45 Methods of Land Disposal of Waste Water 254
46 Soil Type Versus Liquid Loading Rates for
Different Land Disposal Techniques 259
x
-------
FIGURES (Continued)
No. Page
47 Outline of the Effluent Plume Based on Chloride
Concentrations in Ground Water, Tallahassee,
Florida, Spray-Irrigation Site 265
48 Hydrogeologic Section A-A1, Tallahassee,
Florida, Spray-Irrigation Site 266
49 Variation of Nitrate-Nitrogen with Time at
Well 5, Tallahassee, Florida Spray-Irrigation
Site 267
50 Distribution of Mercury in Rural Potable Water
Around Cheraw, South Carolina 272
51 Distribution of Chlorides in the Shallow
Aquifer at La Belle, Florida, 1952-1953 286
52 Chloride Concentrations of Water in Wells at
Highland Estates, Florida 287
53 Decline of Chloride Concentration in Water
Samples from Wells at Highland Estates, Florida,
After Plugging Leaky Artesian Wells 288
54 Salt-Water Contaminant Fronts in Part of the
Pollard Oil Field, Alabama 293
55 Chloride Concentration in Water from Monitoring
Wells at Pollard Oil Field 295
XI
-------
TABLES
No. Page
1 Estimated Use of Water in the Southeast
United States in 1970 10
2 Historical and Projected Trends in Fresh Water
Withdrawal Rates in the United States 18
3 Ground-Water Use, 1965 to 1970 19
4 Population Characteristics 28
5 Geologic Units and Their Characteristics -
Alabama Coastal Plain 34
6 Geologic Units and Their Characteristics in
Florida 38
7 Geologic Units and Their Characteristics -
Georgia Coastal Plain 43
8 Geologic Units and Their Characteristics
in Mississippi 46
9 Geologic Units and Their Characteristics -
North Carolina Coastal Plain 50
10 Geologic Units and Their Characteristics -
South Carolina Coastal Plain 54
11 Lithologic and Water-Bearing Properties of
Consolidated Rocks in Virginia 58
12 Geologic Units and Their Characteristics -
Virginia Coastal Plain 59
13 Household Damages Caused by Use of Mineralized
Surface and Ground Water in 1970 69
14 Tabulation of Selected Chemical Analyses of
Ground Water in Alabama 74
15 Tabulation of Selected Chemical Analyses of
Ground Water in Florida 78
16 Tabulation of Selected Chemical Analyses of
Ground Water in Georgia 81
xii
-------
TABLES (Continued)
No. Page
17 Tabulation of Selected Chemical Analyses of
Ground Water in Mississippi 85
18 Tabulation of Selected Chemical Analyses of
Ground Water in North Carolina 90
19 Tabulation of Selected Chemical Analyses of
Ground Water in South Carolina 94
20 Tabulation of Selected Chemical Analyses of
Ground Water in Virginia 98
21 Number of Wells Drilled in the Southeast
in 1964 115
22 Incidence of Waterborne Disease in the United
States for Untreated Contaminated Ground Water 131
23 Incidence of Waterborne Disease in the United
States, 1946-70, Ground Water (Chlorinated Only):
Treatment Overwhelmed Due to Source Contamination 132
24 Number of On-Site Water Supplies By State for
1970 139
25 Most Common Sources of Contamination Requiring
Water-Supply Well Replacement as Reported by
Selected Well Drillers in the Southeast 141
26 Ranking of the Principal Sources of Ground-
Water Contamination and Their Relative Impact
in the Southeast United States 143
27 Material Flow Estimates of Residential and
Commercial Post-Consumer Net Solid Waste
Disposed of, by Material and Product Categories,
1973 146
28 Estimated Industrial Hazardous Waste Generation
By Census Region in Tonnes (tons) per Year for
1970 149
29 Representative Hazardous Substances Within
Industrial Waste Streams 150
xiii
-------
TABLES (Continued)
No. Page
30 Industrial Waste Water Parameters Having or
Indicating Significant Ground-Water Contamina-
tion Potential 155
31 Summary of Case Histories from Surface
Impoundments in the Southeast 157
32 Land Disposal Sites in the Southeast 165
33 Leachate Control Methods 168
34 Comparison of the Chemical Characteristics
of Leachate from an Operating Section and a
Twenty-Year Old Abandoned Section of a Landfill
in Southeastern Pennsylvania 169
35 Waste Products Injected at Permitted
Facilities in the Southeast 178
36 Estimated Volume of Hydrocarbons Spilled or
Leaked and Recovered in the Southeast in 1975 190
37 Estimated Volume of Hazardous Materials Spilled
or Leaked and Recovered in the Southeast
in 1975 191
38 Petroleum Product Spills and Leaks in North
Carolina in 1974 192
39 Nitrate-Nitrogen Concentrations in Water-Table
Samples from Four Excessively Fertilized Plots
in Florence, South Carolina 202
40 Nitrate-Nitrogen Concentrations from Tile Line
Effluents in Actively Cropped Fields Near
Hartsville, South Carolina 203
41 Nitrogen Balance for the Two Fertilized North
Carolina Coastal Plain Study Sites 205
42 Organic Pesticides Commonly Used in 1966 to
Control Major Citrus and Vegetable Pests
in Florida 210
xiv
-------
TABLES (Continued)
No. Page
43 Estimated Amounts of Common Pesticides Used in
Florida During 1966 211
44 Amounts of Pesticides Applied to Vegetable
Crops in Bade County for the Control of Insects,
Mites, Nematodes, and Fungi, July 1, 1966-
June 30, 1967 212
45 Quantities of Commercial Fertilizers Consumed
in the United States by State, in Thousands
of Tonnes 217
46 Status of Land Disturbed by Surface Mining in
the Southeast as of January 1, 1974, by State,
in Hectares 219
47 Land Disturbed by Strip and Surface Mining in
the Southeast as of January 1, 1975, by
Commodity and State, in Hectares 220
48 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Adversely Affected
by Strip and Surface Mining in the Southeast,
as of January, 1967 222
49 Comparison of Chemical and Radionuclides Water
Sample Analyses from 26 Wells in the Central
Florida Phosphate Mining and Processing Area 228
50 Principal Minerals Produced in the Southeast
States 235
51 Number of On-Site Disposal Systems in the
Southeast, by State 237
52 Counties in the Southeast United States with
More Than 50,000 Housing Units Using On-Site
Domestic Waste Disposal Systems 239
53 Normal Range of Mineral Pickup in Domestic
Sewage 242
54 Comparison of Type of Water-Supply Wells
Exceeding Nitrate Concentration Standard in
Georgia 248
xv
-------
TABLES (Continued)
No. Page
55 Municipalities in the United States Using
Land Applications of Waste Water, and the
Population Served 253
56 Relative Importance of Renovation Mechanisms -
Spray Irrigation 256
57 Relative Importance of Renovation Mechanisms -
Overland Flow 257
58 Relative Importance of Renovation Mechanics -
Rapid Infiltration 258
59 Comparison of the Average Loading Rates and
Treatment Area Requirements for Each of the
Methods of Land Disposal of Waste Water 262
60 Summary of Contamination Likely from Land
Disposal of Domestic Waste Water 263
61 Concentrations of Nitrate-Nitrogen in Ground-
Water Samples from Wells at a St. Petersburg,
Florida, Spray Irrigation Site, in mg/1 269
62 Summary of Case Histories on Salt-Water
Intrusion 278
63 Comparison of Dissolved Solids in Sea Water
and in Oil Field Brine, in mg/1 292
64 Calculated Quantities of Pollutants Which
Would Enter Receiving Waters (Hypothetical
City) 300
65 Quantity and Character of Contaminants Found
on Street Surfaces 301
66 Principal Sources of Ground-Water Contamination
and the Priority for Additional Research and
Control in the Southeast 336
xvi
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report would not have been possible without the infor-
mation received from numerous individuals and organizations.
Personnel from Federal, state, county, and municipal
governmental agencies contributed data on ground-water
conditions, natural ground-water quality, incidents of
pollution and trends in water use. Water well contractors
provided considerable information on ground-water pollution
incidence and the need to replace wells due to such pollution.
Special appreciation is extended to Dr. Phillip E. LaMoreaux
and Mr. Russell L. Lipp, Geological Survey of Alabama, Mr.
Dennis Edmonds and Mr. Randolph D. Williams, Georgia
Department of Natural Resources; Mr. Wilbur Baughman and Mr.
Michael Bograd, Mississippi Geological Survey; Mr. Donald A.
Duncan, South Carolina Department of Health and Environ-
mental Control, Mr. T. L. Swearingen, Virginia State Water
Control Board, and Mr. Robert C. Vorhis, Decatur, Georgia
and Mr. Harry E. LeGrand, Raleigh, North Carolina, private
consultants.
Staff members of the EPA office for Region IV provided
information and suggested people to contact in other govern-
mental agencies. Mr. Russell L. Wright of the Region IV
Hydro-Geology Analysis unit provided assistance and dis-
cussion. The support, guidance and comments on the various
phases of the work by Mr. Marion R. Scalf, Project Officer,
Robert S. Kerr, Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada,
Oklahoma, are gratefully acknowledged.
The authors of this report are hydrogeologists with the firm
of Geraghty & Miller, Inc., Tampa, Florida, and are Senior
Hydrogeologist, Senior Hydrogeologist and Associate,
respectively. Special appreciation is accorded to other
staff members, particularly to Mr. Nathaniel M. Perlmutter
for data collection; Mr. William J. Baldwin for preparation
of illustrations, and Mrs. Dawn L. Logan for preparation of
the manuscript.
xvi i
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
1. Total use of ground water in the seven-state region in
1970 was approximately 20.7 million cu m/d (5.5 billion
gpd), with ground water supplying 44 percent of public
supply, 89 percent of rural, 34 percent of industrial,
and 56 percent of irrigation requirements.
2. The percentage of the population in the study area
dependent upon ground water for drinking water sup-
plies is significant, ranging from 30 percent in
Virginia to 91 percent in Florida.
3. Ground water can be developed almost anywhere in the
region. Areally extensive deposits of sands, gravels,
and permeable limestones of considerable thickness are
the principal aquifers in the Coastal Plain. Fractured
and cavernous limestones and dolomites serve as the
major aquifers in other areas.
4. The natural quality of ground water is good to excel-
lent, except for the occurrence of saline water in some
coastal aquifers.
5. The most common natural water-quality problems in
fresh-water aquifers are high hardness; high iron
content; excessive fluoride concentrations; corrosive-
ness; and the presence of radionuclides.
6. Surface impoundments, which are used for treating,
handling, and storing liquid wastes and sludges, are
leaking many millions of litres per year of potentially
hazardous substances to ground water. The number of
lagoons, pits, and basins is expected to increase
sharply as industries change over from direct surface-
water discharge to land treatment of wastes.
7. Industrial and municipal landfills, covering large
tracts of land, are a source of ground-water contam-
ination everywhere in the region. Specific controls
on, and sites for, the disposal of hazardous wastes are
generally lacking. Most states have little control
over industrial disposal sites located on private
properties.
-------
8. The utilization of deep injection wells for underground
storage of liquid industrial and municipal wastes is
expected to increase considerably. However, drainage
wells pose a more immediate threat to ground-water
quality, particularly in Florida where more than 6,500
such wells are known to exist and receive waters
ranging from normal surplus waters to considerably
polluted urban storm runoff and sewage waters, as well
as a wide variety of other agricultural and industrial
fluid wastes.
9. Leaks and spills of hazardous and non-hazardous fluids
on and below the land surface have occurred throughout
the region. The most commonly spilled or leaked fluids
are petroleum products that are in transferral, in
transport, or in storage. As reported by well dril-
lers, petroleum products in ground-water supplies is
the most common reason for well replacement because of
contamination.
10. Ground-water contamination related to agricultural
activities occurs primarily from the use of excessive
amounts of fertilizers on permeable soils or from the
mixing of pesticides near wells. A greater incidence
of contamination occurs as a result of termite or pest
control practices. In fact, the heavy use of fertil-
izers and pesticides by home owners and pest control
companies in urbanized areas probably has more impact
on ground-water quality than traditional agricultural
activities.
11. The impact of ground-water contamination from coal-
mining activities in Alabama and Virginia has not been
assessed. Increased mining will occur in these areas
due to the nation's drive for energy self-sufficiency.
12. Ground-water contamination has probably occurred in
some of the phosphate-mining areas of Florida, but the
problem is just now being evaluated. The contaminant
is primarily radium-226 concentrated in acidic gypsum
by-product wastes from the wet process of phosphoric
acid production.
13. A significant source of ground-water contamination is
the discharge of partially treated sewage from septic
tank systems. Approximately 13 million people in the
region are served by on-site disposal, of which 76
percent of the systems are septic tanks or cesspools.
As reported by well drillers in the region, bacterial
-------
contamination by septic tanks is the second most
common reason for well replacement. High septic tank
density in some suburbanized areas will probably lead
to regional nitrate buildup in the ground water.
14. There is potential for ground-water contamination by
land disposal of waste waters if the various natural
systems operative at disposal sites are not considered
as in interactive unit. The assessment of site suit-
ability and design requires the combined effort of
multi-disciplined teams of scientist and engineers.
15. Numerous scattered, sporadic, and unforeseen miscella-
neous ground-water contamination events with consider-
able potential for impact on water supplies and public
health have occurred throughout the region. Multi-
disciplinary emergency task forces available on call
are needed to make quick, accurate decisions for
clean-up and water-supply protection.
16. Salt-water encroachment in the coastal areas of the
region has long been recognized as a threat to fresh-
water aquifers. Consequently, the problem is under-
stood and controlled as well as possible.
17. Considerable potential for ground-water contamination
occurs as a result of heavy pumping in karst (sinkhole)
areas which are subject to surface collapse, causing
the introduction of contaminants stored on the surface
or providing a conduit for pollutants to enter the
aquifer.
18. Flowing fresh-water and saline-water wells do cause
gradual salt-water encroachment and contamination of
surficial and confined aquifers, not to mention the
wastage of water resources. It is estimated that in
Florida alone, there are 2,000 to 3,000 flowing wells
of poor quality water.
19. The primary contaminant related to petroleum develop-
ment activities has been the disposal of brines in
seepage pits and disposal wells. Unplugged oil test
wells have contaminated fresh-water aquifers. A long-
term awareness of these problems probably will result
in minimal future contamination despite accelerated
exploration and development.
-------
20. Collapse of sinkhole lakes due to heavy pumping of
underlying aquifers may pose future problems, particu-
larly if such lakes are receiving urban storm runoff
and treated sewage waters.
21. Contamination of ground water by dissolved highway de-
icing salts is minimal and occurs only in the northern
portion of the region.
22. Throughout the region the approach to existing problems
is to apply corrective action only after the contamina-
tion has been discovered. Anticipation and elimination
of potential sources of contamination is not emphasized
because of the lack of funding or staffing of the
agencies responsible for environmental quality.
23. The case histories reported are only a very small per-
centage of the instances of ground-water contamination
from all sources that exist in the region.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The importance of ground water as a source of rural,
public, industrial, and irrigation water supply should
be promoted through educational and informational
programs, emphasizing the need to protect ground-water
quality.
2. Attempts must be made on local, state and national
levels to reduce the redundancy of agency responsibility
and establish a clarification of jurisdiction and
responsibility -
3. Increased funding and staffing is recommended for those
agencies responsible for defining the hydrogeologic
framework of the various states; determining the natural
ground-water quality conditions; inventorying of ground-
water resources; assesing and controlling ground-water
contamination, and enforcing existing regulations.
4. Local agencies (water management districts, river basins,
counties, etc.) should be staffed and funded to handle
the day-to-day individual local problems of ground-water
contamination which may require immediate response.
5. There should be more extensive follow-up on contamination
events in terms of: what happened; what needs to be
done; what was done; what caused the event; what should
be done to prevent the reoccurrence at the site or else-
where; who was affected by the contamination; and what
was the economic loss as a result of cleanup or loss of
water supply.
6. Methods of inventorying all existing and potential
sources of ground-water contamination should be developed
for use on a state-wide basis.
7. Monitoring of suspected sources of contamination should
be increased, especially where contaminants from such
sources could be extremely detrimental to human health,
or in those areas where major or sole water supplies may
be threatened.
8. More detailed analyses of water samples obtained from
new and existing wells are needed. Selection of criteria
for the various parameters measured in such analyses
-------
should take into account the local potential sources
of contamination and the most common contaminants
associated with them.
Particular emphasis should be given to protecting those
areas of the southeast underlain by permeable sands and
karst (sinkhole) terrane, as they are the most vulnerable
to contamination and either contain the largest supplies
of ground water or serve as recharge areas for the
major aquifers.
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
This report deals with ground-water pollution problems in
the southeastern United States, which comprises the seven
states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia. Figure 1 shows the
location of these states and of other groups of states
covered in previous studies of this type. The report con-
tains a general description of the ground-water resources of
the region, an overview of the contamination problems, an
assessment of the severity of the problems, and recommenda-
tions dealing with needs for research and controls.
The following section of this report describes the geologic
setting and occurrence of principal aquifers on a state-by-
state basis, succeeded by a chapter on the natural ground-
water quality. This is followed by a discussion of the
principal sources of ground-water contamination in the
region. The final section recommends research and other
needs required to combat the problems of ground-water con-
tamination, based on the findings of the investigation.
Information on natural water quality and aquifer systems was
obtained from a review of literature on the region. The
published data were also surveyed in an effort to obtain
data on specific cases of ground-water contamination.
However, few of the known instances of contamination have
been reported in the literature. In order to gain a per-
spective on the status of ground-water contamination, it was
necessary to contact, mostly by personal visit, public
officials, consultants, scientists, and others involved in
water supplies so that their files and individual experi-
ences and knowledge could be applied to the study.
Throughout the report the terms "contamination" and
"pollution" are used to mean the degradation of the natural
quality of ground water as a result of man's activities.
Contamination may impair the use of the water or may create
hazards to public health through toxic substances or the
spread of disease. A contaminant as defined by the Safe
Drinking Water Act is - "any physical, chemical, biological,
or radiological substance or matter in water". Increases in
concentrations of mineral constituents as the natural result
of movement of ground water through an aquifer are referred
to as mineralization.
-------
CD
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii!ii!!i!i^iii!i^ii!ii!!!;iii!i!i!!!ii!!ii!!!iii!!ii
t \ •
;;;;;i/;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;irHn:^;;;;;;;:;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
:::::?::::::::::::::::::::::::}:::::::::::!::::::::::::::::::::::::::
iiii^ililiiiiiilliiiiiilliiilliiiiniiii^Jip^iiUI^^1!
V.
I
i
\
TrrrJ
i
\
-s
i
i
'"Si;:!
0 100 300 300 400 Mi
I I'll'. '. I '
0 200 400 800 Km.
\;
VI!
PROJECT AREA
PREVIOUS E.P.ff. INVESTIGATIONS
Figure 1. Location of states in the southeast project
area and previous EPA investigations.
-------
Management and protection of the ground-water resources are
of the utmost importance because whereas pollution of
surface-water supplies is readily detected and often quickly
corrected, pollution of ground water is often not detected
until part of an aquifer system has been adversely affected.
Once an aquifer is polluted, it takes a considerable period
of time and great financial expenditure to alleviate the
problem. Often the damage cannot be undone and on occasion
the water source has to be abandoned. For these reasons
national and state laws and regulations to protect ground-
water reservoirs have been and are being adopted, following
recommendations along these lines made by Federal, state and
private organizations.I'2'3) A more thorough understanding
of natural ground-water quality and ground-water pollution
problems existing in the various regions of the nation is
needed. The Environmental Protection Agency has undertaken
the task of gathering this information, and reports dealing
with ground-water pollution have been issued for the south-
western states, the south-central states, the northeastern
states, and the northwestern states (Figure I).4/5,6,7)
USE OF GROUND WATER
Almost one-half of the population of the United States is
dependent on ground water for drinking purposes. About 94
percent of the rural population and 37 percent of the popu-
lation served by public water-supply systems obtain their
water from ground-water sources. This is because it is
generally more economical to install wells than to pipe
water from a surface-water body and provide the necessary
treatment. Also, many sources of surface water are unreli-
able and the large tracts of land required for construction
of new surface-water reservoirs are becoming scarce and
costly to obtain.
The estimated use of fresh surface and ground water in the
seven states of the project area in 1970 for public supply,
rural supply, and industrial and irrigation purposes was in
excess of 45 cu hm/d or 11.9 bgd.^) Table 1 shows the
breakdown of the estimated fresh-water use on a state-by-
state basis. Figure 2 is a graph of the ground-water use
for the above purposes for each of the states. Figure 3 is
a comparison of the percent surface and ground water used
for all purposes in each state.
As can be seen in the table and figures, the range in water
use is from 2.771 cu hm/d (0.732 bgd) in South Carolina to
16.056 cu hm/d (4.242 bgd) in Florida. The reliance on
ground-water sources is 17 percent in Alabama to 70 percent
in Florida. Use of ground water for public supply ranged
-------
Table 1. ESTIMATED USE OF WATER IN THE SOUTHEAST UNITED STATES IN 1970.8)
(partial figures may not add up to totals because of rounding)
O
Public Supply
State
ALABAMA
Ground water
Surface water
Total:
Percent ground
water
FLORIDA
Ground water
Surface water
Total:
Percent ground
water
GEORGIA
Ground water
Surface water
Total:
Percent ground
water
1,000 m-yd
379
1,363
1,742
22
2,877
454
3,331
86
719
1,325
2,044
35
mgd
100
360
460
760
120
880
190
350
540
Rural3' Industrial13'
1,000 m-Va
288
57
345
84
681
45
726
94
379
5
384
99
mgd 1,000 mJ/d
76 352
15 3,444
91 3,796
9
180 2,687
12 719
192 3,406
79
100 1,249
1.4 1,136
101.4 2,385
52
mgd
93
910
1,003
710
190
900
330
300
630
Irric
1,000 m-
20
45
65
4,921
3,671
8,592
25
151
176
jation
yd mgd
5.4
12.0
17.4
31
1,300.0
970.0
2,270.0
57
6.6
40.0
46.6
14
Total
1
1
4
5
11
4
16
2
2
4
,000 m-ya
,039
,909
,948
17
,166
,890
,056
70
,372
,617
,989
48
mgd
274
1,297
1,571
2,950
1,292
4,242
626
691
1,318
.4
.0
.4
.0
.0
.0
.6
.4
.0
a) Domestic and livestock use
b) Saline water andfcthermoelectric-power water use excluded
-------
Table I (cont.) ESTIMATED USE OF WATER IN THE SOUTHEAST UNITED STATES IN 1970.8'
(partial figures may not add up to totals because of rounding)
Public Supply
State
MISSISSIPPI
Ground water
Surface water
Total:
Percent ground
water
NORTH CAROLINA
Ground water
Surface water
Total :
Percent ground
water
SOUTH CAROLINA
Ground water
Surface water
Total :
Percent ground
water
1,000 mj/d
606
114
720
84
303
1,438
1,741
17
208
908
1,116
19
mgd
160
30
190
80
380
460
55
240
295
Rural a'
1,000 m3/d
151
91
242
63
606
28
634
96
189
19
208
91
mgd
40
24
64
160
7.4
167.4
50
4.9
54.9
Industrial b>
1,000 m3/d
1,173
719
1,892
62
530
1,817
2,347
23
201
1,136
1,337
15
mgd
3J.O
190
500
140
480
620
53
300
353
Irrigation
1,000 m3/d mgd
833 220.0
606 160.0
1,439 380.0
58
189 50.0
121 32.0
310 82.0
61
34 8.9
76 20.0
110 28.9
31
Total
1,000 m3/d
2,763
1,529
4,292
64
1,628
3,404
5,032
32
632
2,138
2,770
23
mgd
730.
404.
1,134.
430.
899.
1,329.
166.
564.
731.
0
0
0
0
4
4
9
9
8
-------
Table 1 (cont.) ESTIMATED USE OF WATER IN THE SOUTHEAST UNITED STATES IN 1970.8>
(partial figures may not add up to totals because of rounding)
Public Supply
State
VIRGINIA
Ground water
Surface water
Total:
Percent ground
water
GRAND TOTAL
Ground water
Surface water
Total:
Percent ground
water
1,000 m'-i/d
280
1,211
1,491
19
5,652
6,813
12,465
44
mgd
74
320
394
1,419
1,800
3,219
Rural a)
1,000 mJ/d mgd
318
12
390
2,612
317
2,929
84
19
103
82
690
83.7
773.7
89
Industrial b)
1,000 m^/d
454
3,482
3,936
12
6,646
12,456
19,102
34
mgd
120
920
1,040
1,756
3,290
5,046
Irrigation
1,000 mVd
20
114
134
15
6,042
4,784
10,826
56
mgd
5.2
30.0
35.2
1,596.1
1,264.0
2,860.1
1
1
4
5
20
24
45
Total
,000 m-i/d
,072
,879
,951
18
,672
,666
,338
46
mgd
283.2
1,289.0
1,572.2
5,461.1
6,437.7
11,898.8
-------
11.0
10.0
9.0
£ 8-°
Q
CC
CO
cc
OJ
I-
UJ
S
CD
ID
O
7.0
6.0
4.0
3.0
2.O
I.O
IRRIGATION
INDUSTRIAL
RURAL SUPPLY
PUBLIC SUPPLY
ALABAMA FLORIDA GEORGIA MISSISSIPPI NORTH SOUTH
CAROLINA CAROLINA
Figure 2. Use of ground water in 1970.
8)
3.0
2.5
2.0 o
o:
UJ
Q.
1.5
1.0
CO
Q
O
_l
_J
CD
0.5
VIRGINIA
-------
...—-T" SOUTH
( CAROLINA
': ALABAMA •
i GEORGIA r"
GULF OF MEXICO
GROUND WATER
SURFACE WATER
Figure 3.
Comparison of ground-water use to
surface-water use in 1970.8)
14
-------
from 0.208 cu hm/d (0.055 bgd) in South Carolina to 2.877 cu
hm/d (0.760 bgd) in Florida.8' Except for Florida and
Mississippi, the use of surface water for all purposes is
greater than that of ground water.
However, the percentage of the population dependent upon
ground water for drinking water supplies in the study area
is significant. Figure 4 shows the percent of the total
population relying on either source for this purpose, with
ground-water use ranging from 30 percent in Virginia to 91
percent in Florida.
In the region, over 34 percent of the total water withdrawn
from all sources for domestic use by public-supply systems
in 1970 was obtained from ground-water sources. The per-
centage of use on a state basis ranged from 10 percent in
Virginia to over 72 percent in Florida.9) A report on water
use by 138 selected municipalities in Florida for 1970 shows
that 119 relied entirely upon ground water. The systems
involved serve 64 percent of the State's population.-^'
Some of the major cities in the region that rely entirely on
ground water for supply include Montgomery, Alabama;
Jacksonville, Miami, and St. Petersburg, Florida; and
Savannah, Georgia.H) Many other municipalities have a
combination of surface-water and ground-water systems for
their source of supply.
Rural areas rely heavily on ground-water sources for domes-
tic supply and livestock watering. The use of ground water
for this purpose ranges from 63 percent in Mississippi to 99
percent in Georgia. Although slightly under the national
average of 94 percent, the dependence of the rural popula-
tion on ground water is still very high, about 87 percent.
Statistics on ground-water use by self-supplied industries
are scanty, but the 1970 compilation (Table 1) shows a total
of 5.66 cu hm/d (1.76 bgd).8' The portion of self-supplied
industrial water from ground-water sources ranges from 9
percent in Alabama to 79 percent in Florida. Over 50 per-
cent of the total industrial water in two other states,
Georgia and Mississippi, is from ground-water sources. Many
large manufacturing plants either are located beyond the
service areas of public utilities or require such large
quantities of high-quality water that they are obliged to
develop their own independent water sources. In many cases,
ground water is the only readily available supply of water.
15
-------
l GEOR
\ r-""
;;;;;; 30%\ GROUND WATER
^79%Ml_
SURFACE WATER
Figure 4. Percent of total population relying
on ground water versus surface water
for drinking water supply.9)
16
-------
By far the largest single use of ground water in the study
area is for irrigation in Florida. The estimated use in
1970 was 4.9 cu hm/d (1.3 bgd), more than one and one-half
times greater than the public supply use. Groung water used
for irrigation ranged from 14 percent of the total in
Virginia to 61 percent in North Carolina.
PROJECTIONS OF GROUND-WATER USE
The demand for ground water for municipal, self-supplied
industrial, and agricultural use is expected to increase
significantly. The historical and projected trends of
fresh-water withdrawal rates in the United States from 1900
to the year 2020 are given in Table 2.3/8/12/13/14) The
projected trend indicates a steady increase in the ground-
water use of over 214 percent between 1970 and 2020. The
total fresh-water withdrawal by 2020 is expected to be
2,895.5 cu hm/d (765 bgd) of which about 548.9 cu hm/d (145
bgd) will be ground water.
The total water use on a per capita basis is expected to
increase from 6.0 cu m/d (1,577 gpd) in 1970 to 8.2 cu m/d
(2,155 gpd) in 2020. Although the actual personal consump-
tion of water is not expected to increase, the expansion of
industries and utilities will create a significant increase
in demand for water. Cooling water demands for electric
generating plants will represent the single most significant
increase in water demand.
A comparison of ground-water use for the years 1965 and 1970
in the study area is given in Table 3. Total use increased
from 15,777 cu hm/d (4.703 bgd) in 1965 to 20,761 cu hm/d
(5.461 bgd) in 1970. '^) i>ne percentage of increase ranged
from four percent in North Carolina to 42 percent in
Virginia. Total withdrawal of ground water in the United
States increased from 60 bgd in 1965 to 68 bgd in 1970.
This represents an overall increase of 11.7 percent. Five
of the seven states, namely Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi,
South Carolina, and Virginia, surpassed the national
average.
17
-------
Table 2. HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED TRENDS IN FRESH WATER WITHDRAWAL
RATES IN THE UNITED STATES. 3,8,12,13,14)
oo
Year
1900
1910
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
Total
U.S. Population
millions
76.0
92.0
105.7
122.8
131.7
150.7
178.5
203.2
230.9
266.2
300.4
338.0
355.0
Total Fresh
Water Withdrawn
cu hm/d bgd
152.2
251.3
346.3
418.2
508.7
734.2
1,023.5
1,212.7
1,409.5
1,736.9
2,075.3
2,485.6
2,895.5
40.2
66.4
91.5
110.5
134.4
194.0
270.4
320.4
372.4
458.9
548.3
656.7
765.0
Total Fresh
Ground Water Withdrawn
cu hm/d bgd
27.6
44.3
59.8
68.9
85.5
127.2
190.8
255.1
310.0
358.1
416.3
481.1
547.3
7.3
11.7
15.8
18.2
22.6
33.6
50.4
67.4
81.9
94.6
110.0
127.1
144.6
Total Per Capita
Withdrawal
cu m/d gpd
2.0
2.7
3.3
3.4
3.9
4.9
5.1
6.0
6.1
6.6
6.9
7.4
8.2
529
722
866
900
1,036
1,287
1,344
1,577
1,613
1,724
1,825
1,943
2,155
-------
Table 3. GROUND-WATER USE, 1965 to 1970. 8'15)
State
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
TOTAL
1965
1,000 cu m/d
743
10,087
2,123
2,021
1,571
496
757
15,777
mgd
196.3
2,665
561
534
415.1
131
200.1
4,702.5
1970
1,000 cu m/d
1,039
11,165
2,372
2,763
1,628
632
1,072
20,671
mgd
274.4
2,950
626.6
730
430
166.9
283.2
5,461.1
Percent of
Increase
Over
1965
40
11
12
37
4
27
42
-------
REFERENCES CITED
SECTION III
1. National Water Commission, "Water Policies for the
Future", U. S. Government Printing Office, 1973.
2. McGuinness, C. L. , "The Role of Ground Water in the
National Water Situation", U. S. Geological Survey,
Water-Supply Paper 1800, 1963.
3. Water Resources Council, "The Nation's Water Resources",
Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D. C., 1968.
4. Fuhriman, D. K., and J. R. Barton, "Ground-Water
Pollution in Arizona, California, Nevada and Utah",
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Monitoring, Water Pollution Control Research Series
16060 ERU 12/71, 1971.
5. Scalf, M. R., J. W. Keeley, and C. J. LaFevers, "Ground
Water Pollution in the South Central States", Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Mon-
itoring, Environmental Protection Technology Series
EPA-R2-73-268, 1973.
6. Miller, D. W., F. A. DeLuca, and T. L. Tessier, "Ground-
Water Contamination in the Northeast States", Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Environmental Protection Technology Series,
EPA-660/2-74-056, 1974.
7. van der Leeden, Frits, L. A. Cerrillo, and D. W. Miller,
"Ground Water Contamination in the Northwestern United
States", Environmental Protection Agency, Ecological
Research Series, EPA-660/3-75-018, May 1975.
8. Murray, C. R., and E. B. Reeves, "Estimated Use of
Water in the United States in 1970", U. S. Geological
Survey, Circular 676, 1972.
9. U. S. Geological Survey, Unpublished data, 1970.
10. Healy, H. G., "Public Water Supplies of Selected
Municipalities in Florida, 1970," Florida Information
Circular 81, 1972.
20
-------
11. Durfor, C. N., and E. Becker, "Public Water Supplies of
the 100 Largest Cities in the United States, 1962",
U. S. Geological Survey, Water-Supply Paper 1812, 1965.
12. U. S. Bureau of Census, U. S. Census of Population:
1920 to 1970, Vol. 1.
13. U. S. Bureau of Census, "Current Population Reports",
Series P-25, Nos. 311, 483, and 493, Series C Pro-
jection.
14. Office of Water Supply, "The Report to Congress: Waste
Disposal Practices and Their Effects on Ground Water",
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1975.
15. Murray, C. R., "Estimated Use of Water in the United
States, 1965", U. S. Geological Survey, Circular 556,
1968.
21
-------
SECTION IV
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA
The project area, which covers the seven states of Alabama,
Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South
Carolina, and Virginia, has an area of roughly 884,000 sq km
(340,000 sq mi), representing 11 percent of the total land
surface of the conterminous United States (Figure 1). The
project area is characterized by a wide variety of land-form
features. Elevations of the land surface range from sea
level along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts to over 2,037 m
(almost 6,700 ft) in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North
Carolina.
PHYSIOGRAPHY
The major physical divisions in the southeast area include
the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain, the Piedmont, the Blue
Ridge, the Valley and Ridge, and small portions of the
Appalachian Plateau and the Interior Low Plateau. Figure 5
shows the limits of these physiographic provinces in the
study area.1/2,3)
A classification devised by Thomas divides the continental
United States into 10 ground-water regions.4) Based on this
system, the study area includes portions of three of these
regions (Figure 6):
1. Coastal Plain Region
2. Unglaciated Appalachian Region
3. Unglaciated Central Region
The Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain physiographic province
is characterized by a seaward-dipping sequence of mostly
unconsolidated gravel, sand, silt, clay, marl, and lime-
stone, of Cretaceous to Quaternary age. These materials
form a wedge that thickens toward the coast. The surface
relief is very moderate with topographic highs rarely
exceeding 100 m (328 ft) above sea level.
The Coastal Plain ground-water region, coinciding with the
Coastal Plain physiographic province, contains abundant
supplies of both surface and ground water. Areally exten-
sive deposits of sands, gravels, and permeable limestones of
considerable thicknesses are found in the region. Large
amounts of ground water can be obtained from individual
wells throughout the entire region.
22
-------
0 200 400 600 800 1000 Km
ii<
ii i i
200
400
GULF OF MEXICO
\ \ ATLANTIC AND GULF COASTAL PLAIN
I////] PIEDMONT
L^^M-WMB
frQCH BLUE RIDGE
[$j§j:j:j:H VALLEY AND RIDGE
£y/\3 APPALACHIAN PLATEAU
liiiiiiiiiil INTERIOR LOW PLATEAU
Figure 5. Physiographic provinces of the
southeastern states.I/2,3)
23
-------
GULF OF
2
COASTAL PLAIN
UNGLACIATED APPALACHIANS
UNGLACIATED CENTRAL REGION
Figure 6. Ground-water regions in the
southeast United States.4)
24
-------
The Unglaciated Appalachian ground-water region is charac-
terized by mountains and hilly uplands separated by broad
valleys. Portions of various physiographic provinces are
included in the region. From east to west these are:
the Piedmont, the Blue Ridge, the Valley and Ridge, and the
Appalachian Plateau.
The Piedmont physiographic province is composed of meta-
morphic rocks intruded by masses of igneous rocks. The
yield to wells in the province is generally very low because
of the relatively low permeabilities of the rocks. Ground
water moves principally along fractures or through the
weathered zones. The water-yielding capabilities of the
rocks of the Blue Ridge physiographic province are similar
to those of the Piedmont province. However because of the
sharp relief of the region, increased surface runoff results
in less infiltration or recharge to the aquifer.
The Valley and Ridge physiographic province is characterized
by folded rocks, principally limestone associated with
sandstone and shale. The region is generally more produc-
tive from a ground-water viewpoint than either the Piedmont
or Blue Ridge provinces. Large springs and high-yielding
wells occur locally in the limestone, where it is very
fractured and cavernous. The uppermost limestones and
sandstones of the Appalachian Plateau physiographic province
are fairly productive, but such aquifers are not very exten-
sive because of deep dissection of the land due to erosion
of the elevated plateaus.
A small portion of the Unglaciated Central ground-water
region extends into northwestern Alabama and northeastern
Mississippi. There, the rocks are characteristically hori-
zontal or slightly dipping sedimentary rocks, overlain
locally by unconsolidated stream sediments or thick zones of
weathered chert. Limestones and sandstones serve as the
principal aquifers. Large springs and high-yielding wells
are scattered throughout the region.
General hydrogeologic conditions in the project area are
shown on Figure 7. The map shows the general type of rock
material and gives the approximate range in ground-water
yield for each. Additionally, it shows the location of salt
domes which locally affect the maximum depth of fresh water.
The map also differentiates between the moderately-yielding
carbonates and sandstone aquifers of the northern portion of
the area and the high-yielding carbonates of Florida, south-
ern Georgia, and South Carolina.
25
-------
0 200 400 600 800 1000 Km
200
400
GULF OF
UNCONSOLIDATED SEDIMENTS;
MODERATE TO HIGH YIELD
CONSOLIDATED SEDIMENTARY ROCK OVERLAIN BY
UNCONSOLIDATED SEDIMENTS; HIGH YIELD
IGNEOUS AND METAMORPHIC ROCKS;
LOW YIELD GENERALLY
CONSOLIDATED SEDIMENTARY ROCKS;
A= MODERATE YIELD
B = HIGH YIELD
SALT DOME
Figure 7.
YIELD OF WELLS
LOW l-IOgpm
MODERATE 10-100 gpm
HIGH 100-1000 gpm
Hydrogeologic map of the southeast
United States . 5 , 6 , 7)
26
-------
POPULATION
According to the 1970 Census, approximately 29.4 million or
about 14.5 percent of the nation's 203.2 million people live
in the report area (Table 4). The rural population exceeds
50 percent in three states: Mississippi, North Carolina, and
South Carolina. A high concentration of population in urban
areas is found in Florida, followed by Virginia, Georgia,
and Alabama. The growth rate of the seven states combined
was 14 percent between 1960 and 1970.8)
CLIMATE
The climate of the seven-state region is influenced by a
number of factors: proximity to the Gulf of Mexico or the
Atlantic Ocean, latitude, elevation, and topography. The
presence of the large bodies of water tends to lower summer
temperatures and raise winter temperatures along the coast.
Inland, however, the summers are hotter and the winters
cooler. In no case can the winters be described as severe.
The region is affected by invasions of cool, dry air from
the interior or of mild, moist air from the Gulf of Mexico
or the Atlantic Ocean. Hot, humid summers occur throughout
most of the area, especially in the interior lowlands and
the south.
Precipitation is fairly well distributed throughout the year
in all of the region except for Florida, where most of the
rain occurs during the period from June to October. Figure
8 is a map showing the distribution of the average annual
precipitation in the area. Snowfall in the area ranges from
unusual in Florida to an average of 1,270 mm (50 in.) in the
mountains of North Carolina. Hurricanes have occurred in
all of the seven states, but most commonly in the more
southern states.
The average annual evaporation from open water surfaces
ranges from 762 mm (30 in.) in the northern portion to 1,372
mm (54 in.) in the south (Figure 9). Only in a small part
of Florida does the evaporation equal or exceed the average
precipitation.
GEOLOGY AND GROUND-WATER RESOURCES
The following is a discussion of the general geology in
relation to the ground-water resources on a state-by-state
basis. Where the water-bearing characteristics of the
aquifers are known, they are included to allow a more com-
plete picture of the system. Because it is beyond the scope
27
-------
Table 4. POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS
Population distribution
00
State
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Mississippi
N. Carolina
S. Carolina
Virginia
1970
Population
3,444,165
6,789,443
4,589,575
2,216,912
5,082,059
2,590,516
4,648,494
Increase
1960 to 1970
5.4
37.1
16.4
1.8
11.5
8.7
17.2
50,000 & 100,000
Population
2
6
2
None
4
2
3
100,000
Population
4
8
4
1
4
1
8
(percent )
Urban
58.4
80.5
60.3
44.5
45.0
47.6
63.1
Rural
41.6
19.5
39.7
55.5
55.0
52.4
36.9
Total :
29,361,164
14.0
19
30
-------
0 200 400 600 800 1000 Km
|—UrJ—i, i ,i—LT-J—i, u^j
0 200 400 600 Mi.
GULF OF MEXICO
50->_ PRECIPITATION IN INCHES
Figure 8. Average annual precipitation
29
-------
0 200 4OO 600 800 1000 Km.
L 1 | I I I i
200
GULF OF MEXICO
42— AVERAGE ANNUAL EVAPORATION IN INCHES
Figure 9. Average annual evaporation from open water
surfaces.9)
30
-------
of this study to present a detailed breakdown of the geology
and the aquifer properties, the statements are generalized
and specific references are given in the event that addi-
tional information is desired.
Alabama
Alabama lies in parts of five physiographic provinces and
three ground-water regions. The physiographic provinces
are: the Interior Low Plateau, the Appalachian Plateau, the
Valley and Ridge, the Piedmont, and the Coastal Plain (Fig-
ure 5). The ground-water regions are the Unglaciated Central
region, the Unglaciated Appalachians region, and the Coastal
Plain region (Figure 6).
There are four basic rock types that serve as aquifers in
Alabama: the igneous and metamorphic rocks of the Piedmont;
the consolidated sedimentary rocks of the Interior Low
Plateau, the Appalachian Plateau, and the Valley and Ridge;
and the generally unconsolidated rocks of the Coastal Plain.
Figure 10 is a generalized geologic map of Alabama.
Igneous and Metamorphic Rocks -
The igneous and metamorphic rocks of the Alabama Piedmont
are composed of schists, phyllites, gneisses, quartzites,
marbles, gabbros and granites. These rocks are low in
permeability except locally where ground water moves along
open fractures. Recharge to these materials is through the
weathered and decomposed rock. Well yields are small but
adequate for domestic and small municipal and industrial
uses. Most wells yield 0.6 1/s (10 gpm) or less but a few
yield 3 1/s (50 gpm) or more. The marble yields up to 56
1/s (900 gpm) to wells.11)
Sedimentary Rocks -
The rocks of the Interior Low Plateau, the Appalachian
Plateau, and the Valley and Ridge consist of limestone,
dolomite, chert, and sandstone. Individual well yields of
more than 12.5 1/s (200 gpm) from the limestones and dolo-
mites are common, and some yield more than 63 1/s (1,000
gpm). Yields tend to be erratic because of the irregular
distribution pattern of the permeable cavernous zones within
the limestones and dolomites. Wells in the sandstone aqui-
fers yield from a few to about 15.6 1/s (250 gpm), and
yields of 3 1/s (50 gpm) or more are common.11^
31
-------
TENNESSEE
MEXICO
CONSOLIDATED ROCK TYPES
3 IGNEOUS AND
3 METAMORPHIC
CARBONATE AND OTHER
SEDIMENTARY
COASTAL PLAIN ROCK AGE
' ' * " •
* f fl * T
'////
PLEISTOCENE
AND HOLOCENE
MIOCENE
OLIGOCENE
o °&0o
-\ -''
^ XI
3S&
EOCENE
PALEOCENE
CRETACEOUS
Figure 10. Generalized geologic map of Alabama.-*^)
-------
Unconsolidated Rocks -
The unconsolidated rocks of the Coastal Plain consist of
southward-dipping beds of sand and gravel, and of porous
limestone interbedded with chalk, marl, and clay. The range
in yields of wells in the area is from less than one 1/s
(less than 16 gpm) to over 63 1/s (1,000 gpm); yields of 31
1/s (500 gpm) are common.ll) Commonly, the water is under
artesian conditions. Table 5 lists the Coastal Plain strati-
graphic units, their generalized lithology, and their water-
bearing properties.
Florida
Florida lies entirely in the Coastal Plain physiographic
province and ground-water region. The peninsular portion is
a south-southeastward-trending, low, elongated dome of
Coastal Plain strata, consisting mostly of limestone and
dolomite. The Peninsular arch and the Ocala uplift are the
principal structures. Figure 11 is a generalized geologic
map of Florida.
There are four major developed aquifers in Florida; Figure
12 shows the areas of the state in which each constitutes
the principal source of ground-water supplies. Table 6
lists the geologic units and their characteristics. The
Floridan Aquifer, of middle Eocene to middle Miocene age, is
the major source of ground water in the state. It crops out
in few places, primarily in the northern part of the
Panhandle, and recharge to it occurs principally in central
Florida where the confining layer is breached by sinkholes
and the aquifer is overlain by permeable sediments. Ground
water moves radially from these recharge areas, a portion
discharging to springs and streams, and the remainder dis-
charging beyond the coastline as submarine springs.
Artesian conditions occur where overlying deposits of imper-
meable materials confine the aquifer, and in some parts of
the state flowing well conditions result when the confining
units are penetrated. The Floridan Aquifer is at least 457
m (1,500 ft) thick in southern Florida.17) Well yields
generally are at least 15.5 1/s (250 gpm) and some wells
have produced as much as 1,250 1/s (20,000 gpm).15)
Another important water-bearing unit is the Biscayne
aquifer in the southeastern part of the state. It is com-
posed of rocks ranging in age from late Miocene through
Pleistocene. The aquifer, under water-table conditions, is
underlain by materials of very low permeability that inhibit
upward movement of saline water. However, landward movement
of salty ground water in coastal areas is a hazard when
33
-------
Table 5. GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS - ALABAMA COASTAL PLAIN10~13)
Stratigraphic Water-bearing
System Series units Generalized lithology properties
Quaternary
Tertiary
Upper
Cretaceous
Pleistocene and
Holocene
Pliocene and
Pleistocene
Miocene
Oligocene
Eocene
Paleocene
Jackson
Group
Claiborne
Group
Wilcox
Group
Midway
Group
B d1
H O
-------
Table 5 (Cont.) GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS - ALABAMA COASTAL PLAIN
10-13)
System
Series
Stratigraphic
units
U)
Ui
Generalized lithology
Water-bearing
properties
Tuscaloosa
Group
Gordo
Coker
Chiefly clay at top. Lower part
chiefly sand and gravel
Upper part chiefly clay. Middle
part alternating sand and clay.
Lower part is gravelly sand
Major aquifer
Major aquifer
-------
ALABAMA
COASTAL PLAIN ROCK AGE
^•j HOLOCENE AND PLEISTOCENE
^ PLEISTOCENE
^] MIOCENE
Till OLIGOCENE
EOCENE
0 20 40 60 80 100120 Km.
0 20 40 60 80 Ml.
Figure 11. Generalized geologic map of Florida. ^
36
-------
ALABAMA
L^-
«==
5
L
\
A
N
^
k
W
—S
\
^
GEORGIA
SHALLOW AQUIFER
SAND AND GRAVEL AQUIFER
BISCAYNE AQUIFER
FLORIDAN AQUIFER
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Km.
I II II I I
I i T"^ r i
0 20 40 60 80 Ml.
Figure 12.
Principal sources of potable ground
water in Florida.15,16)
37
-------
Table 6. GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS IN FLORIDA17"23'
CO
00
System
Quaternary
Tertiary
Series
Holocene
Pleistocene
?Plio-
Pleistocene
Miocene
Tampa
Group
Stratigraphic
units
Lower marine and
estuarine terrace
deposits
Lake Flirt Marl
Pamlico Sand
High Terrace
deposits
Miami Oolite
Anastasia Fm.
Key Largo
Limestone
Fort Thompson Fm.
Caloosahatchee
Marl
Citronelle
Tamiami Fm.
Jackson Bluff Fm.
Fort Preston Fm.
Bone Valley Fm.
Alachua Fm.
Hawthorn Fm.
St. Marks Fm.
Chattahoochee Fm.
Hydrogeologic Generalized Water-bearing
units Lithology properties
Floridan i ,
A uifer 1 Shallow Shallow
, Shallow Aquifer t (Aquifer , 1 Aquifer I
,. | Biscayne Aquifer 1 i g
[
rH
fO M
a
_rt
w
Peat and muck
Fossiliferous,
calcareous mud
Quartz sand, very fine
to coarse
Quartz sand with
interbedded clay and
silt
Limestone, oolitic,
with vertical solution
holes
Coquina, sand,
calcareous sandstone,
sandy limestone and
shell marl
Coralline reef rock,
hard and dense to soft
and cavernous
Marl, limestones and
sandstone
Shells, sands and marl
Quartz sand and gravel
with clay beds
Limestone, sand and
marl
Clayey sands and shell
marl
Gray-white thinly
laminated sands
Phosphatic boulders and
pebbles and sandy clay
Interbedded, clay, sand
sandy clay
Interbedded sand, clay
and limestone and sandy
phosphatic limestone
and marl
Sandy, Chalky limestone
Sandy, Chalky limestone
Relatively
impermeable
Relatively
impermeable
Yields water to
sand-point wells
Yields water to
sand-point wells
Fair to high
permeability
Fair to high
permeability
High permeability
High permeability
Generally low
permeability and
quality
Very permeable
Upper portion very
permeable
Low permeability
except locally
Low permeability
except locally
Low permeability
except locally
Low permeability
except locally
Lower part has
moderate to good
permeability
Moderate permeability
Moderate permeability
-------
Table 6 (cont.) GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS IN FLORIDA17"23'
System
Series
Stratigraphic
units
Hydrogeologic
units
Generalized
Lithology
Water-bearing
properties
Tertiary
(cont)
Oligocene
Eocene
Paleocene
Suwanee Limestone
Crystal River Fm.
Williston Fm.
Inglis Fm.
Avon Park Limestone
Lake City Limestone
Oldsmar Limestone
Cedar Keys Limestone
Limestone
High-calcium limestone
Fragmental limestone
Fragmental limestone
and finely crystalline
dolomite
Chalky limestone and
dolomite with gypsum
and chert
Dolomite and chalky
limestone
Limestone with chert
and gypsum
Limestone
Moderate permeability
Very permeable in
some areas.
Principal components
of the Floridan
Aquifer
Very permeable to
poorly permeable
Locally very
permeable
Locally permeable
generally saline
Generally Saline
-------
natural ground-water gradients are reduced by pumping,
sewering, or construction of drainage systems. Recharge is
derived from local rainfall and from canals that carry water
from the inland conservation areas. The aquifer ranges in
thickness from a thin veneer in the western portion to 38 m
(125 ft) in the Miami area.17) It yields as much as 95 1/s
(1,500 gpm) to wells.16)
The major aquifer in the western part of the Panhandle is
the Sand-and-Gravel aquifer, a wedge-shaped deposit probably
of deltaic origin. This water-table aquifer is composed of
sediments ranging in age from Miocene to Pleistocene, and is
thickest, as much as 213 m (700 ft), along the coast.
Yields of from 3.2 to 126 1/s (50 to 2,000 gpm) are repor-
ted.16)
Most of Florida -is underlain by a water-bearing unit known
as the Shallow aquifer. In most areas it is not developed
extensively because a better supply is available from other
aquifers. The principal areas of use of this aquifer are
along the east coast and in a wide belt extending across
southern Florida in the vicinity of Lake Okeechobee. The
rocks composing it range in age from Miocene to Recent, with
the younger beds to the north. Recharge is derived from
local rainfall. The thickness of the aquifer in places can
exceed 122 m (400 ft), with reported yields of up to 126 1/s
(2,000 gpm).15,18,19)
Georgia
Segments of five physiographic provinces are found in
Georgia: the Coastal Plain, the Piedmont, the Blue Ridge,
the Valley and Ridge, and the Appalachian Plateau (Figure
5). The state is divided into two ground-water regions:
the Coastal Plain and the Unglaciated Appalachian (Figure
6). The southeastern three-fifths of the state is in the
Coastal Plain.
The Unglaciated Appalachian region contains consolidated
sedimentary, igneous, and metamorphic rocks. The sedimen-
tary rocks are located in the Valley and Ridge and*the
Appalachian Plateau physiographic provinces and are generally
referred to as the Paleozoic aquifer. The igneous and meta-
morphic rocks are situated in the Piedmont-Blue Ridge area.
The Coastal Plain region is underlain by generally unconsol-
idated to partially consolidated sedimentary rocks. This
region is sub-divided into the Upper Coastal Plain and the
40
-------
Lower Coastal Plain on the basis of geologic age. Figure 13
is a generalized geologic map of Georgia.
Paleozoic Aquifer -
Limestone, dolomite, sandstone, and shale are the principal
consolidated sedimentary rocks underlying the area. The
major aquifers are the limestones and dolomites, which
usually yield to wells from less than three to more than 63
1/s (less than 50 to more than 1,000 gpm),24) but yields as
high as 200 1/s (3,200 gpm) to wells are reported.11) The
sandstones and shales generally yield to wells from 0.06 to
not more than 1.9 1/s (one to not more than 30 gpm).25)
Piedmont-Blue Ridge Aquifers -
The igneous and metamorphic rocks consist of marble, quartz-
ite, slate, schist, gneiss, and granite. Ground-water move-
ment in these rocks is along fractures or through weathered
zones. Well yields are seldom in excess of a few 1/s (few
tens of gpm), but under some localized conditions are in
excess of 12.5 1/s (200 gpm).H)
Coastal Plain Aquifers -
The Coastal Plain can be divided into two areas that overlap
slightly: the upper and lower Coastal Plains. In the updip
area, or upper Coastal Plain, ground water is obtained from
sands of Cretaceous age and from limestone and sand of early
Tertiary age. The downdip area, or lower Coastal Plain,
contains a thickening sequence of Tertiary limestone which
is a most prolific aquifer. Table 7 lists the geologic
units and their water-bearing properties.
The upper Coastal Plain, bounded on the north by the
Piedmont, is underlain by alternating clays and sands of
Cretaceous age. Well yields of up to 125 1/s (2,000 gpm)
are reported.11) In southwestern Georgia the Paleocene-
Eocene limestone-sand aquifer supplies water to multiple-
screened wells having yields in excess of 31 1/s (500
gpm).28)
The major water-bearing unit in the lower Coastal Plain is
the principal artesian aquifer. It consists of an exten-
sive, permeable, limestone aquifer of Tertiary age overlain
by a thick sequence of relatively impermeable Miocene
deposits. This hydrologic unit correlates with the Floridan
Aquifer. The major area of use is along the Atlantic coast
of Georgia where tens of thousands of cu m/d (tens of mgd)
are withdrawn at the various population centers.11)
41
-------
TENNESSEE
NORTH CAROLINA
0 20 40 60 80 100 Km.
I .' i ' i '. 1 r1
0 20 40 60 Ml,
CONSOLIDATED ROCK TYPES
] IGNEOUS AND METAMORPHIC
I I I I I CARBONATE WITH
SANDSTONE AND SLATE
COASTAL PLAIN ROCK AGE
PLEISTOCENE
AND HOLOCENE
MIOCENE
OLIGOCENE
EOCENE
PALEOCENE
CRETACEOUS
Figure 13. Generalized geologic map of Georgia.23)
42
-------
Table 7. GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS - GEORGIA COASTAL PLAIN26-29)
10
Water-bearing
Stratigraphic properties
System Series units Generalized lithology Yield range in 1/s (qpm)
Quaternary
Tertiary
Cretaceous
Holocene
Pleistocene
Plio-Pleistocene
Miocene
Oligocene
Dndifferentiated
Eocene
Paleocene
Upper Cretaceous
Stream and shore
deposits
Terrace deposits
Undifferentiated
(Citronelle?)
Hawthorn
Tampa Limestone
Suwanee Limestone
Jackson Group
(includes Ocala Lime-
stone and Barnwell
Form. )
Claiborne Group
(Gosport Sand, McBean,
Lisbon and Tallahatta)
Wilcox Group
(includes Tuscahoma
Sand and Nanafalia)
Midway Group
(Clayton Form. )
Providence
Ripley
Cuss eta
Bluff town
Eutaw
Tuscaloosa
Sand and gravel, with silt and
clay
Sand and gravel, with silt, clay
and boulders
Sand and gravel
Clay; clayey sand; calcareous
sandstone; phosphatic sandy
limestone; marl
Limestone , sandy , phosphatic
Limestone, dense to soft and
chalky, with chert and gypsum
Limestone, fossiliferous or dense
and dolomitic; Sand, marl and clay
Glauconitic limestone and sand,
pyritic and dolomitic some gypsum
and chert
Alternating micaceous lignitic
clay and sand with some glauconitic
limestone
Glauconitic limestone with minor
clay and sand
Alternating green, red and purple
micaceous clays and fine to
coarse sand with sandy limestone
Contain appreciable
water; not used due to
flooding
Often too high above
streams to be recharged
Dry because of drainage
or not used due to
flooding
Relatively impermeable
serves as a confining
unit 0-3 (0-50)
Yields up to 12.5
(200)
Major aquifer 1.25-
131 (20-2100)
Major aquifer
Yields 2 to 250
(30 - 4,000)
Yields as high as
19-75 (300-1,200)
some connate
water downdip
Tuscahoma Sand will
yield up to 31
(500) in area of
limestone-sand aquifer
Yields 15.5 - 106
(250-1,700)
Major aquifer
Yields 3-?5
(50-1,200) may
be high in iron and is
saline downdip
-------
Mississippi
There are two basic rock types in Mississippi: the consoli-
dated sedimentary rocks of the extreme northeast corner of
the state (a part of the Unglaciated Central ground-water
region) and the unconsolidated to semi-consolidated sedi-
ments of the Coastal Plain (Figure 6). The consolidated
rocks consist of sandstone, limestone, and weathered chert
of Paleozoic age. The sediments of the Coastal Plain are of
Cretaceous, Tertiary and Quaternary age, and consist of
clay, silt, sand, gravel, marl, chalk, and limestone. These
form a wedge-shaped mass which in the northern part of the
state dips westerly toward the axis of the Mississippi
Structural Trough; the trough coincides roughly with the
present course of the Mississippi River. In southern
Mississippi the sediments dip southward toward the Gulf
Coast Geosyncline. Figure 14 is a generalized geologic map
of Mississippi.
Consolidated Rocks -
The sandstone, limestone, and weathered chert of Paleozoic
age occur in a very small area in the northeast. The water
quality is generally good and well yields may be as high as
50 1/s (800 gpm). Electric logs of borings for oil and gas
in this area indicate that undeveloped portions of this
aquifer are available for use in several counties.32)
Unconsolidated and Semi-Consolidated Sediments -
The unconsolidated and semi-consolidated sediments of the
Coastal Plain cover almost the entire state. Table 8 lists
the stratigraphic units, their generalized lithology and
thickness, and their water-bearing properties. Aquifers
capable of yielding 125 1/s (2,000 gpm) or more to wells are
found in almost three-fourths of the counties of the state.^
The various aquifers are used as sources of water in their
outcrop areas and downdip to a point where the overlying
shallow aquifers are more economical to develop, or to a
point where the water quality renders the water unuseable.
North Carolina
North Carolina lies principally in the Coastal Plain and
Piedmont physiographic provinces, with a small segment along
the western edge lying in the Blue Ridge physiographic
province (Figure 5). The state is situated in the Ungla-
ciated Appalachian and Coastal Plain ground-water regions.
The Unglaciated Appalachian Region is underlain by igneous,
metamorphic and consolidated sedimentary rocks. The Coastal
44
-------
TENNESSEE
pi AIN ROCK AGE
MEXICO
.... .1
• • • • •!
. . . . .1
pOVJ"
t> t -o o
R^
PLEISTOCENE
MIOCENE
EOCENE
CRETACEOUS
I
CONSOLIDATED ROCK TYPE
CARBONATE AND SANDSTONE
Figure 14. Generalized geologic map of
Mississippi.30,31)
45
-------
Table 8. GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS IN MISSISSIPPI31"40*
Water-bearing properties
Stratigraphic Generalized lithology Yield range and average
System Series units and thickness metres (feet) in 1/s (gpm)
Quaternary
Tertiary
Holocene
Pleistocene
Pliocene
Miocene
Oligocene
Eocene
Claiborne Group
Alluvium
Loess
Terrace Deposits
Citronelle
Graham Ferry
Pascagoula
Hattiesburg
Catahoula
Vicksburg
Forest Hill
Yazoo Clay
Moodys Branch
Cockfield
Cook Mountain
Kosciusko
(Sparta Sand)
Zilpha
Winona
Tallahatta (Neshoba
and Meridian Sand)
Silt, clay/ coarse sands and
gravels, 0-61 (0-200)
Silt (windblown) 0-3 3 (0-108)
Sand and gravel w/clay,
0-31 (0-100)
Sand, gravel, silt and clay
0-31 (0-100)
Sands and gravels separated by
clays, 0-61 (0-200)
Sands and gravels separated by
clays
Pascagoula 0-305 (0-1,000)
Hattiesburg 0-122 (0-400)
Catahoula 0-275 (0-900)
Sand, marl, and limestone
0-49 (0-160)
Sand 0-76 (0-250)
Clay 0-160 (0-525)
Marl 3-14 (10-45)
Clay w/lignitic beds and coarse
sands 0-168 (0-550)
Sand and limestone 0-76 (0-250)
Sands and clays
0-244 (0-800)
Carbonaceous shale and clay
w/lenses of silt and sand
0-153 (0-500)
Sand, fossiliferous, glauconitic,
fine to coarse 0-15 (0-50)
Sand, micaceous, fine to coarse
w/clay, shale, claystone, silt-
stone, and sandstone 0-198 (0-650)
Major aquifer
2-225 (30-3,600
78 (1,250)
Not an aquifer
Locally important
Major aquifer
0.6-39 (10-628)
17 (268)
Major aquifer
4-94 (63-1,500)
27 (428)
Major aquifer often
hard to separate these
units
0.1-93 (2-1,484)
18 (285)
Generally not an
aquifer
Minor aquifer
Confining bed
Not an aquifer
Major aquifer
0.06-97 (1-1,550)
27 (425)
Not an aquifer
Major aquifer
0.6-206 (10-3,298)
31 (502)
Not an aquifer
Minor aquifer
Major aquifer
0.2-86 (3-1,375)
26 (417)
-------
Table 8 (oont). GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS IN MISSISSIPPI
31-40)
System
Series
Stratigraphic
units
Generalized lithology
and thickness metres (feet)
Water-bearing properties
Yield range and average
in 1/s (gpm)
Tertiary
Eocene
Paleocene
Wilcox Group
Midway Group
Sand, shale, silt and clay
0-1068 (0-3,500)
Sand, clay, limestone and marl
0-207 (0-680)
Major aquifer
0.6-136 (10-2,182)
20 (312)
Not an aquifer
Prairie Bluff
Chalk and Owl Creek
Chalk and marl
12 (40)
Not an aquifer
Ripley
Sand, clay, limestone and chalk,
0-137 (0-450)
Major aquifer
1-16 (15-250)
6 (101)
Demopolis Chalk
Chalk, 0-153 (0-500)
Cretaceous
Gulf
Not an aquifer
Coffee Sand
Sand, sandy clay and calcareous
sandstone 0-76 (0-250)
Minor aquifer
10-22 (160-350)
17 (274)
Moorevilie Chalk
Chalk, 0-61 (0-200)
Not an aquifer
Eutaw
Sand, glauconitic, fine, silty
0-61 (0-200)
Major aquifer
1.7-53 (27-845)
21 (343)
Tuscaloosa
Sand, coarse and gravel, rounded
w/clay, 0-458 (0-1,500)
Major aquifer
0.6-63 (10-1,000)
22 (358)
Lower
Cretaceous
Comanche
Undifferentiated
Sand, silt, gravel, chalk and
limestone, 0-305 (0-1,000)
Potential aquifer
(untapped)
PennsyIvanian,
Mississippian,
and Devonian
Undifferentiated
carbonates and
sandstone
Sandstone, limestone and weathered
chert, 305-plus (1,000-plus)
Minor aquifer
(locally important)
6-50 (100-800)
28 (446)
-------
Plain, situated in the eastern half of the state, is
underlain by beds of sand, clay, marl, and limestone. These
deposits form a thickening wedge of sediments to the south-
east. Figure 15 is a generalized geologic map of North
Carolina.
Consolidated Rocks -
The igneous and metamorphic rocks are very complex in char-
acter and occurrence, but may be considered to be of two
general types: massive granite-like rocks, and bedded
slate-like rocks. Ground water is stored in the weathered
zone and also in the rock itself where fracturing has taken
place. Water moves through these openings much less readily
than through the pores of the sediments of the Coastal
Plain, and well yields of less than 1.9 1/s (30 gpm) are
common. Statistics on municipal and industrial wells in the
region show that 60 percent yield at least 1.1 1/s (18 gpm) ,
40 percent yield at least 2.1 1/s (33 gpm), and 20 percent
yield at least 3.4 1/s (54 gpm).42)
Two northeast-trending belts of consolidated sedimentary
rocks of Triassic age are situated in the region. These
rocks, chiefly sandstones and shales, are tightly cemented
and dense. Water occurs chiefly in joints, and yields of
wells are somewhat comparable to those of the surrounding
igneous and metamorphic rocks. Small domestic ground-water
supplies are commonly available, but few wells yield as much
as 4.7 1/s (75 gpm).
Unconsolidated Rocks -
The Coastal Plain occupies the eastern portion of North
Carolina. The plain is characterized by a gentle rise from
sea level at the coast to an elevation of more than 91.4 m
(300 ft) along the western inner margin. Deposits of sand,
clay, marl, and limestone of Cretaceous, Tertiary, and
Quaternary age dip seaward. The geologic materials are
Unconsolidated except for some limestones. Table 9 lists
the geologic units of the Coastal Plain and their charac-
teristics .
The Coastal Plain is primarily a rather large and complex
artesian system. The alternating layers of permeable and
relatively impermeable beds and their gentle seaward slopes
produce artesian conditions. The aquifers, which commonly
are medium- to coarse-grained sands or limestones, and the
intervening impermeable beds, commonly clays or shales, vary
greatly in thickness and areal extent. Some geologic forma-
tions contain several aquifers and several impermeable
48
-------
COASTAL PLAIN ROCK AGE
PLEISTOCENE
MIOCENE
CONSOLIDATED ROCK TYPES
=3 IGNEOUS AND METAMORPHIC
SEDIMENTARY
0<*
V
^
0 20 4O 60 80 100 Km.
I .'.'.'.—I .J
I 1^ l 1 l T
0 20 40 6O Mi.
Figure 15. Generalized geologic map of North Carolina.
-------
Table 9.
GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS - NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL PLAIN41"4^
System
Series
Stratigraphic
units
Quaternary
Tertiary
01
O
Cretaceous
Holocene
Jnnamed
Generalized lithology
Pleistocene
Columbia Group
^roatan Sand
Pliocene
Duplin Marl
Miocene
bforktown
Trent Marl
Eocene
Castle Hayne
Limestone
Paleocene
Beaufort
Upper Cretaceous
Lower Cretaceous
Haccamaw
Pee Dee
Black Creek
Tuscaloosa
Patuxent (?)
Sands, clays and gravels
Water-bearing
properties
Yield range in 1/s (gpm)
Sandy clay, clayey sand and some
clean sand and gravel
Sand, fossiliferous
Shell marl and calcareous sands
and clays
Calcareous sands, clays, marls
Interbedded sands and clays with
some sandy limestone layers
Limestone, calcareous sandstone,
sand and marls
Limestone, sandy limestone,
calcareous sandstone, calcareous
sands, and marls
Glauconitic sands
Interbedded sands, clays and marls
glauconitic
Thinly laminated sands and clays
pyritic, lignitic, micaceous
Upper portion is a calcareous
greensand and marine clay
Arkosic sand, clay and gravel
Sand, silt, clay
Domestic wells
Source of major portion
of domestic supplies
0.3-3.8 (5-60)
Minor aquifer
(maximum of 19
(300)
Low yield to domestic
wells
Low yield to domestic
wells
Yields 3-41 1/s
(50-650)
Yields 12.5-63
(200-1,000)
Major aquifer 3-63
(50-1,000)
Minor aquifer
Major aquifer
5-113 (80-1,800)
Major aquifer
3-54 (50-860)
Major aquifer
2-63 (35-1,000)
Generally contains
saline water
-------
layers, whereas other formations compose only a part of an
aquifer. Many aquifers are separated by beds that are
lenticular and not altogether impermeable. Considerable
vertical leakage takes place where there is a difference in
head between such aquifers.
Two types of artesian systems generally characterize the
region: the Cretaceous sand aquifer and the Tertiary lime-
stone aquifer. The Cretaceous sand aquifer is developed for
water supply over a broad area. It consists of several sand
beds that are confined beneath intervening beds of clay-
Some industrial and municipal wells utilize multiple-screened
wells, and water is withdrawn from several sand aquifers.
Many of these wells yield more than 31.5 1/s (500 gpm) with
less than 30.5 m (100 ft) of drawdown. Other wells, common-
ly of the open-end tubular type, obtain high yields from the
Tertiary limestone aquifers. 3)
Throughout the Coastal Plain, the water-table aquifer is
used widely for individual domestic water supplies. However,
there is no significant use of this aquifer for industrial
and municipal water supply. The water-table aquifer is com-
posed principally of sands varying widely in character and
age from place to place. It is commonly less than 9.2 m (30
ft) thick, and is underlain by clay that represents the top
confining bed of the artesian system.
South Carolina
South Carolina is located in parts of three physiographic
provinces (Figure 5) . The southeastern portion of the state
is in the Coastal Plain, and except for a small area of the
Blue Ridge province in the extreme northwest, the remainder
is in the Piedmont province. The area also lies in two
ground-water regions: the Coastal Plain and the Unglaciated
Appalachians (Figure 6).
The Blue Ridge portion of the Unglaciated Appalachians con-
tains mainly crystalline and consolidated sedimentary rocks
in which ground water occurs in fractures or the weathered
zone. The Piedmont is underlain by folded metamorphic rocks
intruded by bodies of igneous rocks. The Coastal Plain
ground-water region is composed of generally unconsolidated
to partially consolidated sedimentary rocks. Figure 16 is
a generalized geologic map of South Carolina.
Piedmont-Blue Ridge Aquifers -
The rocks of the Piedmont-Blue Ridge physiographic region
consist of granite, schist, gneiss, slate, and phyllite.
51
-------
Ln
CONSOLIDATED ROCK TYPES
3 IGNEOUS AND METAMORPHIC
]J PLIOCENE
MIOCENE
OLIGOCENE
t ,.c".\ EOCENE
PALEOCENE
CRETACEOUS
COASTAL PLAIN ROCK AGE
3 PLEISTOCENE AND HOLOCENE
Figure 16. Generalized geologic map of South Carolina. •'-'
-------
Most wells will yield less than 3 1/s (50 gpm), but a few
yield as much as 19 1/s (300 gpm).H) The ground water is
stored in open fractures or within pores of the residuum.
Granites and schists usually have the highest yields.
Coastal Plain Aquifers -
The unconsolidated rocks of the South Carolina Coastal Plain
consist of a thickening sequence of southeastward dipping
beds of sand, gravel, clay, limestone and marl. The thick-
ness of these sediments probably exceeds 914 m (3,000 ft)
near the Atlantic coastline.il) Table 10 lists the Coastal
Plain stratigraphic units, their generalized lithology, and
their water-bearing properties.
In the extreme south of South Carolina, the sedimentary
rocks lie in a shallow basin centered at Savannah, Georgia.
The major limestone aquifer in this area is the northernmost
extension of the Ocala Limestone, a part of the "principal
artesian aquifer" of Georgia and the Floridan aquifer of
Florida. Other major aquifers are situated and developed in
the Coastal Plain. The Tuscaloosa Formation underlies
essentially the entire Coastal Plain. The Peedee and Black
Creek Formations, which act as a single aquifer, are located
throughout the central and eastern part of the lower Coastal
Plain. The Black Mingo Formation is a major aquifer in the
central coastal area. The Santee Limestone is generally
utilized from the central coastal area to some 97 km (60 mi)
or more inland.
Virginia
Ground-water use in Virginia is presently small compared
with use of surface water, but ground water is an important
source of supply both locally and regionally. The ground-
water reservoir consists of a variety of aquifers composed
of both consolidated and unconsolidated deposits. Figure 17
is a generalized geologic map of Virginia. Portions of the
state lie in five different physiographic provinces
(Figure 5).
Consolidated Rocks -
From west to east, the consolidated rocks consist of gently
to intensely folded sedimentary rocks. Of the three princi-
pal types of rocks, the carbonate rocks occur beneath major
lowlands such as the Shenandoah Valley, where they form the
most productive aquifers. Yields commonly are as much as
19 1/s (300 gpm). The other rock types, sandstone and
shale, generally underlie ridges or upland areas and yield
sufficient water only for rural and domestic supplies.
53
-------
Table 10. GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS - SOOTH CAROLINA COASTAL PLAIN50' 51' 52)
System
Series
Stratigraphic
units
Water-bearing
properties
Quaternary
Tertiary
Holocene or
Pleistocene
Pliocene
Miocene
Oligocene
Eocene
c
Jackso
0)
fi
8
3
-------
Table 10 (cont) . GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS - SOUTH CAROLINA COASTAL PLAIN
50, 51, 52)
System
Series
Stratigraphic
units
Cretaceous
t_n
Ln
Generalized lithology
Water-bearing
properties
Yield range in 1/s (gpm)
Upper
Cretaceous
Peedee
Black Creek
Ellenton
Tuscaloosa
Glauconitic, quartz sand and
interbedded lenses of sandy marl
or limestone and thick dark clay
Coarse-grain, glauconitic, phospha-
tic quartz sand interbedded with
black lignitic, pyritic clay
Similar to the Black Creek Forma-
tion, but the sands are coarser and
contain selenite
Quartzitic and arkosic, micaceous
medium to coarse sand and gravel
interbedded with clay. Clays
separate major unit into various
aquifers
Yields of 4-75
(60-1,200)
Similar yield as
Peedee Formation but
high in iron and
sulfate.
Most important aquifer
in State, very low in
dissolved solids low
pH, soft, with some
high iron and sulfate
Yields up to 225
(3,600)
-------
Ul
CONSOLIDATED ROCK TYPES
[ | IGNEOUS AND METAMORPHIC
[ZI7>1 SANDSTONE AND CONGLOMERATE
CARBONATES WITH SANDSTONE AND SLATE
COASTAL PLAIN ROCK AGE
^ PLEISTOCENE AND HOLOCENE
^j MIOCENE
^ EOCENE
3 CRETACEOUS
NORTH CAROLINA
20 40
60 80 KX) Km.
I I I
20
40 60 Ml.
Figure 17. Generalized geologic map of Virginia.41'
-------
In the central half of the state, crystalline rocks such as
granite and diorite, and metamorphic rocks such as schist,
gneiss, phyllite, slate, and quartzite yield small quan-
tities of water for domestic and rural use. Residual
weathered bedrock materials, which range from about 6 to 30
m (20 to 100 ft) in thickness, in places yield as much or
more water to wells than the underlying unweathered bed-
rock. ID
Local bodies of sedimentary rocks of Triassic age occur in
elongated downfaulted basins in the central area. Beds of
sandstone and conglomerate in these basins comprise fair to
moderately good aquifers with reported yields of some wells
being as high as 38 1/s (600 gpm).H) Less permeable shale
and diabase in these basins yield quantities of water gen-
erally sufficient only for domestic supplies. Table 11
lists the lithologic and water-bearing properties of the
consolidated rocks in Virginia.
Unconsolidated Deposits -
These deposits of sand, gravel, and clay occur in two geo-
logic settings. The first, and least important, occurrence
is in the form of discontinuous deposits in stream channels
and as terrace deposits on the bedrock surface. These
deposits, mainly of Pleistocene and Holocene age, commonly
are hydraulically connected to streams and yield moderate
quantities of water locally to dug and drilled wells.
The principal body of unconsolidated deposits is a wedge of
Coastal Plain sediments which thickens from a feather edge
at the Fall Line at the eastern boundary of the Piedmont
Province to probably more than 900 m (3,000 ft) at the
shoreline.-'--'-^ The deposits, composed of beds and lenses of
sand, gravel, and clay of Cretaceous through Holocene ages,
are highly productive and contain water in several aquifers
under confined and unconfined conditions. The principal
aquifer is in the Patuxent Formation. Well yields range
from about 6.3 1/s to a few hundred 1/s (100 gpm to several
thousand gpm).H' The water is of good quality except in
deep zones containing connate salty water and in tongues and
wedges of salt water, which occur in all aquifers at or near
the shoreline. Table 12 lists the stratigraphic units and
the water-bearing properties of the unconsolidated rocks.
57
-------
Table 11
LITHOLOGIC AND WATER-BEARING PROPERTIES OF CONSOLIDATED ROCKS IN VIRGINIA
11, 53, 54, 55)
Physiographic Geologic Principal Water-Bearing Properties
Province Age Rock Type Yield range in 1/s (gpm)
Appalachian
Plateau and
Valley and
Ridge
Ln
00 Blue Ridge
and
Piedmont
Piedmont
Chiefly
Cambrian to
Pennsylvanian
Chiefly
Precambrian
to
Ordovician
Triassic
Sandstone
Shale
Carbonates
(Limestone
and
Dolomite)
Igneous &
Metamorphic
(Granite,
gneiss, schist,
diorite ,
phyllite slate;
quartz ite, and
marble )
Sandstone and
conglomerate
Shale
Igneous
(Diabase)
Water in openings along faults, joints, fractures and bedding
planes; water quality generally good except locally near coal
mining areas where acid and high iron conditions are common.
Yields generally about 0.3 - 1.9 (5 - 30) but as
much as a few tens of liters per second (several hundred gpm)
locally.
Occurrence of water same as above. Yields generally about 0.6 -
3 (10 to 50) .
Important aquifers. Water in openings along joints, fractures,
bedding planes , solution channels , and cavities ; hardness
moderate to excessive, moderate to large yields.
Minor aquifers ; Water mainly in openings along fractures ,
joints, and rock contacts, and in thick weathered residual
deposits on bedrock surface; water is soft to moderately hard.
Yields generally range from a few liters per second (few gallons
per minute) .
Important aquifers locally; rocks occur in several elongated
down-faulted basins; water in openings along bedding planes,
joints, and faults, and in pore spaces; water moderately to
highly mineralized; iron and sulfate are locally excessive;
yields range from about 1.9 - 38 (30-600).
Minor aquifers. Water in openings along joints, fractures,
and bedding planes; yields generally less than 1.3 (20).
Minor scattered aquifers; water in openings along joints and
fractures; yields generally less than 0.6 (10).
-------
Table 12. GEOLOGIC UNITS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS - VIRGINIA COASTAL PLAIN
56'
System
Quaternary
Tertiary
Cretaceous
Series
Pliocene-
Holocene
Miocene
Eocene
Paleocene
Upper (?)
Upper
Lower
Stratigraphic
Richards (1967)
Yorktown Formation
St Marys Formation
Choptank Formation
Calvert Formation
Chickahominy and
Piney Point Fms.
Nanjemoy Formation
Aguia Formation
Mattaponi Formation
Raritan Formation
Patapsco Formation
Arundel Formation
Patuxent Formation
: Units
Teifke (1973)
Columbia Group
Yorktown
Formation
(possibly
Pliocene in
part)
Calvert
Formation
Nanjemoy
Formation
Mattaponi
Formation
"transitional
beds"
Patuxent
Formation
Generalized
Lithology
Chiefly sand and gravel;
some silt and clay.
Terrace, stream channel,
and beach deposits
Silt, sand, cemented
shell beds; glauconitic
sand
Clay, silty clay, sandy
clay, shells, and basal
sand unit
Coarse quartz ; glaucon-
itic sand, shell beds,
limestone, and clay
Glauconitic clay and
sand, shell beds, dolo-
clay; basal sand and
gravel
Fine sand and clay,
clayey gravel, lignite
Med to coarse sand and
gravel ; interbedded
clay & silt. Underlain
by crystalline basement
rocks
Water-bearing Properties
Water-table aquifer; water
is soft; general quality
is fair to good; iron con-
tent excessive locally;
mainly for scattered rural
and domestic supplies;
low to moderate yield
Minor aquifers; confining
unit in part; important
source of water on Eastern
Shore Peninsula; low to
moderate yield
Minor aquifers; hard water;
mainly serves as a con-
fining unit.
Minor aquifers; chloride
content increases toward
eastern shoreline.
Mainly minor aquifers;
water soft to hard.
Major artesian aquifer;
water soft to hard;
increasing chloride con-
tent near shoreline; yields
up to 125 (2,000) .
Ul
'.O
-------
REFERENCES CITED
SECTION IV
1. Fenneman, N. N., "Physiography of eastern United States",
McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, 1938.
2. Murray, G. E., "Geology of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal
Province of North America", Harpers Geoscience Series,
N.Y., 1961.
3. Thornbury, W. D., "Regional Geomorphology of the United
States", John Wiley & Sons, N. Y., 1965.
4. Thomas, H. E., "Ground Water Regions of the United
States-Their Storage Facilities", U. S. 83rd Congress,
House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, The
Physical and Economic Foundation of Natural Resources,
Vol. 3, 1952.
5. Kinney, D. M., "National Atlas, Plate 75-Geological Map
of the United States", U. S. Geological Survey, 1966.
6. U. S. Geological Survey, "National Atlas, Plate 123-
Productive Aquifers and Withdrawals from Wells", 1965.
7. King, P- B., "National Atlas, Plate 71-Tectonic Fea-
tures", U. S. Geological Survey, 1967.
8. Bureau of Census, "1970 Census of Population", U. S.
Department of Commerce, 1972.
9. Geraghty, J. J., and others, "Water Atlas of the United
States", Port Washington, New York, Water Information
Center, Inc., 1973.
10. Copeland, C. W., (Editor), "Geology of the Alabama
Coastal Plain, A Guidebook", Geological Survey of
Alabama, Circular 47, 1968.
11. McGuinness, C. L., "The Role of Ground Water in the
National Water Situation", U. S. Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 1800, 1963.
12. Bennison, A. P., "Geological Highway Map of the South-
eastern Region", American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, U. S. Geological Highway Map Series, No. 9,
1975.
60
-------
13. La Moreaux, P. E., "Fluoride in the Ground Water of the
Tertiary Area of Alabama", Geological Survey of Alabama,
Bulletin 59, 1948.
14. Vernon, R. 0., and H. S. Puri, "Geologic Map of Florida",
Florida Division of Geology Map Series, No. 18, 1964.
15. Pascale, C. A., "Estimated yield of fresh-water wells
in Florida", Florida Bureau of Geology Map Series, No.
70, 1975.
16. Hyde, L. W., "Principal Aquifers in Florida", Florida
Division of Geology Map Series, No. 16, 1965.
17. Florida Department of Natural Resources, "Florida Water
and Related Land Resources Kissimmee-Everglades Area",
1974.
18. Florida Department of Natural Resources, "Florida Water
and Related Land Resources St. Johns River Basin",
1970.
19. Klein, H., "The Shallow Aquifer of Southwest Florida",
Florida Bureau of Geology Map Series, No. 53, 1972.
20. Puri, H. S., and R. 0. Vernon, "Summary of the Geology
of Florida and a Guidebook to the Classic Exposures",
Florida Geological Survey Special Publication No. 5,
1964.
21. Florida Board of Conservation, "Florida Land and Water
Resources Southwest Florida", 1966.
22. Florida Department of Natural Resources, "Water Re-
sources Information Needs for the Northwest Florida
Water Management District", 1975.
23. Smith, J. W., and M. A. Green, "Geologic Map of Georgia",
Georgia Department of Mines, Mining and Geology, 1968.
24. Cressler, C. W., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Gordon, Whitefield, and Murray Counties, Georgia",
Georgia Geological Survey Information Circular No. 47,
1974.
25. Cressler, C. W., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Floyd and Polk Counties, Georgia", Georgia Geological
Survey Information Circular No. 39, 1970.
26. Le Grand, H. E., and A. S. Furcron, "Geology and Ground-
Water Resources of Central-East Georgia", Georgia
Geological Survey Bulletin No. 64, 1956.
61
-------
27. Thompson, M. T., and others, "The Availability and Use
of Water in Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey Bulletin
No. 65, 1956.
28. Wait, R. L., "Source and Quality of Ground Water in
Southwestern Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey In-
formation Circular No. 18, 1960.
29. Sever, C. W., "Reconnaissance of the Ground Water and
Geology of Thomas County, Georgia", Georgia Geological
Survey Information Circular No. 34, 1966.
30. Mississippi Board of Water Commissioners, "Map of Im-
portant Aquifers in Mississippi", Progress Report,
Biloxi, Mississippi, January 1960.
31. Shows, T. N., "Water Resources of Mississippi",
Mississippi Geological Survey Bulletin 113, 1970.
32. Lang, J. W., and E. H. Boswell, "Public and Industrial
Water Supplies in a Part of Northern Mississippi",
Mississippi Geological Survey, Bulletin 90, 1960.
33. Moore, W. H., and others, "Hinds County Geology and
Mineral Resources", Mississippi Geological Survey
Bulletin 105, 1965.
34. Brown, F. B., and others, "Geology and Ground-Water Re-
sources of the Coastal Area in Mississippi", Mississippi
Geological Survey Bulletin 60, 1944.
35. Wasson, B. E., "Source and Development of Public and
Industrial Water Supplies in Northwestern Mississippi",
Mississippi Board of Water Commissioners Bulletin No.
65-2, 1965.
36. Shows, T. N., W. L. Broussard, and C. P. Humphreys,
Jr., "Water for Industrial Development in Forrest,
Greene, Jones, Perry, and Wayne Counties, Mississippi",
Mississippi Research and Development Center,^1966.
37. Boswell, E. H., F. H. Thomson, and D. E. Shattles,
"Water for Industrial Development in Clarke, Jasper,
Lauderdale, Newton, Scott and Smith Counties,"
Mississippi Research and Development Center, 1970.
38. Newcombe, R., Jr., E. J. Tharpe and W. T. Oakley,
"Water for Industrial Development in Copiah and Simpson
Counties, Mississippi", Mississippi Research and
Development Center, 1972.
62
-------
39. Newcombe, R., Jr., and F. H. Thomson, "Water for In-
dustrial Development in Amite, Franklin, Lincoln, Pike
and Wilkinson Counties, Mississippi," Mississippi
Research and Development Center, 1970.
40. Shattles, D. E., J. A. Callahan and W. L. Broussard,
"Water Use and Development in Jackson County, Mississippi
1964-67" , Mississippi Board of Commissioners Bulletin
67-3, 1967.
41. Renfro, H. B., and D. E. Feray, "Geological Highway
Map of the Mid-Atlantic Region", American Association
of Petroleum Geologists, U. S. Geological Highway Map
Series, No. 4, 1970.
42. Le Grand, H. E., Personal Communication, 1975.
43. Le Grand, H. E., "Geology and Hydrology of the Atlantic
and Gulf Coastal Plain as related to Management of
Radioactive Wastes", U. S. Geological Survey Report
TEI-805, prepared for the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission,
1961.
44. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Re-
sources, "Status Report on Ground-Water Conditions in
Capacity Use Area No. 1 Central Coastal Plain, North
Carolina", North Carolina Department of Natural and
Economic Resources, Ground-Water Section, Ground-Water
Bulletin 21, 1974.
45. Nelson, P- F., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
the Swanquarter Area, North Carolina", North Carolina
Department of Water Resources, Ground-Water Bulletin 4,
1964.
46. Mundorff, M. J., "Progress Report on Ground Water in
North Carolina", North Carolina Department of Conserva-
tion and Development, Division of Mineral Resources,
Bulletin 47, 1945.
47. Lloyd, 0. B., Jr., "Ground-Water Resources of Chowan
County, North Carolina", North Carolina Department of
Water and Air Resources, Division of Ground Water,
Ground-Water Bulletin 14, 1968.
48. Sumsion, C. T., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Pitt County, North Carolina", North Carolina Department
of Water and Air Resources, Division of Ground Water,
Ground-Water Bulletin 18, 1970.
63
-------
49. Harris, W. H., and H. B. Wilder, "Geology and Ground-
Water Resources of the Hartford-Elizabeth City Area,
North Carolina", North Carolina Department of Water
Resources, Division of Ground Water, Ground-Water
Bulletin 10, 1966.
50. South Carolina Water Resources Commission, "'ACE'
Framework Study—Ashley-Combahee-Edisto River Basin,"
South Carolina Water Research Commission, 1972.
51. Siple, G. E., "Ground-Water Resources of Orangeburg
County, South Carolina", South Carolina State Develop-
ment Board, Division of Geology, Bulletin 36, 1975.
52. Duncan, D. A., "Ground Water Resources of South Carolina",
in Proceedings of the Water Well Seminar for Profess-
lonal Engineers, February 9- 1972, Columbia, South
Carolina: South Carolina Society of Professional
Engineers and South Carolina Water Resources Commiss-
ion, P. 16-25, 1972.
53. Virginia Department of Conservation and Economic
Development, "James River Basin Comprehensive Water Re-
sources Plan, Volume III, Hydrologic Analysis", Virginia
Department of Conservation and Economic Development,
Division of Water Resources, Planning Bulletin 215,
1970.
54. Virginia Department of Conservation and Economic
Development, "New River Basin Comprehensive Water Re-
sources Plan, Volume III, Hydrologic Analysis", Virginia
Department of Conservation and Economic Development,
Division of Water Resources, Planning Bulletin 203,
1967.
55. Virginia Department of Conservation and Economic
Development, "Potomac-Shenandoah River Basin Compre-
hensive Water Resources Plan, Volume III, Hydrologic
Analysis", Virginia Department of Conservation and
Economic Development, Division of Water Resources,
Planning Bulletin 209, 1969.
56. Richards, H. G., "Stratigraphy of Atlantic Coastal
Plain between Long Island and Georgia - Review,"
American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin,
Volume 51, p. 2400-2429, 1967.
57. Teifke, R. H., "Stratigraphic Units of the Lower
Cretaceous through Miocene Series," in. Geologic Studies,
Coastal Plain of Virginia, Virginia Division of Mineral
Resources, Bulletin 83, pt. 1, p. 1-78, 1973.
64
-------
SECTION V
NATURAL GROUND-WATER QUALITY
INTRODUCTION
Natural ground-water quality varies from region to region,
as a result of geologic and climatic conditions. The
chemical nature of ground water evolves from the interaction
of water with rock materials and from the length of time
water is in contact with these rocks. Natural ground-water
quality is intimately related to the solubility of the
minerals in the rocks through which the water moves, so that
the chemical character of ground water generally can be
associated with a particular rock type. Where the rocks are
similar in composition over broad areas, the chemical char-
acter of the water is generally consistent. Where localized
occurrences of soluble, atypical minerals are present, the
chemical quality of local ground water reflects those
minerals.
Because ground water is not static, but is constantly in
motion, there commonly is a change in quality as water moves
within an aquifer. At the point where the water first
enters the ground its chemical character resembles that of
rain water, but as it moves through the earth its composi-
tion is influenced more and more by the chemical character
of the rocks. The capability of an aquifer to circulate
water has a distinct influence on the mineral content. In
the highly permeable, but areally limited, surficial sand
aquifers, circulation is rapid and water quality is gener-
ally good. In extensive aquifers, however, water can
migrate many miles from the intake area to the discharge
area, and its mineral content generally increases due to the
very long travel time associated with such a migration.
Changes in the relative concentrations of some constituents
occur, such as the softening that takes place during move-
ment through greensands.
Consolidated rock aquifers are quite variable in their
circulation capability, and generally, have only limited
circulation below depths of about 152 m (500 ft). At
greater depths, the water can be highly mineralized, with
high chloride and total dissolved solids the primary objec-
tionable constituents. Figure 18 is a map of the seven-
state study area showing the depth to mineralized ground
water in the major aquifers.
65
-------
/MINERALIZED WATER AT
-x-' DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 500
I FEET, BUT CONTAINING LESS
-_,THAN 1000 MG/L OF
(DISSOLVED SOLIDS.
GULF OF
DEPTH BELOW LAND SURFACE TO SHALLOWEST
ZONE OF GROUND WATER CONTAINING MORE THAN
1,000 MG/L OF DISSOLVED SOLIDS.
LESS THAN 500 FEET
[ | 500-1,000 FEET
GREATER THAN 1,000 FEET
Figure 18.
Depth to mineralized ground water in major
aquifers in the southeast United States.1)
66
-------
PRINCIPAL PROBLEMS OF NATURAL GROUND-WATER QUALITY
The principal problems of natural ground-water quality in
the Southeast are, in order of importance:
1. Hardness
2. Iron
3. Fluoride
4. Corrosiveness
5. Radionuclides
Each of these quality problems is discussed below followed
by a description of natural ground-water quality on a state-
by-state basis. Evaluation of the relative quality of
ground water is according to constituent limits for drinking
water recommended by the U. S. Public Health Service.2)
Hardness
Hardness of water results from the solution of alkaline-
earth minerals from the soil and rocks it passes through.
It is usually entirely attributable to calcium and magnesium,
and is expressed in terms of equivalent calcium carbonate.
Water containing carbon dioxide or other acid constituents
will readily dissolve carbonate minerals (principally in
limestones and dolomites). Some portion of hardness may be
due to the presence of gypsiferous beds in the rock.
Hard water is recognized by the scum or curd formed with
soap. Hard water results in the clogging of boilers and
pipes, and the coating of cooking vessels with a precipi-
tate. The precipitate is some combination of insoluble
carbonates and sulfates as well as silica.
Numerous aquifers of the Southeast contain hard water. An
accepted classification of hardness is as follows:3)
Hardness range
(mg/1 of CaC03) Description
0-60 Soft
61-120 Moderately hard
121-180 Hard
More than 180 Very hard
67
-------
The high hardness and associated high total dissolved solids
content in ground water cause considerable economic damage
to household appliances and plumbing (Table 13). Damages
from mineralized ground water for the seven states are esti-
mated to total some $144.4 million per year. Per-capita
household damages in areas served by private water well
systems range from a high of $10.97 in Florida to a low of
$1.04 in South Carolina.4)
Iron
The occurrence of iron in ground water is due to the leach-
ing of soluble iron from the rocks and sediments that serve
as aquifers. Each of the seven states in the Southeast is
bothered by locally excessive concentrations of iron in
ground water. The U. S. Public Health Service's recommended
limit for iron in drinking water is 0.3 mg/1.2) The limit
is set not for health reasons, but entirely for esthetic and
taste considerations.
Iron and manganese tend to precipitate as hydroxides and
stain laundry and porcelain fixtures. Iron bacteria such as
Crenothrix and Leptothrix will increase the clogging of well
screens and water pipes by forming iron hydroxide slimes.
Often, well users will note that their water is turbid with
iron hydroxide particles. This is attributable to changes
in ground-water level or rate of pumping that tend to loosen
and flush out the deposited iron hydroxides from the well or
plumbing fixtures.5)
Fluoride
Fluoride is present in nearly all igneous and metamorphic
rocks, where it substitutes for the hydroxyl in mineral
structures, principally in apatite, mica, and amphiboles.
Bedded phosphate deposits often contain several percent
fluoride. An additional source of fluoride is the mineral
fluorite which occurs in both igneous and sedimentary rocks.
Fluorides in sufficient quantities are toxic to humans and
may cause fluorosis and bone damage. Low concentrations of
0.8 to 1.5 mg/1 in drinking water aid reduction of dental
decay and are considered beneficial. Higher concentrations,
up to 5 mg/1, may cause mottling of teeth, but no other
harmful effects.^) U. S. Public Health Service drinking
water standards set a recommended upper limit on fluoride
that ranges from 0.8 to 1.7 mg/1 based on the prevailing air
temperature. Because more water is drunk in regions having
warmer climates, the fluoride content in such regions should
be lower to prevent excessive total fluoride intake. For
68
-------
Table 13. HOUSEHOLD DAMAGES CAUSED BY USE OF
MINERALIZED SURFACE AND GROUND WATER IN 19704)
Total Household Damage, Million $a)
Public Water Supply Private Well Total
State
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Mississippi
North
Carolina
South
Carolina
Virginia
Total:
State
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Mississippi
North
Carolina
South
Carolina
Treated
Surface
Water
6.3
5.3
2.8
0.6
5.1
1.9
11.4
33.4
Per
Public
Treated
Surface
Water
3.76
9.60
1.46
2.17
2.38
1.15
Treated
Ground
Water
3.4
40.8
3.7
3.3
2.3
0.4
2.8
56.7
Capita Household
3.3
18.6
9.9
1.4
9.6
0.5
11.0
54.3
Damage, $a)
Water Supply Private Well
Treated
Ground
Water
3.79
8.99
3.09
2.37
3.33
1.11
3.81
10.97
6.76
2.53
4.29
1.04
13.0
64.7
16.4
5.3
17.0
2.8
25.2
144.4
Total
3.78
9.53
3.58
2.38
3.35
1.12
Virginia
3.95
6.21
8.43
5.43
a) Based on a 7.5 percent discount rate.
69
-------
outright rejection of a water supply, the U. S. Public
Health Service sets the standard at 1.4 to 2.4 mg/1 or two
times the optimum recommended level.
Corrosiveness
A ground-water quality problem which can directly affect
health, and also cause economic loss of well equipment,
plumbing, and household appliances, is the corrosive nature
of certain waters. The hydrogeologic conditions that cause
corrosive waters are generally the opposite of those causing
encrustation and clogging of pipes. Encrusting waters are
usually hard, of high total mineral content and alkaline in
pH. Corrosive waters, not including saline waters, often
have a low mineral content, high dissolved CC>2 content, are
soft, and of acidic pH. Corrosive waters can occur in both
the recharge area of the aquifer and down gradient.
Corrosiveness of ground water tends to be a problem in
almost all of the sand aquifers, particularly in the outcrop
areas of the sands. Additionally, the crystalline rocks of
the Piedmont often yield acidic ground water. The median pH
of waters from both such rock materials in the Southeast
ranges from 5.7 to 7.0.
Radionuclides
Naturally radioactive substances in ground water are present
in almost all rocks even though the amounts are often below
detection limits. Development of the nuclear industry,
nuclear weapons testing, and the related increase of radio-
activity in the environment from fallout, required that
limits be set on human exposure to radiation.
The Federal Radiation Council has provided criteria in estab-
lishing limits for radioactivity in drinking water. These
limits are based upon three ranges of intake of radioac-
tivity. For each range, a measure of control action has
been defined as shown below:
Ranges of Transient
Rates of Daily Intake Graded Scale of Action
Range I Periodic confirmatory sur-
veillance as necessary
Range II Quantitative surveillance and
routine control
70
-------
Range III Evaluation and application of
additional control measures
as necessary
Limits have been set for daily intakes of radionuclides with
the provision that dose rates be averaged over a period of
one year. In the case of drinking water, recommended limits
have been established for only two nuclides, namely radium-
226, three pCi/1 (picocuries per liter), and strontium-90,
10 pCi/1, although a great variety of radionuclides may be
present. The accumulation of excessive radium and strontium
from water constitutes a health hazard. These radionuclides
ingested into the body are retained and deposited in the
bones, and ultimately may produce bone cancer.
Specific data for the occurrence of radium-226 in ground
waters of the southeast study area are presented in the
following paragraphs rather than in the tabulations of
selected chemical analyses for each state because the amount
of data is so minimal. Additionally, information indicating
that the ground water of certain geologic formations may
naturally contain high levels of radium-226 was uncovered
during the course of this study. These data are presented
here because such radiation can pose a threat to the public.
An assessment of the levels of radium and uranium in ground
waters of the United States was made from samples collected
from 1952 to 1958. The radium (species undifferentiated)
content of 80 ground water samples in the southeast ranged
from less than 0.1 to 4.7 pCi/1.7)
One of the South Carolina wells sampled in the above study
with a reported radium (species undifferentiated) concen-
tration of 4.7 pCi/1 was resampled by the U. S. Geological
Survey and found to have a radium-226 concentration of 5.7
pCi/1. Two additional wells not sampled previously but in
the same geologic formation, the Orangeburg Group of Eocene
Age, were sampled and were found to have concentrations of
4.6 and 7.1 pCi/1.8)
Evidence that ground water in Cretaceous sands may also have
localized high radium-226 levels comes from two wells sampled
in Alabama: a 122-m (401-ft) deep well in the Ripley Sand
yielded water with a radium-226 concentration of 2.1 pCi/1
and a 311-m (1,020-ft) deep well in the Eutaw Formation had
a concentration of 2.2 pCi/1.9) It is possible that higher
concentrations exist.
A study of 420 wells centering on the phosphate-producing
area of southern Florida showed that 68 percent of them
71
-------
contained ground water with radium-226 levels higher than
U. S. Public Health Service standards . 10) Exact analytical
data have not been released. The geology of the area is
such that the wells probably tap an aquifer which is com-
posed of Miocene sediments; these rock units are those
highest in phosphate content and also highest in fluoride
content.
A number of the geologic formations in the Southeast con-
taining radioactive minerals have one thing in common:
the presence of high amounts of organic matter in the form
of lignite (plant matter subjected to a partial coalifi-
cation process) . The close relationship between carbo-
naceous material and uranium has long been noted by
geologists working in the Colorado Plateau uranium-vanadium
deposits. I2) Additionally, it has been shown that there is
a direct correlation between organic carbon content and
uranium content in coal fields. 13) Uranium deposits occur
in the phosphates of Florida. 14) The phosphates occur as
phosphatized bone and shell material, where phosphate
replaces carbonate to form the mineral apatite.
Many of the geologic formations of the Coastal Plain of the
Southeast contain high concentrations of carbonaceous
matter, or evidence of past occurrence of organic matter
around which uranium-bearing ground water or ancient ocean
waters might have deposited uranium by a replacement or
direct precipitation process. Geologic units that should be
considered as more likely than others to contain ground
water with radium-226 are: Cretaceous sands of Virginia;
Peedee and Black Creek formation of Cretaceous age of North
Carolina and South Carolina; Orangeburg Group of Middle and
Upper Eocene age in South Carolina; Claiborne Group of
Eocene age and Cretaceous sands in Georgia; Tuscaloosa,
Eutaw and Ripley formations of Cretaceous age and formations
in the Eocene age Claiborne Group of Alabama; various lig-
nitic units of the Claiborne Group and Cretaceous sands of
Mississippi; and the phosphatic units such as the Miocene
age Hawthorn, Alachua and Bone Valley Formations of Florida,
the upper Miocene Duplin Marl of Georgia, and thew Miocene
units of South Carolina and North Carolina.
BASE-LINE GROUND-WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS
Natural ground-water quality conditions in each of the seven
states are discussed below, based on a review of the litera-
ture. Most of the studies reviewed for the preparation of
the data tables were made within the last 30 years and
incorporated chemical analysis data extending back as much
as 50 years. More recent changes in water quality stemming
72
-------
from man's activities may not be reflected in many of the
published reports. The chemical analyses tables presented
for each state show the number of samples (N), the range (R)
in concentrations, the median value (M), or the mode value
where median values could not be obtained.
Alabama
Ground water in Alabama has a natural chemical quality that
is suitable for most purposes. In the coastal areas there
is some high chloride due to salt-water encroachment.15)
Excessively high fluoride levels are recorded from two of
the aquifers and iron in the water is a problem in various
aquifers. Table 14 is a compilation of selected chemical
analyses of the ground water from the major Coastal Plain
aquifer and from the aquifers of the Interior Low Plateau,
Appalachian Plateau, and Valley and Ridge.
Most of the ground waters in Alabama are alkaline, soft to
moderately hard, and of low to moderate mineral content.
The Piedmont aquifers tend to yield slightly acidic ground
waters with some locally high nitrate levels. The Interior
Low Plateau, Appalachian Plateau, and Valley and Ridge
ground waters have high fluoride and nitrate (NC>3) concen-
trations in some places. The Ripley, Nanafalia, and
Gosport-Lisbon aquifers of the Coastal Plain have scattered
occurrences of high nitrate in the ground water of their
outcrop areas.
Of 611 water samples from wells tapping the major Coastal
Plain aquifers in Alabama, 40 percent contained iron concen-
trations exceeding the recommended limit of 0.3 mg/1. In
the Piedmont area and in the region comprising the
Appalachian Plateau, Interior Low Plateau, and Valley and
Ridge areas, the iron levels in the water exceeded the limit
for 51 percent and 54 percent of the samples, respectively.9)
The fluoride content of the ground water of the Eutaw and
Ripley aquifers of Cretaceous age in Alabama exceeded the
recommended upper limit of 1.0 mg/1 for 55 percent of 185
samples and for 26 percent of 101 samples, respectively.9)
The high level of fluoride in certain Alabama ground waters
was noted as early as 1940 and is attributed to fluoride in
phosphate and volcanic ash deposits in the upper part of the
formations. There seems to be a direct relationship between
the presence of high fluoride concentrations in the water of
these aquifers and the presence of soft water of high bicar-
bonate content in association with pyrite, lignite, phos-
phate, volcanic materials, and glauconite.16,17) The
fluoride content of the water in the Nanafalia and Lisbon
73
-------
Table 14. TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN ALABAMA9
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter).
Aquifer N
Piedmont
Plateaus and
Valley & Ridge
Tuscaloosa
Eutaw
Ripley
Clayton
Nanaf alia
Gosport-Lisbon
Miocene
103
113
236
287
48
4
7
9
20
Iron (Fe)
R
0-7.6
0-14
0-29
0-14
0-2.8
0-1.0
0-1.0
0-1.2
0-13
Sulfate (S04) Chloride (el)
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
M
.4
.4
.5
.1
.1
—
.2
.2
.3
N
120
232
184
189
106
8
45
55
66
R
0-40
0-2520
0-285
0-300
1-1120
0-108
1-410
1-86
0-70
M N
2
8
5
4
21
—
6
3
5
184
995
358
518
104
8
46
58
89
R
0-71
0-2700
0-4350
0-5690
2-1470
4-310
2-1870
1-29
1-2630
M
4
4
4
8
21
11
9
6
6
-------
Table 14 (cont.) TABULTION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN ALABAMA
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter).
9)
(Jl
Hardness (CaCO
Aquifer
Piedmont
Plateaus and
Valley & Ridge
Tuscaloosa
Eutaw
Ripley
Clayton
Nanafalia
Gosport-Lisbon
Miocene
N
190
1049
362
520
105
8
44
58
85
R
3-224
2-3540
1-1530
0-680
5-1890
32-215
5-245
5-154
1-166
M N
24
106
18
22
64
101
61
67
19
139
245
292
431
71
6
14
19
52
EH
R
4.6-9.4
4.6-8.8
3.9-10.6
4.5-9.0
4.8-9.2
6.4-8.2
5.7-8.6
6.3-8.7
4.9-8.5
M
6.7
7.6
7.0
7.9
7.7
7.9
7.6
7.9
7.4
-------
Table 14 (cont.) TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN ALABAMA *
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter).
Dissolved Solids
Fluoride
Aquifer N R
Piedmont
Plateaus and
Valley & Ridge
Tuscaloosa
Eutaw
Ripley
Clayton
Nanaf alia
Gosport-Lisbon
Miocene
116
144
184
185
101
8
35
46
63
0-1.
0-7.
0-2.
0-6.
0-4.
0-1.
0-1.
Orl.
0-1.
2
5
4
8
4
6
6
1
4
(F)
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
Nitrate (NO^)
M
.2
.1
.1
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
.1
N
104
196
100
122
87
8
43
51
60
R
0-68
0-83
0-28
0-30
0-80
0-9
0-159
0-88
0-17
M
3
1
oa)
1
1
1
oa>
1
oa)
Residue
N
3
88
64
83
14
—
6
11
12
on Evaporation
180° C.
R
10-154
12-3860
16-5240
93-9410
210-570
24-3490
31-255
25-4600
M
-
169
118
225
-
-
-
-
-
a) mode
-------
aquifers is also higher than normal but does not approach
the levels encountered in the Eutaw and Ripley aquifers.
Florida
Ground water in Florida is generally of good quality. Table
15 is a compilation of chemical analyses of selected con-
stituents in natural ground waters of the various aquifers.
The major aquifer in Florida is the Floridan, which under-
lies the entire state. Water from this aquifer is generally
hard, low in iron and fluoride, and is characterized by an
acid to slightly alkaline pH in the recharge areas and an
alkaline pH in the confined portion of the aquifer. Figure
11 shows the approximate areas where the Floridan and other
aquifers are the main source of supply; however, the boun-
daries do not represent the areal extents of the aquifers.
South of Lake Okeechobee and along the east coast north to
St. Augustine, the Floridan aquifer water is generally not
potable due to high total dissolved solids content.
The fluoride content of the Floridan aquifer water in the
western part of the Florida Panhandle exceeds the recom-
mended maximum of 1.0 mg/1 in 28 percent of samples taken
west of Apalachicola, and values as high as 13 mg/1 are
reported.40) The precise origin of the fluoride is unknown,
but is most likely attributable to naturally occurring
minerals that contain soluble fluoride.40) in the phosphate
producing area of south-central Florida, fluoride in the
ground water occurs in concentrations up to 4.0 mg/1, with
the greatest amounts in the Hawthorn and Tampa formations.
The Biscayne aquifer contains ground water that is generally
very hard, and 46 percent of the waters used in the ground-
water quality comparisons contained greater than 0.3 mg/1
iron. The ground water is more mineralized than that from
other aquifers and is also the most alkaline (pH 7.8). The
higher mineral content is attributable to residual saline
waters which have not been flushed out.
In the Florida Panhandle, the Sand and Gravel aquifer is the
principal source of ground water. The water is character-
ized by being very soft and low in mineral content. An
acidic nature and high iron content (greater than 0.3 mg/1
in 40 percent of the analyses), along with an apparent vul-
nerability to nitrate contamination, are other features of
the water quality.
77
-------
CO
Table 15. TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN FLORIDA18'39
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter)
Parameter
Shallow
Aquifer
Sand & Gravel
Aquifer
Biscayne
Floridana)
Iron
Sulfate (SO4)
Chloride (Cl)
Fluoride (F)
Nitrate (NO3)
Dissolved Solids
(Residue on Evap.
at 180° C.)
Hardness (CaC03>
PH
_
N
R
M
N
R
M
N
R
M
N
R
M
N
R
M
N
R
M
N
R
M
N
R
M
350
0-6.4
0.1
272
0-1600
17
360
2-1150
21
306
0-3.1
0.2
263
0-128
15
272
22-2660
275
424
2-1910
148
372
4.2-9.2
7.4
50
0-4.0
0.3
54
0-43
1
54
0-320
3
41
0-0.5
0.1
54
0-20
0.5
54
6-654
24
54
0-136
4.5
55
4.9-8.0
6.4
252
0-8.8
0.3
455
0-2500
17
552
5-18,000
20
196
0-0.9
0.4
301
0-16
0.1
445
58-33,000
325
494
22-6150
276
213
6.4-8.6
7.8
12
0-0.21
0.05
69
0-440
7
71
0 -192
11
71
0-1.7
0.2
66
0-12
0.45
70
95-804
201
70
45-615
151
71
6.2-8.6
7.5*>>
a) Represents 1970 withdrawals of 1.05 hm3/day (277 mgd) or 44 percent of the total
public water supply obtained from ground-water sources. "'
b) pH of the Floridan aquifer is biraodal (7.2 and 8.2)
-------
Covering most of Florida and serving as a source of water
supply for domestic wells and irrigation wells, the shallow
aquifers contain water that is generally alkaline, hard, and
of low iron content. However, the aquifer appears to be
susceptible to nitrate contamination. Nine percent of the
samples contained greater than 0.8 mg/1 fluoride, which is
the U. S. Public Health Service recommended maximum for
eastern and southern Florida where this aquifer is used most
intensely. The mineral content is quite variable due to the
various lithologies of the rock units making up the shallow
aquifer.
The location of the fresh and brackish water in the Floridan
Aquifer is shown on Figure 19. 4D This position of saline
water (greater than 1,000 mg/1 TDS) is attributable pri-
marily to geological controls and saline water that has not
been flushed out of the aquifer.
Georgia
The ground water of Georgia is suitable for most purposes,
and there are few serious quality problems. Those that do
exist are related to such factors as hardness, iron content,
corrosiveness, and residual salinity. Table 16 is a com-
pilation of selected ground-water chemical analyses for the
major Coastal Plain aquifers, and for the aquifers of the
Piedmont-Blue Ridge and Valley and Ridge (Paleozoic) areas.
Ground water in the Valley and Ridge area is generally of
good quality, although the carbonate rocks yield hard water.
Water from the sandstone and shale is soft, but often corro-
sive and high in iron content. In certain areas the deeper
waters may be slightly saline.
The Piedmont-Blue Ridge rocks, because of their less soluble
nature, yield soft water of low to moderate mineral content.
However, such waters tend to be corrosive and high in
iron.52)
The aquifers of the upper Coastal Plain yield ground water
of generally good quality, although the sands yield water
that is somewhat corrosive and may have a high iron content.
Downgradient, these waters become saline which generally
poses no real problem as there are other productive aquifers
above the saline waters.
The principal artesian aquifer of the lower Coastal Plain
contains ground water that is of good quality, although
hard. The dissolved solids content is moderately high, but
generally less than 600 mg/1. Highly mineralized water is
79
-------
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
LESS THAN 1,000 MG/L
|i;:j:j:;:j:j:;:j] GREATER THAN 1,000 MG/L
i
20
40
Figure 19.
Dissolved solids in water from the upper
part of the Floridan Aquifer in Florida.41)
80
-------
Table 16. TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN GEORGIA
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter)
42-61)
oo
Aquifer N
Piedmont- Blue Ridge
Paleozoic
(Valley & Ridge)
Upper Coastal Plain
Sands
Upper Coastal Plain
Carbonates & Sands
Lower Coastal Plain
Principal Artesian
Aquifer
Lower Coastal Plain
Miocene
82
137
52
33
67
11
Iron
R
0-6
0-2
0-5
0-1
0-2
0-1
(Fe) Sulfate (SO^)
M N
.8 0.2
.6 0.1
.4 0.2
.8 0.1
.4 0.1
.0 Oa>
82
142
75
60
69
14
R
0-598
0-277
0-25
0-27
0-952
0-20
M
6
3
2
6
26
2
N
92
143
77
56
70
14
Chloride (Cl)
R
0-3820
0-1394
1-15
0-24
2-1800
2-66
M
5
3
3
3
5
7
a) mode
-------
Table 16 (cont). TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN GEORGIA 42 61)
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter)
Hardness (CaCO^]
oo
to
Aquifer N
Piedmont- Blue Ridge
Paleozoic
(Valley & Ridge)
Upper Coastal Plain
Sands
Upper Coastal Plain
Carbonates & Sands
Lower Coastal Plain
Principal Artesian
Aquifer
Lower Coastal Plain
Miocene
72
134
72
67
64
14
R
0-1090
4-446
4-157
6-252
50-1410
8-155
M N
46
156
21
114
185
77
135
18
17
70
12
R
5.1-8.8
4.6-9. 9
3.7-8.5
5.1-8.0
7.3-8.1
4.4-8.1
M
6.4
7.5
6.5
7.6
7.7
—
-------
Table 16 (cont) . TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN GEORGIA
Concentration in mg/1 (Milligrams per liter)
42
u>
Fluoride (F)
Nitrate (NO-,)
Dissolved Solids
(Residue on evaporation
180° C.)
Aquifer N
Piedmont- Blue Ridge
Paleozoic
(Valley & Ridge)
Upper Coastal Plain
Sands
Upper Coastal Plain
Carbonates & Sands
Lower Coastal Plain
Principal Artesian
Aquifer
Lower Coastal Plain
Miocene
68
133
68
58
70
14
R
0-0.4
0-1.5
0-1.0
0-0.5
0-1.2
0-0.5
M N
oa)
0.1
o»>
0.1
0.4
0.2
68
136
57
67
67
13
R M N
0-113 Oa)
0-22 1
0-32 Oa>
0-56 1
0-19 Oa)
0-21 8
84
86
31
21
68
10
R
19-7230
32-630
18-325
31-241
103-4350
26-216
M
107
151
51
155
225
a) mode
-------
a problem near the Atlantic coast of Georgia and inland
along the Florida border.42,62,63) The Upper zone of the
principal artesian aquifer commonly contains water with
hydrogen sulfide gas, and the lower zone of this aquifer
commonly has a high sulfate content.42,63) Little is known
about the base of fresh ground water in most of Georgia
because the fresh water zone is so thick that there has been
little need for deep drilling.
Mississippi
The natural quality of the ground water in Mississippi is
good for most purposes, although minor problems are present
at certain locations. High iron concentration, low pH,
excessive carbon dioxide content, and color are the princi-
pal problems.
Table 17 is a compilation of ground-water chemical analyses
from the major aquifers, taken from published reports.
Usually the water from the deeper zones of the aquifers is
of better quality than that obtained from the shallow zones.
Waters in the outcrop areas of the aquifers, although of a
lower mineral content than that of the deeper zones, are
harder, have a low pH, are high in iron and carbon dioxide
content, and contain the highest concentrations of nitrate.
Analyses of 671 water samples from wells tapping the major
aquifers in Mississippi show that 38 percent contained iron
concentrations exceeding 0.3 mg/1. The aquifers most often
exceeding the limit are the alluvium, the Miocene aquifers,
some sands of the Tallahatta Formation, and the Tuscaloosa
and Wilcox Groups.
Locally, the fluoride concentration of ground water in the
Cretaceous aquifers (Eutaw and Tuscaloosa) exceeds the
recommended health limit. However, fluoride concentrations
in Mississippi ground waters are generally low.
Organic color in ground water is a problem in certain aqui-
fers, particularly the Kosciusko (Sparta Sand) aad Cockfield
aquifers in some areas of the central portion of the state,
and some of the deeper Miocene aquifers along the Coast.
The color originates from organic material (lignitic) within
the aquifer.67,68,70,71)
The position of the base of fresh ground water (total dis-
solved solids content less than 1,000 mg/1) is fairly well
known. Figure 20 shows the configuration of the base of
fresh water in Mississippi.73,74,75) The total dissolved
solids content increases with depth for many of the aquifers,
84
-------
Table 17. TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN MISSISSIPPI
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter).
64-72)
Iron (Fe)
Chloride (Cl)
Aquifer N
Palezoic
Tuscaloosa
Eutaw
Rip ley
CO
01 Wilcox
Tallahatta
Kosciusko
(Sparta)
Cockf ield
Miocene
Graham Ferry
Citronelle
Alluvium
2
25
33
7
80
128
74
74
185
45
15
3
R
0.3-15
0-14
0-1.4
0. -1-1.1
0-14
0-21
0-18
0-14
0-23
0-6.3
0-1.2
0.1-16
M
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
N
-
.4
.2
.2
.3
.2
.1
.2
.3
.1
.1
-
2
26
32
6
94
119
70
73
211
57
20
5
R
9.4-12
0-16
0-34
3.6-132
0-36
0-121
0-26
0-183
0-75
0.7-16
0-31
0-24
M N
—
1.6
3.8
8.9
5.9
7
8.2
30
5
8.1
1
2
2
29
33
7
94
128
76
75
213
60
20
7
R
5.5-100
1-335
1-454
1.2-9
1.2-725
0-860
1.7-81
2.8-532
0-756
1-171
1.2-50
0-16
M
—
22
57
3
6
5
6
23
5
6
10
6
-------
Table 17 (cont.)
TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN MISSISSIPPI
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter)
64-72)
00
Fluoride (F)
Nitrate
Dissolved Solids
(Residue on Evaporation
180° C)
Aquifer N
Palezoic
Tuscaloosa
Eutaw
Ripley
Wilcox
Tallahatta
Kosciusko
(Sparta)
Cockfield
Miocene
Graham Ferry
Citronelle
Alluvium
2
22
29
6
89
115
67
69
182
24
20
5
R
0.3-0.7
0-1.1
0-5
0.2-1.3
0-1.8
0-4
0-2.3
0-3
0-1.3
0-0,7
0-0.2
0-0.3
M N
—
0.3
0.3
0".7
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
1
28
30
5
74
65
40
41
178
20
19
5
R
0.2
0-3
0-7.6
1.2-4.4
0-41
0-17
0-6
0-2.8
0-52
0-1.2
0.3-19
0.1-2.5
M N
—
0.4
0.7
2.3
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.1
2.7
0.8
2
28
33
7
82
119
72
74
181
41
15
7
R
113-311
27-722
70-1,080
170-489
48-1,938
33-2,680
25-780
39-1,410
20-1,637
152-610
27-156
33-361
M
—
188
244
241
162
197
208
349
135
228
64
307
-------
Table 17 (cont.)
TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN MISSISSIPPI
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter)
64-72)
00
Hardness (CaCOQ)
Aquifer N R
Palezoic
Tuscaloosa
Eutaw
Ripley
Wilcox
Tallahatta
Kosciusko
(Sparta)
Cockf ield
Miocene
Graham Ferry
Citronelle
Alluvium
2
28
32
7
86
121
74
75
213
58
20
7
84-90
6-70
2-153
16-207
0-134
0-170
0-176
0-428
0-142
2-20
4-52
6-300
M
—
34
42
39
22
12
15
75
12
8
17
260
N
2
26
32
7
92
121
72
74
162
22
15
7
EM
R
7.4-7.6
5.9-8.5
6.4-8.2
7.5-8.4
5.3-8.7
5.2-9.0
5.1-9.0
5.8-8.9
4.6-9.1
5.0-9.2
5. 2-7.5
5.3-7.5
M
—
7.6
7.9
8.2
7.2
7.5
7.2
7.8
6.7
8.0
5.9
7.2
-------
TENNESSEE
i tnmc.ootn , .. _j
1 1 \ "7 T ' "1 'x.
\ COFFEE SAND \ / / / ^
l AQUIFER yf EUTAW / •
'\ I § / I A9UIFER^ f> I
If
1000— CONTOURS ON BASE OF FRESH I,
WATER. CONTOUR INTERVAL 500 FEET.
(DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL)
BOUNDARY OF AREA WITHIN WHICH THE
INDICATED GEOLOGIC UNIT CONTAINS THE
LOWERMOST BODY OF FRESH WATER.
SHALLOW EUTAW IS NOT FRESH
NO FRESH WATER AVAILABLE
GOLF OF MEXICO
Figure 20. Base of the fresh ground water in
aquifers in Mississippi.73)
-------
Numerous salt domes penetrate the sedimentary strata of
southern Mississippi (Figure 7), and the presence of these
domes results in the base of fresh water being much higher
than in areas away from the domes.76)
North Carolina
The natural quality of ground water in North Carolina is
variable among aquifers but is good overall. Table 18 is a
compilation of chemical analyses of selected constituents in
natural ground water. Ground-water quality problems are
minor, related to locally high concentrations of iron or
excessive hardness. Some of the waters from the Coastal
Plain sands tend to be corrosive; others contain high levels
of fluoride.
The igneous and metamorphic rocks of the North Carolina
Piedmont vary considerably in chemical composition, and each
major rock type yields ground water having a distinctive
chemical character. In terms of chemical character of the
water derived from them, the rocks may conveniently be
divided into two groups. The first includes granite,
granite gneiss, mica schist, slate, and rhyolite flows and
tuffs; these rocks approximate granite in composition and
are rich in silica and poor in calcium and magnesium. The
second group includes diorite, gabbro, hornblende gneiss,
and andesite flows and tuffs; these rocks approximate
diorite in composition and are poorer in silica and richer
in calcium, magnesium, and iron. The granite group yields a
soft, slightly acidic water that is low in dissolved mineral
constituents; in contrast, the diorite group yields a hard,
slightly alkaline water that is high in dissolved minerals.95)
Ground water in the consolidated sedimentary rocks of
Triassic age in central North Carolina tends to be slightly
hard to hard. Locally the water contains as much as 500
mg/1 of chloride. Ground water in the Triassic rocks is
generally satisfactory for domestic use, however.
Ground water from the lenticular Cretaceous Tuscaloosa sand
beds of the inner Coastal Plain is low in mineral matter,
the dissolved solids ranging from about 15 to 100 mg/1 and
the hardness ranging from about 5 to 75 mg/1. As the water
from this aquifer is slightly acid (pH as low as 4.7) and
the mineral content is low, the water tends to be corrosive.
Waters from the Cretaceous Black Creek and Peedee formations
have enough similarity to be grouped together as a rela-
tively high bicarbonate water. As a result of the natural
softening capacity of some sand and clay beds, the water
-------
Table 18. TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN NORTH CAROLINA
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter).
77-94)
Aquifer
Iron (Fe)
N R M
Sulfate (SO.)
N R M
Chloride (Cl)
N R M
Pre-Cretaceous
granite-type
Pre-Cretaceous
diorite-type
Triassic
Sedimentary
Tuscaloosa
Peedee and
Black Creek
Castle Hayne
Quaternary
Water-table
Sands
29 0.01-8.7 0.2
23 0.0-5.7 0.2
15 0.0-3.8 0.1
11 0.05-3.0 0.2
25 0.04-2.2 0.2
65 0.0-7.2 0.2
18 0.1-21 0.4
29 0.1-23 2
23 0.1-391 44
15 1.0-32 12
11 1.0-15 2
25 0.4-12 2
65 0.0-50 2
18 2.0-20 4
29 1.1-17 2
23 1.4-204 28
15 3-744 35
11 3-25 12
25 3-92 5
65 4-405 13
18 3-62 15
-------
Table 18 (corrt. ) TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN NORTH CAROLINA 77~94'
Concentration in mg/1 (Milligrams per liter)
Fluoride (F)
Nitrate
Dissolved Solids
(Residue on Evaporation
180° C.)
Aquifer N
Pre-Cretaceous
granite-type
Pre-Cretaceous
diorite-type
Triassic
Sedimentary
Tuscaloosa
Peedee and
Black Creek
Castle Hayne
Quaternary
Water-table
Sands
300
101
17
10
103
64
58
R
0-1.5
0-2.2
0-1.5
0-0.9
0-7.0
0-2.4
0-1.6
M N
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.7
0.3
0.1
347
99
21
10
89
56
55
R
0-94
0-75
0-89
0-16
0-5
0-9
0-66
M N
1
1
Oa>
oa)
oa)
oa)
1
29
23
15
11
25
65
18
R
25-123
106-696
43-1180
28-115
56-410
107-1010
26-355
M
71
269
140
42
170
258
37
a) mode
-------
Table 18 (cont.) TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN NORTH CAROLINA77
Concentration in rag/1 (Milligrams per liter)
M
Hardness (CaCO^)
Aquifer
Pre-Cretaceous
granite- type
Pre-Cretaceous
diorite-type
Trias sic
Sedimentary
Tuscaloosa
Peedee and
Black Creek
Castle Hayne
Quaternary
Water-table
Sands
N
29
23
15
11
25
65
18
R
8-58
52-402
12-1160
5-90
5-283
12-461
4-88
M
23
172
74
10
74
192
21
N
29
23
15
11
25
65
18
EH
R
5.8-7.
6.5-8.
5.8-7.
5.2-6.
6.1-8.
5.7-8.
5.2-6.
0
2
6
9
4
1
7
M
6.5
7.1
7.2
6.0
7.6
7.3
5.7
-------
passes through a slightly hard calcium bicarbonate state to
a soft sodium bicarbonate state as it moves deeper and
coastward in the aquifers. Most of the water deeper than 91
m (300 ft) tends to have a hardness of less than 50 mg/1 and
a bicarbonate content greater than 150 mg/1. This soft
sodium bicarbonate water is excellent for most uses. Most
of the water contains slightly less than one mg/1 of
fluoride, but in a belt extending from the central portion
of the Coastal Plain northeast to the Virginia line, some of
the water from the aquifer contains enough fluoride to
mottle the enamel of teeth.96) Approximately 24 percent of
the ground-water analyses from the Black Creek and Peedee
formations show concentrations exceeding 1.5 mg/1 of fluoride,
Water quality in the limestone aquifer (chiefly the Castle
Hayne Formation) is closely related to the solubility of
these deposits. The chief mineral constituents in solution
are calcium and bicarbonate, and the median hardness is
about 190 mg/1. Locally the water contains objectional
quantities of iron. A slight odor of hydrogen sulfide is
commonly present.
The Quaternary sand water-table aquifer, which is the
shallow aquifer throughout the Coastal Plain, contains water
that is soft and low in total dissolved solids. The water
has a low pH value and is almost everywhere corrosive.
In most places below a depth of about 152 m (500 ft) the
water is salty, although the boundary between fresh and
salty water crosses formational contacts and is very irreg-
ular. The salinity tends to increase with depth. Along the
coastal areas the Cretaceous aquifers are deeply buried and
contain connate salty water.
South Carolina
The natural quality of ground water in South Carolina is
suitable for most purposes. High iron concentration, low
pH, high fluoride, excessive hardness, and high chloride are
the principal problems, but alternate sources of better
quality water are locally available from other aquifers.
Table 19 is a compilation of selected ground-water chemical
analyses for the Piedmont-Blue Ridge aquifer and the major
Coastal Plain aquifers. Ground-water quality data are not
as plentiful as for other areas because of the emphasis that
has been placed on the development of surface supplies.
In addition, the ground water is of such good quality that
there has been little reason for extensive studies.
93
-------
Table 19. TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN SOUTH CAROLINA
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter)
8,97,98,99)
Iron(Fe)
Chloride (Cl)
Aquifer N
Piedmont-
Blue Ridge
Tuscaloosa
Peedee-
Black Creek
Orangeburg
(Barnwell, McBean,
War ley Hill,
Congaree)
Santee Limestone
Ocala Limestone
13
9
21
15
13
33
R
0-14
0-1.6
0-4.0
0-1.1
0-6.3
0-3.8
M N
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.1
13
12
31
13
11
33
R
0-279
1-11
0-2150
0-9
2-109
2-775
M N
2
8
6
1
5
22
13
18
31
14
11
33
R
1-34
2-97
1-13,900
2-14
1-1330
4-2020
M
4
3
4
5
6
53
-------
ft Q7
Table 19 (cont.) TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN SOUTH CAROLINA9'
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter)
<_n
Aquifer
Piedmont-
Blue Ridge
Tuscaloosa
Peedee-
Black Creek
Orangeburg
(Barnwell, McBean,
Warley Hill,
Congaree)
Santee Limestone
Ocala Limestone
Hardness (CaCO^)
N R M
46 7-1170 34
—
—
13 4-49 6
11 11-165 107
—
N
191
15
5
13
10
32
£H
R
5.4-7.9
4.2-8.6
7.3-8.1
4.1-7.3
4.6-7.9
7.3-9.6
M
6.5
6.4
7.7
5.6
7.4
7.9
-------
Table 19 (cont.) TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN SOUTH CAROLINA3'97'98'99'
Concentration in mg/1 (Milligrams per liter)
Fluoride (F)
Nitrate
Dissolved Solids
(Residue on Evaporation
180° C.)
Aquifer N
Piedmont-
Blue Ridge
Tuscaloosa
Peedee-
Black Creek
Orangeburg
(Barnwell, McBean,
Warley Hill,
Congaree)
Santee Limestone
Ocala Limestone
11
18
27
12
11
33
R
0-0.5
0-3.0
0-4.4
0-0.7
0-2.2
0.1-2.6
M N
0.2
0.2
0.5
Oa>
0.1
0.7
13
11
25
14
10
33
R
0-9
0-1
0-37
0-16
0-10
0-6
M N
1
oa>
oa>
6
oa)
Oa>
11
17
29
12
12
33
R
28-526
20-772
27-27,700
18-143b)
136-2830b)
160-4620
M
99
66
167
34
166
306
a] mode
b) dissolved solids calculated
-------
The aquifers most often containing ground water with
naturally high levels of iron are those composed of sands of
Cretaceous and Tertiary age in a belt 9 km (15 mi) wide
extending from southwest to northeast across the central
portion of the Coastal Plain.100) Locally high levels of
iron occur in the ground waters of the Piedmont.
Ground water contained in the Santee and Ocala limestones
has a considerably higher level of hardness than that of the
Cretaceous and Tertiary sands. The ground water of the
Santee and Ocala limestones is in general more mineralized
than that of any of the other aquifers except for the
Peedee-Black Creek.
The ground water of Cretaceous and Tertiary sands tends to
be quite acidic and corrosive, whereas that of the lime-
stones is very alkaline.101) Waters from the McBean and
Congaree Formations are extremely acidic, with pH as low as
4.1.8) This is attributed to the dissolution of pyrite and
formation of hydrogen sulfide in the water.
Ground water in the southern coastal Tertiary limestones has
a high chloride concentration which is attributed to incom-
plete flushing of connate waters100^ or to erosion of the
overlying impermeable Hawthorn Formation and entrance of sea
water into the limestone.102)
Virginia
Ground water in Virginia is generally of good quality.
Table 20 is a compilation of chemical analyses of selected
constituents in Virginia ground waters. Minor reported
quality problems are related to locally high levels of iron,
chloride, fluoride or hardness. In most cases an alternate
aquifer is available for water supply.
Ground waters of the Valley and Ridge carbonate aquifers are
moderately mineralized and hard, whereas waters from the
sandstone and shale aquifers are softer but locally higher
in iron content. Ground water in the aquifers of the
Appalachian Plateau is often acidic and contains iron in the
vicinity of coal-mining areas.
The Blue Ridge and Piedmont aquifers contain moderately
mineralized, soft to moderately hard water with iron locally,
Ground-water quality data for the Triassic aquifers are
sparse, but the waters tend to be somewhat mineralized and
hard.
97
-------
Table 20. TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN VIRGINIA
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter)
103-109)
Iron (Fe)
Sulfate
Chloride (Cl)
Aquifer N
Valley & Ridge and
Appalachian Plateau —
shale and sandstone
Valley & Ridge and
Appalachian Plateau
co carbonates
Blue Ridge-Piedmont
igneous and meta-
morphic
Triassic
Cretaceous
Tertiary
Quaternary
10
25
46
3
57
55
13
R M N
0-6.6 0.2
0-4.7 Oa)
0-4.6 0.2
0.3-1.8
0-15 0.2
0-19 0.1
0-41 0.1
23
79
52
2
76
97
23
R
1-349
0-78
0-333
5-11
1-234
0-480
1-115
M N
5
4
4
-
12
7
15
22
76
55
5
75
92
22
R
0-298
0-295
1-755
5-40
1-1820
1-2200
1-380
M
1
1
4
-
3
21
21
a) mode
-------
Table 20 (cont.)
TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN VIRGINIA
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter)
103-109)
Fluoride (F)
N R M
Nitrate (NOO
N R M
Dissolved Solids
(residue on evaporation
180° C.)
N R M
i. . 1
Valley & Ridge and
Appalachian Plateau--
shale and sandstone
Valley & Ridge and
Appalachian Plateau
carbonates
Blue Ridge-Piedmont
igneous and meta-
morphic
Triassic
Cretaceous
Tertiary
Quaternary
8 0-0.4 0.2
23 0-2.3 0.2
44 0-14 0.3
1 0.3
59 0-7.4 1.0
81 0-4.3 0.3
16 0-0.5 0.1
22
70
47
5
65
73
20
0-4 Oa)
0-9 2
0-9 Oa)
0-36
0-5 Oa)
0-5 1
0-22 2
20
69
45
4
46
66
16
48-869
52-1390
11-857
192-411
85-4308
123-3777
15-814
-
170
117
-
244
266
—
a) mode
-------
Table 20 C.cont.l
TABULATION OF SELECTED CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER IN VIRGINIA
Concentration in mg/1 (milligrams per liter)
103-109)
Aquifer
Hardness (CaCO.)
N
R
N
R
M
Valley & Ridge and
Appalachian Plateau —
shale and sandstone
!_, Valley & Ridge and
o Appalachian Plateau
° carbonates
Blue Ridge-Piedmont
igneous and meta-
morphic
Triassic
Cretaceous
Tertiary
Quaternary
24
78
56
3
61
86
23
38-1152 114
27-322 142
2-758 54
123-344
2-186 20
7-342 90
7-516 45
9
22
44
2
25
45
8
6.0-8.1
6.0-8.0
5.4-9.4
7.1-7.7
6.7-8.7
6.4-8.5
5.7-7.9
7.5
7.4
6.9
-
8.3
7.9
6.4
-------
The ground water of the Coastal Plain is low to moderately
mineralized and of moderate hardness near the Fall Line
(Piedmont-Coastal Plain contact), but becomes softer and
more mineralized toward the Atlantic coast. The aquifers
contain high levels of dissolved iron locally. Addition-
ally, the Tertiary aquifers of Virginia are less calcareous
than similar aquifers in the states to the south, and hence
contain softer water.
The ground water contained in the Cretaceous aquifers of
Virginia has a very high fluoride content. The fluoride in
these aquifers exceeds 1.5 mg/1 for 37 percent of the 57
samples used in the natural water-quality compilation. High
concentrations of fluoride are also present in the ground
water of some of the Tertiary aquifers.
101
-------
REFERENCES CITED
SECTION V
1. Feth, J. A., and others, "Preliminary Map of the Conter-
minous United States Showing Depth to and Quality of
Shallowest Ground Water Containing More Than 1,000
Parts Per Million Dissolved Solids", U. S. Geological
Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-199, 1965.
2. U. S. Public Health Service, "Drinking Water Stan-
dards", U. S. Public Health Service Publication 956,
1962.
3. Durfor, C. N., and E. Becker, "Public Water Supplies of
the 100 Largest Cities in the United States, 1962", U.
S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1812, 1964.
4. Tihansky, D. P., "Economic Damages from Residential Use
of Mineralized Water Supply", Water Resources Research,
Vol. 10, No. 2, April, 1974, pp. 145-154.
5. Hem, J. D., "Study and Interpretation of the Chemical
Characteristics of Natural Water", 2nd Edition, U. S.
Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1473, 1970.
6. McKee, J. E., and H. W. Wolf, "Water Quality Criteria",
California State Water Quality Board, Publication 3-A,
1963.
7. Scott, R. C., and F. B. Barker, "Data on Uranium and
Radium in Ground Water in the United States 1954 to
1957", U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 426,
1962.
8. Siple, G. E., "Ground-Water Resources of Orangeburg
County, South Carolina", South Carolina State Develop-
ment Board, Division of Geology, Bulletin 36,«1975.
9. Avrett, J. R., "A Compilation of Ground-Water Quality
Data in Alabama", Geological Survey of Alabama, Cir-
cular 37, 1968.
10. "Phosphate Peril Upgraded", Tampa Tribune, Tampa,
Florida, February 27, 1976.
11. Toler, L. A., "Fluoride in Water in the Alafia and
Peace River Basins, Florida", Florida Division of
Geology Report of Investigation No. 46, 1967.
102
-------
12. Park, C. F., Jr., and R. A. MacDiarmid, "Ore Deposits",
W. H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco, 475 p., 1964.
13. Bloxam, T. W., "Uranium, Thorium, Potassium and Carbon
in Some Black Shales from the South Wales Coalfield",
Geochimica et Cosmochimica, Acta 1964, Vol. 28, pp.
1177-1185, 1964.
14. Bateman, A. M., "Economic Mineral Deposits", John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., New York, 916 p., 2nd Edition, 1950.
15. Riccio, J. F., J. D. Hardin, and G. M. Lamb, "Develop-
ment of a Hydrologic Concept for the Greater Mobile
Metropolitan-Urban Environment", Geological Survey of
Alabama, Bulletin 106, 1973.
16. CarIston, C. W., "Fluoride in the Ground Water of the
Cretaceous Area of Alabama", Geological Survey of
Alabama, Bulletin 52, 1942.
17. La Moreaux, P. E., "Fluoride in the Ground Water of the
Tertiary Area of Alabama", Geological Survey of Alabama,
Bulletin 59, 1948.
18. Foster, J. B., and C. A. Pascale, "Selected Water Re-
source Records for Okaloosa County and Adjacent Areas",
Florida Bureau of Geology Information Circular 67,
1971.
19. Clark, W. E., and others, "Water-Resources Data for
Alachua, Bradford, Clay, and Union Counties, Florida",
Florida Division of Geology Information Circular 43,
1964.
20. Bishop, E. W., "Geology and GroundWater Resources of
Highlands County, Florida", Florida Geological Survey
Report of Investigation 15, 1956.
21. Leve, G. W., "Ground Water in Duval and Nassau Coun-
ties, Florida", Florida Division of Geology Report of
Investigation 43, 1966.
22. Fairchild, R. W., "The Shallow-Aquifer System in Duval
County, Florida", Florida Bureau of Geology Report of
Investigation 59, 1972.
23. Klein, H., "Ground-Water Resources of the Naples Area,
Collier County, Florida", Florida Geological Survey
Report of Investigation 11, 1954.
103
-------
24. McCoy, J., "Hydrology of Western Collier County,
Florida", Florida Bureau of Geology Report of Investi-
gation 63, 1972.
25. Pascale, C. A., C. F. Essig, Jr., and R. R. Herring,
"Records of Hydrologic Data, Walton County, Florida",
Florida Bureau of Geology Information Circular 78,
1972.
26. Healy, H. G., "Public Water Supplies of Selected Muni-
cipalities in Florida, 1970", Florida Bureau of Geology
Information Circular 81, 1972.
27. Grantham, R. C., and C. B. Sherwood, "Chemical Quality
of Waters of Broward County, Florida", Florida Divis-
ion of Geology Report of Investigation 51, 1968.
28. Bearden, H. W., "Ground Water in the Hallandale Area,
Florida", Florida Bureau of Geology Information Cir-
cular 77, 1972.
29. Schroeder, M. C., D. L. Milliken, and S. K. Love,
"Water Resources of Palm Beach County, Florida", Florida
Geological Survey Report of Investigation 13, 1954.
30. McCoy, H. J., and J. Hardee, "Ground-Water Resources of
the Lower Hillsboro Canal Area, Southeastern Florida",
Florida Bureau of Geology Report of Investigation 55,
1970.
31. Tarver, G. R., "Hydrology of the Biscayne Aquifer in
the Pompano Beach Area, Broward County, Florida",
Florida Division of Geology Report of Investigations
36, 1964.
32. Land, L. F., H. G. Rodis, and J. J. Schneider, "Apprai-
sal of the Water Resources of Eastern Palm Beach
County, Florida", Florida Bureau of Geology Report of
Investigation 67, 1973.
*
33. Sherwood, C. B., "Ground-Water Resources of the Oakland
Park Area of Eastern Broward County, Florida", Florida
Geological Survey Report of Investigation 20, 1959.
34. Sproul, C. R., D. H. Boggess, and H. J. Woodard,
"Saline-Water Intrusion from Deep Artesian Sources in
the McGregor Isles Area of Lee County, Florida",
Florida Bureau of Geology Information Circular 75,
1972.
104
-------
35. Clark, W. E., "Possibility of Salt-Water Leakage from
Proposed Intracoastal Waterway near Venice, Florida
Well Field", Florida Division of Geology Report of In-
vestigation 38, 1964.
36. Peek, H. M., "Ground-Water Resources of Manatee County,
Florida", Florida Geological Survey Report of Investi-
gation 18, 1958.
37. Laughlin, C. P., and D. M. Hughes, "Hydrologic Records
for Lake County, Florida, 1972-73", U. S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report FL-74018, 1974.
38. Lichtler, W. F., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Martin County, Florida", Florida Geological Survey
Report of Investigation 23, 1960.
39. Bermes, B. J., G. W. Leve, and G. R. Tarver, "Geology
and Ground-Water Resources of Flagler, Putnam and St.
Johns Counties, Florida", Florida Division of Geology
Report of Investigation 32, 1963.
40. Toler, L. G., "Fluoride Content of Water from the
Floridan Aquifer in Northwestern Florida", Florida
Division of Geology Map Series 23, 1966.
41. Shampine, W. J., "Dissolved Solids in Water from the
Upper Part of the Floridan Aquifer in Florida", Florida
Division of Geology Map Series 14, 1965.
42. Sever, C. W., "Ground-Water Resources and Geology of
Cook County, Georgia", U. S. Geological Survey Open-
File Report, 1972.
43. Owen, V., Jr., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Mitchell County, Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey
Information Circular 24, 1963.
44. Wait, R. L., "Source and Quality of Ground Water in
Southwestern Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey Infor-
mation Circular 18, 1960.
45. La Moreaux, P. E., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources
of the Coastal Plain of East-central Georgia", Georgia
Geological Survey Bulletin No. 52, 1946.
46. Le Grand, H. E., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
the Macon Area, Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey
Bulletin No. 72, 1962.
105
-------
47. Owen, V., Jr., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Lee and Sumter Counties, Southwest Georgia", U. S.
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1666, 1963.
48. Le Grand, H. E., and A. S. Furcron, "Geology and Ground-
Water Resources of Central-east Georgia", Georgia Geo-
logical Survey Bulletin No. 64, 1956.
49. Sever, C. W., "Ground-Water Resources of Seminole,
Decatur and Grady Counties, Georgia", U. S. Geological
Survey Water-Supply Paper 1809-Q, 1965.
50. McCollum, M. J., and H. B. Counts, "Relation of Salt-
Water Encroachment to the Major Aquifer Zones Savannah
Area, Georgia and South Carolina", U. S. Geological
Survey Water-Supply Paper 1613-D, 1964.
51. Gregg, D. 0., and E. A. Zimmerman, "Geologic and
Hydrologic Control of Chloride Contamination in Aqui-
fers at Brunswick, Glynn County, Georgia", U. S.
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2029-D, 1974.
52. Sever, C. W., "Acid Water in the Crystalline Rocks of
Dawson County, Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey
Mineral Newsletter Vol. XV, Nos. 3-4, pp. 57-61, 1962.
53. Sever, C. W., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Crystalline Rocks Dawson County, Georgia", Georgia
Geological Survey Information Circular No. 30, 1964.
54. Herrick, S. M. and H. E. Le Grand, "Geology and Ground-
Water Resources of the Atlanta Area, Georgia", Georgia
Geological Survey Bulletin No. 55, 1949.
55. McCollum, M. J., "Ground-Water Resources and Geology of
Rockdale County, Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey
Information Circular No. 33, 1966.
56. Croft, M. G., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Bartow County, Georgia", U. S. Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 1619-FF, 1963.
57. Croft, M. G., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Bade County, Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey In-
formation Circular No. 26, 1964.
58. Cressler, C. W., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Catoosa County, Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey In-
formation Circular No. 28, 1963.
106
-------
59. Cressler, C. W., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Walker County, Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey In-
formation Circular No. 29, 1964.
60. Cressler, C. W., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Gordon, Whitfield, and Murray Counties, Georgia",
Georgia Geological Survey Information Circular No. 47,
1974.
61. Cressler, C. W., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Floyd and Polk Counties, Georgia", Georgia Geological
Survey Information Circular No. 39, 1970.
62. Wait, R. L., and D. 0. Gregg, "Hydrology and Chloride
Contamination of the Principal Artesian Aquifer in
Glynn County, Georgia", Georgia Department of Natural
Resources, Earth and Water Division Report No. 1, 1973.
63. Sever, C. W., "Reconnaissance of the Ground Water and
Geology of Thomas County, Georgia", Georgia Geological
Survey Information Circular No. 34, 1966.
64. Brown, F. B., and others, "Geology and Ground-Water Re-
sources of the Coastal Area in Mississippi", Mississippi
Geological Survey Bulletin No. 60, 1944.
65. Moore, W. H., and others, "Hinds County Geology and
Mineral Resources", Mississippi Geological Survey
Bulletin No. 105, 1965.
66. Lang, J. W., and E. H. Boswell, "Public and Industrial
Water Supplies in a Part of Northern Mississippi",
Mississippi Geological Survey Bulletin No. 90, 1960.
67. Wasson, B. E., "Source and Development of Public and
Industrial Water Supplies in Northwestern Mississippi",
Mississippi Board of Water Commissioners Bulletin No.
65-2, 1965.
68. Shows, T. N., W- L. Broussard, and C. P. Humphreys,
Jr., "Water for Industrial Development in Forrest,
Greene, Jones, Perry, and Wayne Counties, Mississippi",
Mississippi Research and Development Center, 1966.
69. Boswell, E. H., F. H. Thomson, and D. E. Shattles,
"Water for Industrial Development in Clarke, Jasper,
Lauderdale, Newton, Scott, and Smith Counties,
Mississippi", Mississippi Research and Development
Center, 1970.
107
-------
70. Newcombe, R., Jr., E. J. Tharpe, and W. T. Oakley,
"Water for Industrial Development in Copiah and Simpson
Counties, Mississippi", Mississippi Research and
Development Center, 1972.
71. Newcombe, R., Jr., and F. H. Thomson, "Water for
Industrial Development in Amite, Franklin, Lincoln,
Pike, and Wilkinson Counties, Mississippi", Mississippi
Research and Development Center, 1970.
72. Shattles, D. E., J. A. Callahan, and W. L. Broussard,
"Water Use and Development in Jackson County,
Mississippi 1964-67", Mississippi Board of Water
Commissioners Bulletin No. 67-3, 1967.
73. Shows, T. N., "Water Resources of Mississippi",
Mississippi Geological Survey Bulletin No. 113, 1970.
74. Gushing, E. M., "Map Showing Altitude of the Base of
Fresh Water in Coastal Plain Aquifers of the Mississippi
Embayment", U. S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Inves-
tigation Atlas HA-221, 1966.
75. Newcombe, R., Jr., "Configuration on the Base of the
Fresh Ground-Water Section in Mississippi", Mississippi
Board of Water Commissioners, Water Resources Map No.
65-1, 1965.
76. Taylor, R. E., "Geohydrology of Tatum Salt Dome Area,
Lamar and Marion Counties, Mississippi", Atomic Energy
Commission and U. S. Geological Survey, VUF-1023 Final
Report, 1971.
77. Le Grand, H. E., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Wilmington-New Bern Area, North Carolina", North
Carolina Department of Water Resources, Division of
Ground Water, Ground-Water Bulletin No. 1, 1960.
78. Bain, G. L, and J. D. Thomas, "Geology and Ground Water
in the Durham Area, North Carolina", North Carolina
Department of Water Resources, Division of Ground Water,
Ground-Water Bulletin No. 7, 1966.
79- Floyd, E. 0., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
the Monroe Area, North Carolina", North Carolina
Department of Water Resources, Division of Ground Water,
Ground-Water Bulletin No. 5, 1965.
108
-------
80. Marsh, 0. T., and R. L. Laney, "Reconnaissance of the
Ground-Water Resources of the Waynesville Area, North
Carolina", North Carolina Department of Water Resources,
Division of Ground Water, Ground-Water Bulletin No. 8,
1966.
81. Le Grand, H. E., "Geology and Ground Water in the
Statesville Area, North Carolina", North Carolina
Department of Conservation and Development, Division of
Mineral Resources, Bulletin No. 68, 1954.
82. Mundorff, M. J., "Geology and Ground Water in the
Greensboro Area, North Carolina", North Carolina
Department of Conservation and Economic Development,
Division of Mineral Resources, Bulletin No. 55, 1948.
83. Trapp, H. , Jr., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
the Asheville Area, North Carolina", North Carolina
Department of Water and Air Resources, Division of
Ground Water, Ground-Water Bulletin No. 16, 1970.
84. Sumsion, C. T., and R. L. Laney, "Geology and Ground-
Water Resources of the Morgantown Area, North Carolina",
North Carolina Department of Water Resources, Division
of Ground Water, Ground-Water Bulletin No. 12, 1967.
85. Dodson, C. L, and R. L. Laney, "Geology and Ground-
Water Resources of the Murphy Area, North Carolina",
North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources,
Division of Ground Water, Ground-Water Bulletin No. 13,
1968.
86. Schipf, R. G., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
the Fayetteville Area, North Carolina", North Carolina
Department of Water Resources, Division of Ground
Water, Ground-Water Bulletin No. 3, 1961.
87. Pusey, R. D., "Geology and Ground Water in the Goldsboro
Area, North Carolina", North Carolina Department of
Water Resources, Division of Ground Water, Ground-Water
Bulletin No. 2, 1960.
88. Harris, W. H., and H. B. Wilder, "Geology and Ground-
Water Resources of the Hartford-Elizabeth City Area,
North Carolina", North Carolina Department of Water
Resources, Division of Ground Water, Ground-Water
Bulletin No. 10, 1966.
109
-------
89. Lloyd, 0. B., Jr., "Ground-Water Resources of Chowan
County, North Carolina", North Carolina Department of
Water and Air Resources, Division of Ground Water,
Ground-Water Bulletin No. 18, 1970.
90. Sumsion, C. T., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Pitt County, North Carolina", North Carolina Department
of Water and Air Resources, Division of Ground Water,
Ground-Water Bulletin No. 18, 1970.
91. Floyd, E. O., and A. T. Long, "Well Records and Other
Basic Ground-Water Data, Craven County, North Carolina",
North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources,
Division of Ground Water, Ground-Water Circular No. 14,
1970-
92. Blankenship, R. R., "Reconnaissance of the Ground-Water
Resources of the Southport-Elizabethtown Area, North
Carolina", North Carolina Department of Water Resources,
Division of Ground Water, Ground-Water Bulletin No. 6,
1965.
93. Nelson, P. F., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
the Swanquarter Area, North Carolina", North Carolina
Department of Water Resources, Division of Ground
Water, Ground-Water Bulletin No. 4, 1964.
94. U. S. Geological Survey, selected unpublished analyses
for North Carolina.
95. Le Grand, H. E., "Chemical Character of Water in the
Igneous and Metamorphic Rocks of North Carolina",
Economic Geology, Vol. 53, No. 2, pp. 178-189, 1958.
96. Mundorff, M. J. "Progress Report on Ground Water in
North Carolina", North Carolina Department of Conser-
vation and Development, Division of Mineral Resources,
Bulletin No. 47, 1945.
97. Bloxham, W. M., G. E. Siple, and T. R. Cummings, "Water
Resources of Spartanburg County, South Carolina", South
Carolina Water Resources Commission, Report No. 3,
1970.
98. Koch, N. C., "Ground-Water Resources of Greenville,
South Carolina", South Carolina State Development
Board, Division of Geology Bulletin No. 38, 1968.
99. South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental
Control, unpublished analyses.
110
-------
100. McGuinness, C. L., "The Role of Ground Water in the
National Water Situation", U. S. Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 1800, 1963.
101. Siple, G. E., "Geology and Ground Water of the Savannah
River Plant and Vicinity, South Carolina", U. S.
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1841, 1967.
102. Le Grand, H. E., "Geology and Ground-Water Hydrology of
the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain as Related to
Disposal of Radioactive Wastes", U. S. Geological
Survey TEI-805 (prepared for the U. S. Atomic Energy
Commission), 1962.
103. Cederstrom, D. J., "Chemical Character of Ground Water
in the Coastal Plain of Virginia", Virginia Geological
Survey Bulletin No. 68, 1946.
104. Back, W., "Hydrochemical Facies and Ground-Water Flow
Patterns in North Part of Atlantic Coastal Plain",
U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 498-A, 1966.
105. Virginia Department of Conversation and Economic
Development, "Small Coastal River Basins and Chesapeake
Bay Comprehensive Water Resources Plant, Hydrologic
Analysis", Virginia Department of Conservation and
Economic Development, Division of Water Resources,
Planning Bulletin 251P, Vol. Ill, 1972.
106. Virginia Department of Conservation and Economic
Development, "Rappahannock River Basin Comprehensive
Water Resources Plan, Hydrologic Analysis1' , Virginia
Department of Conservation and Economic Development,
Division of Water Resources, Planning Bulletin 221,
Vol. Ill, 1970.
107. Virginia Department of Conservation and Economic
Development, "James River Basin Comprehensive Water
Resources Plan, Hydrologic Analysis", Virginia Depart-
ment of Conservation and Economic Development, Division
of Water Resources, Planning Bulletin 215, Vol. Ill,
1970.
108. Virginia Department of Conservation and Economic
Development, "New River Basin Comprehensive Water
Resources Plan, Hydrologic Analysis", Virginia Depart-
ment of Conservation and Economic Development, Division
of Water Resources, Planning Bulletin 203, Vol. Ill,
1967.
Ill
-------
109. Virginia Department of Conservation and Economic
Development, "Potomac-Shenandoah River Basin Compre-
hensive Water Resources Plan, Hydrologic Analysis",
Virginia Department of Conservation and Economic
Development, Division of Water Resources, Planning
Bulletin 209, Vol. Ill, 1969.
112
-------
SECTION VI
SOURCES OF GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION
DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM
For many years, public agencies on all levels of government
have been concerned about the contamination of surface
waters. The loss of rivers and lakes as sources of water
supply and for recreation can have a tremendous impact on a
particular region, leading to construction of a long pipe-
line to import acceptable water, for example, or the closing
of a popular swimming area to local residents. Degradation
of the quality of water in a stream or lake can be rather
obvious through discoloration, odor, and floating debris.
Problems of ground-water contamination, on the other hand,
have never received much attention because they are usually
localized and the effects are hidden from view. Only when
a regional water source is threatened, due to problems such
as salt-water encroachment or pollution from septic tanks,
are controls recommended and implemented. However, protec-
tion of ground-water resources from all types of pollutants
is an essential part of any program involving the solution
of environmental problems. In many ways, the correction of
ground-water quality degradation is considerably more
complex than in the case of surface waters.
The impact of ground-water contamination in the Southeast
takes on many aspects including:
1. The important role of ground water as a water-supply
source.
2. The technical difficulties and high costs associated
with the investigation, control, and correction of
ground-water pollution.
3. The hidden and often misunderstood nature of ground-
water pollution and the resulting health hazards and
other effects.
4. The interrelationship of surface-water quality and
ground-water quality.
5. The problems involved in monitoring ground-water
quality.
113
-------
Importance of the Resource
In the seven southeastern states covered in this report,
ground water plays a major role in meeting the water-supply
requirements of communities, individual homes, commercial
establishments, self-supplied industrial facilities, and
irrigated farms. Total ground-water use in the region in
1970 has been estimated at more than 20.7 cu hm/d (5.5 bgd),
which is 46 percent of all the fresh water diverted for all
purposes exclusive of that used for the generation of ther-
moelectric and hydroelectric power.D
Ground water plays a significant role with regard to rural
populations and those not served by community systems. The
rapid growth of suburbs in areas around major cities in the
region has outpaced the ability of local utilities to build
the necessary supply facilities, and consequently, more and
more homes and small commercial establishments have con-
structed their own on-site water supplies. Invariably, they
depend on drilled wells. The widespread use of ground water
is possible because almost all of the rock formations are
capable of yielding at least the few gallons per minute
required to supply a single home or store.
Probably several million domestic wells are presently in use
within the seven states. Table 21 shows by state the esti-
mated number of wells constructed in 1964 in the region; the
figures represent mostly domestic wells.
Ground water for domestic-type water supply development is
available almost everywhere within the region, and many of
the aquifer systems are capable of producing several thousand
gallons per minute to properly developed individual wells.
Reliance on ground water will increase in the region in the
future, not only because of its widespread availability but
because surface waters are becoming increasingly more diffi-
cult and expensive to develop. &ome principal causes for
this include the rising costs of treating surface waters,
the stricter regulations being imposed by public health
agencies with regard to water treatment, and the problems
inherent in obtaining large tracts of land for surface
reservoirs. In addition, there is the competition for
surface-water rights and the more active environmental
concern over the effects of surface-water diversions.
Finally, the extreme drought conditions experienced in the
region from time to time have revealed to many water man-
agers the vulnerability of surface water during adverse
climatic conditions. Because of this, a large number of
high-capacity wells have been installed as back-up systems
for some municipal and industrial surface-water supplies.
114
-------
Table 21. NUMBER OF WELLS DRILLED IN THE SOUTHEAST IN 19642)
State Estimated number of wells drilled
Alabama 4,500
Florida 55,000
Georgia 10,000
Mississippi 5,900
North Carolina 25,000
South Carolina 5,400
Virginia 10,000
Total 115,800
115
-------
In summary, the availability of high-quality ground water is
essential to the physical and economic well-being of the
region, and the loss of aquifers or portions of aquifers due
to contamination must be avoided.
Technical and Economic Difficulties
One particular aspect of ground-water contamination that
makes it quite different from river pollution, and in many
ways a more difficult problem to solve, is the long period
of time required for decay, sorption, or dispersion of the
contaminant in the ground-water system even if the source of
contamination is removed. Correcting a situation causing
ground-water contamination, such as lining a leaky basin
into which a liquid industrial waste has been discharged,
will prevent additional highly mineralized fluid from
arriving at the water table but will not eliminate the
problem itself. Because the polluted ground-water body
normally moves and disperses slowly, and is affected very
little by dilution from the recharge of or mixing with
unaffected water, contaminants in ground water tend to be
reduced in concentration over a period usually measured in
years and even decades. In fact, long after a source of
pollution has been removed, the contaminated ground-water
body actually can expand in areal extent and can travel
significant distances before it disperses.
Within the southeast region, there are several widely used
methods for combating contamination of ground water after it
occurs. The first step, once the problem has been dis-
covered, is to prevent the activity from continuing to
degrade water quality, in other words, to eliminate the
source as quickly as possible. For example, a specific
activity such as the discharge of industrial wastes into a
limestone sinkhole can be ended immediately if action is
brought to bear by a public agency equipped with evidence
that a well supply has been rendered unfit or is threatened
because of the industry's disposal method. A storage tank
can be pumped dry and taken out of service if it is iden-
tified as the source of a gasoline leak that has affected
ground-water quality in the area.
However, it is not always possible to immediately end some
types of activities that contribute to ground-water con-
tamination. For example, because it is a difficult and
time-consuming project to find a substitute site for the
dumping of refuse even though an existing site is found to
be a source of ground-water contamination, some time is
required before a shutdown can be effected. Additional
water-quality degradation of an aquifer from septic tank
116
-------
wastes can be halted by the installation of collecting
sewers, but again planning and implementation of such a
system can be slowed drastically by economic and political
considerations.
Of course, if a well supply has been affected by a pollu-
tant, especially if the substance is toxic, the other
initial step taken in combating the problem is the aban-
donment of the well or wells, and replacement with a new
source, if available. In fact, based on the inventory of
case histories in the region, the abatement procedure often
ends with the abandonment of the water-supply source or the
physical treatment of the water pumped in order to reduce
the concentration of the pollutant to an acceptable level.
This course of action is more or less typical due to the
technical difficulties inherent in correcting the source of
some types of ground-water contamination and the physical
and economic problems involved in controlling or removing
the pollutant.
Nevertheless, there are two basic approaches that have been
used in the region to control the spread of or to clean up
contaminated ground water. The first is containment and the
second is actual removal of the pollutant.
Containment involves the use of methods to protect against
the spread of degradation of water quality within the
aquifer already affected, to other aquifers that might be
affected, or to surface water bodies into which the con-
taminated ground water might discharge. It is an approach
often used to protect existing ground-water and surface-
water users but does not help well owners whose supplies are
already damaged, nor does it fully restore water quality in
the aquifer to its natural state within what might be
considered a reasonable length of time.
Actual removal of the pollutants from the ground-water
reservoir has been attempted at a number of locations in the
southeast but is not practiced on a broad scale because of
technical and economic considerations. Use of wells drilled
specifically for the purpose of pumping out the contaminated
fluid is the most common approach to removal. The water is
then subjected to treatment on-site, discharged to a sewer
or nearby surface-water body, or collected for reprocessing
and reuse. Existing supply wells, to which the polluted
water has migrated, have also been pumped in an attempt to
reduce the volume or concentration of the pollutant. A
third approach has been the construction of surface drains
and ditches in order to skim the pollutant off the water
table.
117
-------
Generally, removal has been applied only in those cases
where ground-water contamination represents a severe health
or economic hazard. The presence of toxic or combustible
hydrocarbon-based materials in the ground-water system is an
example of a severe hazard; this is especially true in
urbanized or industrialized areas where there is a good
potential for loss of life and damage to property unless the
greatest possible amount of the hazardous substance is
removed. The discovery of a highly toxic substance in
ground water, such as arsenic or mercury, which is an obvious
health hazard if the contaminated fluid were to be left in
the ground to perhaps migrate to a supply well or surface
stream, usually precipitates quick action. Attempts also
have been made to remove contaminated ground water if there
is a distinct economic advantage, such as preserving a
community or an industrial well vital to the water-supply
system or the protection of an important aquifer.
One of the most difficult types of removal operations is
that dealing with hydrocarbons. Here, the problem involves
a two fluid system because of the light density and low
solubility of the hydrocarbon. The pollutant floats and
migrates on top of the water table. Drawing down water
levels and inducing the fluid to migrate toward a pumping
well will trap only a portion of the hydrocarbon. Ulti-
mately, as the hydrocarbon lens thins, less and less of the
substance is removed. Thus, in addition to pumping wells,
use has been made of ditches and trenches to skim oil off
the water table, biological processes to break down gasoline
in the ground, and water-flooding techniques to drive sol-
vents and other hydrocarbons to central collection points,
all with limited success. Another factor which cannot be
ignored is that even when a pollutant can be successfully
removed from an aquifer, the time period involved and the
quantity of water pumped are usually considerable. Also,
after the contaminant and its accompanying large volume of
water is removed there still remains the major problem of
converting this hazardous mixture to a harmless state.
Sometimes successful treatment can be accomplished by merely
diluting the material with large quantities of clean water.
In some cases, treatment of the contaminant-water*mixture in
an industrial or municipal liquid waste or sewage treatment
facility is possible. However, with some contaminants such
as chlorinated hydrocarbons, cyanide and similar poisonous
materials, dilution-related treatment methods are not always
effective so that much more complex and costly processes of
treatment or neutralization must be employed.
Any discussion of the problems associated with the control
and correction of existing ground-water contamination
118
-------
problems would not be complete without consideration of the
high costs involved. Although very little information was
obtained on cost estimates for clean-up operations, it is
known that some plans had to be abandoned because of econ-
omic considerations. In addition, some operations are still
in progress so that final cost figures are not available.
Health Hazards and Other Effects of Contamination
In order to fully understand the health hazards and other
adverse effects of ground-water contamination, it is neces-
sary to review the principles governing the movement within
the ground-water system of a water body containing pollu-
tants. Most problems of contamination begin when an objec-
tionable fluid arrives at the water table. The fluid may
have leaked out of unlined municipal or industrial waste
lagoons, septic tank tile fields, or ruptured sewers, pipe-
lines and storage tanks. On the other hand, the contamina-
tion could have been transported to the ground-water reservoir
with precipitation, recharge from solid waste landfills,
liquid waste land disposal sites, industrial plant grounds,
urban and rural roads, animal feed stations and farm fields,
mining spoil disposal lands, and by ground-water development.
Figure 21 shows schematically the many different ways a
contaminant can enter the ground-water system through man's
activities.
Once a contaminated liquid reaches the ground-water reser-
voir, it moves downgradient through the water-bearing
material from its point of entry to some lower pressure
discharge point. Its rate of movement depends largely upon
the permeability of the earth materials and the hydraulic
gradient in the ground-water system. For example, in
unconsolidated fine-grained sediments such as clay, ground
water may move less than 3m (10 ft) per year under natural
geohydrologic conditions. In sandy aquifers the movement is
rarely more than 152 m (500 ft) per year, and even in very
permeable gravel units the rate of travel probably would not
exceed 762 m (2,500 ft) per year. On the other hand, the
distance and rate of travel can be considerably greater if
the contaminated fluid moves through fracture zones or
solution cavities of rock formations. Where pumping from
wells has lowered ground-water levels in an aquifer, the
rate and direction of travel are also affected, and the
pollutant can move more quickly toward the center of
pumping.
Other factors important to the occurrence and movement of
contaminated ground water are the various processes that can
affect the concentration of the pollutant, such as adsorption
119
-------
LEAKS AND SPILLS, INJECTION
AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES, WELL
LAND SPREADING, IRRIGATION SEPTIC TANK
OR HIGHWAY DEICING SALTS OR CESSPOOL W£LL
SINKHOLE -Tl SEWER
LANDFILL, DUMP
REFUSE STORAGE,
OR TAILING PILE
PUMPING
(FRESH):
LAGOON, PIT OR BASIN WELL SURFACE
r-* — —
-------
by the materials through which it passes, its density with
respect to that of natural ground water, and the manner in
which it spreads out or disperses as it travels. Adsorption
or physiochemical forces can remove pollutants from solution
and concentrate them on soil, clay, or fine-grained sand
materials. Ion exchange and precipitation also can alter
the character of the contaminant. Differences in density
may cause a contaminant to travel in a direction somewhat
different from that of the natural ground water. For
example, gasoline will tend to float on the water table,
even where there is a strong downward component of flow in
the aquifer system. Dense fluids introduced into a fresh-
water aquifer may tend to sink to the bottom of the aquifer
under the influence of gravity before moving horizontally
downgradient from their initial point of entry.
Polluted water moving through an aquifer generally takes on
the form of a bulb or plume, extending along the flow path
from the source of the pollution to a point where it is
either attenuated within the aquifer or is discharged to a
well or a surface-water body such as a river, a lake, or
the sea. Although dispersal in the direction of flow tends
to reduce the concentration of a pollutant, the fluid
normally does not fan out, and dispersal across the direc-
tion of flow is considerably less than that taking place
during the distance traveled. Figures 22 and 23 illustrate
this effect in an unconsolidated sand and gravel aquifer.
Movement of a contaminated fluid in fractures of a rock
aquifer is shown in Figures 24 and 25. In this latter case,
dispersion is very slight and the fracture pattern controls
the shape and areal extent of the plume. Figure 26 illus-
trates the type of plume associated with a light-density
fluid such as oil or gasoline.
Figure 27 shows how temporary flooding around a well can
cause ground-water contamination. Downward flow of polluted
surface water takes place around the well casing because of
improper placement or lack of a seal at ground surface.
Figure 28 shows how contaminants introduced into a disposal
well or entering the ground from a surface water body can
move into a pumping well. Because the well is a convergence
point for ground water, it acts as a collection mechanism.
Figure 29 illustrates how interaquifer transfer of water may
take place. The potential degradation of an aquifer con-
taining good quality water by upward movement of mineralized
water from an underlying aquifer occurs because pumping from
wells reverses the natural hydraulic gradient, indicated by
the change in the relative position of the two water levels.
121
-------
ISJ
//////I'I
/PRECIPITATION
/'/
r=T7// tbNTAMINATED WATER
x3-^WFROMPUMPING WELL
::: CONTAMINATED WATER • •
•••••••••RECHARGE
FRESH WATER
WATER TABLE
\
AQUIFER
RECHARGE
CONFINING BETJ
Figure 22.
Flow pattern showing downward leaching of pollutants
from a stockpile and movement toward a pumped well.3)
-------
< DIRECTION OF GROUND-WATER FLOW
RIVER
BASIN
--CONFINING BED--
LAGOON
ORIGINAL ,,
WATER JLABLE. ^y.--±£-+£:&:
CONTAMINATED GROUND WATER
Figure 23.
Contaminated ground water as caused by leakage
from a lagoon and a basin into a water-table
aquifer discharging into a river.
123
-------
•
aquifer.
and
-------
DIRECTION OF
GROUND-WATER FLOW
PUMPING
WELL
LANDFILL
.•'.•'•.UNCONSOLIDATED SANDS//'• :'l|i ||^^||*^f^[fV'.-\.'"'-.'';'•'.':"•!'.•'":'' :".''":-'.'^^''.'--'-''''.:.1/•'•'.'','
...:,. |.:,,™;,..w,.i..,.,...v,,.,,,|:,,,,,.. ..,,,
1
CONSOLIDATED ROCK
1
CONTAMINATED GROUND WATER
MOVEMENT ALONG FRACTURES AND BEDDING PLANES
Figure 25.
Contaminated ground water in bedding planes and
fractures in a rock aquifer, caused by leachate
from a landfill.
125
-------
OIL
SPILL
LAND SURFACE
to
OIL IN PHASE FORM (BODY OF OIL)
DIRECTION OF
GROUND-WATER FLOW
OIL IN DISSOLVED FORM
Figure 26.
Movement of light-density fluid in the
ground-water system. Contamination caused by
a spill of hydrocarbons.4)
-------
RIVER IN FLOOD
CONTAMINATED
WATER
f£LZ
IMPROPERLY INSTALLED
OR MISSING SEAL
CONFINING BED-
WATER TABLE
•f
AQUIFER
FRESH WATER
-QPNFJNING BED--
Figure 27.
Diagram showing flood water entering a well through
a missing or improperly installed seal on a well.3)
-------
oo
CONTAMINANTS
INTRODUCED
CONTAMINATED
SURFACE WATER
CONTAMINATED
GROUND WATER
ORIGINAL WATER TABLE
CONTAM NATED WATER
i^iriririr^ririririzuizir^irtitriziririr^zirizirir^^JTr?^^
Figure 28. Diagram showing movement of contaminants from a recharge
or drainage well and surface water body to a nearby
pumping well.
-------
NATURAL CONDITIONS
STATIC WATER TABLE
OF AQUIFER A —7
»?
POTENTIOMETRIC /
SURFACE OF AQUIFER B
SCREENK
\
-J_J_
\ '
AQUIFER A
FRESH WATER
. . . . BED . . . . . ;
"
, •
MINERA
WAT
R B V ^
LIZED
ER
PUMPING CONDITIONS
POTENTIOMETRIC
SURFACE OF AQUIFER B
\
WATER TABLE
OF AQUIFER A
SCREEN -
AQUIFER A
FRESH WATER
AQUIFER B
MINERALIZED WATER
Figure 29.
Diagrams showing reversal of aquifer leakage
by pumping.3)
129
-------
Although the role that ground-water contamination plays in
waterborne-disease outbreaks in this particular region is
obscure, national surveys have shown it to be an important
factor. One problem is that almost all privately supplied
homes, some small community systems, and even some larger
public utilities are supplied with insufficiently treated or
even untreated ground water. Therefore, the user may be
exposed to bacteria and virus which have entered the well
because of poor well construction, improper location with
respect to septic tanks, or flooding of the land surface
with polluted surface water containing sewage effluent.
Tables 22 and 23 show the results of an inventory in the
United States of water-borne disease outbreaks related to
ground-water sources for the period 1946-70. The more than
47,000 cases are significant, especially in view of the fact
that most cases of illness related to contaminated ground
water probably are not reported because they are isolated
cases, or no death has occurred, or the source of the
disease was not suspected or investigated.
The Relationship of Ground Water to Surface Water
One often overlooked aspect of ground-water contamination in
the humid Southeast is the close relationship between
ground-water and surface-water quality. Most programs for
cleaning up streams neglect to take into account the fact
that ground-water discharge represents a major portion of
flow in rivers and that during dry times of the year stream
flow is often 100 percent ground-water discharge. Because
stream quality criteria are based on low flow quantities and
quality, it is essential to maintain the quality of ground
water in order to protect surface water.
Great effort is being directed toward improving the quality
of surface water by seeking out sources of pollution dis-
charging directly into streams and by requiring treatment or
some other means for upgrading waste-water quality. How-
ever, few investigations include an evaluation of the
quality of ground water entering a particular stream, or an
inventory of potential sources of ground-water contamination
that are already or might ultimately discharge into a
surface-water body.
Numerous case histories have been uncovered in this investi-
gation where contamination of ground water from a point
source has significantly affected surface-water quality, at
least in the general vicinity of the area into which the
plume of the contaminated ground water is discharging.
These include problems of seepage related to lagoons, pits,
basins, mine drainage, spills, and landfills.
130
-------
Table 22. INCIDENCE OF WATERBORNE DISEASE IN THE UNITED STATES FOR UNTREATED
CONTAMINATED GROUND WATER.
5)
Private
Public
All Systems
Cause
Improper construction of well
or spring
Surface contamination nearby
Overflow or seepage of sewage
H Seepage from abandoned well
to Source of contamination not
I — '
determined
Flooding
Contamination through creviced
limestone or fissured rock
Chemical or pesticide contamination
Data insufficient to classify
Total :
Outbreaks
21
49
1
8
4
10
4
46
143
Cases
640
2,779
50
235
66
555
17
2,001
6,343
Outbreaks
1
4
-
1
3
1
-
3
13
Cases
2,500
531
—
400
4,400
70
—
16,350
24,251
Outbreaks
22
53
1
9
7
11
4
49
156
Cases
3,140
3,310
50
635
4,466
625
17
18,351
30,594
-------
Table 23. INCIDENCE OF WATERBORNE DISEASE IN THE UNITED STATES, 1946-70, GROUND WATER
(CHLORINATED ONLY): TREATMENT OVERWHELMED DUE TO SOURCE CONTAMINATION.5^
Private
Cause Outbreaks Cases
Overflow or seepage of sewage
Flooding
Contamination of raw-water 1 31
Public
Outbreaks
3
1
_
Cases
16,273
600
_
All Systems
Outbreaks
3
1
1
Cases
16,273
600
31
transmission line or
suction pipe
Total
31
16,873
16,904
-------
The Problem of Monitoring
Monitoring ground-water contamination and providing a means
for adequate warning against use of waters that may be
harmful are especially difficult problems, owing to:
1. The complex nature of aquifer systems and patterns of
movement of ground water.
2. The large number of individual wells and springs being
used.
3. The great variety of potential sources of contamina-
tion, and their relative abundance in the Southeast.
4. The lack of information on the quantities and kinds of
chemical compounds being discharged to the air, soil,
and water.
5. The scanty knowledge of the biological, chemical and
physical reactions taking place among the contaminants,
the soil and rock materials, and the native ground
water.
The movement of contaminants through aquifer systems, as
described previously, is dependent upon local and regional
ground-water flow patterns, which are not discernible
through a casual visual inspection. If a load of chemical
waste is dumped into the Mississippi River, for example, it
is expected to move downstream. Furthermore, if the river
is being polluted with high counts of coliforrn bacteria, a
sample dipped from almost any portion of the stream will
give some indication of the pollution. Not so with ground
water, where "downstream" may be in any direction, not
necessarily related to the surface topography at any par-
ticular location. Also, polluted fluids do not always move
with the main body of ground water. They can float on the
water table or sink toward the bottom of the aquifer, and
can move at a different rate than the ground water.
Thus, determination of the direction of flow and areal
extent of a contaminated ground-water body often can be
determined only by a rather detailed and costly program of
test drilling and investigations of water-level changes and
differences in water quality. Even determining the con-
figuration of the water table may not be adequate for
defining the problem, because this only indicates the
horizontal direction of flow and gives no indication of how
deeply contaminated fluid may descend along its path to a
point of discharge, or when it will arrive at that point.
133
-------
For example, under some conditions, a drop of water may
travel at fairly shallow depths from the place where it
reaches the water table to the place where it leaves the
ground-water system. Elsewhere, it may descend rather
steeply to invade aquifers many hundreds of feet below the
water table, and may move through those aquifers in a
direction quite different from that followed by water in the
shallow beds. Therefore, a proper evaluation of ground-
water flow involves a knowledge of what is taking place in
the vertical dimension as well as in the horizontal.
Figure 30 illustrates this principle. The diagrams in the
figure are hypothetical but are based on detailed studies of
the hydrology of several solid waste landfills. Figure 30A
is a water-table map showing that the highest point on the
water table underlies the landfill area. According to one
basic law of ground-water flow, the horizontal direction of
movement of any drop of ground water in an unconfined
aquifer is at right angles to the water-table contours.
Thus, a drop starting at point "B", for example, will ulti-
mately discharge into the adjoining marsh whereas a drop
introduced at point "A" will eventually flow in an opposite
direction to the adjacent stream. Figure SOB, which is a
cross section through the hypothetical landfill along line
X-X", shows, by means of arrows, the vertical pattern of
flow. A drop of contaminated fluid reaching the water table
at point "A" would penetrate quite deeply into the under-
lying sediments before being discharged into the river. As
an example, abnormally high levels of iron, chloride, and
hardness have been found in observation wells screened more
than 30.5 m (100 ft) below the water table beneath a land-
fill, indicating penetration to this depth of ground water
contaminated by contact with the refuse.
Stratification of sediments within a sand and gravel aquifer
can locally modify the movement of ground water and distort
the overall pattern of flow. Unfortunately, this factor all
too often is ignored in many monitoring systems. In some
land disposal sites, for example, only the lower more per-
meable parts of the unconsolidated earth material above
bedrock are tapped by monitoring wells, even tho'ugh over-
lying water-bearing zones are known to be present. Under
such conditions, as illustrated in Figure 31, a major por-
tion of ground-water pollution derived from the disposal
sites may flow undetected through these overlying beds to
some nearby natural or man-made drainage course. A similar
type of situation can also occur if too few monitoring wells
are installed or if the wells tap only the uppermost part of
the zone of saturation.
134
-------
FIGURE A
• DISCHARGE -
AREA
•RECHARGE AREA
PRECIPITATION
DISCHARGE-
AREA
FIGURE B
Figure 30. Plan view and generalized hydraulic profile
associated with a landfill.
135
-------
SAND OR GRAVEL
AQUIFER;
gCONSOLIDATED ROCK AQUIFER
Figure 31. Diagram showing an ineffectual ground-water
monitoring program using only deep wells.
-------
Thus, locating pollutants in the ground-water system is a
complicated matter. Even after contamination is indicated,
defining the problem calls for use of all the various
techniques available to the investigator.
The second problem with regard to monitoring is the diffi-
culty of keeping track of the long-term quality of water
withdrawn from the large number of public supply, indus-
trial, and domestic wells in the region. In none of the
seven states of the project area are accurate figures
available on the number of wells drilled each year, how many
are in use, or what proportion are abandoned. Even in those
states where permits are required for new well construction,
many wells are installed without permits or do not come
under the definitions of the permitting regulations. Each
year a tremendous number of new wells are constructed, but
analyses of water are made for only a relatively small
percentage of them. Exceptions to this, of course, are
public water-supply wells which invariably must be approved
by some type of health authority before they are put into
service. Generally, domestic wells and those used by
industry for drinking-water purposes do not normally fall
within the authority of public health agencies.
Many state and local agencies provide free analyses for
selected chemical constituents and bacteria in water from
private sources when the sample is brought in on a voluntary
basis. Many of the state laboratories are sorely taxed
trying to keep up with this activity. Nevertheless, only a
relatively small percentage of the wells drilled are sampled
initially, and even fewer are sampled on a periodic basis.
Of equal concern in this regard is the fact that many of the
most hazardous contaminants are difficult and costly to
analyze by presently available methods and equipment and not
identified in typically prescribed analyses programs, an
omission that creates continuous uncertainty concerning
their possible existence even in those few well-water
supplies that are actually sampled and analyzed.
In some states and local areas, there has been a growing
trend toward requiring analyses of new private well-water
supplies and certification by a health agency before the
well can be put into service in the home or factory. This
trend undoubtedly will continue but there still will be a
need to sample wells that have been in service for many
years, to conduct periodic analyses of water from new wells,
and to locate the large number of unreported wells installed
each year in the region.
137
-------
Table 24 shows that the total number of on-site water
supplies in the study area in 1970 was in excess of 2.7
million. Continuously monitoring such a large number of
facilities on a periodic basis is practically an impossi-
bility.
Another problem in monitoring is the great variety of
inorganic salts, acids or bases, synthetic organics, flam-
ables and other compounds produced or used each year in the
Southeast. Much of this material is toxic and finds its way
into industrial waste streams. It has been pointed out that
of 496 organic chemicals considered likely to be found in
waste water, only 66 have been positively identified.7)
Hazardous substances such as arsenic, cadmium, chromium,
chlorinated hydrocarbons, cyanides, lead, mercury, copper,
and zinc are widely used or produced in many industrial
activities including metallurgy; paint, rubber, and paper
manufacturing; and the production of batteries, pharma-
ceuticals, and textiles.
Unfortunately, many toxic substances are not included in
normal analyses conducted on water-supply sources. In fact,
in the seven southeast states, analyses for some of the
hazardous elements such as barium, selenium, and silver,
included in the U. S. Public Health Service Drinking Water
Standards, 1962, are not usually required for a ground-water
source to be approved, nor are they often included in
routine analyses unless contamination is suspected.^'
Interviews with public health personnel in the region did
indicate that more effort is being made to determine the
possible presence of toxic substances, and that there is an
overall trend toward more detailed analyses of drinking
water. However, again this is difficult to accomplish due
to limitations of budget, staff, and laboratory facilities.
It is interesting to note that a large portion of the
ground-water contamination case histories inventoried in
this investigation came to the attention of authorities
because of complaints of taste and odor, noticeable effects
on surface waters or vegetation, or through the investiga-
tion of an accident such as a ruptured storage tank or a
spill of hazardous material. Few were uncovered in the
course of routine analysis of the water itself. Where
hazardous substances were present, for example, in those
cases involving high concentrations of arsenic, hexavalent
chromium, cyanide, or lead, it was a change in the non-toxic
chloride content, or hardness, that led to more complete
analyses of the water from the affected source. Only after
the more detailed testing was the presence of the toxic
substance determined.
138
-------
Table 24. NUMBER OF ON-SITE WATER SUPPLIES BY
STATE FOR 1970.6)
State On-Site Supply
Alabama 339,305
Florida 390,423
Georgia 351,318
Mississippi 246,144
North Carolina 732,273
South Carolina 289,771
Virginia 418,948
Total 2,768,182
139
-------
Information was obtained from selected well drillers in the
seven-state study area pertaining to the most common reason
for well replacement in a given year. Table 25 shows the
most common source of contamination which required water-
supply well replacement. For the most part, the replaced
wells were used for individual domestic supply and do not
show the ground-water contamination prevalent around
industrial complexes. However, a few probably involved
industrial and municipal supplies.
Summary
The various factors discussed above should indicate the
cause for concern regarding ground-water contamination and
the need for more research, control, and education to help
prevent new occurrences and to aid in correcting existing
problems. This investigation revealed the fortunate cir-
cumstance that there are dedicated technicians on different
levels of government in each of the states working toward
educating the public on the importance of protecting ground-
water quality, in addition to developing guidelines and
manuals to prevent practices that might adversely affect
underground water sources. However, activities involved in
the protection and monitoring of ground-water quality, with
a few notable exceptions that will be discussed later in
this report, are too splintered among various agencies to be
effective. In addition, the agencies are hindered by lack
of sufficient budget to staff properly and to carry out the
functions necessary for ground-water management programs to
be successful.
In the following portions of this section, key sources of
contamination will be explored in greater detail. By this
means, it is hoped that the principal problem areas, which
require the greatest effort, can be illustrated. A review
of case histories on ground-water quality degradation pro-
vides the best means for understanding the nature and pos-
sible extent of the problem in the Southeast. In this
regard, selected instances of contamination are tabulated.
Where possible, locations and references are provided for
each of the cases included. However, where future*liti-
gation may be involved, for example, and the data shown do
not appear in the literature, the location and reference may
not be listed in order to respect the confidential nature of
the information.
PRINCIPAL SOURCES OF GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION
Natural ground-water quality in the southeast region
generally can be described as good to excellent, and only in
140
-------
Table 25. MOST COMMON SOURCES3)OF CONTAMINATION REQUIRING
WATER-SUPPLY WELL REPLACEMENT AS REPORTED BY SELECTED
WELL DRILLERS IN THE SOUTHEAST.9)
Reason
Leaks and spills )
Septic tanks
Salt-water encroachment
Mining activities
Feedlots (all animals)
Pesticides
Fertilizers
Surface impoundments
Landfills
High water from river
Number
of wells
replaced
57
48
20
9
8
4
3
2
1
1
Number
of
drillers
16
9
5
2
4
2
1
2
1
1
a) Shallow wells and poor construction methods were reported as
problems by ten drillers. Additionally, two drillers reported
having to drill to deeper horizons because of citrus pulp
disposed of in wells and storm runoff and raw sewage disposed
of in drainage wells.
b) 55 of these are hydrocarbon products.
141
-------
very localized parts of the region are there natural
contaminants present that pose a potential health hazard.
On the other hand, man's activities and the many thousands
of tons of waste materials he produces each year are causing
an ever-increasing number of ground-water contamination
problems which are now in need of attention, solution and
control if optimum protection of the ground-water resources
in this region is to be assured in the future.
Some idea of the wide variety of potential sources of
ground-water pollution can be gained from the compilation
given in Table 26, which is based on an analysis of actual
reported cases of ground-water contamination inventoried
during this investigation. Representative examples of the
various categories listed were obtained from public agencies
involved in health and environmental matters, from well-
drilling contractors, from private organizations such as
consulting firms and business associations, and from litera-
ture sources. It can be seen that many activities of man
can lead to degradation of ground-water quality. Monitoring
of the potential source, either by means of accurate measure-
ment of losses of fluid and soluble material to the ground-
water system or through the installation of enough wells for
periodic water-quality sampling, is an almost insurmountable
task. Even inventorying the location of potential sources
of contamination is a major problem for regulatory agencies.
Although no list could contain all causes of subsurface
contamination, Table 26 does include the key sources, and an
attempt has been made to rank them in terms of their rela-
tive degree of actual or potential harm to public health.
If considered on this basis, it follows that contamination
derived from poisonous substances must be assigned a higher
priority of importance than actual or possible water-quality
degradation resulting from objectionable yet relatively
harmless ingredients such as chlorides and sulfates. By the
same token, the relative size of area affected by any given
contaminant and the probable future trend in its rate of new
occurrences also were major considerations in this listing.
The estimated values in Table 26 are based on an evaluation
of such factors as awareness of toxicity, volume, «size of
area affected, particular source of contamination, the
predicted degree of future increase of new sources, and the
level of technology and staffing available to prevent future
problems.
The ranking presented in the table considers the entire
southeast study area and as such the ranking of any par-
ticular source of contamination will differ on a state-by-
state basis. For example, those states without petroleum
142
-------
Table 26. RANKING OF THE PRINCIPAL SOURCES OF GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION
AND THEIR RELATIVE IMPACT IN THE SOUTHEAST UNITED STATES.
Estimated
Source of
Ground-Water Toxicity
Contamination Ranking
SURFACE
IMPOUNDMENTS 1
LANDFILLS ?
(urban &
industrial)
UNDERGROUND
STORAGE OF WASTE
FLUIDS & SURPLUS
WATER 3
LEAKS & SPILLS 4
AGRICULTURAL
ACTIVITIES 5
MINING ACTIVITIES 6
SEPTIC TANKS 7
LAND DISPOSAL OF
WASTE WATERS 8
MISCELLANEOUS
SOURCES 9
GROUND-WATER
DEVELOPMENT 10
PETROLEUM DEVEL-
OPMENT ACTIVITIES 11
Volume
Ranking
3
6
7
4
5
9
1
13
11
2
8
Size
of Area
Affected3^
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
1
2
Future Trend
Rate of New
Occurrences*5/
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
Totals
of all
Columns
8
12
14
13
14
19
11
25
25
14
23
NATURAL BODIES OF
SURFACE WATER 12
HIGHWAY DEICING 13
10
12
2
2
27
30
a) 1-Regional
2-Point source but can be
regional in nature due to
high density of individual
occurrences
3-Can affect adjacent properties
b) 1-Increase
2-No significant change
143
-------
development activities can essentially eliminate this source
of contamination from any listing generated on a state
basis. The totals shown in the last column are an attempt
to assign priorities to the principal sources, using the
four separate criteria. The lower the total derived, the
higher the priority.
When considered on an individual state level, the number of
columns could be expanded to include such factors as:
economic considerations, method of abatement and removal,
alternate plans, technical feasibility, impact of proposed
plan on environment, time factors to implement and complete
the plan, sufficient and capable staff to supervise the
program and follow-up, and impact of continuing with the
situation as is relative to a time period. In other words,
the use of a ranking system can be beneficial on local and
state levels to rank sources of contamination and initiate
programs of abatement and removal. Without such priorities,
the method of attack will continue to be more or less dis-
organized and geared mainly to emergency situations.
From Table 26 it is apparent that the wastes man generates
and eventually must throw away in a solid or liquid state
pose a very serious threat to ground-water quality through-
out the southeast region. This is readily understandable
when it is considered that practically all of the waste
produced is eventually dumped somewhere—on or beneath the
land surface or into some nearby stream or ocean. Land
storage-attenuation and water dilution generally are the
most common disposal-treatment methods employed because they
are the most economically attractive. For example, costs of
land disposal now range from 4 to 50 times less than costs
of other available processing or treatment methods, depend-
ing upon the nature of the waste to be treated. In addition
to this cost incentive, the waste originator is being forced
to utilize land disposal by current air and surface water
pollution protection laws which prohibit or seriously
restrict burning of many combustible solid and liquid waste
streams or water dilution treatment of a host of others that
are inorganic in nature and not readily treatablg by any
other means. Also, economic and population growth and new
methods of manufacture, packaging and marketing have
resulted in the production of an ever-increasing amount of
refuse which must be eventually discarded. The waste
disposal problem is made even more complex by other pollu-
tion control regulations now being developed and enforced
which restrict land disposal to those methods and those
disposal sites that are least likely to cause serious
adverse environmental effects.
144
-------
The magnitude of the problem is evident when it is considered
that the nation produced more than 3.96 billion tonnes (4.36
billion tons) of solid wastes in 1969 and about 79.5
trillion litres (21 trillion gallons) of waste water each
year during the period 1963-1970.2'6>10) of this amount,
only about 8.3 percent or 327 million tonnes (360 million
tons) of the solid waste is derived from residential, com-
mercial, institutional and industrial sources; the remainder
is fairly evenly distributed between agricultural (52
percent) and mining (39 percent) sources. On the other
hand, approximately 38 percent of the waste water is derived
from residential, commercial, and institutional sources.
The source of the remaining 62 percent of the waste water is
industrial: 33 percent for primary metals; 28 percent
chemical; 14 percent paper and allied products; 10 percent
petroleum and coal; 5 percent food products; and 10 percent
for textiles, rubber plastics, machinery, transportation
equipment and all other manufacturing. From these statis-
tics it appears that about 10 percent of all solid waste and
practically all of the liquid waste generated originates in
the more urbanized and industrialized regions of the country
where nearly two-thirds of the nation's total population is
currently living and working. These urban areas constitute
only about eight percent of the total land in the United
States.
Municipal solid waste differs considerably in composition
from region to region and seasonally within any given
region. However, the breakdown as presented in Table 27 is
fairly typical. In this listing, it appears significant
that approximately 80 percent of all municipal solid waste
materials are of a combustible nature and that most of the
remainder is made up of metal or glass waste products. This
suggests that nearly all of the solid refuse now discarded
could be reclaimed for energy production or resource
recovery. Municipal liquid waste streams also vary greatly
in chemical composition. The primary controlling factors
for this in any given region for any particular season are
the nature of the community (residential, commercial or
industrial) and the percent of total sewage flow that is
derived from industrial concerns, hospitals, institutional
laboratories, and storm runoff from yards, streets and
parking lots.
Industrial refuse generally can be divided into two cate-
gories, non-process and process wastes. Non-process wastes
are those common to most industries, such as refuse derived
from packaging, shipping, office and cafeteria activities.
These types of materials usually are disposed of by the same
methods and in the same facilities as those used for munici-
pal waste disposal. Industrial process wastes are far more
145
-------
Table 27. MATERIAL FLOW ESTIMATES OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL POST-CONSUMER NET SOLID WASTE
DISPOSED OF, BY MATERIAL AND PRODUCT CATEGORIES, 1973.a' **'
Product Category
In millions of tonnes (tons), as generated^)
(Partial figures may not add up to totals
because of rounding)
Newspapers,
books,
Material Magazines
Paper 10.3 (11.3)
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other non-
ferrous
Plastics tr.
Rubber and
Leather
Textiles tr.
Wood
Total non-
food product
waste 10.3 (11.3)
Food Waste
Containers,
Packaging
21
11
5
5
0
0.
2
1
42
.2
.0
.9
.1
.7
09
.8
.7
.6
(23
(12
( 6
( 5
( 0
( 0
(3.
tr.
tr.
(1-
(46
.3)
.1)
.5)
.6)
.8)
.1)
'O
J
9)
.9)
Major
household
appliances
1.7 (1.9)
1.5 (1.7)
0.09 (0.1)
0.09 (0.1)
0.09 (0.1)
1.9 (2.1)
Furniture, Clothing,
furnishings footwear
tr. tr.
tr .
0.09 (0.1) tr.
tr.
tr .
tr .
0.09 (0.1) 0.18 (0.2)
tr. 0.45 (0.5)
0.5 (0.6) 0.5 (0.6)
2.3 (2.5) tr.
3.1 (3.4) 1.2 (1.3)
Food Other
Products Products
8
1
3
3
.7
.0
.6
.4
0.09
0.
1
2
0
0.
18
20.3 (22.4)
18
.5
.7
.6
45
.6
(9.
(1.
(4.
(3.
(0.
(0.
(1.
(3.
(0.
(0.
6)
1)
0
7)
1)
2)
6)
0)
7)
5)
(20.5)
Total Product
Waste 10.3 (11.3) 42.6 (46.9) 1.9 (2.1)
3.1 (3.4) 1.2 (1.3) 20.3 (22.4)18.6 (20.5)
a) Net solid waste disposal defined as net residual material after accounting for recycled materials
diverted from waste stream.
b) "As generated" weight basis refers to an assumed normal moisture content of material in its final
use prior to discard, for example: paper at an "air-dry" 7 percent moisture; glass and metals at
zero percent.
c) As-disposed" basis assumes moisture transfer among materials in collection and storage, but no net
addition or loss of moisture for the aggregate of materials.
-------
Table 27 (cont.) MATERIAL FLOW ESTIMATES OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL POST-CONSUMER NET SOLID WASTE
DISPOSED OF, BY MATERIAL AND PRODUCT CATEGORIES, 1973.a* 13'
Product Category
In millions of tonnes (tons), as generated"'
(Partial
totals
Material
Paper
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other nonferrous
Plastics
Rubber and leather
Textiles
Wood
Total nonfood product waste
Food waste
Total product waste
Yard Waste
Misc . inor ganic s
Total
A
Million
40.
12.
11.
10.
0.
0.
4.
3.
1.
4.
77.
20.
97.
22.
1.
122.
figures may not add
because of rounding)
s-generated
weight1^
up to
Totals
As-diposed weight1"'
Tonnes (tons) Percent
1
0
3
0
9
36
5
3
7
4
5
3
9
7
7
4
(44.2)
(13.2)
(12.5)
(11.0)
(1.0)
(0.4)
(5.0)
(3.6)
(1.9)
(4.9)
(85.4)
(22.4)
(107.8)
(25.0)
(1.9)
(134.8)
32.
9.
9.
8.
0.
0.
3.
2.
1.
3.
63.
16.
80.
18.
1.
100.
8
9
3
2
7
3
7
7
4
6
5
6
1
5
4
0
Million Tonnes (tons)
48
12
11
5
3
1
4
87
16
103
17
1
122
.5
.2
.5
.1
.4
.9
.4
.1
.3
.5
.2
.8
.4
(53
(13
(12
(5
(3
(2
(4
(96
(18
(114
(19
(2
(134
.4)-
.4)
.7)
.6)
-7)
.1)
.9)
.0)
.0)
.0)
.0)
-0)
.8)
Percent
39
10
9
4
2
1
3
71
13
84
14
1
100
.6
.3
.9
.1
.7
.6
.6
.1
.3
.4
.1
.5
.0
-------
complex in their composition and form, and many of these
require special disposal methods and techniques to prevent
possible serious adverse effects to some part of the
environment. For example, it is estimated that about 9
million tonnes (10 million tons) of the 100 million tonnes
(110 million tons) of industrial waste generated annually
are presently or potentially hazardous to human health or
living organisms. These wastes may be in the form of
solids, sludges, liquids or gases and may consist of varying
mixtures of toxic chemicals, as well as flammable, radio-
active, explosive and biological-virological materials. A
breakdown of the total volumes of these wastes produced by
region within the United States is given in Table 28.
Representative hazardous substances within the various
categories of industrial waste streams are illustrated in
Table 29.
SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS
Practically every municipality, industry, and mining opera-
tion in the region uses unlined pits, ponds, lagoons or
basins as part of the overall waste water treatment facil-
ity. Some of these merely serve as settling basins for
suspended solid matter contained in the waste liquid. In
others, organic materials in the waste stream are decomposed
by aerobic or anaerobic bacterial action during a prolonged
retention period. In still others, the impoundments are
used primarily as evaporation-seepage basins for waste
volume reduction.
The liquid component not consumed by evaporation is either
routed to some surface-water course or else percolates
through the bottom and sides of the impoundment to under-
lying aquifers. The solid or semi-solid sludge part of the
waste settles to the bottom for eventual removal and disposal
in a landfill or by spreading on nearby lands. In some
instances, where the accumulated solids contain product-rich
materials, they are reclaimed.
Surface impoundments are generally constructed by building
dikes or excavating a basin in unconsolidated deposits.
Some impoundments are lined throughout or in part with clay,
concrete, asphalt or plastic membranes. Abandoned quarries
and mines are sometimes used to hold untreated wastes.
There is a considerable range in the size of surface
impoundments. They can be a series of cooling ponds
receiving hundreds of litres per second of hot waste water
and covering hundreds of hectares. On the other hand, a
small unlined pit may only be a few metres in diameter and
148
-------
Table 28. ESTIMATED INDUSTRIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATION BY
CENSUS REGION IN TONNES (Tons) PER YEAR FOR 1970.
9)
South Atlantic
East South Central
Total
Inorganic in Aqueous
Organics in Aqueous
Organics
Sludges, Slurries, Solids 72,600
tonnes
208,500
545,000
68,000
72,600
(tons)
(230,000)
(600,000)
(75,000
(80,000)
tonnes
81,700
350,000
40,000
8,600
( tons )
(90,000)
(385,000)
(44,000)
(9,500)
tonnes
290,000
895,000
108,000
81,200
( tons )
(320,000)
(985,000)
(119,000)
(89,500)
Total:
894,100
(985,000)
480,300 (528,000) 1,374,400 (1,513,000)
a) States in South Atlantic Region:
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Maryland & D. C.
North Carolina
Virginia
West Virginia
b) States in East South Central Region;
Alabama
Kentucky
Mississippi
Tennessee
-------
Table 29. REPRESENTATIVE HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES WITHIN INDUSTRIAL
WASTE STREAMS.9^
Industry
Mining & Metallurgy
Paint & Dye
Pesticide
Electrical & Electronic
Printing & Duplicating
Electroplating &
Metal Finishing
Chemical Manufacturing
Explosives
Rubber & Plastics
Battery
Pharmaceutical
Textile
Petroleum & Coal
Pulp & Paper
Leather
Arsenic
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cadmium
X
X
X
X
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons3)
X
X
X
X
X
Hazardous Substances
Chromium
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
M
0)
ft
&
o
o
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cyanides
X
X
X
X
X
X
13
cd
cu
hJ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Mercury
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Misc.
Organics
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Selenium
X
X
X
X
o
ti
•H
N
X
X
X
X
X
a) Including polychlorinated biphenyls.
b) Acrolein, chloropicrin, dimethyl sulfate, dinitrobenzene,
dinitrophenol, nitroaniline, and pentachlorophenol.
150
-------
used to dispose of highly toxic wash water from a photographic
laboratory. Most lagoons, pits, and basins are relatively
shallow, usually less than 3 m (10 ft) in depth.
Complete statistics on the numbers and locations of surface
impoundments have never been compiled for the Southeast.
However, data from a few states serve to illustrate the use
of surface impoundments in treatment facilities. In
Mississippi, a 1972 regional inventory of impoundments for
facilities with a volume greater than 61,700 cu m (50 acre-
ft) was compiled from an aerial survey. A total of 87
surface impoundments with a total capacity of approximately
three million cu m (2,500 acre-ft), including industrial and
municipal facilities, were inventoried.12) Generally, most
of the lagoons inventoried had an average depth of less than
1.8 m (6.1 ft). In the study area, some of the states
maintain centralized records of municipal and industrial
waste water treatment facilities. Due to the quantity of
information and the method of data storage, much of this
information was not readily retrievable.
In Alabama, municipal waste treatment systems in 1972
utilized 144 lagoons, with a total flow of 273,000 cu hm/d
(72 mgd), for waste treatment.^3) & 3.975 inventory for
Georgia listed 493 lagoons, with a total flow of 276,000
cu hm/d (72.9 mgd), used for municipalities, private
developments and institutional waste-treatment facilities.
Only limited information is available regarding industrial
waste-treatment facilities. A 1972 inventory of industrial
waste-treatment facilities for Georgia reported a total of
142 lagoons used in the treatment process that received a
total flow of 855,000 cu hm/d (226 mgd).14) A Bureau of
Census report compiled the total volume of industrial waste
water treated in ponds and lagoons in the United States
during 1968. Figure 32 is an indication of the volume of
industrial waste waters handled in the study area.
Because lagoons, pits, and basins are such a common means
for treating, handling, and storing liquids and sludges, it
is likely that thousands of these impoundments are present
in the study region. Their potential for leaking many
thousands of cubic meters (millions of gallons) per year of
potentially hazardous materials into the ground-water system
is significant enough to be of considerable concern to water
regulatory agencies.
This concern is justified on the basis of a number of
factors inherent to the design and operation of surface
impoundments. First, few were designed with any considera-
tion given to protecting ground-water quality, and many
151
-------
400 600 800 1000 Km
'1 I
MILLIONS OF
CUBIC METRES
BILLIONS OF
GALLONS
>IOO
37.8-189.2
> 189.2-378.5
> 378.5
Figure 32.
,»
Distribution of total industrial waste water
treated in ponds and lagoons in the southeast
study area and associated river basins, 1968 15)
152
-------
operate on the principle that at least some fluid will be
lost to the ground. Typical is the so-called evaporation
pond which contains industrial or municipal waste and only
operates successfully in the humid southeast region if
enough leakage is taking place through the bottom and sides
of the impoundment to create additional storage space for
continued waste discharges. Many unlined surface impound-
ments are located in geological settings that are highly
favorable for leakage.
Lagoon and retention basin failures were found to be a
problem in areas of carbonate terrane. These areas are
prone to subsidence and sinkhole development, and often
ground-water contamination results. Problems found during
this investigation were land-surface collapse under lagoons
and downward seepage through a thin cover that remains after
lagoon excavation. In many lagoons, the limestone bedrock
is exposed in the bottom.
Data on case histories collected in this investigation show
that typical surface impoundments are in areas where
pollutants have easy access to aquifers. In some of the
states, no general guidelines have been enforced until
recently regarding siting or designing new surface impound-
ments from the standpoint of ground-water protection.
Consequently, lagoons, pits and basins are located and
constructed to meet other criteria, such as convenience and
lowest possible cost.
Even in the case of some lined impoundments, the potential
for leakage can be significant. Various types of clay are
probably the most universally employed lining materials.
However, they are not impermeable, so that enough concen-
trated pollutants can leak from a large lagoon to damage
ground-water supplies under certain conditions. For
example, a lagoon 8.1 ha (20 acres) in size and 3 m (10 ft)
deep lined with a 0.6-m (2-ft) thick clay blanket with a
typical permeability of 41 X 10~6 m/day (0.001 gpd/ft2) can
leak about 5,680 cu m (1.5 X 106 gal) of fluid per year into
the ground-water system. If the fluid is an industrial
waste and little change in water quality from contact with
the natural soil occurs before the pollutant arrives at the
water table, then a potentially serious contamination
problem can occur. If 305 m (1,000 ft) is the distance from
the lagoons to the nearest well tapping the water-table
aquifer, and ground water is moving toward the well at a
rate of 0.15 m (0.5 ft) per day, it would take more than
five years before the plume of contaminated water would be
detected. Meanwhile, 28,400 cu m (7.5 X 106 gal) of the
waste water would have leaked into the aquifer.
153
-------
Another major concern is the general lack of metering of
waste discharges into holding ponds, lagoons and basins. If
losses of fluids to the ground-water system are taking
place, this condition generally continues unobserved for
extended periods. In addition, the use of monitoring wells
to determine whether leakage is occurring and is affecting
ground-water quality in the vicinity of existing surface
impoundments is rare.
The types of wastes put into industrial lagoons, pits and
basins are virtually limitless. However, only a relatively
few industries generate the great bulk of the total lagooned
waste water. Four major industrial groups generated about
91 percent of the total volume of waste water put into ponds
and lagoons in 1968: paper and allied products, 29 percent;
petroleum and coal products, 22 percent; primary metals, 22
percent; and chemicals and allied products, 18 percent.15)
While numerous chemical constituents are contained within
the waste waters of these major industrial groups, general
constituent groups or parameters that indicate potential
contamination can be identified. Table 30 lists the para-
meters for the above-mentioned key industrial groups which
have significant ground-water contamination potential.
Case Histories
The results of the inventory of documented and potential
ground-water contamination problems involving surface
impoundments are summarized in Table 31. The tabulation is
not comprehensive, because very few investigations have been
undertaken to define the problem. In addition, few regula-
tory agencies or industries even recognize that a problem
may exist.
In Pensacola, Florida, concentrated acid wastes from a
fertilizer plant were disposed of in unlined pits from about
1889 to 1957. The area is underlain by a sand and gravel
aquifer, with an approximate hydraulic conductivity of 17.4
m/day (57 ft/day), to a depth of about three hundred metres
(a thousand feet). In the area, the sand and grava»l aquifer
is extensively developed for industrial, municipal and
domestic water supply. Ground-water development for public
supply was formerly centered to the southeast of the plant
site. Generally, the water table slopes to the east. The
contaminant plume migrated to the east and south (Figure
33). General chemical characteristics of the waste were low
pH and high dissolved solids, hardness, sulfate, fluoride,
calcium, and magnesium. A municipal well located 1.8 km
(1.1 mi) east of the disposal pits was abandoned in about
154
-------
Table 30. INDUSTRIAL WASTE WATER PARAMETERS HAVING OR
INDICATING SIGNIFICANT GROUND-WATER
CONTAMINATION POTENTIAL.15>
PAPER AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
COD
TOC
PH
Ammonia
Pulp and Paper Industry
Phenols
Sulfite
Color
Heavy metals
Nutrients (nitrogen
and phosphorus)
Total dissolved solids
PETROLEUM AND COAL PRODUCTS
Ammonia
Chromium
COD
pH
Phenol
Sulfide
Total dissolved solids
PRIMARY METALS
Petroleum Refining Industry
Chloride
Color
Copper
Cyanide
Iron
Lead
Mercaptans
Nitrogen
Odor
Total phosphorus
Sulfate
TOC
Turbidity
Zinc
PH
Chloride
Sulfate
Ammonia
Steel Industries
Cyanide Tin
Phenol Chromium
Iron Zinc
CHEMICALS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
Organic Chemicals Industry
COD TOC Phenol
pH Total phosphorus Cyanide
Total dissolved solids Heavy metals Total nitrogen
PCB's Vynal chloride
Inorganic Chemicals, Alkalies and Chlorine Industry
Acidity/Alkalinity
Total dissolved solids
Chloride
Sulfate
COD
TOD
Chlorinated Benzenoids Chromium
and polynuclear Lead
aromatics Titanium
Phenol Iron
Fluoride Aluminum
Total phosphorus Boron
Cyanide Arsenic
Mercury
155
-------
Table 30 (cont.) INDUSTRIAL WASTE WATER PARAMETERS
HAVING OR INDICATING SIGNIFICANT GROUND-WATER
CONTAMINATION POTENTIAL.16)
CHEMICALS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (cont.)
Plastic Materials and Synthetics Industry
COD Phosphorus Ammonia
pH Nitrate Cyanide
Phenols Organic nitrogen Zinc
Total dissolved solids Chlorinated benzenoids Mercaptans
Sulfate and polynuclear
aromatics
Nitrogen Fertilizer Industry
Ammonia Sulfate COD
Chloride Organic nitrogen Iron, total
Chromium compounds pH
Total dissolved solids Zinc Phosphate
Nitrate Caldium Sodium
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry
Caldium Acidity Mercury
Dissolved solids Aluminum Nitrogen
Fluoride Arsenic Sulfate
pH Iron Uranium
Phosphorus
156
-------
Table 31. SUMMARY OF CASE HISTORIES FROM SURFACE
IMPOUNDMENTS IN THE SOUTHEAST.
Type of Industry
or Activity
Chemical
Number of
Cases
Municipal and insti-
tutional sewage
waste treatment
Petroleum brine k)
disposal pits
4c)
Agricultural
b)
Principal
Contaminants a)
Acidity
Ammonium
COD
Dissolved solids
Fluoride
Hardness
Nitrate
Oil
Sulfate
Total nitrogen
TOC
Turbidity
Zinc
Nitrate
Sewage
Brine
Acidity
BOD
COD
Manure
Total dissolved
solids
Total solids
Sulfate
a) List includes only those contaminants determined by
analysis or observation, thus, others may exist that
were not determined by analysis.
b) These cases are discussed in other sections of the
report.
c) Not the total number pits, but rather the number of
fields where problems have been documented.
157
-------
Table 31 (cont.) SUMMARY OF CASE HISTORIES FROM SURFACE
IMPOUNDMENTS IN THE SOUTHEAST.
Type of Industry
or Activity
Food processing
Textile
Metal plating
Number of
Cases
Commercial waste
disposal
Recycling oil
Paper
1
1
1
Mechanical repair shops
Principal
Contaminants a)
Chloride
Sodium
Unidentified
organics
Dye
Acidity
Aluminum
Iron
Phosphate
Sulfate
Zinc
Carbon black
Unidentified
organics
Acidity
Lead
Oil sludge
Acidity
Alcohols
Formaldehyde
Phenols
Sodium
Diesel fuel
Nitrate
Oil
Phenols
Sludges
(unidentified)
Wash water
158
-------
o
500
1000 M.
2000
4000 Ft.
o
A
WATER SUPPLY WELL
OBSERVATION WELL
WASTE DISPOSAL PIT
CONTAMINATED AREA
ACUTELY AFFECTED AREA
Figure 33. Extent of contaminant plume in 1972 in the
Sand-and-Gravel aquifer, Pensacola, Florida
159
-------
1958. The industry has since abandoned use of the pits and
now uses deep disposal wells. However, field determinations
of water samples collected in 1975 indicate that the ground
water is still contaminated.17'18'
In northeastern North Carolina, waste water from a fertilizer
plant was used to irrigate a small field on an irregular
schedule from 1970 to 1972. In 1972 about three thousand
cubic metres (eight hundred thousand gal) of a more concen-
trated waste nitrogen solution were disposed of in a
temporary waste pond constructed with soil diking. Neither
the sides nor the bottom of this pond were treated to
prevent leakage of the stored effluent. The pond was filled
with waste nitrogen solutions to a depth of about 1.7 m (5.6
ft) for about one year. During the irrigation period and
after the waste pond was filled, water samples from a fresh-
water pond located 60 m (197 ft) to the south had 400 to 500
mg/1 nitrogen (ammonium plus nitrate-nitrogen). Prior to
construction of the waste pond, the water-table gradient was
toward the north and east; however, use of the waste pond
and a drainage ditch locally reversed the gradient. The
area is underlain by sandy sediments with discontinuous beds
of clay. Generally, the contaminant moved downward and
horizontally in the sediments. An underlying unit of silty
clay at a depth of about 10 m (33 ft) and an upward hydraulic
gradient from deeper confined aquifers prevent further
downward movement of the contaminant.1^
At the Savannah River Plant near Aiken, South Carolina,
which is an ERDA facility for the processing of nuclear
fuels, radioactive solid waste is buried and low-level
radioactive liquid waste is disposed of through seepage
basins on the site. The site is situated in the Coastal
Plain and is underlain by generally unconsolidated sandy
sediments. It is drained by five small streams that are
tributary to the Savannah River. Liquid wastes are disposed
in six seepage basins, and the depth to the water table
ranges between 9m (30 ft) and 18 m (60 ft) below land
surface. All of the radionuclides disposed in the basins,
except plutonium, have been detected in the surrounding
ground water. Tritium is not sorbed in the soil, a^nd
therefore has migrated the farthest. Strontium 90 is poorly
sorbed in the soils, and has migrated as far as 152 m (500
ft) from the basins. Soil sorption and/or radioactive decay
have limited the movement of many other elements.20)
Two lagoon failures due to sinkhole development have been
reported in Alabama. Near Talladega, a sewage lagoon was
excavated in alluvial sand and gravel deposits with bedrock
exposed in several places. A short time after the lagoon
160
-------
was placed in operation, a sinkhole approximately 1.8 m
(6 ft) in diameter and 0.6 to 1.2 m ( 2 to 4 ft) deep
developed in the bottom of the lagoon draining the waste
water. Near Centerville, a sewage lagoon was excavated in
sand and gravel deposits. It was found that dolomite bed-
rock was near the lagoon bottom in two areas. One solution-
ally enlarged fracture was grouted with cement and the area
covered with a plastic membrane. A compacted clay liner was
placed over the bottom and sides of the lagoon. About two
months after the lagoon was placed in operation, a sinkhole
developed in the bottom draining the waste water.21)
At Fort Gaines, Georgia, a sewage treatment lagoon designed
to handle 306 I/sec (7 mgd) was constructed in a carbonate
terrane. The lagoon was in use for two years when a sink-
hole developed in the bottom draining the waste water.
During operation, the lagoon never filled to its design
level.22>
Future Trends
Expanded effluent standards for industrial and municipal
wastes that have been imposed almost everywhere in recent
years are forcing an ever increasing treatment of many
liquid waste streams before they are permitted to be dis-
charged to streams. Such treatment usually involves
additional suspended solids and bacteria removal, but may
also include nutrient and other chemical reduction as well.
Sludges also are being more carefully scrutinized and their
disposal more rigidly controlled, primarily because of the
possible harmful levels of hazardous chemicals or biological-
virologic contaminants that they might contain. One result
is an increasing use of surface impoundments in the waste
treatment process. However, an increasing number of ground-
water contamination occurrences from leaky waste ponds and
lagoons is forcing the regulatory agencies to drastically
restrict the use and operation of unlined basins throughout
the region.
The development of guidelines, an approach being used by
state agencies to protect ground water from contamination by
landfills, might be considered for surface impoundments.
However, before such guidelines could be established,
additional research is required on the characteristics and
effectiveness of the different materials available for
artificial lining. Acceptable methods for metering loss of
liquids from lagoons, pits, and basins have to be developed
and tested. More information is needed on what happens to
different types of soil beneath and around impoundments
containing various wastes with respect to changes in
161
-------
permeability, adsorptive capacity, and potential for ion
exchange. More should be learned about many of the wastes
placed in surface impoundments, especially the municipal and
industrial waste sludges, which if not already wet when
impounded soon become wet from precipitation. Finally,
identification of compounds that can be leached from these
sludges along with their ultimate fate when they reach the
saturated zone must be accomplished. In too many cases, not
even the chemical make-up of the original material impounded
is known in any detail.
What may be more important from an overall ground-water
quality standpoint than the control of new surface impound-
ments are the thousands of existing and already leaking
sites throughout the region. A major difficulty will be
locating those that may be damaging ground-water quality.
Many surface impoundments are on private lands and are
therefore difficult to inventory, except by air. Industries
and municipalities have not had to register the existence of
surface impoundments with regulatory agencies in the past,
and thus, no central statistical file exists in the various
states on where and how they are used. Also, basins with a
very small area can be as potentially dangerous as extensive
lagoon systems, depending on such factors as the type of
pollutant being lost, the rate at which leakage is taking
place, the susceptibility of the aquifer to extensive
contamination, and the proximity of wells supplying drinking
water. These small basins would be difficult to locate even
from the air.
A second difficulty is how to contain the pollutant and
clean up the aquifer that has been contaminated. Regulatory
agencies hesitate to place heavy economic burdens on the
owner of the leaky surface impoundment.
Because of the problems inherent with attempting to remove
a pollutant from an aquifer, cleanup operations when large
volumes of contaminated ground water are involved are for
the most part ineffective. In the long run, most of the
pollutant is left in the ground. Cases of active ground-
water contamination first reported decades ago are* not
uncommon. In some instances, ground-water contamination was
discovered after an industry had gone out of business or
abandoned the site. Cleanup in such cases can be difficult
to enforce, and litigation over this and other conditions of
ownership and responsibility can be time consuming and
costly.
Most efforts toward containment or cleanup are hindered by
what to do with the pollutant after it has been removed from
162
-------
the aquifer and brought to the surface. In many cases the
contaminant is too toxic to discharge into a nearby surface-
water body or the volume is too large to leave in the ground
but too small to justify the construction of a special
treatment plant on the site. If a nearby municipal or
privately owned waste-treatment plant could be found to
accept the effluent removed from the aquifer, then perhaps
it could be taken away by tank truck at a reasonable cost.
However, where the polluter no longer exists as a corporate
entity, it is questionable as to who would pay for any
corrective measures. Except for abandonment of the waste
lagoon and affected wells, the problem remains unsolved.
LANDFILLS
Prior to about 1965, effective rules and regulations
controlling the location and operation of municipal garbage
dumps, landfills and industrial hazardous waste disposal
grounds were nonexistent throughout the United States. Even
today, large quantities of municipal, commercial and insti-
tutional garbage and hazardous waste produced by industry
each year are disposed of on the land in an unsatisfactory
manner. Formerly, landfill sites were typically abandoned
sand and gravel pits, rock quarries, or gullies, hollows or
sinkholes. Now, more and more attention is being given to
selecting disposal grounds that are underlain by much less
permeable materials, such as clays, shales, and similar
fine-grained earth materials where adverse environmental
effects can be minimized. Also, special dumping grounds for
hazardous waste materials are being developed to replace
those previously used, which were generally inadequate and
unsafe from an environmental pollution standpoint. The
hazardous waste component of domestic, municipal and
industrial refuse is of special concern because of its
potential for serious harm to public health.
Much of the hazardous industrial wastes still is deposited
in municipal sanitary landfills or buried on private property
that is presently not under regulatory control unless
contamination from such sources is detected off the site or
causes harm to others. For instance, most of the more than
250 million pesticide containers and unknown but suspectedly
large quantities of unused or wasted pesticides in the
United States each year are crudely buried, thrown away as
trash into some gully, or else discarded in some nearby
landfill with the daily domestic garbage accumulation. At
least part of the estimated 154,300 tonnes (170,000 tons) of
pathological wastes from hospitals each year in the United
States also is buried and every household in the country
yearly throws away one or more pounds of lead, cadmium,
163
-------
mercury, arsenic, or similar poisons from such common
sources as paint, dry cell batteries, paper, cleanser
products, and weed or insect killers. These become espe-
cially significant when it is considered that only a hundred
grams (or 3.5 ounces) of many of these toxic metallic,
organic, or chlorinated hydrocarbon compounds dissolved in a
million kilograms (or pounds) of clean water may be harmful
or even lethal to humans, animals, plants, and many aquatic
life forms.
In the southeast region there are over 2,000 known active
landfill sites that currently receive almost all of the
residential, commercial and institutional waste material and
a large portion of the total industrial waste produced each
year. In addition, there are 48 known hazardous waste
management facilities in the Southeast. Table 32 lists the
number of land disposal sites in each state of the study
area. Unfortunately, throughout the region there also are
many abandoned land-disposal sites that in the past
undoubtedly received large but unknown quantities of
hazardous materials; the locations of most of these are
unknown. These especially pose a particularly serious ground-
water contamination threat. This is due to the fact that an
evaluation of geologic and hydrologic conditions was rarely
included among the various considerations that determined
site selection for landfills.
Existing and abandoned landfills or dumps invariably were
placed on land that had little or no value for other uses.
The site chosen, for example, was in a marshland, an
abandoned sand and gravel pit, an old strip mine, or a
limestone sinkhole, each of which is a favorable environment
for the development of ground-water contamination problems.
The processes that can lead to contamination of ground water
from the disposal of wastes in landfills are relatively
simple. The various organic compounds in refuse (with the
exception of most plastics) are decomposed or stabilized by
aerobic and anaerobic organisms to simple substances that
will decompose no further. These products of decomposition
include gases and soluble organic and inorganic compounds.
If sufficient water is available from precipitation, surface
drainage or from ground water in contact with the refuse,
these compounds can be dissolved and ultimately recharge the
ground-water reservoir or discharge into adjacent surface-
water bodies.
Solid inorganic refuse, such as tin cans and metal pipes,
can also be slowly dissolved by percolating waters, resulting
in a solution with an increased concentration of metallic
164
-------
Table 32. LAND DISPOSAL SITES IN THE SOUTHEAST.
23)
No. of Known No. of
Land Disposal Authorized
Sites Landfills
Special State No. of Dis-
Regulations posal Facil-
for Hazardous ities for
Wastes Hazardous
Wastes
No. of Sites No. of Sites
with Imperme- with Leachate
able Linings Treatment Facil-
ities
ALABAMA
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
MISSISSIPPI
NORTH
CAROLINA
SOUTH
CAROLINA
VIRGINIA
143
500
625
274
162
276
188
23
179
125
0
Unknown
100
173
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
9±
Unknown
3
1
Unknown
35
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
6
0
0
0
0
1
TOTALS
2,168
600
48
-------
ions. Finally, disposal of liquid industrial wastes,
septic tank pumpings, and waste-water treatment sludges can
contribute to an overall increase in dissolved solids in
water passing through the landfill. Leachate is that highly
contaminated water generated by a refuse disposal site.
Changes in the composition of leachate and in concentrations
of substances take place as the various pollutants move
through the subsurface environment. Significant indicators
of pollution in leachate from landfills containing municipal
refuse include BOD (biological oxygen demand), COD (chemical
oxygen demand), iron, chloride, and nitrate. The interaction
of C02 (carbon dioxide) with soil and rock materials may
contribute to the hardness of ground water in the area and
result in the release of iron and manganese held on soil
particles. In addition, biological pollution can be
associated with waters discharging from a municipal land-
fill. Heavy metals and other toxic compounds can be found
in ground water containing leachates from municipal landfills
where toxic wastes have been accepted, and from private
landfills serving particular industries where special types
of wastes are dumped.
The concentration of chemical and biological pollutants
travelling through soil decreases with distance from the
landfill. The effectiveness, however, of such processes as
adsorption, ion exchange, dispersion, or dilution varies
considerably with the type of pollutant involved, the charac-
teristics of the soil underlying the landfill, and geologic
and hydrologic conditions at the site. Thus, no broad
generalizations can be made.
The volume of leachate developed is a function of the
absorptive capacity and areal extent of a particular land-
fill and the amount of recharge water available for infil-
tration. Most landfills have a relatively flat surface with
no vegetation, which is more conducive to infiltration than
to runoff and evapotranspiration. They are normally covered
with a relatively coarse-grained material, again increasing
infiltration efficiency. Therefore, it is reasonable to
assume that at least one-half of the annual precipitation
can become recharge to the ground-water reservoir, after it
has come in contact with the solid waste contained in the
landfill. Average annual rainfall in the southeast region
ranges from less than 889 mm (35 in.) to more than 1,524 mm
(60 in.) per year. Thus a 40.47-ha (100-acre) site would be
capable of producing from 179.8 million 1 (47.5 million gal)
to 308.5 million 1 (81.5 million gal) of leachate per year
after field capacity of the refuse has been reached.
166
-------
Experiments have been conducted to test the feasibility of
diminishing leachate production of sanitary landfills by
using the roots of transpiring plants to dry the refuse and
surrounding soil. At Auburn University, full-scale models
of landfill cores were constructed and filled with typical
municipal refuse. Various trees and grasses were used to
vegetate the landfill models, while another landfill was
denied vegetation and used as a control. Although the lower
two-thirds of the landfills became anaerobic, the vegetation
thrived and roots penetrated the cover soil and the upper
layer of refuse. The volume of leachate varied considerably
in the different landfill models, as measured in lysimeters.
The leachate volume under areas vegetated by pine and thorny
elaeagnus was seven times less than under the unvegetated
area, although the leachate from the vegetated area was
twice as concentrated as that from the unvegetated area. ^'
The effectiveness of various other types of leachate control
methods is summarized in Table 33, along with the degree of
use of these methods and an estimate of the cost involved.
Research on how long after abandonment a landfill can be
expected to generate leachate has been minimal. However,
one investigation under a grant from the U. S. Public Health
Service to the Pennsylvania Department of Health sheds some
light on this. A study was made of a landfill in south-
eastern Pennsylvania, part of which had been closed in 1950
but was still producing leachate. This was sampled along
with leachate from a new section of the same landfill site
still in operation in 1970. The comparison of the chemical
characteristics of the two leachate samples is shown in
Table 34. It should be noted that there is a difference of
a hundred-fold or more in BOD and COD between the leachate
from the old abandoned section and the new section of the
landfill. Differences in specific conductance, ammonia
nitrogen, and sulfate are not as significant. Although
concentrations of iron and hardness are considerably lower
in the leachate from the older portion of the landfill, this
site must still be considered a source of contamination,
even 20 years after being abandoned.2^)
In addition to the adverse effects of leachates on adjacent
surface-water and ground-water bodies, the gas-forming
characterisitcs of water mixed with refuse cannot be ignored,
As water is added to the organic constituents in landfills,
decomposition of these materials starts to take place. As
this occurs, various gases such as methane, carbon dioxide
and hydrogen sulfide are produced. Methane (CH/j) is a
colorless, odorless gas that is highly explosive in concen-
trations of 5 to 15 percent when in the presence of oxygen.
In a number of instances, methane gas has migrated from
167
-------
Table 33. LEACHATE CONTROL METHODS25>
NATURAL ATTENUATION
Clay
Silt
Sand
PREVENTING LEACHATE
GENERATION
Effectiveness
promising research
unknown
unknown
ranges from
complete to
partial control
COLLECTION AND TREATMENT
Liners
Biological
treatment
Physical -Chemical
Recirculation
Spray irrigation
IMMOBILIZATION
Chemical
stabilization
Encapsulation
Fixation and
encapsulation
VOLUME REDUCTION
Dewatering
Incineration
DETOXIFICATION
promising research
promising research
promising research
promising research
promising research
research progressing
looks promising
research progressing
looks promising
research progressing
looks promising
effective
effective for
organics
varies widely by
process and waste
Degree of use
unknown
unknown
unknown
limited
limited
very limited
very limited
very limited
very limited
limited but growing
very limited
not in use
widely practiced
in water pollution
moderate
limited to
specific
wastes
Cost (examples)
natural
natural
natural
N.A.
$1.50 to $4.00
per sq yd
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$10 to $20/ton
$16/ton
$40/ton
$5 to $20/ton
$20 to $100/ton
varies widely
168
-------
Table 34. COMPARISON OF THE CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF LEACHATE
FROM AN OPERATING SECTION AND A TWENTY-YEAR OLD
ABANDONED SECTION OF A LANDFILL IN SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA.
(All constituents in mg/1, where applicable.)
Specific Conductance (micromhos)
BOD
COD
Ammonia (NH3 as N)
Hardness (as CaC03)
Iron (Total Fe)
Sulfate (SO4)
Operating
Landfill
3,000
1,800
3,850
160
900
40.4
225
Abandoned
Landfill
2,500
18
246
100
290
2.2
100
NOTE: Sample collection in 1970.
169
-------
landfills and accumulated in explosive concentrations in
nearby sewer lines and buildings. Gas from some landfills
has been known to kill nearby vegetation, presumably by
excluding oxygen from the root zone. Carbon dioxide (CC>2)
also is a colorless, odorless gas, but it does not support
combustion. It is approximately 1.5 times as heavy as air
and is soluble in water. The C02 may react to form carbonic
acid (H2C03), which can dissolve mineral matter such as
carbonates in refuse and surrounding earth materials. As
this occurs, the hardness and total mineral content of
contiguous waters increase, as has been commonly detected in
shallow wells located near landfills and dumps. The other
primary objectionable gas, hydrogen sulfide, is generally
considered objectionable because of its "rotten egg" smell.
However, in relatively low concentrations form this par-
ticular gas is lethal.
Case Histories
In northeastern Virginia, a 30.4-ha (75-acre) sanitary
landfill containing up to 30 m (100 ft) of solid waste is
generating leachate which is moving along the contact of the
solid waste and the original land surface. Additionally,
the leachate has moved into, and saturated, the permeable
saprolite (silt and sand derived as a weathering product of
igneous and metamorphic rocks) and joints and fractures of
the Wissahickon Schist. The leachate will ultimately
discharge to nearby streams. Based on criteria in regula-
tions, the landfill is properly designed and operated, and
is located in a relatively favorable site. Renovation of
leachate is taking place as it moves through 13 m (43 ft) of
saprolite to the water table; except that the material is
too permeable and the partially renovated leachate is
contaminating the ground water. In order to control the
leachate, the following have been recommended: 1) monitor
wells located along the fracture traces in the schist;
2) recovery of part of the leachate from the ground by means
of wells; and 3) spraying of recovered leachate over the
landfill for further renovation.27)
Shallow ground water around a county landfill in northeast
Mississippi is being contaminated by leachate. Most of the
leachate and contaminated ground water is moving toward
streams. Low permeability materials underlying the landfill
inhibit downward movement of the leachate. Contamination at
the site is attributed to poor engineering and operational
methods. The material used for cover is sandy and relatively
thin and is not applied on a daily basis. The landfill is
subject to excessive infiltration, erosion and siltation.
Vegetative cover necessary for surface stabilization and
170
-------
transpiration of water is not maintained. Runoff is
directed toward the fill because the final grade of the
landfill is lower than that of the surrounding topography.^7)
A 30.4-ha (75-acre) abandoned shell pit west of West Palm
Beach, Florida, has been used for disposal of solid waste
since the late 1940's. When the dump was full in 1973, an
estimated 1.9 million cu m (2.5 million cu yd) of refuse had
been disposed. The waste material is in direct contact with
the water table. Movement of leachate-contaminated ground
water is through the shallow aquifer southeast toward West
Palm Beach. Leachate has been detected in the immediate
vicinity of the dump at shallow depth. However, a quarter
mile south and east the water was not noticeably impaired by
the leachate. Although contamination of ground water is
occurring, it will not be detected until pumping to the
southeast increases. ^'
In Haywood County, North Carolina, solid wastes from a paper
mill were disposed of in a draw. Fluids generated by rain
percolating through the waste penetrated the soil and
contaminated the water-table aquifer. A water-supply well
was contaminated by chlorides and phenols and had to be
abandoned. Other characteristics of the contamination were
a lowering of pH, high iron and manganese concentrations,
and increased hardness and COD. Ten monitor wells have been
installed to determine the extent of contamination and the
direction of movement.29)
Disposal of latex waste has resulted in ground-water
contamination in Walker County, Georgia. Although two latex
operations were disposing of their wastes in the same
general area, it was not possible to determine which was
responsible. One latex producer dewaters his waste prior to
disposal (an operation now required by the State of Georgia)
and the other disposed of his fluid latex wastes in shallow
pits at the site. Quantities of latex disposed at the
landfill range from 344 to 612 cu m (450 to 800 cu yd) of
dewatered wastes per month for one company to 45,420 1
(12,000 gal) per month for the other company. After dis-
posal of the liquid wastes in the pits located 168 m (550
ft) uphill from a small spring-fed stock-watering pond,
milky latex wastes contaminated the pond. Another disposal
site is located around a large sink. Water flowing through
the solid latex wastes flows down the sink and exits from
nearby springs where the milky color was observed.3oi 3D
Shallow ground water in the vicinity of the Broward County
Central Disposal Landfill, Florida, is contaminated by
leachate at depths of 0-6 m (0-20 ft). Contamination at 27 m
171
-------
(90 ft) was not observed, because ground-water movement is
primarily lateral and not vertical. Some distance down-
gradient the leachate generated by the solid waste portion
of the landfill was rejuvenated. However, the organic
leachate generated from septic tank sludge disposal sites
did not change character due to filtration and renovation
processes in the soil. Ground water moving from the north-
west passes through the site toward the southeast under a
hydraulic gradient of 0.5 m/km (2.5 ft/mi) during the dry
months and slightly more than 0.2 m/km (1 ft/mi) during the
wet months; the gradients are locally affected by pumping in
nearby rock pits and wells, drainage canals, and the pattern
of the rainfall. An increase in the generation of leachate
and the extent of the contamination of the Pamlico Sand, the
upper part of the Biscayne aquifer in this area, was noted
after the landfill site was covered with a slurry of
material ranging from silt to coarse gravel. It is not
known how far the leachate has moved toward the southeast,
past the last monitor well.32)
In Georgia, state environmental protection officials have
noted some interesting geographical occurrences of leachate
from landfills. In the northern part of the state, where
generally low to moderate permeability crystalline rocks are
present, leachate emanates as seeps along the slopes or at
the toes of the landfills. At some of the sites, waste
material was emplaced over existing springs or streams. In
the southern part of the state the earth materials are much
more permeable and leachate is rarely seen. The greatest
risk to ground-water quality occurs at the site of landfills
immediately below the Fall Line where Cretaceous and Eocene
aquifers are recharged, and in the southwest where the
Eocene limestone aquifer is recharged. In general, it is
the agency's opinion that only the water-table aquifer will
become contaminated. Monitoring programs have been started
at some sites, with several in the vulnerable recharge areas
of the above-mentioned important aquifers. Additionally, at
four metropolitan Atlanta sites, underlain by the relatively
impermeable crystalline rocks, leachate collection systems
are being installed because of surface-water contamination. 3'
In southwestern Georgia in the recharge area of the Eocene
limestone aquifer, a landfill poses a considerable threat to
ground-water quality. The landfill is situated on the flood
plain of a river and is contributing contaminants to the
surface water. Additionally, the alluvial deposits are
quite thin and permeable and are underlain by active and
potential sink structures. Attempts to relocate the land-
fill are compounded by the possibility of direct recharge to
the Eocene (Ocala) limestone aquifer if ground at higher
172
-------
elevations is utilized. Monitor wells have been recommended
for the present landfill site on the flood plain.33)
Considerable leachate is being generated by a county land-
fill in northwestern Georgia, with the leachate being
observed in a small stream adjacent to the site. The site
is underlain by a cherty residuum of the limestone that
occurs in the area and some of the leachate is probably
contaminating the locally fractured and cavernous limestone.
A large municipal landfill in northern Alabama was sited in
an area subject to high water table and collapsing sinkhole
structures. An older portion of the landfill lies in a
flood-prone area. No hydrogeologic criteria were used in
selecting the site. Leachate movement is toward the south
and probably downward into the cavernous limestone. At
least the lower portion of the refuse in the landfill is
saturated at some time during the year. The likelihood that
ground-water contamination is occurring at the landfill is
reinforced by an incident nearby in which sewage from a
digester at a local sewage treatment plant south of the
landfill entered a collapsed sinkhole under the digester and
exited from a spring located 1.8 km (1.1 mi) southeast.3^)
Leachate from the 58th Street Solid Waste Landfill in Bade
County, Florida is reportedly moving toward municipal well
fields located 3,350 to 3,960 m (11,000 to 13,000 ft) east
of the landfill. The leachate may have migrated more than
half the distance between the well fields and the landfill.
From data supplied, it is estimated that the leachate plume
is over 18 m thick, 600-1,200 m wide, and 1,200-1,525 m long
(60 ft thick, 2,000-4,000 ft wide, and 4,000-5,000 ft long).
The direction and rate of movement of the leachate in the
Biscayne aquifer are affected by heavy pumping from the
municipal well fields.35)
The construction of new residential areas on abandoned land-
fills, as cities and suburbs expand, has been a common
occurrence in the region. In Richmond, Virginia, it has
been reported that between 400 to 500 privately-operated
dumps were active during the Civil War period. After the
Second World War, with the explosion of residential con-
struction, more recently active landfill areas were utilized
for new residential developments. Numerous homes, schools,
and other buildings were constructed on landfilled areas
creating problems directly related to such activities. On
January 8, 1975, a woman suffered first-degree burns when an
explosion occurred in her living room, presumably from
methane gas; the apartment door and two windows were blown
out. Since then 1,000 families living on or near landfill
173
-------
sites have had to keep their windows open for fear of
explosion or suffocation by methane gas, which is generated
by the decomposing materials in the landfills. Two elemen-
tary schools have also been closed due to the buildup of
hazardous levels of methane gas. Movement of the gas from
the landfill takes place along the path of sewer lines or
permeable zones within the rock surrounding the landfills.36^
Future Trends
Because water pollution associated with landfills is becom-
ming a real problem, state and other regulatory agencies in
the region are in the process of preparing new regulations
or modifying old ones to better control this activity. To a
large degree, these are directed toward the design and
siting of new municipal landfills. Industrial landfills
will continue to be difficult to control, if located on a
particular plant property unless more successful methods for
inventorying solid-waste sites are developed, perhaps using
advanced aerial photographic techniques.
New regulations normally call for geologic and hydrologic
investigations of proposed sites and require such informa-
tion as water-table elevation; direction of ground-water
flow; distances to existing well supplies in the area;
depth, thickness, and character of the overburden; and
details of the bedrock aquifer. Although there is much
variation in the details included in regulations and guide-
lines, a 152-cm (60-in) separation between the highest
anticipated level of the water table and the base of the
landfill is a typical requirement. A buffer zone of 15 to
30 m (50 to 100 ft) between the refuse area and the property
boundary is called for by most agencies. Distances to the
nearest operating wells normally are not specified but are
to be determined on a case-by-case basis. Finally, the
majority of new regulations call for 1) the sloping of the
surface of the landfill to maximize runoff and minimize
infiltration, 2) prohibition or curtailment of the dumping
of hazardous or toxic solid and liquid materials, and
3) installation of monitoring wells.
Undoubtedly, these new regulations and the greater interest
on the part of public agencies will help to reduce some
serious ground-water contamination problems that otherwise
would have occurred. However, the guidelines are based on
insufficient research into such factors as the true character
of leachate from various types of landfills, the ability of
different soils to reduce the concentrations of different
types of leachates, and the effects of landfill cover
material, slopes, and thickness on infiltration of
174
-------
precipitation. Therefore, it is not known how effective the
new codes will be in actually preventing ground-water
contamination.
Some new landfills in the region are being constructed with
clay or synthetic liners. These are used in combination
with a system of drains to collect leachate before it can
seep into an underlying aquifer. The major problems
involved with this approach are the lack of experience and
difficulties in the collection and treatment of leachate.
Undoubtedly, the use of liners will be required more and
more in the study area, especially where critical aquifers
would otherwise be threatened or where nearby existing
landfills have already been proven to be sources of ground-
water contamination.
Another approach being considered in landfilling is to
reduce the volume of solid waste to be handled. Alterna-
tives already in practice or proposed include incineration,
pyrolysis, composting, or recycling. All of these either
create other environmental hazards, such as air pollution in
the case of incineration, or are not economically attractive
enough. Thus, solid-waste generation will probably continue
to increase at an accelerating rate, unless environmental
restraints on siting, including requirements for artificial
liners, make the various alternatives listed above economic-
ally more attractive. Finally, concern over air pollution
and surface-water quality may actually lead to a greater use
of the land for disposal of wastes that formerly were dis-
charged into these other two environments.
With the trend toward greater use of wells by public
agencies as a means of monitoring ground-water quality, it
is reasonable to predict that there will be an acceleration
in the discovery of new problems at existing landfills.
Unfortunately, adequate alternatives for eliminating the
landfill as a source of contamination have not been
developed, and, because of this, there do not appear to be
any clear-cut guidelines or policies that can be followed.
The same holds true for containing or removing the pollutant
after it has entered the ground.
Contouring or grading and then covering the landfill with
relatively impermeable material on which soil can be placed
and vegetation established is being attempted at a number of
sites in the region as a means of limiting the formation of
new leachate. However, not enough history on this method
has been developed to comment on its potential for success.
Pumping from properly spaced wells is another alternative
for containing or removing the pollutant, but this has been
175
-------
proposed only as a last resort. Pumping is a slow and
costly process, which is not always successful and can
create other serious environmental problems. Research on
these aspects of ground-water quality protection is
presently lacking, particularly in the areas of methodology
and technology development for effective and economical
leachate reduction, collection and treatment. Even now the
operators are being forced to line and cover landfill sites,
often with materials that have only a relatively short
service-life expectancy. Also, they generally are required
to collect and treat all leachates before discharge to any
part of the environment. Both of these requirements, in
effect, ignore two different yet closely interrelated
realities of the situation. The first is that after land-
fill leachate collection is started, it must continue until
decomposition of the refuse ceases and no more leachate is
produced. When it is considered that such stabilization may
not take place for years after the site has been completely
filled and abandoned, it follows that any leachate collec-
tion system must be considered as a long-term and potentially
very expensive venture. Some attempts are now being made to
expedite the refuse decomposition process by adding water
and oxygen at controlled rates. Also, leachate recycling to
the disposal grounds shows some promise of hastening the
waste decomposition process. However, the end product of
all of these processes is a more concentrated leachate than
before, a fluid that might be even more difficult and costly
to treat. The second often ignored factor is that no
economical way of actually treating such fluids now exists.
UNDERGROUND STORAGE OF WASTE FLUIDS AND SURPLUS WATERS
Subsurface injection of all types of waste fluids and sur-
plus waters through wells has been practiced for many years,
but injection of industrial and municipal wastes has become
common only recently. The injection process need not
require closed systems under pressure; that is, gravity
drainage wells are considered to be injection wells also.
One reason for the increasing use of injection wells is the
newly enacted Federal and state water-pollution control laws
that discourage or prohibit the discharge of wast£ fluids to
surface-water bodies. Initially, it was believed that
injection wells could provide ultimate disposal, but over
the years, it has become increasingly obvious that sub-
surface disposal is at best temporary storage. Therefore,
the terms storage and disposal are used interchangeably in
this section of the report. It should also be noted that
injection is not a waste treatment method. There is little
evidence to suggest that storage underground is conducive to
176
-------
degradation of contaminants, except in cases involving acid
wastes injected into limestone and short-lived radionu-
clides.25'
Two general categories of fluids are being handled by
injection wells: low volume, high toxicity fluids which are
biologically hazardous even in small quantities and there-
fore must be isolated from the bioshpere; and high volume,
low toxicity fluids that might have future uses. The high
toxicity fluids can be lethal in minute quantities and are
of limited degradable potential. At the present time,
treatment by other methods may be technically or econom-
ically unfeasible. Although low toxicity wastes may be
detrimental to human health, their effect is usually not
deadly. The huge volumes of low toxicity fluids are the
major problem. That is, there is too much waste to be
conveniently manipulated by the more commonly employed
disposal or treatment methods.2->)
The primary concern over contaminating potable water is with
the chemicals involved. Fluids injected into wells can range
in composition from rain water, through treated sewage
effluent, to highly toxic chemical and radioactive wastes.
A partial list compiled during this study of injected wastes
in the Southeast is shown in Table 35. Of 268 industrial
and municipal waste injection systems inventoried in the
United States, 48.9 percent of the wells were operated by
chemical, petrochemical, and pharmaceutical manufacturing
firms, where toxic and refractory wastes were common.37)
Little is known about the chemical reactions of injectants
underground, both with the formation and the formation
fluids. Many reactions may occur under conditions of sub-
surface heat and pressure that do not occur at room tempera-
ture and atmospheric pressure. In those cases where more
than one type of fluid is injected, the resulting mixture
may produce some completely different exotic compound.
The growing and varying use of injection wells implies an
increasing competition for available underground space.
Among the many problems associated with injection of wastes,
in a heavily industrialized area where many disposal wells
are used, are the possible chemical and/or biological inter-
actions of the different fluids and the effects of pressure
build-up when a number of wells are located in a relatively
small area and completed within the same hydrogeologic unit.
For example, at a waste injection site in Florida and at a
brine injection site in Mississippi, the natural hydraulic
gradient has already been reversed over a large area, which
is directly related to the injection practices at the
sites.38,39)
177
-------
Table 35. WASTE PRODUCTS INJECTED AT PERMITTED FACILITIES IN THE SOUTHEAST.
-j
CO
acids (inorganic)
fluosilicic
hydrochloric
nitric
sulfuric
acids (organic monobasic)
acetic
formic
acids (organic diabasic)
unidentified
adiponitriles
agricultural chemical wastes
ammonia
ammonium salts
bicarbonates
BOD waste
carbonates
caustics (unidentified)
chlorides
chlorobenzilate
COD waste
cyanides
cyanogen chloride
diazone
dimethylterephthalate
by-products
esters (unidentified)
fluorides
furfural (an aldehyde)
by-products
hexamethylene-alcohols
hexamethylene diamine
industrial chemical wastes
inorganic compounds
(unidentified)
iron chloride
iron sulfate
ketones (unidentified)
methanol
municipal waste treatment
plant effluent
"oil and grease"
organic compounds
(unidentified)
organic nitrogen
pesticide manufacturing
waste
phenols
phosphates
sodium carbonate
sodium chloride
sodium sulfate
sodium sulfite
sulfates
sulfides
sulfites
steel pickling liquor
wastes
sugar plant wastes
surfactants
synthetic rubber manu-
facturing wastes
triazines
waxes (unidentified)
-------
Several routes of contamination followed by injected wastes
have been recognized, including^):
direct emplacement into potable water zones;
escape into potable water zones by failure of well
casings or grouting;
upward migration from receiving zones along the
outsides of casings;
leakage through unsuitable confining beds;
leakage through abandoned or active wells; and
migration to potable water zone of same aquifer.
In investigations into problems arising from the failure of
injection wells at various locations in the Southeast, a
number of routes of contaminant migration were identified.
Many shallow drainage wells contaminate potable ground water
by direct placement into fresh-water zones of an aquifer.
At two injection sites, one in Florida and another in North
Carolina, injection well failure and unsuitable confining
beds were the possible causes for leakage into overlying
aquifers. At a site in Mississippi, waste injected through
a well migrated to a nearby monitor well and backflowed as
a result of pressure buildup from other waste injection in
this area. These are discussed in greater detail in the
following case histories.
Case Histories
As of 1974, a total of 19 disposal wells had been permitted
in four states within the study area. These were dis-
tributed as follows; five in Alabama, nine in Florida, one
in Mississippi, and four in North Carolina. Of these, only
six were operational, one each in Alabama and Mississippi
and four in Florida. Oil field brine injection, injection
for secondary petroleum recovery, and private domestic
sewage disposal wells were not included in the inventory.-^')
No problems have been reported in Alabama, however, there
have been problems in Florida and North Carolina.
At Belle Glade, Florida, during the period from December
1966 to June 1973, over 3 billion 1 (800 million gal) of
industrial waste from a furfural (an aldehyde) plant and a
sugar mill were injected into a well completed in the lower
Floridan Aquifer. The temperature of the waste ranged from
71 to 103°C (160 to 217°F); the pH from 2.6 to 4.5; the
179
-------
suspended solids from 500 to 2,800 mg/1; and the COD from
6,000 to 26,000 mg/1. The injection system consists of one
injection well, one shallow monitor well located 23 m (75
ft) from the injection well, and one deep monitor well
located 305 m (1,000 ft) from the injection well (Figure 34).
Over the period 1967 to 1971, the rate and volume of
injected wastes increased, but the injection pressures
remained stable or even decreased slightly. The injection
rates range from 25 to 50 1/s (400 to 800 gpm) under injec-
tion pressures of 2.8 to 3.5 kg/sq cm (40 to 50 psi).
Injection is seasonal with the sugar cane harvest, occurring
during the fall, winter, and spring.
Although no pressure effects were evident in the two monitor
wells, geochemical effects were observed. Slight increases
in calcium concentration and alkalinity, and a slight
decrease in the sulfate-to-chloride ratio, suggested that
the waste front arrived at the shallow monitor well about 27
months after waste injection began. Because the temperature
of the injected fluid was several times that of the native
water, the hydraulic conductivity of the receiving zone and
the confining beds may have increased by a factor of 2.5,
increasing the probability of upward migration of the waste.
After the waste was detected in the upper Floridan Aquifer,
the injection well was deepened and the casing extended.
The effectiveness of this remedial measure has not yet been
determined.4°-41,42)
In 1968, a chemical company in North Carolina began
injecting waste from diraethylterephthalate production, used
in production of synthetic fibers, into wells completed in a
saline zone of the Coastal Plain sedimentary units at depths
of 259 to 305 m (850 to 1,000 ft). The system was experi-
mental and designed to inject about 1,135,500 1/d (300,000
gpd) of waste effluent. The waste was composed of water
containing approximately 15,000 mg/1 acetic acid, 5,000 mg/1
formic acid, and 500 mg/1 methanol, with a pH range of 3.5
to 4.0. Due to hydrologic conditions at the site and
failure of some injection wells, leakage of a portion of the
waste into overlying aquifers occurred. In 1972, almost 4.5
years after the system was placed in operation, the injec-
tion operation was discontinued upon completion of a con-
ventional waste-treatment plant.43)
A sewage treatment plant at Pompano Beach, Florida, has been
disposing of its waste waters through deep wells. Between
1959 and 1965, about 11.4 billion 1 (3 billion gal) of
secondary treated waste waters had been injected into two
wells 305 to 427 m (1,000 to 1,400 ft) deep. In 1965, some
180
-------
CO
o
cr.
o
LU
m
CL
LU
Q
INJECTIO
WELL
— »-
JS
0 —
100—
300 —
400 —
500 —
6OO —
\
vA
///
i
N
I23M
C75FT)
1
i
Y//
SHALLOW MONITOR DEEP MONITOF
WELL WELL
]
j
n
n
ii
n
i
CHLORIDE
CONCENTRATION . . AnmppB
onALLUW AQUIrtK
150 mg/l (sand, shell, and limestone)
CONFINING BED
(dense marl)
CONFINING BED
(dense carbonate rock)
FLORIDAN AQUIFER
UPPER PART
(permeable carbonate rock)
1000 mg/l
CONFINING BED
(dense carbonate rock)
1650 mg/l
FLORIDAN AQUIFER
7000 mg/l LOWER PART
(permeable carbonate rock)
15,800 mg/l
near bottom
<=;
\
y/i
/ / /
]
\
}//l
///,
u
— 0
— 500
— 1000
LU
O
CL
13
CO
O
LU
m
LU
LU
a_
LU
a
-2000
Figure 34. Schematic diagram of well construction and hydro-
geologic section, Belle Glade, Florida.40,41,42)
-------
wastes began to appear at land surface around the casing due
to improper cementing. The casing was recemented and no
evidence of contamination has appeared since.44)
Thermal pollution of ground water as a result of injection
of air-conditioning cooling water has been reported in
Tallahassee, Florida, in the vicinity of the two state
universities and the state government office buildings. The
majority of the large air-conditioning systems in this area
use ground water for condenser cooling. During the process,
the water is heated and then returned to the aquifer through
disposal wells. Both the cooling water supply wells and the
disposal wells are completed in the same zone of the aquifer.
As a result, the ground-water temperature in the area
increased by 2 to 3°C (5 to 6°F).45)
In the early 1960's, Florida State University experienced
severe thermal pollution in its cooling water supply wells.
Spent cooling water heated to 34.7°C (94.4°F) was disposed
of through a well at a rate of 94.7 1/s (1,500 gpm). Three
nearby supply wells completed in the same zone of the
aquifer as the disposal well produced water with tempera-
tures of 22.8, 30, and 32.2°C (75, 86, and 90°F). Wellbore
current meter studies indicated that flow was restricted to
a shallow section between 36.6 to 54.9 m (about 120 to 180
ft) in the wells. A tracer study indicated an apparent rate
of ground-water movement of 24.4 m (80 ft) per hour. The
disposal wells were redesigned to inject the heated water
into a deeper zone isolated from the shallower supply zone
by a 15 to 30 m (50 to 100 ft) thick zone of dolomite.45)
Near Hattiesburg, Mississippi, two nuclear devices were
detonated in 1964 and 1966 respectively, in the Tatum Salt
Dome. The first device was exploded 826 m (2,710 ft) below
land surface and the second one in the resultant cavity.
Analysis of the post-shot data indicated that the radio-
nuclides were contained within the cavity and in the frac-
tures at the cavity margin.39,46)
Although no water is known to be present in the sa^Lt dome,
there are eight discrete artesian aquifers that overlie and
are adjacent to the dome. All but one, the Cook Mountain
Limestone, contain fresh water and are over 4.6 m (15 ft)
thick. The original hydraulic gradient in each was toward
the south-southwest. However, the gradient was reversed in
the fresh-water aquifers by pumpage from water-supply wells
and in the brine aquifer by oil well brine injection prac-
tices. 39, 46)
182
-------
From March to July, 1965, radioactive waste generated from
drilling reentry operations was injected into an observation
well completed in the Cook Mountain Limestone. About
1,279,000 1 (338,000 gal) of water containing 38 Ci of beta
and gamma activity and 3,253 Ci of tritium were injected.
At the completion of the injection program, the well was
sealed and a second monitor well was installed 91 m (300 ft)
northeast in the same aquifer. Later, approximately 34,000 1
(9,000 gal) of water containing 1.13 mCi of tritium flowed
from this well. In March 1972, the well was capped to stop
the flow-46'47)
In September, 1972, water samples from the second monitor
well were collected and analyzed and the presence of tritium
was confirmed. A subsequent study and report stated that
the contaminant migrated up the wellbore. In March, 1974,
water containing 34,000 pCi/1 flowed at land surface. This
well was plugged to its total depth in August, 1975. No
contaminants were reported in samples from other drill holes
or in surface water at the site.4")
Drainage wells have been used to dispose of urban storm
runoff and to drain land for agricultural use. Numerous
instances have been reported in which drainage wells were
improperly used to dispose of municipal and industrial waste
effluent. Ground-water contamination from drainage wells
has been best documented in Florida, where there are an
estimated 6,500 drainage wells.48) The exact number of
drainage wells is not known, because prior to 1939 such
wells were constructed without permits.4"'
In Orange County, Florida, an estimated 400 drainage wells
have been drilled since 1904, most of them in the Orlando-
Winter Park area.49) During the early 1930's about 18
drainage wells were used by the City of Orlando to dispose
of sewage.50) Many of the drainage wells are used to store
storm water runoff. These wells receive runoff directly or
from a storm drain system that discharges into a lake, where
a drainage well is used to control lake levels.
Numerous cases of ground-water contamination by means of
drainage wells, as a result of accidental spills or improper
use of these wells, have been reported in Orange County. In
one case, it is suspected that an accidental spill at a bulk
fuel storage depot entered a storm drain system that dis-
charged into a lake where water levels were controlled by
drainage wells. Subsequently three domestic water supply
wells in the area were contaminated with hydrocarbon and
chlorinated hydrocarbon compounds. But the exact source of
the contaminants could not be proven.51)
183
-------
At another location, a drainage well is used to dispose of
surface drainage that contains water from dairy barn
washings. Water entering the well had concentrations of
sodium, potassium, chlorides, fluorides, and phosphates
higher than natural water in the area. A well located 305 m
(1,000 ft) down gradient was contaminated by the polluted
water entering the drainage well.49) At another location, a
drainage well received water from tile drains underlying a
citrus grove. Samples of the water entering the well in
January 1964 contained 15 mg/1 sodium, 15 mg/1 potassium,
156 mg/1 sulfate, 48 mg/1 chloride, 2.0 mg/1 fluoride, and
104 mg/1 nitrate. All of these concentrations were higher
than normal for the area, and the high concentrations of
potassium and nitrate indicated pollution from fertilizer. *>
Citrus processing waste, mainly pulp, has been disposed of
in wells in the past. It has been reported that some water-
supply wells in these areas are discharging methane gas. In
1943 the gas concentration from one well was approximately
74 percent methane, and by 1974 the methane decreased to
only 24 percent.50) one well in the Orlando area, operated
by a citrus fruit processor, erupts every so often, spilling
diluted orange juice and other citrus wastes onto company
grounds. Decomposing citrus pulp, generating methane gas,
probably provides the driving force for this orange juice
geyser.52)
The drainage capacities of the wells in the Orlando area
have been estimated to range from 6.3 to 599 1/s (100 to
9,500 gpm). Although the total volume of recharge through
drainage wells is unknown, it is undoubtedly high and is one
of the reasons that no appreciable water-level cone of
depression has developed in the Orlando-Winter Park area
despite combined pumpage exceeding 189 million 1/d (50 mgd)
at times.53)
Widespread contamination, primarily bacterial, has been
reported in the upper part of the aquifer. In the lower
zone, which is tapped by most public supply wells, only
local, isolated problems have been reported. However, the
potentiometric head of the lower zone is always below that
in the upper zone in the area. It may only be a matter of
time until increased downward movement of the contamination
is evidenced.53)
In 1964, during a six-week period, about 16,000 residents of
Gainesville, Florida, were hit by stomach influenza,
resulting in abdominal cramps and diarrhea. High concen-
trations of detergents had also been showing up in the city
water supply during previous months. The source seems to
184
-------
have been a sewage treatment plant at the University of
Florida which disposed of slightly more than 7.95 million
1/d (2.1 mgd) into Lake Alice. Water from the lake flows
into a drainage well, and from the point of the inflow to
the drainage well, the contaminated water moved underground
toward the municipal well field. The problem was resolved
by chlorination and the subsequent closing of the sewage
treatment plant.54)
In Bade County, Florida, there are 3,500 permitted shallow
drainage wells completed in the fresh-water Biscayne
aquifer. These wells reportedly receive spent cooling
water, swimming pool effluent, slaughter house waste,
battery acid waste, metal plating waste, laundromat dis-
charge, and similar matter.54) Drainage wells have also
been used in Hillsborough, Marion, and Leon Counties,
Florida, to augment the natural drainage through sinkholes,
in order to control storm water runoff.45,55,56) jn Georgia,
drainage wells were installed to drain ponds for peat moss
production. These wells were completed in fresh-water
aquifers, resulting in a degradation of the natural water
quality.54) The North Carolina Highway Department has
drilled 21 drainage wells to dispose of storm water runoff.
The use of these wells is being phased out, but 15 still
remain in use.57)
It is not known how many disposal wells are in use in the
study area, nor is it known what is being or has been dis-
posed of in these wells. Some controls must be implementd
which include all users, including the private homeowner.
Future Trends
Recharge of waste water through shallow wells probably will
not be an important source of contamination in the Southeast
as a whole. However, pollution problems may become severe,
even threatening public-water supplies, in those areas of
concentrated population and industry utilizing this means of
disposal. More controls are needed to guard against use of
shallow wells and drainage wells for disposal of waters that
may contain chemical pollutants originating from industrial
processes or from runoff from highways, urban areas, and
agricultural areas that contain fertilizers, pesticides, and
other organic and inorganic residues. Research is needed to
determine the effects of these substances on ground-water
quality in urban areas.
One serious problem associated with the deep underground
disposal of hazardous waste liquids is the very high costs
involved in site investigation to prove that the receiving
185
-------
aquifer is truly isolated by impermeable formations from all
fresh-water zones. An exact definition of the controlling
geohydrologic factors must be made prior to approval and
construction of such an installation. Past practice in most
cases of record was to define the suitability of some
particular site to effectively receive and store a specific
waste based on a review of available information, without
test drilling.
Because subsurface injection is not a waste treatment prac-
tice but rather a waste storage practice, the chemical
composition of the injecta is of particular concern. In
many cases the injecta is highly toxic and contains non-
biodegradable substances. Since there is no way to
guarantee that an industry using an injection well at the
present time will always exist and maintain the facility, a
methodology must be established for the long-term main-
tenance and monitoring of the site and its vicinity. Thus,
the long-term care requirements must be identified and
adequately funded long before a site is abandoned. With
regard to the land disposal of radioactive wastes, five
states require disposal site operators to contribute to a
fund for long-term care of the site. A study completed for
one state suggested that the operator post a bond to cover
these costs.58) other states could do much the same, that
is, assess a fee based in part upon the design and type of
waste storage site and in part on the volume of waste
injected. This fund would accumulate until the site was
abandoned by the industry. To protect citizens from the
cost of long-term maintenance should a site be abandoned
before sufficient funds are available, injectors could
execute a performance bond, the amount of which would
decrease as the long-term care fund grows.
LEAKS AND SPILLS
Pollutants from leaky and ruptured buried pipes, sewer
lines, and storage tanks can directly enter and contaminate
aquifers. Within the study region, the principal pollutants
from these sources are sewage, storm water, and ^petroleum
products. Chemicals used in industrial processes have also
been reported as contaminants in a number of cases.
Exfiltration and infiltration commonly occur in sanitary and
storm sewers. A system which was poorly designed and
improperly installed or which contains old pipelines in
disrepair, often leaks substantial quantities of poor-
quality water into the soil system, eventually leading to
186
-------
contamination of an aquifer. Storm sewers are especially
subject to exfiltration because joints normally are not
completely sealed against leakage.
Petroleum and petroleum products are pumped through hundreds
of miles of transmission pipelines and are contained in
thousands of home fuel and gasoline station tanks throughout
the region. Interstate and intrastate transportation pipe-
lines are regulated, but they are still subject to accidental
rupture and external corrosion.
If a leak of gasoline, oil, or a chemical fluid occurs in
the soil zone above the water table, the liquid pollutant
will either remain in the vicinity of the leak, move within
the backfill in the trench or excavation, or migrate down-
ward through the natural soil under the influence of gravity.
The actual route and rate of travel taken by the pollutant
depend on several factors including the volume of fluid
released, the comparative permeabilities of the soil mate-
rials in the vicinity of the excavation, and the density,
viscosity, and miscibility of the liquid. If the fluid
entering the soil system is not completely adsorbed on soil
particles, it eventually may reach the water table, and if
miscible with water, move into the saturated zone.
Subsequent rainfall can drive the pollutants coating the
soil particles down to the saturated zone and add to the
contamination of the water-table aquifer.
Methods used for the control and solution of problems caused
by leakage from tanks and pipelines have been only partially
successful, especially with regard to hydrocarbons. Repairs
to the source of contamination are, of course, immediately
undertaken, but in a number of cases, it was not possible to
detect the source. Flushing the area with water has been
reported as a method for attempting to dilute the pollutant
in the shallow aquifer zone. Ruptured tanks have been dug
out, and to prevent future problems, clay barriers have been
installed in the excavation before a replacement tank was
buried. Also, trenches and wells for skimming have been dug
to remove hydrocarbons from the water table. Nevertheless,
well owners in some areas of the region report that taste
and odor problems from petroleum contamination of aquifers
have existed for 20 to 25 years, in spite of all abatement
efforts.
Each year accidental spills and improper management of
hazardous and non-hazardous liquid materials at their points
of use or storage result in an appreciable number of ground-
water contamination occurrences thoughout the Southeast. In
those cases where the volume of spilled fluids is large,
187
-------
direct infiltration to surficial aquifers usually takes
place within a few weeks. In other cases, where inter-
mittent applications merely result in saturation of the
upper soil, ground-water quality deterioration in the
vicinity of the spill area usually takes place during
subsequent natural recharge periods, perhaps several months
later. Activities leading to spills and surface discharges
generally can be separated into three main categories: poor
"housekeeping" and failures of above-ground tanks and
pipelines; indiscriminate dumping of waste products; and
accidents involving vehicular surface transportation of
fluids.
Poor "housekeeping" practices on industrial plant grounds
and around commercial establishments, airports, service
stations and farms appear to be the major cause of those
ground-water contamination instances inventoried. Most of
these result from boil-overs and blow-offs, from overpumping
during transfer of liquids to or from storage and carriers,
from leaks in faulty pipes, tanks, and valves in production
or distribution systems, and from poor control over waste
discharges and storm-water runoff.
Contamination of ground water also has occurred in the
southeast states from the indiscrimate dumping of pollutants
on the land surface, especially waste hydrocarbon products
at service stations and other types of small commercial
establishments. When it is considered that several millions
of gallons of such waste materials are discarded in the
region each year, it seems amazing that many more actual
cases of ground-water contamination from this source were
not revealed during the present study- The probable reason
why more were not reported is that such occurrences are so
common and individually affect so small a part of any given
aquifer that they are largely accepted as a not-too-unusual
or an unimportant happening and are, therefore, not reported
to any public health or environmental protection agency.
This is not the case in accidental spills of hazardous
materials resulting from train or truck wrecks, which,
because of their potential harm, commonly receive wide
publicity and immediate attention. However, the clean-up
measures taken are not always those that will prevent
ground-water contamination.
During the study an attempt was made to assess the potential
impact of surface leaks and spills on ground-water quality.
Data obtained from the Environmental Emergencies Branch of
the Environmental Protection Agency Region IV office (Atlanta,
Georgia) were used to determine what proportion of fluids
spilled or leaked onto the land surface might reach the
188
-------
water table. The tabulated information came under two
categories: oils and hazardous material. Under oils, the
principal constituents were various hydrocarbon products
with some minor amounts of oleoresins and vegetable oils.
Those substances included in the hazardous materials consist
of a wide variety of chemical compounds.
A summary of the data for six states is presented in Tables
36 and 37. It should be pointed out that the summary does
not include every incident in each of the states, but only
those reported with volumes recovered, lost to surface-water
bodies and remaining on the ground. As can be seen in
almost all cases in both tables, only a small percentage of
the volume spilled or leaked was recovered. In addition,
the methods of disposing of the recovered materials are,
themselves, potential sources of ground-water contamination.
Cleanup operations, in many areas, involve recovery of
fluids from bodies of water by means of pumping, skimming,
or absorption. The fluids and absorptive materials are
either burned, recycled, buried on-site, or disposed of in
landfills. In the case of hazardous materials, the disposal
practices are not so casual, and the sites or methods of
disposal are more carefully chosen.
The percentage recovery of fluids leaked or spilled is quite
variable from state to state. In Mississippi, almost 43
percent of the hydrocarbons was recovered whereas in South
Carolina, only 17 percent was recovered. The reasons for
such a variation throughout the Southeast may be attributed
to various factors, including: 1) individual state atti-
tudes toward and responses to cleanup (for example, training
and funding); 2) geology favoring rapid or slow infiltration
or runoff to streams; 3) topography hindering cleanup or
favoring leaks and spills; 4) attitude of the public toward
reporting leaks and spills, and 5) lack of a central agency
to which citizens can report.
The North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic
Resources, Environmental Management Division, has a rather
thorough program of describing petroleum product spills and
leaks. Data have been collected that are useful in deter-
mining the probable final repository of the fluids that were
lost to the environment. Basically, the fluids enter
surface-water bodies and are partially recovered, or they
are spilled on the ground and remain there. In some cases,
the contaminated soil was disposed of in a landfill, or the
contaminant was burned. Table 38 is a summary of the data
and shows the number of incidents of leaks or spills that
affected the surface-water or ground-water system. Out of a
total of 120 reported incidents, cleanup operations were
189
-------
Table 36. ESTIMATED VOLUME OF HYDROCARBONS SPILLED OR LEAKED AND RECOVERED
IN THE SOUTHEAST IN 1975.59)
Number
of
Incidents
Total
Volume
Litres
(Gallons)
Volume
[~J Recovered
o Litres
(Gallons)
Volume Lost
to Surface
Water
Litres
(Gallons)
Alabama
68
456,944
(120,725)
92,146
(24,345)
71,707
(18,945)
Florida
36
173,887
(45,941)
32,430
(8,568)
40,405
(10,675)
Georgia
73
420,582
(111,118)
130,639
(34,515)
127,850
(33,778)
Mississippi
66
247,312
(65,340)
105,598
(27,899)
92,823
(24,524)
N. Carolina
115
377,671
(99,781)
80,839
(21,355)
61,889
(16,351)
S. Carolina
65
480,248
(126,882)
81,465
(21,523)
12,755
(3,370)
Totals
423
2,156,644
(568,787)
523,106
(138,205)
407,429
(107,643)
Volume Re-
maining on
the Ground
Litres 293,091
(Gallons) (77,435)
101,052
(26,698)
162,093
(42,825)
48,891
(12,917)
234,954
(62,075)
386,028
(101,989)
1,266,109
(323,939)
-------
Table 37. ESTIMATED VOLUME OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SPILLED OR LEAKED AND RECOVERED
IN THE SOUTHEAST IN 1975.
Alabama Florida
Number
of 64
Incidents
Total
Volume
Litres 399,704 77,797
(Gallons) (105,602) (20,554)
Volume
Recovered
Litres 1,041 None
(Gallons) (275)
Volume Lost
to Surface
Water
Litres 1,238 204
(Gallons) (327) (54)
Volume Re-
maining on
the Ground
Litres 397,425 77,593
(Gallons) (105,000) (20,500)
Georgia
7
69,171
(18,275)
563
(150)
18,263
(4,825)
50,341
(13,300)
Mississippi
3
57,532
(15,200)
37,850
(10,000)
757
(200)
18,925
(5,000)
N. Carolina
10
184,159
(48,655)
102,195
(27,000)
47,123
(12,450)
34,841
(9,205)
S. Carolina Totals
8 38
213,020 1,001,383
(56,280) (264,566)
1,136 142,785
(300) (37,735)
28,637 116,222
(12,850) (30,706)
163,247 742,372
(43,130) (196,135)
-------
Table 38. PETROLEUM PRODUCT SPILLS AND LEAKS IN NORTH CAROLINA IN 1974.
60)
to
Total Total Incidents Incidents
Number Volume of Surface of Ground-
of In- Litres Water Con- Water Con-
cidents (gallons) tamination tamination
Sources
Pipeline
Rupture 26
Tank Overfill 24
Tanker Truck
Accidents 39
Ruptured Tank 8
Dumping 2
Miscellaneous 17
Unknown Causes 4
TOTALS: 120
78,115 8 14
(20,638)
549,351 12 11
(145,139)
386,100 21 17
(102,008)
58,194 4 1
(15,375)
757 2
(200)
58,490 12 4
(15,453)
21,234 2 1
(5,610)
1,152,241 61 48
(304,423)
Incidents
of Surface-
Water and
Ground-Water
Contamination
4
1
1
3
--
1
1
11
-------
undertaken in 108 cases. However, other than burning of the
flammable fluids and removal of the larger spills for
recycling, most of the cleanup materials were probably
disposed of in local landfills or buried on-site. Gasoline
was often washed off the road surface by the local fire
department.^O) The data presented in the table indicate the
main causes of the incidents and put emphasis on the need
for bettering controls on petroleum product transfers,
devising better inspection procedures, and developing tanks
that are less likely to rupture in vehicular accidents.
Case Histories
The number of incidents of ground-water contamination due to
spills and leaks, especially of petroleum-related products,
is too great for each one to be described, and the informa-
tion obtained in this study indicated that the problem was
common throughout the region. During the investigation, a
total of 27 water-well drilling contractors were personally
contacted in the states of the study area. The largest
number of well replacements was attributed to contamination
by petroleum products. A total of 55 wells were replaced by
15 water-well drillers. For the most part, cases of
contamination were reported to local or regional authorities.
However, in some instances, no reports were made of the
problem to any governmental or regulatory agency.9)
Conceivably, a large number of ground-water contamination
incidents are buried in the literature or are undocumented.
If the problem is not reported, it cannot be investigated,
and if not investigated, no remedial actions can be taken to
alleviate the situation and protect water users in the
vicinity. The following are some case histories of petro-
leum product contamination caused by leaks and spills in the
region.
A well used for fire-fighting purposes at a fire house in
Franklin, Georgia, had to be replaced because it contained a
high level of hydrocarbons and was considered unsafe for its
intended use. The source of the contaminant is attributed
to leaking tanks and/or spills.61)
In Morganton, Georgia, gasoline leaking from a buried
storage tank caused an explosion which destroyed a well
house. Two nearby wells reportedly yielded water containing
so much fuel that it could be used to power tractors.61)
Residents of a small town near Atlanta, Georgia, noticed an
objectionable taste and odor in their water. An investiga-
tion revealed that gasoline leaking from a buried storage
193
-------
tank had migrated down through fractured rock and into the
town well.62)
At a power plant in east central Georgia, a pipe ruptured
during cold weather and released approximately 2,271,000 1
(600,000 gal) of No. 2 diesel oil. The spill was contained
in an unlined dike around the facility. A total of
757,000 1 (200,000 gal) were immediately recovered and
182,000 1 (48,000 gal) were retrieved from sumps constructed
for that purpose. It is assumed that the balance, amounting
to 1,332,000 1 (352,000 gal), remains in the ground-water
environment. Investigations and recovery attempts are still
being conducted at this site; no water-supply wells to date
are reported to be contaminated because of this spill.^3)
For about 40 years, two service stations in Fincastle,
Virginia, had disposed of waste oil and gasoline on the
ground. A fire occurred in 1974, and shortly thereafter, a
private water well 30 m (100 ft) deep was contaminated by
hydrocarbons, possibly as a result of the flushing action
that took place in the ground when large amounts of water
were applied to combat the blaze. Eventually, 13 to 18
domestic wells were rendered unusable.64)
In 1961, regular grade gasoline of 89 to 92 octane began
seeping into manholes and ductlines of the Savannah Electric
and Power Company in Savannah, Georgia. The gasoline was
found in a very fine sand just above the water table over an
area of approximately 4,830 sq m (52,000 sq ft). The
amount of gasoline in the area was estimated to be 189,000 1
(50,000 gal). Small, shallow wells were unable to recover
the gasoline by direct pumping. However, deeper wells with
a large pump were used to increase the water-table gradient
and recover part of the gasoline. Complete recovery of the
gasoline is not likely because of retention in the pores of
the fine sand. Unsuccessful attempts were made to determine
the source of the gasoline by comparing its chemical analysis
with analyses of gasolines from the various service stations
in the area. Hydrostatic tests on underground storage tanks
indicated a number of small leaks which were repaired.65)
»
In the vicinity of airports, contamination of ground water
by aviation fuel is very common. For example, the main-
tenance base of a commercial airline was found to be
contributing large amounts of hydrocarbons to the Biscayne
aquifer near Miami, Florida. The area of contamination was
estimated to be 133,800 sq m (1,440,000 sq ft) and the
quantity of hydrocarbons floating on top of the water table
was about 3,785,000 1 (1,000,000 gal). Drainage ditches
were constructed and shallow wells were installed as part of
194
-------
the clean-up program. By utilizing the drainage ditches,
recovery of 75,700 1 (20,000 gal) of the contaminant was
accomplished in the first year of operation. Contamination
has not yet reached any water-supply wells.66)
In addition to the contamination of ground water by petro-
leum products, many other fluids are entering the ground by
means of leaks and spills. The following selected case
histories summarize a number of them.
At a nuclear power plant located 40 km (25 mi) south of
Miami, Florida, leaks in the storage facility and spills of
radioactive fluid have occurred. Leaks in the steel liner
of one of two multi-story concrete radioactive waste
storage structures were detected before the plant went into
operation. Reportedly, the company did not repair the leaks
because they considered them minor. Leakage from the second
storage structure was discovered in late 1975. The liner
not only leaked, but the radioactive cooling water seeped
through a 1.2 m (4 ft) concrete wall. The flow from the
first structure is 340 1 (90 gal) per hour, whereas the flow
from the second leak is slower and at times is only a seep.
Repairs to the structures cannot be started until all of the
spent fuel is unloaded and the structures drained. This may
take several years.67)
A portion of the water collected from the leaky structures
is treated to remove some of the radioactive material. It
is then stored in a tank that must be cleaned periodically.
During a cleaning operation in 1975, the radioactive mate-
rial, primarily containing radioactive cobalt, was removed
and stored in 208 1 (55 gal) containers. Later, 3,330 1
(880 gal) of liquid waste from the containers soaked into
the ground when it was accidentally dumped into the wrong
drain. The amount of radioactive cobalt was approximately
15 times that released from the plant in the first six
months of 1975. Additionally, the water in the storage
tanks becomes very hot and must be circulated for cooling
purposes. In the past, the circulation was handled by one
pump with no emergency backup pump. Early in 1975, a pump
failed, and a mishap with an emergency pump resulted in the
release of over 28,000 1 (7,400 gal) of radioactive waste
liquid. Approximately 11,360 1 (3'QQ9 9al) flowed through a
doorway and soaked into the ground. ''
At a battery plant in Sumter, South Carolina, numerous
spills and leaks of nickel sulfate and nickel sulfamate
entered the water table and migrated 762 m (2,500 ft) to
private wells. Water from a well in a trailer park
contained a maximum of 210 mg/1 of nickel; clothes washed in
195
-------
the water turned black. The suspected point of entry into
the ground water was the plant's waste treatment pond.
However, five monitor wells were installed and subsequent
analyses did not detect any nickel in the ground water in
the vicinity of the pond. The source is thought to be
spills and leaks of nickel compounds, estimated to be in
excess of 11,026 1 (2,913 gal), on the land surface from
ruptured barrels and pressure lines and from a barrel
plater.68)
In Chesterfield County, Virginia, a company recycling auto
batteries disposed of waste sulfuric acid on the ground; it
then flowed into an unlined drainage ditch. Contamination
was first noted when a man utilizing a well 61 m (200 ft)
from the plant complained of burning his hands. An analysis
of the well water showed the following concentrations of
chemical constituents: nickel, 0.3 mg/1; zinc, 25 mg/1;
copper, 1.1 mg/1; sulfate, 1,500 mg/1; and pH, 4.1. The
acid is now routed to neutralizing tanks and lined evapora-
tion lagoons.69)
High levels of arsenic have been found to depths of 2.1 m
(7 ft) in soil and ground water near a chemical plant in
Alexandria, Virginia, which mixed arsenic-containing chemi-
cals until 1967. Concentrations as high as 27,700 mg/1 have
been found on the 0.4-ha (one-acre) plant site. The arsenic
contaminated an estimated 8,640 cu m (305,000 cu ft) of
soil. At present, paving over the contaminated material
appears to be the favored solution.70)
Two wells in a municipal well field in Irondale, Alabama,
were contaminated by hexavalent chromium in concentrations
of 60 and 70 yg/1. The U. S. Public Health Service limit is
50 ug/1. The wells are constructed in limestone with
casing and cement grout set to a depth of 55 m (180 ft).
The suspected source of the contamination is spills from a
chromium plating plant located 30 m (100 ft) from the well
field. Chromium-bearing water probably moved along frac-
tures in the rock.71)
Ethyl acrylate and non-chlorinated hydrocarbons have con-
taminated ground water in the vicinity of at least one
chemical plant in Langley, South Carolina; major spills and
leaks from transmission lines near the railroad unloading
area appear to be the cause. Improper handling and cleaning
of used chemical containers and failure to collect washdown
waters from empty tank trucks are also contributing factors.
Test wells in the area contained ethyl acrylate in concen-
trations of from 500 to 1,000 mg/1.72)
196
-------
In Hopewell, Virginia, a plant producing the pesticide
Kepone, an ant and roach poison, was shut down after workers
developed illnesses producing such symptoms as slurred
speech, nervousness, twitching eyeballs, liver damage, and
loss of memory. Extremely high levels of Kepone were found
in the town's sewage treatment plant and in sludge dumped
into a nearby pond.73) Airborne contamination around and
downwind from the plant occurred during the period of
operation, and particulate matter settled out onto the
ground. Most of the monitoring emphasis was placed on air
and surface-water contamination.
A memorandum from the Virginia State Water Control Board
indicates that ground water in several areas is contaminated
and that it is likely that further investigations will
reveal that the entire Hopewell area is contaminated with
some amount of Kepone.74) The plant was shut down, dis-
assembled, and eventually the rubble was buried in a
plastic-lined landfill. However, unlined sewage lagoons,
sludge-filled ponds, and city dumps or landfills all contain
Kepone which may eventually enter the ground water. Addi-
tionally, as plasticizers in the liner volatilize, it will
become brittle and rupture, causing further and continuing
contamination.
The town well in Prentiss, Mississippi, showed a continual
rise in chloride concentration from 21 mg/1 in 1958 to
53 mg/1 in 1965 and to 70 mg/1 in 1969. Although these
concentrations are considerably lower than the 250-mg/l
recommended limit of the U. S. Public Health Service, the
community looked into the matter and determined that the
well was being affected by the front of a plume of brine
from a pickle plant located 0.8 km (0.5 mi) from the well.
Brine from the plant was periodically disposed of in a small
stream and, in addition, considerable leakage from the
plant's 120 brine vats was also reported. Surface water
runoff at the plant contained concentrations of up to 3,550
mg/1 chloride.'5)
In Swanquarter, North Carolina, a water well was contam-
inated with DDT which had been spilled on the courthouse
grounds while being issued to farmers. The well had to be
abandoned, and a replacement well was drilled.61)
An indication of the rapidity of contaminant movement
through solutionally enlarged openings in limestone comes
from studies related to chloride contamination of a munici-
pal well in Stevenson, Alabama. The suspected source of the
chloride was an accidental discharge from a textile plant
brine vat into a nearby drainage ditch. A 300,000-mg/l
197
-------
sodium chloride brine solution was dumped into the ditch as
a tracer. Approximately 18 hours later, a sharp increase
was noted in the chloride content of water from the muni-
cipal well, which was located 1,067 m (3,500 ft) from the
ditch, demonstrating that the drainage ditch was hydraul-
ically connected with the limestone aquifer supplying the
well.1/6)
Future Trends
Accidental spills are unavoidable in the storage and trans-
portation of fluids, and it is likely that the number of new
spills will continue to increase in the future. Increased
protection of ground-water resources can be achieved by
better handling of spills after they have taken place.
Time appears to be the most important factor in minimizing
the contamination of ground-water supplies by accidental
spills. If cleanup operations are carried out quickly,
especially when hydrocarbons are involved, there is a
chance either to remove much of the pollutant from the
surface before it enters the ground or to excavate the
affected soil before the pollutant reaches the water table.
On the other hand, if action is taken only after a broad
area of an aquifer is affected, containment or removal of
the contaminated ground water is almost impossible.
Recognizing the importance of immediate attention to spills,
Pennsylvania has adopted a regulation that requires indi-
viduals responsible for a spill to immediately notify the
Department of Environmental Resources regional office. If
ground water is threatened, the Regional Geologist attached
to the state's Ground Water Section attempts to respond
within two hours.77) In this manner, a technical appraisal
of the situation is made within a short period of time, and
cleanup operations and assessment of damage can begin in a
more orderly manner. Also in Pennsylvania, certain indus-
tries are required to adopt a Pollution Incident Prevention
Program, which establishes a specific procedure for
informing the state of spills or other major pollution
problems. The programs established by the states "within the
study area are commendable, especially those of Georgia and
North Carolina; however, all of the states need to place
more emphasis on ground-water contamination prevention.
Certainly the Pennsylvania approach to this problem should
be considered by other regulatory agencies throughout the
country. Also, there should be more recognition and better
understanding by the carrier and other industries of the
need for reporting spills to the proper authorities.
198
-------
Finally, guidelines should be developed for state and local
highway personnel, railroad operators, and industrial plant
managers defining such procedures as who should be informed
of accidental spills and how to handle the incident
initially.
As in the case of spills, ruptures, breaks, and leaks in
buried tanks and pipelines are unavoidable, and contam-
ination of ground waters near such facilities will be a
continuing problem. Leakage from sanitary and storm sewers
will continue because many of these systems are old, and it
is doubtful that a major portion of the old leaky sewers
will be replaced in the foreseeable future. Thus, even
though the materials and the design and installation prac-
tices for new sewers have greatly improved, this source of
ground-water contamination will remain an important factor
to be considered in making decisions regarding the siting
and construction of water wells.
More promising from the standpoint of ground-water pro-
tection is the greater scrutiny by public agencies of major
petroleum pipeline projects because of new environmental
laws. Before the pipeline is constructed, codes and regula-
tions call for consideration of factors involving design and
management of the system related to possible effects of
leaks on the underlying aquifers. Oil pipelines must be
equipped with special valving, and all connections are to be
carefully inspected at the time of installation in order to
minimize leakage from breaks or failures that might occur.
Public supply and domestic wells are mapped along the route
to determine the sensitivity of water supplies to possible
contamination. The flow of fuel oil through the line is
carefully monitored so that losses in product can be quickly
discovered, and an emergency program is developed for con-
tainment and cleanup in the event of a leak.
Concern for environment will undoubtedly lead to better
protection of pipelines and tanks against corrosion and to
the use of materials such as clay and tar to line excava-
tions for tanks and pipelines where leakage might affect
nearby water wells. Most of these efforts are presently
directed toward minimizing the possibility of fire,
explosion, or the escape of toxic substances. However, the
need for protecting ground-water resources is becoming well-
recognized in the region because of the growing number of
cases reported to state agencies each year concerning con-
tamination of water wells from hydrocarbons.
Industry has long appreciated the ills associated with poor
housekeeping, and a number of trade organizations such as
199
-------
the Manufacturing Chemists Association and the American
Petroleum Institute have published manuals and educational
booklets on the prevention and control of surface dis-
charges .78 '79/80; Nevertheless, more controls are needed on
practices that can lead to contamination of ground-water
resources in the vicinity of industrial, commercial, and
construction sites. Elimination of open discharges of
wastes to the ground surface, paving and the control of
runoff in areas susceptible to infiltration of pollutants,
and maintenance of above-ground distribution systems are
especially important and may require more attention from
regulatory agencies. Traditional practices of dumping waste
petroleum products at the point of use should be evaluated
for their long-term effects on ground-water quality, and
controls should be established if the problem is of great
enough magnitude to justify regulation.
Research is most needed in the development of new methods
for removing hydrocarbons from the ground-water reservoir.
Abatement by pumping or ditching is widely used but is only
partially effective. Other means for cleaning up petroleum-
contaminated soils and aquifers have been suggested and
should be further investigated. These include water-
flooding techniques to better control and collect the body
of fluid for more efficient removal; biodegradation of
hydrocarbons by aerobic and/or anaerobic bacteria; and the
use of chemicals to precipitate or immobilize the pollutant.
AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES
Contamination of ground water can occur from a number of
activities associated with crop growing, horticulture, dairy
farming, and cattle raising. Introduction of chemicals at
the surface which eventually migrate to the water table and
accumulation of salts in ground water due to irrigation
practices are the principal causes. The effects are both
local and regional, depending upon the sources of the
contaminants.
The agricultural chemicals which pose a major threat to
ground water are fertilizers and pesticides (including
herbicides and insecticides). Fertilization is one of the
few methods by which man can exert a major influence on the
natural processes governing plant growth. In order to
maintain adequate plant yields, the major nutrients (nitro-
gen, phosphorus, and potassium) must be replaced to
compensate for the removal by a previous crop. Originally,
fertilizers consisted of organic wastes—animal, human, and
plant. More recently, fertilizers have been produced
synthetically.
200
-------
The use of synthetic fertilizers has grown severalfold
during the past thirty years. The use of nitrogen in
fertilizer has increased even more rapidly (nitrogen appli-
cation rates per acre have increased more than those for
phosphorus and potassium) because it generally stimulates
crop yields to a greater degree. As a result, nitrogen
applications in excess of the amounts removed by the crop
are common. Nitrate, the oxidized form of nitrogen, is
produced and accumulated in the soil regardless of the
applied nitrogen form. It is soluble and does not interact
with the soil, and therefore can migrate with percolating
water and enter the ground-water system. The use of
nitrogen fertilizers is involved in 30 percent of U. S. food
production.
Fertilizer use is both a rural and urban practice. Not only
are large quantities applied to crops, but fertilizers are
popular in the suburbs to promote lawn and garden growth.
According to recent studies, plants may store such excess
nutrients during the growing season and release them to the
soil during the non-growing season.81/82) During the non-
growing period, excess nitrate, associated with recharge
from precipitation, is leached from soil into the ground
water at high concentrations.
In a study in Florence, South Carolina, excessive applica-
tion of nitrogen fertilizer increased the nitrate content in
the shallow ground water and the sandy loam soils. Under
test conditions, excessive fertilizer was applied on fallow
plots that were maintained free of grass and weeds by
disking the soil. Table 39 shows the results of ground-
water sampling at each of four plots that received applica-
tions of nitrogen fertilizer in concentrations of 0, 112,
336, and 672 kg/ha (0, 100, 300 and 600 lb/acre).83>
During the one-year study period, the nitrate-nitrogen
(N03-N) content of the ground water gradually decreased, but
some increase over the background levels persisted for a
year or longer.83) Unexplained is the fact that, except for
one sample, the background content of nitrate (N03) in the
ground water exceeded the U. S. Public Health Service limit
of 45 mg/1 N03 (io mg/1 NC»3-N) . Apparently, nitrogen
fertilizer from earlier crops had been leached from the
control plot during the study.
At the time these studies were being conducted on the test
plots, the nitrate-nitrogen content of 13 tile lines used to
drain fields of soybeans, cotton, corn, and tobacco grown on
similar soils was being monitored. These data are presented
in Table 40 for comparison. Nitrogen fertilizer was applied
201
-------
Table 39. NITRATE-NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS IN WATER-TABLE
SAMPLES FROM FOUR EXCESSIVELY FERTILIZED PLOTS
IN FLORENCE, SOUTH CAROLINA.
83)
Nitrate Nitrogen Added June 23, 1971
kg/ha
Ib/acre
Date
Sampled
08/19/71
09/16/71
10/12/71
10/27/71
12/15/71
01/13/71
02/17/72
03/13/72
04/20/72
05/25/72
06/22/72
0
0
N03-N
21
"18
14
14
13
14
16
14
13
11
5
112
100
Concentrations in
in mg/la)
33
25
15
17
15
17
23
18
28
13
14
336
300
Groung Water
101
73
62
60
35
47
29
23
15
23
33
672
600
89
81
79
54
48
35
37
32
27
27
25
a) To convert mg/1 N03~N to mg/1 N03, multiply by 4.4
202
-------
fO
Table 40. NITRATE-NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS FROM TILE LINE EFFLUENTS IN
ACTIVELY CROPPED FIELDS NEAR HARTSVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA.83'
(NO3-N in mg/1)
Crop Effluent Sampling Dates, 7/15/71 to 6/22/72
7/15
Cotton
Soybeans ,
Tobacco
Soybeans ,
Tobacco
Soybeans ,
Tobacco
Cotton,
Soybeans
Cotton,
Soybeans,
Tobacco
Cotton
Soybeans .65
Soybeans
Soybeans .47
Corn
Soybeans,
Tobacco .71
Soybeans,
Tobacco
Average . 61
8/2 8/4 8/19 8/25
6.9
.71 2.8 4.3 .38
4.4
1.6 4.5 .56
.56 1.8 4.1 .62
4.8 3.5 .53
4.0 .56
3.7 4.3 .53
.76 4.6
5.0 9.8 .21
5.0 3.6 .35
4.3 4.4
5.0 7.4
.68 3.87 5.20 .47
9/16 1/13
8.6
.71 8.5
.76 7.8
.62 8.1
9.2
.50 9.6
8.4
.59 9.6
9.4
.74 8.8
8.4
7.0
9.0
.65 8.65
2/17 3/14
17.9
18.2 4.7
13.2
14.2
14.6
14.2
14.2 5.0
12.6 13.4
14.7 11.1
15.2
14.9
15.3 9.3
14.2
14.88 8.70
6/22
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.7
4.6
4.7
3.7
4.8
4.8
4.7
4.7
4.8
4.70
-------
to these fields at the following rates: cotton, 103 kg/ha
(92 Ib/acre); soybeans, 0 kg/ha (0 Ib/acre); corn, 195 kg/ha
(174 Ib/acre); and tobacco, 81 kg/ha (72 Ib/acre).83)
There was a wide seasonal range of nitrate-nitrogen concen-
tration in the tile drain effluent, with little difference
in the concentrations from the various fields at any one
period of sampling. The highest levels of nitrate-nitrogen
occurred during the winter or non-growing season.83) This
observation agrees with those of F. E. Allison who states
that "nitrogen recoveries in the crop under average field
conditions often are no greater than 50 to 60 percent of
that applied, even if immobilization is taken into account.
The chief channel of loss in normal agricultural practice is
probably leaching, which usually occurs chiefly in the fall
and spring months."84) This, combined with the result of
the above studies, points to the potential regional impact
of excessive fertilization practices.
Studies of Coastal Plain soils in North Carolina indicate
that approximately one-half of the applied nitrogen
fertilizer was not utilized by the crop. Nitrogen balances
were measured for moderately well-drained and for poorly-
drained soils to evaluate the effects of drainage on the
unused nitrogen. In poorly-drained soils with high water
tables, much of the leached nitrate is lost as gaseous
nitrogen through denitrification, and approximately 14.6
kg/ha (13 Ib/acre) of nitrogen are lost annually to surface
water via subsurface drainage. In moderately well-drained
soils, there is no significant quantity of nitrogen lost via
denitrification, but approximately 45 kg/ha (41 Ib/acre) of
nitrogen are lost to surface water via subsurface drainage.
In the case of moderately well-drained soils, half of the
loss was through tile drains. The samples of water from the
tile drains contained a nearly constant concentration of 15
mg/1 N03-N (66 mg/1 N03).85)
Calculation of the nitrogen balance for the two fertilized
Coastal Plain study sites is presented in Table 41. The
data indicate that, in moderately well-drained soj.ls,
approximately 12.5 percent of the nitrogen fertilizer
applied at the rate of 160 kg/ha/yr (143 Ib/acre/yr) will
enter shallow aquifers. This amounts to approximately 20
kg/ha/yr (17.8 Ib/acre/yr). There are reportedly 0.676
million ha (1.670 million acres) of well-drained cultivated
land in North Carolina.85) Thus, assuming the same applica-
tion rates of fertilizer nitrogen, a total of 13,520 tonnes
(15,142 tons) of nitrogen are entering the shallow aquifers
each year. Similar data can be generated for other states
if the application rates and the area of cultivated well-
drained soils are known.
204
-------
Table 41. NITROGEN BALANCE FOR THE TWO FERTILIZED NORTH CAROLINA
COASTAL PLAIN STUDY SITES (Two Year Average).85>
fo
o
Lenoir County Site
(Moderately well-drained soils)
kg/ha/yr
N Input
Fertilizer
Net N from soil
Total
N Removal
Grain
Surface runoff
Subsurface drains
Total
Nitrogen not
directly
accounted for
160
0
160
92
22
26
140
20a,
Ib/acre/yr
142.
0.
142.
82.
19.
23.
124.
17.
8
0
8
1
6
2
9
9
Beaufort County Site
(Poorly -drained soils)
kg/ha/yr
196
0
196
92
29
15
136
60t>>
Ib/acre/yr
174.
0.
174.
82.
25.
13.
121.
53.
9
0
9
1
9
4
4
6
a) Data indicate that most of this N moves into shallow aquifers.
b) Data indicate that most of this N is lost by denitrification.
-------
In a three-year study conducted near Tifton, Georgia,
nitrogen fertilizer applied to test plots planted in corn
moved rapidly through the loamy sand soil to the shallow
ground water. Before the application of 128 kg/ha (114
Ib/acre) of nitrogen fertilizer and a sidedressing of 168
kg/ha (150 Ib/acre) of liquid ammonium nitrate-urea each
year, the fields had been fallow for four years. The tile
drainage water prior to the start of the study had a con-
centration of 4.8 mg/1 N03-N (21 mg/1 N03). The tile drain
effluent nitrate-nitrogen concentration rose to 7.1 mg/1 (31
mg/1 N03) in the first year, 10.3 mg/1 (45 mg/1 N03) in the
second year, and declined to 9.4 mg/1 (41 mg/1 N03) in the
third year.86) The vertical movement was restricted below a
depth of .92 m to 2.14 m (3 to 7 ft) by a zone of low per-
meability in the Hawthorn Formation. Nitrate-bearing water
moved along the upper surface of this zone, which slopes 3.2
percent. Although nitrate in the ground water usually moved
laterally through the permeable loamy sand toward streams,
there is the potential for movement through sandy horizons
of the formation to domestic wells tapping this aquifer.**?)
However, the potential for contamination is not as great as
in areas underlain by more permeable rocks.
The term pesticides is a general term for that group of
chemicals used to control organisms which limit crop growth
or proliferation; it usually includes algacides, herbicides,
fungicides, and insecticides. The problem with the use of
pesticides is similar to the one involving use of nitrogen
fertilizers; that is, some chemicals are not easily degraded
in the natural environment. There are many pesticides on
the market that are readily degraded and are, therefore,
less of a threat to ground water. Pesticide contamination
of ground water is less common than nitrate contamination.
Pesticides are usually applied in limited quantities a few
times a year. However, handling practices, such as mixing
in the fields, increase the possibility of spillage and
contamination.
A journal article reported that the ability of arsenic as
MSMA (monosodium methanearsonate) to move through soils in
Alabama is directly dependent upon the type of soil. Silt
loams adsorbed considerably more MSMA-arsenic than fine
sandy loams or loamy sands. The high adsorption on the silt
loams is explained by the high kaolinitic percentage of the
clay fractions, the clay content of the soil, and the high
free iron content. These characteristics are lacking in the
fine sandy loams and loamy sands, which also have a coarse
siliceous nature. Relative arsenic concentrations in suc-
cessive increments of effluent from glass columns packed
with the different soils showed that the loamy sands
retained the least and the silt loams retained the most.88)
206
-------
Along these same lines, research was undertaken on the
movement of picloram, an extremely potent herbicide used for
control of perennial broadleaved plants in non-cropland
areas. Its migration through the soil solum was compared
with that of nitrate; leaching was conducted on field plots
of loamy sand and fine sandy loam in Alabama. The results
show that: (1) the nitrate moved downward in both of the
soils at a rate of about one inch per one inch of rainfall
received; (2) some picloram was retained in surface soil
whereas all nitrate was eventually leached below the surface
soil; and (3) the picloram that was leached below the
surface soil moved downward at about the same rate as
nitrate.89)
The above studies indicate the potential of insecticides and
herbicides to move into the ground water. Consistently,
researchers will emphasize that these contaminants are
adsorbed on clays in the soils. Yet, many types of soils of
the U. S., and especially some of those found in the Coastal
Plain of the Southeast, are often lacking in sufficient clay
content to favor adsorption. Proof that clays will adsorb
the pesticides and herbicides does not mean that the user of
these products has soil suitable for such a process to take
place.
Many persons conducting investigations of the potential
movement of contaminants from a source make the fundamental
error of locating observation wells such that representative
water samples are not obtained. For example, one study of
the movement of various pesticides in soil, surface water,
and ground water concluded that no detectable levels of
these pesticides were found in well water. These conclu-
sions were correct; however, the wells were sited upgradient
from the test plots and contaminants were moving away from
them. This type of situation occurs very frequently, and
once test results are reported in the literature, they are
used as a guideline by others and the error is compounded.
The need for a team effort involving various disciplines on
such studies is evident.
Investigations in South Carolina in 1971 showed that the
insecticides toxaphene and fluometuron, when applied to the
soil surface, were found in the ground water within two
months. About two million kg (4.4 million Ib) of toxaphene
and about 70,000 kg (154,000 Ib) of fluometuron were used
in 1971. Even after the growing season ended, these
insecticides persisted as residues and were present through-
out the duration of the
207
-------
Although an increase in insecticide or herbicide content on
a regional basis has not been documented, it undoubtedly
does occur in the vicinity of large farms underlain by
permeable soils. Knowledge of the amounts and types of
pesticides used in the Southeast will be useful if agri-
cultural patterns are known. A 1970 summary of sources of
pesticides in Florida waters was prepared for use in
designing programs to monitor and trace them in the hydro-
biologic system.
Figure 35 is a map of major citrus and agricultural areas in
Florida (1966). There are several hundred different organic
pesticides manufactured, but only 22 different kinds appear
in significant quantities in Florida waters because they are
associated with specific crops. The chlorinated hydrocarbon
Chlorobenzilate and the organophosphates Delnab, Ethion,
Systox, Trithion, and Tedion are found most commonly in
citrus-growing regions. Table 42 lists pesticides commonly
used in 1966 to control major citrus and vegetable pests in
Florida.
Dyrene, Maneb, Zineb, and Karathane are fungicides largely
used in vegetable farming; environmentally persistent
chlorinated hydrocarbons such as DDT, Dieldrin, and Toxa-
phene are also used on vegetables.
Table 43 lists estimated amounts of common pesticides used
in Florida during 1966 according to area of application.
Compiling such data in a more detailed form by individual
county and type of vegetable crop (Table 44) would be
helpful in assessing impacts on ground-water quality and
should point to areas of research.91)
One problem occurring with great frequency is the contam-
ination of ground water and wells by pesticides applied to
the foundations of residences and other structures as part
of termite and other insect control programs. This
situation is in need of greater assessment and regulation.
Health officials interviewed during this study expressed
considerable concern with pesticide application methods and
the qualifications and training of people engaged in this
business. Some felt that stricter controls were needed.
Case Histories
Rising concentrations of arsenic in two wells in Broward
County, Florida, are attributed to the use of sodium
arsenite weed killer and the subsequent movement of arsenic
through the drainage canal system from industrial or
agricultural sources. Drought conditions limited the
208
-------
ALABAMA
<*
-------
Table 42. ORGANIC PESTICIDES COMMONLY USED IN 1966 TO
CONTROL MAJOR CITRUS AND VEGETABLE PESTS IN FLORIDA.91)
Major Pests
Fungi
Rust Mites
Scale Insects
Spider Mites
Aphids
Armyworms
Bean Leafhoppers
Bean Leafrollers
Bud Nematodes
Cabbage Loopers
Corn Earworms
Cowpea Curculio
Fungi (including
Leaf Blights, Leaf
Spots and Mildews)
Leaf Miners
Pameras
Spider Mites
Stinkbug Worms
Sweet Potato Weevils
Wireworms
Pesticides Applied for Control
Citrus
Captan
Chlorobenzilate, Zineb
Ethion, Guthion, and Para-
thion
Delnab, Ethion, Tedion, Tri-
thion, Kelthane, Systox
Vegetables
Dimethoate, Parathion,
Phosdrin
DDT, Parathion
Toxaphene
Guthion, Toxaphene
Parathion
Parathion, Phosdrin
Sevin, Toxaphene
DDT, Toxaphene
Captan, Dyrene, Karathane,
Maneb, Nabam, Zineb
Guthion, Parathion
Parathion
Kelthane
Sevin
Dieldrin
Di-azinon, Dimethoate, Para-
thion
210
-------
Table 43. ESTIMATED AMOUNTSa) OF COMMON PESTICIDES USED IN
FLORIDA DURING 1966.b) 91)
Millions of Kilograms
(Pounds) Applied0'
Vegetable and melons
Citrus
Lawns and homes
Soybeans, cotton and peanuts
Mosquito control
Sugar Cane
Totals
8
2
1
1
0
0
15
.8
.8
.6
.5
.7
.1
.5
(19.
( 6.
( 3.
( 3.
( 1.
( o.
(34.
4)
2)
5)
2)
5)
2)
0)
Percent of Total
Usage by Crop
57
18
10
9
5
1
100
a) Totals include usage of the major chlorinated hydrocarbon, organophosphate,
carbamate, and metallo-organic pesticides only. Herbicides, inorganic compounds
and other categories of pesticides have been omitted from these tabulations.
b) Usage of pesticides for all categories is given for calendar year 1966 rather
than for crop years, which vary for different agricultural crops.
c) Active ingredient.
-------
TABLE 44- AMOUNTS OF PESTICIDES APPLIED TO VEGETABLE CROPS IN DADE COUNTY FOR THE CONTROL OF INSECTS, MITES, NEMATODES,
AND FUNGI, JULY 1, 1966-JUNE 30, 1967.91)
Percentage use of each chemical by crop
Percentage
Crops of total
hectares a'
(acres)
Tomato 38
Pole bean 20
Irish potato 17
Squash 8
Sweet Corn 4
Cucumber 4
Sweet Potato 2
Southern pea 2
Other crops**) 5
Chlorinated
hydrocarbons
s
97
3
Dieldrin
100
Toxaphene
93
7
Organophosphates
Parathion
39
10
26
10
6
9
Guthion
66
15
7
7
4
1
Dimethoate
48
18
34
Phosdrin
77
23
Diazinon
100
Kelthane
100
Carbamates
and
metallo-organic fungicides
Sevin
78
22
Dyrene
100
1
100
Maneb
51
14
28
6
1
1
N
78
6
16
0
n)
O
100
Karathane
39
39
22
to
M
NJ
Total of each insecticide
(active ingredient) applied
in thousands of
Kilograms
Pounds
35.4
78
2.7 55.3 48.5 66.2 5.5 1.3
6 122 107 146 12.2 2.9
6.89 0.8 41.0
15.2 1.8 90.4
18.0 358 204 17.8
39.6 790 450 39.3
63.5 36.2
140 79.9
a) Total hectares (acres) planted in Dade County 18,616 (46,000).
b) Cabbage, collard, turnip, cantaloupe, watermelon, okra, and strawberry.
-------
dilution and flushing of the arsenic from the canals, and
pumping at the well fields induced movement of the arsenic
from the canals into the aquifer. The Broward County Health
Department has restricted the use of arsenite weed killers
in the vicinity of public supply wells in the county.92)
In Durham County, North Carolina, pesticides were found in
the water samples obtained from two domestic supply wells
drilled in crystalline rock. The foundations of two houses
located 45.7 m (150 ft) apart had been treated with
chlordane. The well for one of the treated houses, situated
downgradient, was contaminated. Movement of contaminated
water along the outside of the well casing was suspected as
the cause. The second well supplied a third untreated house
located 45.7 m (150 ft) further downgradient. The suspected
cause in the latter case was the migration of the contam-
inated water through the rock fractures.^3)
A similar case occurred in Middletown, Virginia, where six
cases of pesticide poisoning were reported to have been
caused by well water contaminated during termite protection.
Chlordane (0.29 mg/1) was found in the well water.54)
A strange taste in the water from a recently completed well
in the Coastal Plain deposits near Statesboro, Georgia, was
found to be caused by the presence of the pesticides
toxaphene and DDT, which were in soil used to backfill
around the well casing. The backfill material had been
obtained in the vicinity and was contaminated by flushings
from an insecticide sprayer. Concentrations of the con-
taminant were small because of the very low solubilities of
the pesticides. However, much of the pesticide is suspected
to still be in the backfill material.^)
A damage suit was brought against a pest-control company in
Virginia as a result of chlordane contamination of domestic
wells. The chlordane was injected through the cement
basement floor of a house. The following day, chlordane
appeared in the water well adjacent to the house. Attempts
to cleanse the well by continuous pumping proved futile.
Several months later, a new well was drilled approximately
30 m (100 ft) from the house. The new well was also con-
taminated with chlordane. After one year of periodic
pumping and sampling, the chlordane content is now below
three yg/1 and the new well is being used.95)
Contamination of a well by telone, a soil fumigant, occurred
in Benson, North Carolina. The well is 6.1 m (20 ft) deep
with a concrete slab 1.8 m (6 ft) in diameter poured around
it and grouted to a depth of 3 m (10 ft) as prescribed by
213
-------
North Carolina State Board of Health regulations. It is
unknown whether the contamination is due to nearby applica-
tion on crops or to an accidental spillage into the well.93)
A domestic well near Smithfield, North Carolina, was
contaminated with a mixture of Ethyl Parathion, TDE, Xylene,
and MH-30 (pesticides used for tobacco sucker and insect
control) when a pipe discharging into a sprayer tank was
accidentally disconnected and the contents siphoned onto the
ground. The fluid contaminated the shallow well and the
odor was noticed that night while family members were
showering. The well was abandoned, and a deeper well was
constructed away from the contaminated area.93)
Since 1969, the North Carolina Division of Health Services
has conducted a pesticide detection program; approximately
100 wells have thus far been found to be contaminated with
pesticides. In the first 11 months of 1975, 36 well-water
samples were collected for pesticide analysis (on the basis
of suspicions of the well owners); the analyses were
positive in 15 of these wells. The pesticides detected were
Toxaphene, Chlordane, Prophos, Aldrin, 2-4-D, and Atrazine.
The most common causes of contamination were applications of
pesticides around house foundations or spills around
wells.93)
In 1969, a systematic study of individual water supplies in
four counties in Georgia was conducted to assess the number
of wells contaminated by various substances and to determine
what geologic or physical factors favored contamination.
Pesticide analyses were run on 76 water samples obtained
from shallow wells. Pesticides were detected in low con-
centrations in 43 of the samples. Surface contamination was
considered to be the source; DDT was the predominant pesti-
cide detected.96)
Contamination of the shallow unconfined aquifer by chlorides
contained in irrigation waters is occurring in southwest
Florida. In that area, the Floridan Aquifer contains water
under pressure with heads ranging from about 20 ft above
msl along the coastal margin to more than 50 ft ab
-------
The use of saline artesian water for irrigation has
contaminated the shallow unconfined aquifer in Brevard
County, Florida. In the northern part of the county, along
the west side of the Indian River, citrus areas are irrigated
with artesian water containing as much as 1,800 to 2,000
mg/1 of chloride. Some groves have been badly burned and
even killed by over-irrigation with salty artesian water.
Because the Floridan Aquifer water is highly mineralized in
Brevard County, water for domestic and commercial uses is
pumped from the shallow aquifer which is the sole potable
source.99)
A potential source of ground-water contamination is the mass
burial of livestock, although no actual case histories have
been reported. In five adjoining counties in south central
Mississippi, it was necessary to kill and bury 10 million
chickens after discovering that feed sold in these counties
was contaminated with the pesticide Dieldrin. Burial sites
in the five counties were selected in areas underlain by
clay, to prevent ground-water contamination. The chickens
were placed in trenches 2.4 to 3.0 m (8 to 10 ft) deep with
1.2 m (4 ft) of cover on top. No monitor wells were placed
around the sites to determine whether movement of the
decomposition products toward ground water was taking place.
It is reported that the decomposition in the unvented burial
trenches was so intense that chicken bodies would erupt
through the soil with explosive sounds.100)
An additional source of ground-water contamination in the
Southeast is that resulting from animal-holding operations
such as feedlots. Another is seepage from unlined lagoons
containing solid and liquid dairy cow or hog waste. The
problem of potential ground-water contamination from these
sources has been recognized but has not been fully
assessed.101)
It is common practice in northwest Alabama to hold liquid
and solid dairy wastes in lagoons constructed by a combina-
tion of excavation and diking. One lagoon of this type,
with a clayey chert gravel bottom, leaked large quantities
of liquids, manure and sludge to a spring located approxi-
mately 300 m (1,000 ft) downgradient. The leak occurred
when a small sinkhole opened in the side of the lagoon. The
spring served as a domestic water supply-102)
An assessment of ground-water contamination potential from
anaerobic lagoons treating wastes from milking barns was
made at a Florida dairy. Test wells located 5m (16.4 ft)
and 15 m (49.2 ft) from a 4-m (13.1-ft) deep anaerobic
lagoon indicated significant increases in biochemical oxygen
215
-------
demand, total dissolved solids, and nitrate-nitrogen after
eight months of operation. No contamination was detected at
a 30-m (100-ft) deep test well during this period.103) it
was also noted that the infiltration rate at the site did
not decrease to a constant value, as might be expected if
sealing of the lagoon had occurred through organic clogging
but fluctuated with time.104)
A study of 21 feedlots in Georgia concluded that contamina-
tion of the ground water directly beneath the sites is
probably not significant because of the high level of
denitrification due to extended wet soil conditions. The
data indicate that the average soil nitrate-nitrogen content
in the upper 15 cm (6 in.) was less than 20 mg/kg (88 mg/kg
NC>3).101) However, cattle feedlots can become a source of
local ground-water contamination after abandonment of the
site when nitrogen compounds are leached out and converted
to nitrates. It must also be pointed out that in the above
study no samples of ground water under the site were taken,
only soil cores to depths of 122 cm (4 ft).
It has been noted elsewhere that comparatively high nitrate
concentrations occur under feedlots. The nitrate-nitrogen
content of ground water at depths of 4 to 11 m (13 to 36 ft)
under Colorado feedlots ranged from 1.1 to 21 mg/1 (4.8 to
92 mg/1 N0o).105) Studies in Missouri showed that, in old
abandoned feedlots, the highest concentrations of nitrate in
the soil were 1.8 to 3.7 m (6 to 12 ft) below the surface,
while in-use lots contained the greatest quantities of
nitrate in the surface layers of the soil.106,107) Nitrate-
nitrogen concentrations as high as 16.7 mg/1 (73 mg/1 N03)
were noted in ground water around feedlots in the Texas
Panhandle.108)
During the period 1950-1970, the quantity of commercial
fertilizer used in the southeast dropped from 39.7 percent
of the total U. S. consumption to 22.8 percent. There are
indications that the amount used will continue to decline as
a result of industrialization in the Southeast. Lands are
going fallow because of worker migration to the cijzies,
lands are being removed from cropping because of government
cash subsidies, crop yields are being increased due to
better farming methods, and farmlands are being converted to
urbanized areas. Table 45 presents fertilizer consumption
data for the Southeast during the period 1950-1974.
It is expected that there will be an increased use of
fertilizers, insecticides, and herbicides by home owners in
suburban areas. Research is needed on the effect of this
216
-------
Table 45. QUANTITIES DF COMMERCIAL FERTILIZERS3) CONSUMED IN THE UNITED STATES
BY STATE,109) IN THOUSANDS OF TONNES (Thousands of Short Tons).
COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER
STATE
United States
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
TOTALS
% of U.S. Use
1950*»
16,424,754
(18,092,922)
1,034,686
( 1,139,773)
797,008
( 877,955)
1,078,499
( 1,188,036)
581,543
( 640,607)
1,579,888
( 1,740,348)
793,897
( 874,528)
661,154
( 728,304)
6,526,675
( 7,189,551)
39.7
1960C>
22,361,594
(24,632,732)
974,735
( 1,073,733)
1,414,873
( 1,558,574)
1,371,079
( 1,455,253)
629,572
( 693,514)
1,455,124
( 1,602,913)
711,663
( 783,943)
680,518
( 749,634)
7,187,564
( 7,917,564)
32.1
1970DJ
35,797,742
(39,433,512)
937,786
( 1,033,032)
1,717,888
( 1,892,364)
1,675,529
( 1,845,703)
671,453
( 739,649)
1,620,988
( 1,785,622)
776,736
( 855,625)
749,728
( 825,873)
8,149,608
( 8,977,868)
22.8
1974c;
42,605,413
(46,932,599)
1,032,801
( 1,137,697)
1,743,381
( 1,920,446)
2,006,746
( 2,210,560)
876,662
( 965,700)
1,862,992
( 2,052,205)
876,066
( 965,043)
729,007
( 803,048)
9,127,655
(10,054,699)
21.4
Includes government sales of fertilizer: secondary and micronutrient
fertilizers (those essential to plant growth other than nitrogen,
phosphate, and potash), but not liming materials.
b)
Year ended June 30.
217
-------
contamination source on ground-water quality, especially
where expanding cities are surrounding the sites of wells
supplying them.
MINING ACTIVITIES
Mining operations, such as ore extraction, beneficiation
methods, generation of wastes, and dewatering practices, are
among the most obvious causes of ground-water contamination.
Additionally, two widespread types of ground-water con-
tamination resulting from mining activities stem from acid
mine drainage and leaching of mine tailings. In both these
cases, the contaminants are released from the mineralized
rocks because they are not stable in the new chemical
environment resulting from dewatering of mines or from
disposal of mineralized wastes on the land surface. The
large affected areas usually associated with mining activi-
ties and the variability of geologic conditions make
recovery of the contaminants or the prevention of the
release of the contaminants a difficult task.
The numbers and sizes of mines in the Southeast are not
known in detail. Mining has been an active industry in the
region for more than 200 years, and mines abandoned prior to
the present century have probably been forgotten, even by
local historians. Data on the amount of land disturbed by
surface mining as of January, 1974, are given in Table 46.
Information on the amount of land disturbed by earlier
mining activities by state and by mineral commodity is given
in Table 47.
Mines in the Southeast are of two basic types: surface
mines and underground mines. Some solution mining has been
utilized, but to a very limited extent. In any mining
method, the presence of ground water can make ore extraction
impossible if the water cannot be removed. Dewatering is a
time-consuming and expensive operation occurring prior to
and during the actual mining.
One effect of dewatering and thus lowering the wat^r table
is that mineralized rocks are exposed and oxidized. The
oxidation of sulfide minerals is the principal cause of
ground-water contamination near mining areas. The most
common such mineral, pyrite (FeS2), is usually associated
with the ore and the country rock surrounding the ore body,
as well as being present in coal deposits. Oxidation of
pyrite in the presence of water results in the formation of
sulfuric acid (H2S04). Associated with the acid are high
iron and sulfate. In the presence of the acid solutions,
other materials may be dissolved from their mineral form
and mobilized.
218
-------
Table 46. STATUS OF LAND DISTURBED BY SURFACE MINING IN THE SOUTHEAST AS OF
JANUARY 1, 1974, BY STATE, IN HECTARES (Acres).110)
State
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Missis-
sippi
North
Carolina
South
Carolina
Virginia
Totals
Land needing reclamation
Reclamation not
required by law
Coal
mines
23,423
(57,878)
—
—
—
—
—
7,285
(18,000)
30,708
(75,878)
Sand
and
gravel
7,029
(17,369)
4,510
(11,144)
520
(1,285)
13,974
(34,529)
4,816
(11,900)
3,440
(8,500)
698
(1,725)
34,987
(86,452)
Other
mined
areas
7,182
(17,747)
44,680
(110,402)
5,981
(14,779)
4,075
(10,069)
1,943
(4,800)
4,856
(12,000)
2,216
(5,475)
70,933
(175,272)
Reclamation required
by law
Coal
mines
2,881
(7,118)
—
—
--
—
—
2,029
(5,014)
4,910
(12,132)
Sand
and
gravel
728
(1,800)
594
(1,467)
455
(1,125)
—
1,497
(3,700)
—
314
(775)
3,588
(8,867)
Other
mined
areas
1,140
(2,816)
28,924
(71,472)
5,028
(12,425)
—
2,104
(5,200)
—
994
(2,455)
38,190
(94,368)
Land not
requiring
reclamation
30,527
(75,432)
22,135
(54,694)
3,539
(8,744)
353
(873)
2,833
(7,000)
6,071
(15,000)
15,647
(38,664)
81,105
(200,407)
Total
land
disturbed
72,911
(180,160)
100,843
(249,179)
15,523
(38,358)
18,402
(45,471)
13,193
(32,600)
14,367
(35,500)
29,180
(72,103)
264,419
(653,371)
to
-------
Table 47. LAND DISTURBED BY STRIP AND SURFACE MINING IN THE SOUTHEAST AS OF
JANUARY 1, 1975, BY COMMODITY AND STATE, IN HECTARES (Acres) .1:L1)
State
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Mississippi
North
Carolina
South
Carolina
Virginia
Totals
Clay
1,619
(4,000)
5,342
(13,200)
526
(1,300)
1,093
(2,700)
2,347
(5,800)
4,411
(10,900)
445
(1,100
15,783
(39,000)
Coal
20,478
(50,600)
—
121
(300)
—
4
(10)
—
12,060
(29,800)
32,663
(80,710)
Stone
1,578
(3,900)
10,239
(25,300)
2,752
(6,800)
162
(400)
2,428
(6,000)
567
(1,400)
1,740
(4,300)
19,466
(48,100)
Sand
and
gravel
8,580
(21,200)
1,578
(3,900)
486
(1,200)
10,725
(26,500)
2,428
(18,400)
4,209
(10,400)
5,302
(13,100)
38,326
(94,700)
Gold
40
(100)
—
—
—
890
(2,200)
81
(200)
243
(600)
1,254
(3,100)
Phos-
phate
rock
—
58,115
(143,600)
—
—
121
(300)
3,278
(8,100)
40
(100)
61,554
(152,100)
Iron
ore
21,287
(52,600)
—
40
(100)
12
(30)
40
(100)
40
(100)
3,116
(7,700)
24,535
(60,630)
All
other
607
(1,500)
1,133
(2,800)
4,856
(12,000)
—
1,619
(4,000)
648
(1,600)
1,659
(4,100)
10,522
(26,000)
Total
54,189
(133,900)
76,407
(188,800)
8,782
(21,700)
11,991
(29,630)
14,897
(36,810)
13,234
(32,700)
24,606
(60,800)
204,106
(504,340).
NJ
NJ
O
-------
Acid water, pumped during mining or flowing from the mines
as the water table rises after mining and dewatering opera-
tions cease, causes extensive damage to both surface and
ground water. Also, acidic rainwater passes through
oxidized sulfide minerals in the tailings or spoil piles,
releasing large quantities of sulfuric acid. As shown in
Table 48, acid mine drainage and mine-related sediment load
affect fish and wildlife along more than 1,200 km (750 mi)
of streams, of which 856 km (535 mi) are in Alabama and
Virginia.
Dewatering of mines can also result in the movement of
poorer quality water into the mining area; after the mine is
abandoned, rising ground water of a significantly degraded
quality can enter the dewatered portions of aquifers.
Ground-water contamination is not generally taken into
account in acid mine drainage studies, but it may be even
more serious than contamination of surface waters.
A number of recent studies have treated the subject of
radiological pollution from phosphate rock mining and
processing in the phosphate district of south central
Florida. Although the studies are still continuing because
they are not yet definitive, analyses of samples of ground
water collected in 1966 in the area showed radium concen-
trations as high as 76 pCi/1. A more detailed study, the
results of which were released in 1973, pointed to the
phosphate development and processing activities as the
source of radium-226 in the ground water. In addition, the
radon-222 found in houses built on recovered phosphate land
was attributed to these sources.112'11-^'114)
Phosphate rock is a term used in the mining industry to
describe a rock containing economic quantities of phosphate
minerals, usually calcium fluorophosphate. Figure 36 shows
the locations of the principal phosphate mining and milling
sites in the Southeast. In the Florida phosphate district,
the phosphate has a sedimentary origin and occurs as
minerals of the apatite group, represented by the formula
Ca5(P04)3(F,C1,OH).
Uranium is associated with the phosphate as an impurity, and
the amount varies directly with the phosphate content.
There are 40 to 165 g (0.1 to 0.4 Ib) per tonne (ton) of
rock.115) The decay chain of uranium-238 leads to radium-
226 and radon-222. Radon-222, a gas, decays into particu-
lates which can be adsorbed onto particles of dust that
might be inhaled. Miners exposed to radon have an increased
incidence of lung cancer, and the radium tends to replace
calcium in bone.116)
221
-------
Table 48. FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY STRIP AND SURFACE MINING
IN THE SOUTHEAST, AS OF JANUARY, 1967. ll:L)
State
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
Totals
Streams
Kilometres
(Miles)
440
(275
insignificant
296
(185)
48
(30)
—
—
416
(260)
1,200
(750)
Surface Hectares
(Surface Acres)
660
(1,700)
insignificant
206
(510)
77
(190)
—
—
411
(1,015)
1,382
(3,415)
Reservoirs &
Impoundments
Number
7
—
10
1
—
—
—
18
Surface Hectares
(Surface Acres)
6,597
(16,300)
— —
158
(390)
121
(300)
—
—
—
6,874
(16,990)
Wildlife
Habitat
Hectares
(Acres)
4,856
(12,000)
16,593
(41,000)
324
(800)
769
(1,900)
344
(850)
324
(800)
2,428
(6,000)
25,638
(63,350)
to
-------
rJ
r-~
N
0 200 400 GOO 800 \000 Km
200
400
A MINING AREAS
• WET-PROCESS FERTILIZER PLANTS
• THERMAL PROCESS PLANTS
Figure 36.
Major phosphate rock mining and milling sites
in the Southeast.112)
223
-------
In the Florida phosphate region, the overburden is removed,
the ore is mined with draglines, and the materials are then
slurried and pumped to washing plants. Slimes, which
contain particles less than 0.074 mm (0.0029 in) in size,
are pumped back to mined-out pits or to surface ponds.
Material containing particles larger than 0.074 mm (0.0029
in) is treated by an amine flotation process. The separated
phosphate minerals are then sold for export or sent to a
phosphate processing plant. The silica sand separated from
the ore is discarded in piles, used in dike construction, or
sent to mined-out areas. The used amine flotation water is
discharged to mined-out areas and recycled. 12) Figure 37
shows the Florida phosphate rock mining and beneficiation
flowsheet.
In Florida, the wet process is the most commonly used
processing method, in most cases utilizing sulfuric acid to
produce phosphoric acid and a waste product of hydrated
calcium sulfate (gypsum). Various investigators indicate
that there is a partitioning of uranium and its decay
products during the acidization of the ground phosphate
rock.H7,118,119) ^11 of the uranium remains with the
fertilizer, while a major portion of the radium and its
decay products are removed in the waste, both liquid and
solid. The acidic calcium sulfate, containing the radium,
is discharged by means of slurry lines to a gypsum pile,
from which part of the water is collected and recirculated.
The wet-process phosphoric acid manufacture flowsheet, with
typical radium concentrations at each stage, is shown in
Figure 38. Eight wet-process phosphoric acid plants are in
operation in Florida, with 19 additional plants scattered
throughout the U. S.H2)
A 1973 study by the Environmental Protection Agency's
National Field Investigations Center in Denver reports that
water from recirculating gypsum slurry systems has between
60 and 100 pCi/1 of radium-226. These concentrations exceed
the Atomic Energy Commission standard for discharge to an
unrestricted environment by two to three times. The AEC
standard for release of radium-226 to an unrestricted
environment is 30 pCi/1. Ground water collected in 1966 and
1973 in the Central Florida mining and processing area
showed radium-226 concentrations in shallow aquifers as high
as 76 pCi/1. The limit recommended by the U. S. Public
Health Service for radium-226 in drinking water is three
pCi/1.112)
Reaction between the acidic waters carrying the waste gypsum
and the limestone artesian aquifer underlying the ponds and
gypsum piles has enlarged solution cavities in the aquifer
224
-------
WELL
WATER
SLURRY GIANT
ORE
MATRIX
SLURRY
MINE PIT
COARSE ROCK
SCREEN
AMINE
FLOTATION
CO
FINE
SLIME POND
SEEPAGE
GRIND
REAGENT
SURGE POND
SAND TAILS
co
UJ
<
CO
K.
o
-------
EXHAUST
Rn
FLASH
COOLER
PHOSPHATE
ROCK I
(40pCi/g)t
U- Ra
ATTACK
VESSEL
SULFURIC
ACID
FUME
SCRUBBER
BAROMETRIC
CONDENSERS
U, Ra
PAN FILTER
U. Ra
ACID
EVAPORATOR lACID U Rn
(50pCi/l)
PRODUCT
(20pCi/|)
Ra(25pCi/g)
SLURRY TANK
MIXER
Rn.F
Ra
I
GYPSUM PILE
(25 pCi/g)
WATER !
SEEPAGE Ra
(90 pCI/l)
Ra
Rn.F
I
I
I
FERTILIZER
PLANT
Ra (90 pCi/l)
GYPSUM
WATER POND
LIQUID STREAM
^ GAS STREAM
(25pCi/l) TYPICAL RADIUM
CONCENTRATION
OOpCI/l)
Ra
SEEPAGE Ra '
(90 pCi/l)
j (ALTERNATIVE TO TREATMENT) J
DOUBLE
LIME TREAT
Figure 38.
STREAM
(IpCi/l)
Flowsheet, wet-process phosphoric acid
manufacture.
226
-------
and permitted the movement of radioactive water into the
shallow ground water over a large portion of Polk County,
Florida. The region is part of the recharge area for the
Floridan Aquifer which underlies the contaminated shallow
aquifer. Some of the recharge to the Floridan occurs where
sinkholes extend to the surface through the overlying
confining units and the water-table aquifer. It is through
these sinkholes or related solution cavities that radium-
bearing water enters the aquifer.113) Because of the large
withdrawals of ground water from the Floridan Aquifer for
mining and processing operations and for citrus irrigation,
it is expected that contamination of the Floridan Aquifer
will eventually take place. Many plants that report a
negative water balance on the contaminated-water system are
actually discharging radioactive waste waters to aquifers.112)
There was little attempt in either of the studies referred
to above to separate the ground-water samples on the basis
of which were contaminated and which were not. However, in
the 1966 report, if the inorganic chemical analyses are
compared with the radium-226 concentrations of the water
samples from the same wells, the wells can very distinctly
be separated into two groups, as shown in Table 49.
Additional chemical parameters are correlated with the
radium-226 content and some very striking relationships are
noted. The high NC>3 concentration can be attributed to
oxidation of nitrogen compounds used in the amine flotation
process, the low pH to seepage of acidic gypsum waters, and
the low alkalinity to the low pH. The nitrate-alkalinity-
pH-radium relationship is useful for determining if the
waters are contaminated by fluids related to the beneficia-
tion and the acidization processes.
Type 1 waters as reported in Table 49 can essentially be
described as modified waters. However, the Type 2 waters
may not all be the result of natural conditions. It is
possible that some of these Type 2 water analyses which do
list high concentrations of radium-226 reflect downward
seepage of oxidized and leached materials from the original
mined waste materials which were never acidized, but which
were subject to the acidic action of natural rain. Rain in
equilibrium with the atmosphere has a pH of 5.7.120' From
the data supplied, the mining stage cannot be said to be
a contributing factor to contamination. However, past ore
processing activities do seem to be a more likely source.
As a follow-up to the 1966 and 1973 EPA studies, the Florida
State Radiological Laboratory and the U- S. Environmental
Protection Agency sampled an additional 420 wells in 1975.
Water samples were collected from wells in seven Florida
227
-------
Table 49. COMPARISON OF CHEMICAL AND RADIONUCLIDES WATl'R SAMPLE ANALYSES
FROM 26 WELLS IN THE CENTRAL FLORIDA PHOSPHATE MINING AuD PROCESSING AREA.113)
Type of Watersc)
Range
Average
Type 2 Waters c)
Range
Average
Number
of
Samples
3
23
Nitrate3^
N03-
7.4-26
16.5
0-4
0.4
PH
4.1-5.1
4.6
6.3-7.9
7.4
Alkalinitya)
0-4
2.7
18-246
119
Radium-226b)
4.5-76
43.2
0.00-8.4
1.76
to
to
oo
a) mg/1
b) pCi/1
c) Water sample analyses segregated on the basis of chemical concentrations.
-------
counties centered in and around the phosphate area. The
results indicate that 68 percent of the wells contained
waters with a radium-226 content exceeding the three-pCi/1
U. S. Public Health Service drinking water standard.1-1-4)
Case Histories
Acid mine drainage resulting from oxidation of sulfide
minerals associated with coal has severely contaminated
streams in the Cane Creek basin of Walker County, Alabama.
The pH of the stream ranged from 2.9 to 5.2 during the
period July, 1964 to June, 1965. The sulfate content of
stream water at different points in the basin during
January, 1965, ranged from 564 to 720 mg/1, and the pH
ranged from 3.0 to 3.8. This high acidity has caused
extensive damage to metals and concrete used in roadway
culverts, and the water is not suitable for municipal or
industrial use without extensive treatment.!21) Contam-
inants enter the streams by way of overland flow and ground-
water discharge. The quality of the ground water in the
area has not been investigated in detail, but it is con-
ceivable that a large body of highly mineralized ground
water exists under the mine area and is contributing to the
base flow of the stream.
In a mining operation in York County, South Carolina, acid
drainage resulting from oxidation of pyrite associated with
the mineral kyanite has denuded approximately 200 acres,
killing all vegetation and contaminating a nearby stream. 22)
The extent of ground-water contamination has not been
assessed and no water-supply wells are known to be located
in the area.
Land subsidence, water accumulation at the surface, and
saline-water problems have occurred in Saltville, Virginia,
due to past salt-mining activities. Salt has been extracted
by brine wells since the 1780"s. Two sites were mined by
injection of fresh water into wells penetrating the salt
beds. A low-pressure brine well field removed about
7,846,000 cu m (277,050,000 cu ft) of salt from the site of
the original seeps. High-pressure wells removed 7,919,000
cu m (279,620,000 cu ft) of salt from a mountain south of
town. Land subsidence in the low-pressure well field was
gradual and uniform, with 7 m (23 ft) of subsidence taking
place between 1920 and 1953; there has been no subsidence in
the interval 1963-1973. In the high-pressure well field
where the caprock is a brittle dolomite, the subsidence was
quite sudden. A cave-in on the mountainside took place in
1960, and deep fissures, rockfalls and subsidence occurred
in the area of three brine wells.123)
229
-------
Naturally occurring salt springs existed in the area where
ground water entering at a higher point passed through shale
and salt beds and seeped out. Also, subsidence in the low-
pressure brine well field mentioned above has resulted in a
saucer-like depression which fills with water from rainfall,
salt seeps, and leaking abandoned salt-mining wells. This
water periodically floods portions of the town of Saltville.
Total dissolved solids of approximately 11,000 mg/1 are
contained in waters pumped from the ponds at the rate of 530
1/s (8,400 gpm) every three days.123)
In late 1972 and early 1973, the low-pressure brine wells
used by the chemical company mining the brine were plugged
with concrete grout to a depth of 61 m (200 ft). At least
40 known wells were plugged, but some of these continued to
flow at land surface. It is possible that well casings are
corroded and that seepage is taking place at depth and
entering the alluvium that overlies the shale and salt beds
in the low-pressure area. A part of the salinity in the
area can also be attributed to spills and leaks during the
almost 200 years of salt extraction.123)
Phosphate mining by the dry, open-pit method was begun in
1965 at Lee Creek, Beaufort County, North Carolina. The
mine was dewatered to a depth of 45.7 m (150 ft) by pumping
approximately 227,000 cu m/d (60 mgd) of water from the
artesian Castle Hayne aquifer which immediately underlies
the phosphate ore body.124) As a result, the water levels
in more than 900 domestic wells and 45 irrigation wells were
lowered below suction limits. Figure 39 is an idealized
geologic section through the Lee Creek Mine.125) Tne
potentiometric surface has been lowered substantially at
distances up to 64 km (40 mi) from the pumping site.
During the period June, 1965, to January, 1968, it was
lowered more than 1.5 m (5 ft) over about 3,367 sq km (1,300
sq mi), and fell below sea level in an area of more than
2,072 sq km (800 sq mi)-126) Figures 40 and 41 show the
potentiometric surface of the limestone member of the Castle
Hayne aquifer just prior to pumping and two and one-half
years later.
A rise in chloride concentration in the upper Castle Hayne
aquifer unit from 30 mg/1 in October, 1965, to more than 400
mg/1 in July, 1972, was observed in monitor wells.127) y^e
region has been declared a "Capacity Use Area" as of
December 18, 1968, by the North Carolina Board of Water and
Air Resources. Under the Water Use Act of 1967, the term is
defined as one in which "the aggregate uses of ground water
or surface water, or both, in or affecting said areas
(1) have developed or threatened to develop to a degree
230
-------
WEST
EAST
RECHARGE
METRES
MSL —
10 —
20 —
30—
40—
50—
60 —
70—
80—
90—
\
\
\
\
\
\
DEPRESSURIZING
WELL
SILTY CLAYS (MIOCENE)
PHOSPHATE UNIT MIOCENE
\
\
\
PALEOCENE
\
CASTLE HAYNE FORMATION (EOCENE)
\
\
024 68 10 Km.
I i i i i i II i ii
0246 Mi,
FEET
—MSL
— 100
—200
—300
Figure 39. Idealized geologic section thru the Lee Creek
mine, Beaufort County, North Carolina.125)
-------
20
10
30 Km.
20 Mi.
10 ELEVATION OF WATER LEVEL IN I H
THE CASTLE HAYNE AQUIFER WITH ° 5
REFERENCE TO MSL.(DASHED WHERE
INFERRED.)
Figure 40. Map showing the piezometric surface of the
limestone member of the Castle Hayne aquifer,
June 1965.126)
232
-------
10
30 Km.
I
15
20 Mi.
— 0 ELEVATION OF WATER LEVEL IN I
THE CASTLE HAYNE AQUIFER WITH °
REFERENCE TO MSL.(DASHED WHERE
INFERRED.)
Figure 41. Map showing the piezometric surface of the
limestone member of the Castle Hayne aquifer,
January 1968.126)
233
-------
which requires coordination and regulation, or (2) exceeds
or threatens, to exceed, or otherwise threatens or impairs,
the renewal or replenishment of such waters or any part of
them."127)
In early 1975, a sinkhole opened up under a waste gypsum
stockpile near Mulberry, in Polk County, Florida. During a
three-week period, 17 million 1 (4.5 million gal) of gypsum
leachings (with a radium-226 value of ± 91 pCi/1) and
68,800 cu m (90,000 cu yd) of solid gypsum (23 pCi/g)
entered the ground water through the sinkhole. Although the
pH of the liquid effluent was less than 2.0, piezometers
around the stockpile yielded water above pH 7.0. This
phenomenon and the sudden collapse were explained by the
discovery that the site was highly fractured and subject to
sinkhole formation. Inspection of aerial photographs taken
prior to use of the site for waste gypsum stockpiling
revealed that the area is cut by many long lineations repre-
senting fractures extending to land surface. The collapse
took place at the intersection of two of these lineations.
Prior to collapse, the acidic leachings from the stockpile
enlarged the fractures, permitting more rapid downward
movement of contaminant fluids and eventually structural
weakening of the area. There was essentially no lateral
movement of the radioactive, acidic solutions.128)
Future Trends
Mining will continue to increase in the Southeast, responding
to the demands of a production-oriented society. The areas
of the Southeast most likely to feel the impact of such
contamination are those which contain deposits of minerals
and mineral fuels that are going to be needed in increasing
quantities in the coming years. The principal materials
that will continue to be mined in future years will be
phosphate rock in North Carolina and Florida, bituminous
coal in Alabama and Virginia, and iron in Alabama. The
principal minerals produced in the Southeast and the
national rankings are given in Table 50.
With the increasing demand for coal, phosphate, and* other
minerals, it can be expected that economically marginal
deposits or abandoned deposits will be rained. Additionally,
there will be an expansion in the reworking of tailings
piles as the methods of mineral beneficiation become more
effective and the prices of minerals increase. This may
have two effects: 1) the incidence of ground-water con-
tamination will increase if old practices causing such
contamination are not modified in the new mining areas, and
234
-------
Table 50. PRINCIPAL MINERALS PRODUCED IN THE
SOUTHEAST STATES.129)
Minerals
Aplite
Asbestos
Asphalt (Native)
Barite
Bauxite
Clays
Feldspar
Kyanite
Lithium Minerals
Mica, scrap
Mica, sheet
Olivine
Phosphate Rock
Rare Earth Metal
Concentrates
Staurolite
Titanium Concentrate
Tungsten Concentrate
Vermiculite
Zircon Concentrate
Principal Producing States
and National Ranking
Virginia (1)
North Carolina (4)
Alabama (3)
Georgia (4)
Alabama (2), Georgia (3)
Georgia (1), North Carolina (4)
North Carolina (4)
Virginia (1), Georgia (2),
Florida (3)
North Carolina (1)
North Carolina (1), Alabama (2),
Georgia (3), South Carolina (4)
North Carolina (1)
North Carolina (2)
Florida (1), North Carolina (4)
Georgia (2)
Florida (1)
Florida (2), Georgia (4)
North Carolina (3)
South Carolina (2)
Florida (1), Georgia (2)
235
-------
2) contamination will decrease if old tailings piles are
reworked for additional mineral content, followed by proper
land reclamation practices.
Although present land reclamation practices have as their
primary purpose the reduction or prevention of acid mine
drainage to streams, other methods that decrease the contact
between water and acid-producing materials also will help to
lessen the impact on ground water. Mines, whether surface
or underground, cover large areas and will always produce
contaminants. The most practical control method is removal
of as much water from the surface as possible, either
through drainage systems and grading techniques or through
evapotranspiration of moisture by proper vegetation. Waste
materials should be disposed of in such a manner that
oxidation processes are inhibited and contact with water is
minimized. Acids seeping from mines should be neutralized
so that they do not re-enter the ground-water system to
cause further solution of minerals and contamination of
aquifers.
SEPTIC TANKS
Ground-water contamination as a result of the use of septic-
tank systems has occurred in all seven states in the report
area. This method of domestic waste disposal is used in
rural areas or in suburbs beyond municipal or county sewer
district service areas. The major growth in septic-tank use
took place after World War II due to the rapid development
of suburban areas around major cities. Prior to that time
septic tanks were used primarily in rural areas.
Approximately 4,339,000 individual housing units, repre-
senting 45 percent of the population in the southeast study
area, dispose of their domestic wastes through individual
on-site disposal units.6'130) These are primarily septic
tanks and cesspools, although in some of the states there
are almost as many privies as other types of on-site units.
Table 51 lists the number of on-site disposal systems in the
Southeast, by state.
Figure 42 shows three ranges of density of housing units
using on-site domestic waste disposal units in the
Southeast: less than 3.8/sq km (10/sq mi); between 3.8 and
15.4/sq km (10 and 40/sq mi); and more than 15.4/sq km
(40/sq mi). Data for Figure 42 were obtained from the "1970
Census of Housing" and mapped on a county-by-county basis.
It should be noted that, even in counties having a low
density, large concentrations of disposal units may exist in
urbanized areas. Table 52 lists those counties in the
236
-------
Table 51. NUMBER OF ON-SITE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS IN THE
SOUTHEAST, BY STATE.°)
State
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
Total
Number of On-Site
Disposal Systems
584,524
981,097
615,121
357,497
882,932
441,211
512,589
4,338,971
237
-------
N
0 200 400 600 800 1000 Km.
I | I | [I I I I I I
0 200 400 600 Mi.
V
— I '
GULF OF MEXICO
UNITS/SO. Ml.
40
UNITS/SQ. K
< 3.8
3.8 -15.4
>I5.4
Figure 42.
Density of housing units using on-site
domestic waste disposal systems.
238
-------
Table 52. COUNTIES IN THE SOUTHEAST UNITED STATES WITH
MORE THAN 50,000 HOUSING UNITS USING ON-SITE
DOMESTIC WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS.6)
Jefferson, Alabama Broward, Florida
Duval, Florida Hillsborough, Florida
Dade, Florida
239
-------
Southeast with a total of more than 50,000 housing units
using on-site waste disposal systems.
The volume of waste fluid handled by disposal systems can be
large. For example, it is estimated that in 1970, nearly
175,000 septic tanks in Dade County, Florida, were dis-
charging about 151,400 cu m/d (40 mgd) of domestic waste
water into the highly permeable Biscayne aquifer, the
primary source of fresh water in the county-131)
The complete septic-tank and tile-field system consists of
three basic components. The first is the septic tank
itself, which is a watertight, non-corrosive, covered recep-
tacle designed to remove solids by settlement and to trap
and store scum and sludge. The second is the distribution
box which distributes effluent to the several lateral lines
of the tile field. The third component is the soil absorp-
tion system or tile field. This consists of a series of
pipes, usually made of perforated fiber or plastic material,
the purpose of which is to distribute the sewage effluent as
evenly as possible over an area of soil large enough to
absorb it. The distribution lines are normally laid in
trenches, backfilled with filter material consisting of
washed gravel, crushed stone, or slag. Figure 43 shows the
layout of a typical septic tank-soil absorption system.
The acceptability of a site for a septic-tank system is
commonly based upon the ability of the local soil to absorb
water at a fast enough rate to handle the anticipated volume
of effluent. A percolation test is used to determine the
suitability of the soil for such use. The slower the perco-
lation rate, the larger the tile absorption field must be.
It is assumed that if the percolation (absorption) rate is
acceptable and the tile field is large enough, there will be
removal of organic materials from the effluent by natural
adsorption and biological processes in the soil zone in the
immediate area of the tile field. However, it must be
pointed out that high absorptive capacity as determined by
the percolation test does not necessarily correlate with the
adsorptive capacity of the soil. For this reason, many
soils of high absorptive capacity can be overloaded with
organics as a result of low adsorption.
It is generally accepted that as much as 300 mg/1 of total
dissolved solids are added to water by domestic use; thus,
the effluent from septic tanks can increase the concentra-
tion of minerals in ground water. Table 53 shows the range
of mineral pickup in domestic sewage. Under normal
conditions of soil pH, efficient removal of phosphates can
take place; however, chlorides, nitrates, sulfates, and
240
-------
PRODUCTION
DISPOSAL
WATER TABLE
Figure 43. Disposal of household wastes through a
conventional septic tank-soil absorption
system.132)
241
-------
Table 53. NORMAL RANGE OF MINERAL PICKUP IN
DOMESTIC SEWAGE. H3)
Mineral Mineral range (mg/1)
Dissolved solids 100 - 300
Boron (B) 0.1-0.4
Sodium (Na) 40 - 70
Potassium (K) 7 - 15
Magnesium (Mg) 3 - 6
Caldium (Ca) 6-16
Total Nitrogen (N) 20 - 40
Phosphate (P04) 20 - 40
Sulfate (S04) 15 - 30
Chloride (Cl) 20 - 50
Alkalinity (as CaC03) 100 - 150
242
-------
bicarbonates can often enter a ground-water body and move
freely. Bacteria and viruses are normally removed by the
soil system but, under conditions favorable for their
survival, can reach the water table and can travel signifi-
cant distances through an aquifer. Some other pollutants
that have been found associated with septic tanks include
synthetic detergents, excessive chlorides from water
softener regeneration, and, in special cases where industrial
wastes have been discharged to a septic tank, a number of
toxic and non-toxic constituents.
Figure 44 is a schematic diagram of the reactions that occur
when nitrogen is added to the soil. Oxidizable nitrogen
compounds entering the soil in septic tank effluent are
converted to nitrite by the soil bacteria Nitrosomas spp.
and from nitrite to nitrate by Nitrobacter spp. In order
for these conversions to take place the soils must have
favorable moisture, temperature, and oxygen content (all
such conditions are generally met in well-drained soils).
Nitrification will not take place if the soil is so water-
logged that reducing conditions result. Overloading the
soil with oxidizable organics will also inhibit nitrifica-
tion.134)
In areas with well-drained soils and a low water table, most
agencies responsible for septic-tank approvals find that
percolation tests indicate the sites to be acceptable. From
a purely physical and, generally, biological viewpoint they
are acceptable. Fluids from the septic tank tile field
would percolate downward, pathogenic organisms would be
filtered out, and there would be no surface overflow or
seepage. However, the ground-water would become contaminated
in varying degrees by nitrates generated from the organic
nitrogen compounds in the downward-percolating effluent.
In areas that are generally rejected for septic tank instal-
lation because of high water tables and impermeable, water-
logged soils, septic tank effluent moves either toward the
land surface at the site or laterally toward low points or
bodies of water in an essentially aseptic condition. In
this manner, direct bacterial contamination of shallow or
poorly-constructed wells can occur during periods of rain-
fall and overland runoff.
Septic-tank effluent can easily contaminate ground water
when fractured crystalline rock lies close to the land
surface. Fluids leaving tile fields have little opportunity
to be filtered by the thin soil horizon and enter the
ground-water environment by means of the fractures in the
rock. Movement of water along these fractures is quite
243
-------
R-NH2
ORGANIC N
AMMONIUM
NITRITE
NITRATE
AMMONIFICATION NITRIFICATION
THIS REACTION OCCURS IN SOILS AT TEMPERATURES ABOVE I5.56°C (60°F)
LOST TO AIR
NITRATE
NITRITE
NITRIC OXIDES
ELEMENTAL
DENITRIFICATION
THIS REACTION OCCURS WHEN SOILS ARE VERY WET
Figure 44. Soil reactions that occur when nitrogen is
added to soil.134)
-------
rapid compared to movement in a sand aquifer. Wells tapping
the fractured rock are thus susceptible to both chemical and
biological contamination.
The above suggests that the percolation tests commonly used
to evaluate a site for septic-tank use are valid if one is
concerned only with physical disposal of the effluent.
However, those sites shown on soils maps or septic-tank
suitability maps as being acceptable are in many cases un-
acceptable from a chemical viewpoint because ground-water
contamination results.135,136,137,138)
In a more detailed look at the problem of actual septic-tank
failure, not just surface overflow or tile-field clogging,
Bouma reports on some very realistic methods of resolving
failures under each of various pedologic and hydrogeologic
conditions. Subsurface denitrification systems are being
planned for use with absorption mounds over shallow soils on
creviced bedrock and with seepage beds in highly-drained
sands. Seepage beds in moderately permeable loams and silt
loams tend to crust and clog resulting in surface discharge
of contaminated raw effluent; through use of the dual bed
system these can be revived by alternating use. Soils of
low permeability are made more usable with the creation of
larger subsurface seepage beds and with soil-mounding tech-
niques that provide a greater receptive surface area to the
effluent.139)
Two techniques are used for effluent disposal in areas
subject to ponding of rainwater in silty subsoil layers of
low permeability and in areas with shallow water-table
conditions. The first necessitates removal of the low
permeability material and placement of seepage beds in more
permeable material that might underlie the area, and the
second calls for use of a mound system.140)
One approach that might be considered with regard to site
evaluation before any septic-tank systems are placed in a
developing area would be to determine the oxidation-
reduction potential (ORP) of the ground water, assuming that
water-table conditions exist. In general, areas of high
nitrate contain oxidizing waters and areas of low nitrate
contain reducing waters. If there is free vertical movement
of percolating rain water, even if it is slow, it is likely
that a determination of the ORP of the waters will be useful
in assessing possible chemical reaction. Predictions can be
made as to whether nitrification (N02 and N03 formation),
denitrification (elemental nitrogen formation), or ammonifi-
cation (ammonium formation) will take place.
245
-------
Various areas of Florida contain waters where ammonification
processes are taking place. Muck soils in Conservation Area
3 and the interior undeveloped marshlands of Bade County
produce high organic nitrogen and ammonia values in water.
Due to the lack of oxygen, the microbial oxidation of
nitrogen in ammonia to nitrite and nitrate does not occur.
Percolating rainfall carrying dissolved oxygen favors bac-
terial nitrification. In the northern part of Dade County,
where the Biscayne aquifer has a low permeability and con-
sists of sand and limestone, reducing conditions exist and
the nitrate content is low; to the south, where the aquifer
is a highly permeable limestone, the water is oxidized and
has a high nitrate content.131)
During the course of preparing this report, it became
apparent that the occurrence of nitrate in concentrations
approaching or exceeding the U. S. Public Health Service
limit of 45 mg/1 (as NC>3) corresponded geographically and
geologically with the outcrop areas of aquifers, particu-
larly the sands and sandstones. Downdip in these same
aquifers the nitrate concentration was much less. In these
outcrop areas, high-density developments (houses on 1/4- to
1/2-acre lots) which utilize septic-tank systems will tend
to cause formation of high-nitrate ground water, which may
then enter shallow domestic wells.
Case Histories
Pollution of a large spring in Gordon County, Georgia, was
discovered when the City of Calhoun tried to use the spring
to supplement its water supply- Total coliform density of
three water samples taken over a 30-day period in 1971
ranged from 240 to 2,300 per 100 ml. The fecal coliform
density ranged from 15 to 430 per 100 ml. The source of the
bacteria was a septic tank nearly half a mile away. The
construction practice of removing too much soil when
installing the septic tank above fractured bedrock was the
presumed cause of the rapid movement of the septic tank
effluent.140)
In Bartow County, Georgia, just south of the foregoing area
and in the same kind of fractured and cavernous rock, a
study showed that of 194 private water supplies sampled,
50.5 percent were polluted. 141) ip^g general practice of
locating water-supply wells for convenience and economy
rather than for safety of the supply is a major contributing
factor to this condition.
An epidemic was reported at a Girl Scout camp in northern
Floyd County, Georgia, when a spring utilized as the source
of water became contaminated. Tests revealed that bacteria
246
-------
reaching the spring originated in recently installed flush
toilets at the camp. Fluorescein dye flushed down the
toilets appeared in the spring water in less than 48 hours.
The dye passed through the septic tank, seeped from the
field lines into the aquifer, and traveled several hundred
feet along the bedding planes of the rock to the spring.I42)
In Chesterfield County, South Carolina, 45.6 percent of 217
rural water supplies contained arsenic exceeding the U. S.
Public Health Service limit (0.05 mg/1); arsenic was
detected in 91 percent of the samples. There is a sig-
nificant statistical correlation between nitrate, phosphate,
chloride and arsenic concentration and the distance of the
water-supply source from the septic tank; the concentrations
decrease with increased distance. The source of the arsenic
is synthetic detergents passing through the septic-tank
system and into the ground water.143)
In Anson County, North Carolina, water samples from seven
wells 12 to 47 m (39 to 155 ft) deep contained abnormally
high concentrations of nitrate, which ranged from 18 to 94
mg/1.144) This is considerably above the natural background
level of one mg/1 (median of 467 well samples) found in the
fractured rocks in the North Carolina Piedmont (see Natural
Ground Water Quality Section of this report). All of the
wells are located in rural areas, and septic tanks and
barnyards are suspected to be the sources of the contaminant.
Four counties in Georgia, each located in a different hydro-
geologic setting, were selected for a survey of ground-water
quality. The counties were Wayne County in the Atlantic
Coastal Plain; Mitchell County, in the Dougherty Plain of
the Gulf Coastal Plain, which has a shallow limestone
aquifer in which sinkholes are prevalent; Coweta County, in
the Piedmont Province, where fractured metamorphic rocks
occur; and Bartow County in the Valley and Ridge Province,
where fractured and cavernous carbonate rocks are common.96)
The well construction methods fell into five categories:
dug, driven, jetted, bored, or drilled. Table 54 lists
sources of rural water supply by type that exceed the
nitrate standard in each county. A total of 43 out of 760
samples in all counties exceeded the U. S. Public Health
Service standard for nitrate. Shallow dug wells had the
highest incidence of nitrate contamination (28 of the 43
wells sampled); a similar incidence of high coliform was
noted. In general, the larger the number of dug wells in
use, the greater was the percentage of contamination.
Coweta County, with the greatest number of dug wells, had
the highest percentage of contaminated wells; verified
247
-------
Table 54. COMPARISON OF TYPE OF WATER-SUPPLY WELLS EXCEEDING
NITRATE CONCENTRATION STANDARD IN GEORGIA.96>
to
j^
CO
County
Bartow
Coweta
Mitchell
Wayne
TOTAL
Types of Wells
Dug
5
13
5
5
28
Driven
0
0
0
5
5
Jetted
0
0
0
1
1
Bored
0
3
0
1
4
Drilled
2
0
3
0
5
Total
7
16
8
12
43
-------
coliform and fecal coliform counts were 59.5 percent and 24
percent, respectively. Bartow County was second with 49.7
percent and 19 percent, Mitchell County was third with 26.0
percent and 9.5 percent, and Wayne County was lowest with
18.9 percent and 6.1 percent.96)
A survey of 62 wells in 12 housing subdivisions where septic
tanks were in use was undertaken in Raleigh, North Carolina.
The report concluded that, although no appreciable amount of
detergent buildup had occurred, zones of high nitrate and
chloride were forming. Most of the homes were on lots
ranging in size from a quarter acre to more than a half
acre, and most of the wells were drilled into fractured
granites, schists and gneisses to depths of 30.5 to 61 m
(100 to 200 ft). Septic tanks were generally located at the
lower part of each lot, whereas the wells tended to be at
slightly higher elevations.145)
Nitrates in amounts of more than nine mg/1 do not occur
naturally in the Raleigh area, and chlorides of more than
ten mg/1 are uncommon. Water from 10 of the 62 wells
sampled in 1962 had a high nitrate concentration or a com-
bined high chloride and high nitrate concentration. The
range in nitrate concentration was 0.0 to 24 mg/1 with an
average of 4.3 mg/1. The range in chloride concentration
was 0.2 to 67 mg/1 with an average of 5.5 mg/1.145)
Although the nitrate concentrations do not exceed the U. S.
Public Health Service standard of 45 mg/1, the indication of
nitrate buildup due to septic tank contamination was con-
firmed. A similar trend has been observed in other areas of
the U. S., especially in the major suburbanized areas of the
northeastern states where excessive nitrate levels are found
in some of the water supplies.146) The implications are
that the Raleigh area is in a transitional stage which has
not yet reached the recommended limit for nitrate concen-
trations .
A similar pattern of increasing nitrate concentration seems
to be taking place in the sand and gravel aquifer of
Pensacola, Florida. Nitrate levels as high as 44 mg/1 have
been recorded in isolated areas, but in the downtown area of
the city, there is a definite trend toward increasing
nitrate. The highest concentration was 17 mg/1 in 1970;
only two years before it had been 8.3 mg/1. This same trend
of increases ranging from 10 to 88 percent has been noted in
other wells sampled during the two years. Possible sources
of contamination are septic tanks, industries, and sewer
lines.147)
249
-------
Scattered wells in the Athens, Alabama, area are producing
water with high concentrations of nitrate. South of the
town a spring and two wells contained 40 to 50 mg/1 of
nitrate. The source of the contamination appears to be
septic tanks and a sewage lagoon used by a nearby school.148)
To the north at sites west of Elkmont, Alabama, three wells
constructed in the Chickamauga Limestone have nitrate levels
of 57, 97, and 111 mg/1 and chloride levels of 56, 43, and
13 mg/1, both indicative of contamination by septic tank
effluent.149)
A well in the Fayetteville, North Carolina, area had a
nitrate concentration of 258 mg/1. The fluids from a septic
tank drainfield located 46 m (150 ft) from the 51 cm
(20 in) diameter shallow bored well moved along large,
decaying tree roots which channeled the seepage to the well.
The well was abandoned and replaced with a 117 m (385 ft)
deep well cased to 57 m (187 ft).15°)
In 1970, the public water supply of a residential community
in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, was polluted by
septic tank effluent. The well had been properly con-
structed and surface drainage had been ruled out as the
cause. For the 1,000 people utilizing the well, 505 cases
of shigellosis were reported.54) A similar incident of 44
cases of gastroenteritis (shigellosis) was reported at a
YMCA camp near Waco, Georgia, in 1968. The contamination
was attributed to septic tank effluent.54)
Two wells, one within 15 m (50 ft) of a septic tank and
another inducing flow from a stream fed by a contaminated
lake, are considered to be responsible for 64 cases of
gastroenteritis in 1967 in Fauquier County, Virginia. A
total of 83 people were exposed to water from the contam-
inated wells.54!
A detailed study of selected areas serviced by septic tanks
in Bade County, Florida, showed that inland areas, remote
from urban development, have ground water naturally high in
organic nitrogen, ammonia, organic carbon, and chgmical
oxygen demand. The presence of septic tank effluent in
developed areas was consistently indicated by high ammonia,
nitrogen, phosphorus, fecal coliform bacteria, and sodium.
Uniformly high nitrate values in the Homestead, Florida,
area are attributed to agricultural activity; lawn fer-
tilizers may be contributing a portion of the nitrates in
other areas. The radical differences in nitrogen chemistry
of water from the different sites in the county were related
to: 1) nature of soil cover; 2) proportion of sand to
limestone in the subsurface; 3) internal drainage of the
sediments; 4) proximity to agriculture; and 5) presence of
septic tank effluent.1^!)
250
-------
Future Trends
In spite of their potential for causing ground-water
contamination, millions of septic tanks will continue to be
used in the region, and their overall numbers may increase
over at least the next decade. The reasons for this
include:
1. The lack of other acceptable alternatives for domestic
waste disposal in unsewered areas;
2. Existing limitations on local, state, and Federal
budgets which prevent installation of public sewers to
meet waste disposal needs of expanding suburban
communities;
3. New environmental criteria calling for the upgrading of
community sewage treatment plants. This slows down the
expansion of these central systems into unsewered
areas;
4. The continued resistance by residents in many parts of
the study region to approve the large expenditures
necessary for conversion from on-site disposal systems
to sewered communities;
5. The long time period required for a public system to
become fully operational, even in areas where the
density of housing and problems of ground-water
contamination justify the need for conversion to
collecting sewers and treatment plants.
Probably the best approach to limiting future problems is
better governmental control and planning. Zoning and land-
use planning in areas where septic tanks will be required
should be based on a thorough understanding of regional
variations in topography, soils, aquifer characteristics,
and recharge and discharge relationships involving ground
water and surface water. An initial study in a particular
region leading to recommendations on planning procedures and
guidelines for on-site waste disposal facilities would be
the most environmentally sound approach; errors that might
be even more costly and controversial over the long term
might then be prevented. Research is needed to develop the
tools that can be used for decision-making related to
septic-tank feasibility and density. In this way, ground-
water quality can be better protected.
251
-------
LAND DISPOSAL OF WASTE WATER
There has been increased interest in land disposal of
municipal and industrial waste water as a result of the 1972
Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, which
established goals of higher water quality. The major
problem associated with this method of disposal is that it
cannot be considered a standard solution to be applied
anywhere but must be evaluated on a site-by-site basis;
physical, chemical, and biological properties of the site
and the waste water itself must be taken into account.
Usage of land for disposal of waste water was taking place
prior to the turn of the century, and a 1935 survey listed
113 localities in 15 states practicing irrigation of crops
with waste water.151) Another survey, in 1972, notes 316
localities in 13 states practicing such crop irrigation;
most of the locations noted in the 1935 survey reappeared in
the 1972 survey.152) The increase in the number of systems
applying waste water to the land is shown in Table 55.
Three methods of applying waste water to land areas are in
use: spray irrigation, overland flow, and rapid infiltra-
tion (Figure 45). Spray irrigation is the controlled
spraying of waste effluent on moderately permeable soils at
a rate measured in centimetres per week to support plant
growth; the flow paths of the water are infiltration and
percolation within the area of the disposal site.154,155)
In this process, pollutants in the effluent are either taken
up by plants, converted to neutral substances in the soil,
or adsorbed onto the soil particles.
Overland flow is the controlled discharge of effluent by
spraying or other means onto relatively impermeable soils at
a rate measured in centimetres per week; the flow path of
the water is downslope sheet flow.154,155) Vegetative cover
is used to reduce erosion and to provide a suitable habitat
for microorganisms participating in the purification
process.
Rapid infiltration is the controlled discharge of*effluent
by spreading or other means onto very permeable soils at a
rate measured in tens of centimetres per week; the flow
paths of the water are high-rate infiltration and percola-
tion. 154,155) Pollutants in the effluent are removed by
physical, chemical, and biological processes as they travel
through the soil and subsoil.
The principal mechanisms for renovation of the effluent are
filtration, volatilization, plant-uptake, ion exchange, and
fixation. The relative importance of each of these
252
-------
Table 55. MUNICIPALITIES IN THE UNITED STATES USING LAND
APPLICATIONS OF WASTE WATER, AND THE POPULATION SERVED.153'
Population served
Year Number of municipalities (millions)
1940 304 0.9
1945 422 1.3
1957 461 2.0
1962 401 2.7
1968 512 4.2
1972 571 6.6
253
-------
EVAPORATION
SPRAY OR
SURFACE
APPLICATION
ROOT ZONE
SUBSOIL V
SPRAY IRRIGATION
SLOPE
'. VARIABLE
-*• DEEP
' PERCOLATION
UNDERDRAIN RECOVERY
IN SOME CASES
EVAPORATION
SPRAY
APPLICATION—^
SLOPE 2-6%
GRASS AND VEGETATIVE
LITTER
SHEET FLOW
100- 300 FEET
OVERLAND FLOW
RUNOFF
COLLECTION
SPREADING BASIN
SURFACE APPLICATION
PERCOLATION THROUGH
GET' ~i g'. •*— PERCOLAIIUN I tinuu
w':-:':':?^-^ UNSATURATED ZONE
RAPID INFILTRATION
Figure 45. Methods of land disposal of waste water-
154)
254
-------
renovative mechanisms for each of ten waste water constituents
varies for spray irrigation (Table 56), overland flow (Table
57), and rapid infiltration (Table 58)-156)
There are no methods for land disposal of waste waters that
can be routinely applied to every section of the U. S. Each
site considered for use must be designed from information on
the local climatologic, soil, geologic, and hydrologic
conditions. Beyond this, an assessment of site suitability
and design requires the interaction of geologists, sanitary
engineers, hydraulic engineers, hydrologists, agronomists,
soil scientists, irrigation engineers, virologists, health
scientists, land planners, water resource planners, and
social planners.157)
Climatological factors to be considered in site selection
are temperature, precipitation, and wind speed and direction.
Temperature affects the rate of evapotranspiration, the rate
of infiltration, the renovation efficiency during winter
months, the length of the growing season, and the micro-
biological activity within the soil. Precipitation affects
the rate of application of the effluent and causes soil
saturation and overland runoff of unrenovated effluent.
Wind speed and direction can influence the drifting of
aerosols and odors which may cause health problems.157)
The two most important soil characteristics influencing site
selection are the ability to accept the applied effluent at
the desired rate on a long-term basis and the ability to
provide the desired renovation through the continued
presence of chemically and physically active constituents.
Each land disposal technique has its own soil drainability
requirements. Overland flow works successfully on low
permeability soils because most of the renovation takes
place within the upper 5.1 cm (2 in) of the soil. Spray
irrigation requires soils of moderate permeability so that
water will be retained for crop uptake. Rapid infiltration
requires soils with high permeability so that large
quantities of the waste water effluent can be applied to a
small land area.157) Figure 46 indicates the land disposal
techniques and the corresponding ranges of liquid loading
rates generally suitable to various soil types.
The nature and amount of physically and chemically active
constituents in the soil, principally clay particles, control
the extent of nutrient fixation. Rapid infiltration
requires coarse soils with limited capacities for chemical
reactions. Soils which have only a moderate content of
these constituents are most suitable for spray irrigation
sites where nutrients must be available or released for
crop-uptake. Overland flow, which does not require
255
-------
Table 56. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF RENOVATION
MECHANISMS - SPRAY IRRIGATION.156^
Plant Volatil- Ion
Uptake Fixation ization Exchange Filtration
Biochemical
Oxygen Demand
Settleable
Solids
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
Heavy Metals
Organics
Viruses
Bacteria
Total Dissolved Solids
Cations
Anions
0
4
4
1
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
3
4
Oa)
2
2
4
4
2
4
0
0
4
3
3
0
0
0
1
2
4
0
0
0
2
1
4
0
0
0
1
4
4
0
0
a) Fixation is significant for chlorinated and polynuclear hydrocarbons.
Scale: 0 to 4
"0" relatively insignificant
"4" major mechanism
256
-------
Table 57- RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF RENOVATION
MECHANISMS - OVERLAND FLOW.156)
Plant Volatil- Ion
Uptake Fixation jzation Exchange Filtration
Biochemical
Oxygen Demand
Settleable
Solids
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
Heavy Metals
Organics
Viruses
Bacteria
Total Dissolved Solids
Cations
Anions
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
4
4
0
2
2
4
4
4
2
4
0
0
4
4
4
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
0
0
0
1
3
3
0
0
Scale: 0 to 4
"0" relatively insignificant
"4" major mechanism
257
-------
Table 58. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF RENOVATION
MECHANICS - RAPID INFILTRATION.156)
Plant Volatil- Ion
Uptake Fixation ization Exchange Filtration
Biochemical
Oxygen Demand
Settleable
Solids
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
Heavy Metals
Organic s
Viruses
Bacteria
Total Dissolved Solids
Cations
An ions
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
4
4
0
2
2
4
4
2
2
4
0
0
4
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
1
4
4
0
0
Scale: 0 to 4
"0" relatively insignificant
"4" major mechanism
258
-------
2.54
CLAY
CLAY
LOAM
SILT
LOAM
LOAM
SOIL TYPE
SANDY
LOAM
LOAMY
SAND
SAND
Figure 46. Soil type versus liquid loading rates for
different land disposal techniques.155)
259
-------
substantial uptake of nutrients by vegetation, is a
technique that needs a highly reactive clay soil to achieve
renovation.157)
Some attempts have been made to offer general guidelines for
the land disposal of waste waters. One principally endorsed
recommendation is that a site-specific study be undertaken
by a multi-disciplined team. In addition, relative to
hydrologic considerations, the minimum depth to ground water
must vary depending upon the method of disposal used. In
the case of spray irrigation, the soil mantle must be thick
enough to promote aerobic conditions for proper root
development and to ensure renovation of the applied waste
water. Minimum depth recommendations vary from 1.5 m (5 ft)
for fine-grained soils to 3 m (10 ft) for coarser soils.154)
For application by overland flow, water budget studies have
shown that as much as 21 percent of the applied waste water
may be lost to deep soil percolation.158) A minimum of 1.5
m (5 ft) is recommended between the ground surface and the
water table.156) Application by rapid infiltration requires
a very thick soil layer between the ground surface and the
water table if renovation is to succeed. In this type of
application, high effluent loading rates will cause the
formation of a recharge mound on top of the water table.
This could decrease the effectiveness of renovation if the
mound rose too close to the land surface. Therefore, a
minimum separation of 4.6 m (15 ft) between the ground
surface and the water table has been recommended.159)
Varied hydrogeologic factors influence site acceptability or
the need to modify the site or the method of application of
effluent; they are not foreseen until more detailed site
studies are undertaken. Existing ground-water quality is an
important factor. If the ground water is of high quality,
limited application of effluent may be required to avoid
degradation by partially renovated waste water. Where the
ground water is of poor quality, it may be necessary to
install an underdrain system to collect the purified
effluent if its reuse is contemplated.157) Also, the
location of disposal sites in areas of fractures or
cavernous bedrock can cause contamination if the soils are
overloaded physically, chemically, or biologically by the
waste water.
Site failures occur because the waste-water loading rate has
exceeded the acceptable level. The loading rate has three
components: hydraulic, organic, and nutrient. In a recent
report by J. P. Hartigan, a series of hypothetical design
problems were developed for each of the three waste water
disposal methods taking into account the impact of the
260
-------
different loading components. Emphasis is placed on the
necessity of knowing the nature of the effluent that is to
be delivered to the site in order to calculate loading rates
and size of the treatment area. In general, the size of the
treatment area is inversely proportional to the waste water
loading rate. There are approximate ranges of average
loading rates with area requirements for each of the dis-
posal techniques. They are presented in Table 59 for
comparative purposes.1^7)
Other factors which must be considered in the design of a
disposal system are the "wetting" and "drying" schedules and
the storage capacity. The wetting period should not over-
stress the system nor bring about anaerobic conditions.
Intermittent drying is required to maintain design loading
rates and renovative capacities. Excessive rainfall or
frozen ground will inhibit infiltration, so a storage
lagoon is needed. Such a facility should possess the
following site characteristics: soil, topographic, hydro-
logic, and geologic conditions that will permit long-term
storage of the waste water without degrading the local
ground-water quality -157) if such conditions do not exist
to effectively protect the ground water, artificial seals or
liners must be used in the storage lagoon.
Land disposal of waste water can pose a significant threat
to ground-water quality when little renovation takes place
before the waste water enters the ground-water system. The
rapid infiltration method involves the highest probability
of ground-water contamination; spray irrigation, a moderate
probability; and overland flow, a slight probability.160)
Table 60 is a summary of ground-water contamination likely
to occur from land disposal of waste waters. Although the
overland flow method is not included in the table, it should
not be discounted as a potential method of contaminant
introduction. As mentioned earlier, as much as 21 percent
of the applied waste water can be lost to deep soil perco-
lation when utilizing the overland flow method.158) if an
overland flow system functions on more permeable soils than
should be used, it will contribute fluids to the water
table.
Case Histories
Near Tallahassee, Florida, an experimental spray irrigation
disposal site utilizing secondarily-treated sewage has been
in operation since 1966. Development of this method of
waste-water disposal resulted from the need to decrease the
flow of nutrients into Lake Munson, south of Tallahassee
(see Natural Bodies of Surface Water section for a more
detailed discussion).
261
-------
Table 59. COMPARISON OF THE AVERAGE LOADING RATES
AND TREATMENT AREA REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH
OF THE METHODS OF LAND DISPOSAL OF WASTE WATER.157)
Spray Overland Rapid
Irrigation Flow Infiltration
Average Loading
Rates
centimetres/week 1.27-10.2 5.08-14.0 9.14-304.8
inches/week 0.5-4.0 2.0-5.5 3.6-120
Treatment Area
Requirements
hectares 208-26.1 52.2-19.0 29-0.89
acres 516-64.6 129-47 71.6-2.2
262
-------
Table 60. SUMMARY OF CONTAMINATION LIKELY FROM LAND DISPOSAL OF DOMESTIC WASTE WATER.
160)
Parameter
Spray irrigation
Rapid infiltration
Nitrogen
Nutrients that are not used by plants
or fixed in the soil can leach to
ground water
Significant quantities passed
to ground water at most sites
Phosphorus
Leaching of excess phosphorus is rare
occurrence. Organic and clay soils
absorb practically all of the phos-
phorus
Removal may be limited because
granular soils are used
Organics
LO
Usually broken down by microorganisms
and used by plants. Can appear in
ground water when application rate
is highest or when in open soil,
such as sand or gravel, with a high
percolation rate
Evidence is that little organic
matter reaches ground water
Trace Element
Toxic compounds can be changed by the
chemical reaction of cation exchange
and can be rendered non-toxic by
bacteria. Chemical precipitates
formed can be leached out, however
Retention may be limited due to
granular nature of soils
Total Dissolved Solids
Leaching can occur and build-up is
possible
Build-up is possible
Enteric Organisms
Usually are removed or die out and
do not reach ground water espe-
ially if water table is kept low
Spread of bacteria and viruses
by insects or percolating
water is of concern but un-
likely under proper soil
conditions
-------
Secondarily-treated sewage effluent was applied to 15.6 ha
(38.5 acres) of forested and cropped sites by a number of
spray irrigation techniques. A detailed study of the
effects of irrigation on ground-water quality was conducted
during the period March, 1972 to June, 1974. The results
indicate that ground-water contamination by nitrate is
taking place downgradient from the disposal site. The
outline of the effluent plume and its movement based on
chloride concentrations in ground water is shown in Figure
47; the physical arrangement of the site and the observation
wells are also illustrated. Chloride and nitrate-nitrogen
data indicate that there was some lateral movement of the
partially renovated effluent, but most of the effluent moved
downward at least 82 m (270 ft), as illustrated in Figure
48. The contaminant movement is attributed to the applica-
tion of about 43 m (140 ft) of effluent onto the forested
area from March, 1972 to June, 1974. Chloride and nitrate-
nitrogen concentrations equivalent to those in the undiluted
effluent were found in ground water from depths of 46 to 82
m (150 to 270 ft) at the downgradient edge of this heavily-
sprayed area. Effluent-percolate has moved from the spray
irrigation site at the rate of about 730 m (2,400 ft) per
year. As of June, 1974, the ground water beneath about 56.7
ha (140 acres) had increased nitrate-nitrogen and chloride
concentrations. This plume may extend downgradient from the
site as far as 1,200 m (4,000 ft).161)
Figure 49 shows the variation of NO3~N with time at the site
of Well 5 (see Figure 47 for location). This illustrates
that lateral movement of NC^-N has occurred; however,
concentrations are less than those at greater depths in Well
23 (Figure 47). It appears that the rate of increase of
N03-N is leveling off in Well 5.161)
The principal cause of the contamination seems to be an
overloading of the system. Effluent is being applied to a
very small area at the rate of approximately 35.6 cm (14 in.)
per week. The process taking place at the site is nitrifi-
cation, resulting in massive nitrate contamination.
Nitrate-nitrogen concentrations have risen as high.as 37
mg/1 (163 mg/1 as N03).161) The contaminated water is
moving southward, rendering the Floridan Aquifer unuseable
in that direction. Nearby well pumpage could induce move-
ment of the contaminated water toward those wells.
In St. Petersburg, Florida, a waste disposal site utilizing
the spray irrigation method was tested. (Salt-water
encroachment in the downtown city wells had occurred in the
1920's and there are no public-supply wells in St. Petersburg.
Competition for water supply is so intense in the adjoining
264
-------
SINGLE
IRRIGATION-
FIELDS AREA
14
>I2 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TEST WELL
-— OUTLINE OF EFFLUENT PLUME, JUNE 1974
— OUTLINE OF EFFLUENT PLUME, NOV-DEC 1972
500 1000 Ft.
i I
100 200 300 M.
Figure 47. Outline of the effluent plume based on chloride
concentrations in ground water, Tallahassee,
Florida, spray-irrigation site.16!)
265
-------
FEET
100
80
60
40
20-
SEA
LEVEL
20 -
40 -
60 -
80 -
100-
120 -
140-
160 -
180 -
200-
220
AREA SPRAYED WITH
TREATED WASTEWATER
TOP OF FLORIDAN
AQUIFER (ST. MARKS
LIMESTONE)
15'
FEET
rlOO
-8O
-60
•40
500 1000 Ft.
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
ISO
200
220
METRES
r30
•20
SEA
LEVEL
10
20
30
40
50
60
Figure 48.
300 M
-* DIRECTION OF EFFLUENT - PERCOLATE MOVEMENT.
48J26 REPRESENTS CHLORIDE/NITRATE-N CONCENTRATION
\ RESPECTIVELY IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITRE AT THAT DEPTH.
POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE. SHOWS ALTITUDE AT WHICH
WATER LEVEL WOULD HAVE STOOD IN TIGHTLY CASED WELLS
OPEN TO THE UPPER FLORIDAN AQUIFER, FEB. 1974.
Hydrogeologic section A-A1, Tallahassee, Florida,
spray-irrigation site.161)
(See Figure 47 for location)
266
-------
UJ
cc
cc
Ul
a.
cc
u
i
ui
cc
K
Z
s.or-r-T
7.0
5.0
4.0
UJ
§ 3.0
cc
2.0
1.0
0.0
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
TREND LINE
1
h/
i i i i i i
1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1
JFMAMJ JASONDJ FMAM JJ ASOND
1973 1974
Figure 49.
Variation of nitrate-nitrogen with time at
Well 5, Tallahassee, Florida spray-irrigation
site.161) (See Figure 47 for location)
267
-------
counties where newer supply wells are located that waste-
water renovation and reuse is being considered to supplement
present local supplies.) The nutrient constituents in the
waste water delivered to the site were principally in the
form of organic nitrogen (2 to 6 mg/1), ammonia nitrogen (14
to 16 mg/1), and total phosphorus (2.6 to 4 mg/1). The
content of nitrate and nitrite nitrogen was less than one
percent of the total nitrogen. The waste water also con-
tained approximately 110 mg/1 chloride.162)
The spray-irrigation site is underlain by three hydrogeo-
logic units: an uppermost shallow aquifer of fine sands and
clayey sands; a middle confining unit of pale green, dense,
sandy clay; and the lower limestone and dolomite of the
Floridan Aquifer. The soil immediately under the site is a
fine-grained sand low in organic matter.162)
Batteries of wells constructed in and near the spray
irrigation site were used to measure water levels and to
collect water samples. Each battery consists of several
wells; 0.6, 1.5, 3.0, 4.6, and 6.1 m (2, 5, 10, is and 20
ft) deep. One battery also had a well 15.2 m (50 ft) deep.
Additionally, an underdrain system was installed 1.5 m (5
ft) below land surface. Application rates of 5.1, 10.2, and
27,9 cm (2, 4, and 11 in.) per week were tried, and water
samples were taken at the end of each period of irrigation.
Table 61 illustrates the extent of NO3-N buildup in the
ground water and the drainage system effluent. An increase
in chloride content from 25 to 120 mg/1 occurred at the 3 m
(10 ft) depth and from 9.2 to 120 mg/1 at the 6.4 m (15 ft)
depth. Total phosphorus content increased after each
period of irrigation, with the greatest increase occurring
after the 27.9 cm (11 in) per week rate of application.
The original total phosphorus contents at the various depths
ranged from 0.0 to 0.84 mg/1; and, after the sequence of
effluent application, the range was from 0.5 to 5.4 mg/1.
The ground water under the spray irrigation site is not
being utilized at present. An increase in the chemical
concentrations of selected parameters was observed.* However,
contamination of the Floridan Aquifer is not likely because
of the confining layer which separates it from the shallow
aquifer. It is possible that there is an acceptable loading
rate for these soils.
Future Trends
The use of land disposal of municipal waste water will
continue to increase as communities attempt to meet the
268
-------
Table 61. CONCENTRATIONS OF NITRATE-NITROGEN IN GROUND-WATER SAMPLES FROM WELLS AT A ST. PETERSBURG,
FLORIDA, SPRAY IRRIGATION SITE, IN mg/1. 162)
N)
Sampling Before
Point Irrigation
1.5- m
(5-ft) well 1.4
3-m
(10-ft) well 0
4. 6-m
(15-ft) well 0
6.1-m
(20-ft) well 0
15.2-m
(50-ft) well 0.02
Underdrain System
During Irrigation
@ 5 . 1 cm/wk @ 10 . 2 cm/wk
(2 in/wk) (4 in/wk)
9/19-10/2/72 10/5-11/14/72
a) 8.0
0.06 0.79
0 0
0 0.07
a) a)
3.3 0.97
@ 27.9 cm/wk
(11 in/wk)
1/29-3/12/73
12
8.1
0.24
0.19
0
3.9
a) No sample collected.
-------
higher water quality standards adopted as national goals
through the 1972 Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act. This expanded use of spray irrigation, over-
land flow, and rapid infiltration as methods of waste-water
renovation can cause further occurrences of ground-water
contamination.
It should be pointed out that certain methods of waste-water
disposal on land do not necessarily cause ground-water
contamination. However, without the wide variety of per-
sonnel needed to properly design the system and a program of
constant supervision and maintenance, contamination will
occur in many cases. Communities desiring such a facility
will have to employ consultants qualified to follow the
multi-discipline approach. The design and operation of land
disposal centers requires the interaction of geologists,
sanitary engineers, hydraulic engineers, hydrologists,
agronomists, soil scientists, irrigation engineers, virolo-
gists, health scientists, land planners, water resource
planners, and social planners.
Within the next few years a considerable amount of data will
be generated in reports concerning sites in operation at the
present time. Rather than the conclusions being used to
standardize methods for designing new sites, they should be
used as guidelines only. However, encouragement is given by
the fact that consultants who would have traditionally
handled such a project on their own are now expanding the
capabilities of their professional staff or are entering
into cooperative arrangements with other specialists.
MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES
In modern times, man's activities have become so varied and
complex that many unforeseen cases of ground-water contam-
ination have occurred. This report summarizes the sources
of contamination that commonly cause problems in the
Southeast. However, it is by no means a complete list of
actual and potential sources. All documented cases of
contamination which have occurred anywhere in the world
could be used to forecast potential sources of contamination
in the southeastern United States. The ground-water
geologist continually encounters new types and methods of
contamination, even though the mechanisms are the same.
Listed below are some case histories of ground-water con-
tamination difficult to classify because the actual cause is
unknown or because it may be considered a one-time event.
270
-------
Case Histories
In Chesterfield County, South Carolina, 217 farm and rural
community water supplies were sampled to assess the quality
of water. Higher concentrations of nitrate, phosphate,
chloride and arsenic were found in water sources located
near septic tanks, and higher concentrations of cadmium and
lead occurred in samples taken from residences with older
plumbing. There was, however, no explanation for the high
concentrations of mercury found in the ground water.
Mercury was found in 80.9 percent of the water supplies
sampled, of which 13.2 percent exceeded 10 yg/1. Figure 50
is a map of the Cheraw, South Carolina, area which shows an
increase in mercury content in and around an industrial area
south of town.143) Further investigation to locate the
precise source of mercury is in progress. It is unlikely
that surface spills are the cause. Widespread areal dis-
tribution suggests that airborne dispersion of plant
emissions could be the primary cause. The distribution may
be the result of particulate fallout and subsequent leaching
of the mercury by acidic rainwater. A rather large area is
involved and no clear migration pattern is distinguishable
based on the flow pattern of water in the aquifer. The
trend of the Upper Cretaceous sands northeast to southwest
across the area shows no influence on the distribution of
mercury contaminant as would be expected if it had been a
surface spill.
A recent Environmental Protection Agency survey of suspected
carcinogens in drinking water disclosed that there were high
levels of chlorinated organics in the ground waters of the
Preston-Hialeah well fields in Dade County, Florida.163)
The source of the chemicals is unknown, although the concen-
tration of chlorinated organics is greater downgradient from
the 58th Street Landfill than upgradient. It is uncertain
whether the source of the carcinogens is from the chlorina-
tion of substances in the leachate or of natural organics
within the shallow aquifer.164)
Road construction and associated blasting of consolidated
rock probably cause considerably more local contamination of
ground water than was indicated by the cases uncovered in
this study- Of particular concern are those incidents
related to bacterial contamination. In Clifton Forge,
Virginia, about 25 percent of the water-supply wells became
contaminated when bacteria entered the aquifer through
fractures in the rock; the apparent cause of the fractures
was the blasting in the area. The jarring of the rocks
caused "contaminants of all sorts" which have collected on
the ground surface for years to enter the ground-water
271
-------
«o
0 I 234 5 Km.
I •—H '. ' .'
3 Mi.
• II
10— CONCENTRATION OF MERCURY IN //G/L
• 6 WELL SAMPLING LOCATION AND CONCENTRATION
OF MERCURY IN /iG/L
Figure 50. Distribution of mercury in rural potable water
around Cheraw, South Carolina (modified from
Ref.143)
272
-------
system.-i-"5) Similar events occurred in northern Florida
during and after construction of Interstate Highway 10.
Well owners reported muddying of water in wells and
springs.166)
In 1952, city water officials of New Bern, North Carolina
noticed that the chloride content of two of their eight
wells had risen from less than 10 mg/1 to 90 and 405 mg/1
respectively. These wells had been recently installed as
replacements for abandoned supply wells contaminated by
salt-water encroachment from the Neuse River. However, it
was determined that the source of the chlorides was the
downward percolation of calcium and sodium chloride from the
effluent from a water-treatment plant; it had been dis-
charged into a ditch which ran between the two wells. Near
the ditch, at a depth of about 3 m (10 ft), the chloride
content of the ground water was 1,950 mg/1. A study of the
calcium/magnesium ratios in the water samples provided
further evidence that the source of contamination was the
waste water from the treatment plant and not salt-water
encroachment, as had occurred in the abandoned wells.
Additionally, a three-month pumping test of a well showed a
continuous decrease in chloride content. This is contrary
to what would have been expected if the cause had been salt-
water encroachment.167)
A fire destroyed a pesticide and fertilizer warehouse in
Farmville, North Carolina, in June, 1971. Large volumes of
water, estimated to be as much as 5,677,500 1 (1.5 million
gal), were used to extinguish the fire. Warehouse person-
nel, realizing that runoff water would be highly toxic,
dammed the nearby ditches to prevent flow to surface waters.
The contaminated water was essentially confined to the
property. A total of 61 different pesticides were stored in
the warehouse with 54,107 1 (14,295 gal) in liquid form and
95,755 kg (211,099 Ib) in solid form at the time of the
fire.
Such an incident had not occurred in North Carolina before,
and a plan for a cleanup was not readily available. Various
governmental agencies and industry groups were called in for
advice and assistance. The critical nature of the situation
was that not only surficial contamination was involved; deep
municipal water-supply wells were located nearby. One well
was located within 91 m (300 ft) of the contaminated area.
The well was immediately shut off, and water samples were
collected for pesticide analyses.
An estimated 378,500 1 (100,000 gal) of contaminated runoff
water was in a ponded area, and two pits, which were 30.5 m
273
-------
(100 ft) long, 1.8 m (6 ft) wide, and 2.1 m (7 ft) deep,
were constructed and lined with polyethylene. The water was
then pumped from the ponded area into the pits.
A report by the North Carolina State Pesticides Program
stated that bureaucratic and inter-agency arguments delayed
decisions, and disposal of contaminated rubble and soil did
not start until almost one week after the fire. A site
located on Federal land 4.3 km (7 mi) to the northeast was
chosen for disposal purposes because of the high ground-
water levels in the Farmville area.
Two cells at the disposal site were prepared, each 30.5 m
(100 ft) wide, 61 m (200 ft) long, and 0.3 m (1 ft) deep.
A layer of dolomitic lime 153 mm (6 in) thick followed by a
10.2 cm (4 in) thick layer of hydrated lime was placed on
the floors of the cells. The solid waste from the pesticide
and fertilizer warehouses was landfilled into one cell. The
material, compacted to a 0.9 m (3 ft) thick layer, was
covered with a minimum of 0.9 m (3 ft) of compacted clay
mounded with sufficient slope to allow runoff. The liquids
at the site were hauled by tanker trucks to the disposal
site where they were mixed with lime and clay and buried in
the second cell.
Shallow wells were drilled by the Ground-Water Division of
the North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources
near the site of the fire and near the disposal site for
monitoring purposes. The Farmville municipal wells were to
be monitored by the North Carolina State Board of Health.168)
Samples collected from monitor wells at the fire and disposal
sites during the period 1971-1975 have not contained pesti-
cides. As was mentioned previously, only 378,500 1 (100,000
gal) of the estimated 5,677,500 1 (1.5 million gal) of water
used to fight the fire were recovered; the location of the
remainder of the contaminated water is unknown. Continued
monitoring of both sites is recommended.169)
Future Trends
As previously stated, ground-water contamination occurs
because of actions by our varied and complex society.
Unforeseeable circumstances may cause many sources of
ground-water to be affected or rendered unuseable. However,
the recent awareness of such possible contamination has
caused investigators to anticipate many problems. Con-
tingency and emergency plans exist and they are ready to be
implemented. In some states teams have been formed to deal
with emergency environmental problems. Both industry and
274
-------
local governments have been made aware of the existence of
such teams, and contact has been made simple. Such an
approach to safeguard our ground-water resources should be
encouraged.
GROUND-WATER DEVELOPMENT
Ground-water development can cause physical, chemical or
biological effects on the environment. In an area underlain
by carbonates, the lowering of the water table may result in
the development of sinkholes or areas of subsidence; these
are physical effects. Land surface collapse or subsidence
may result directly in pollution by causing cracks or
ruptures in pipelines or storage tanks. It may result in
pollution indirectly by providing a route for pollutants to
enter the ground-water system.
Chemical effects can result from the lowering of the water
table, exposing minerals to an oxidizing environment. The
oxidation products may be leached downward by percolating
rain water; subsequent recovery of the water level may
result in a highly mineralized solution entering the ground-
water system. Salt-water encroachment is both a physical
and chemical effect; that is, saline water is moved from one
place to another in an aquifer and results in deterioration
of the chemical quality of the water. Biological effects
can result from an increase or decrease of bacterial
activity when physical and/or chemical changes cause an
imbalance in the ground-water system.
In the Southeast, intrusion of brackish or saline water into
fresh-water aquifers is a widely recognized form of con-
tamination resulting from ground-water development. Under
natural conditions, aquifers may contain saline water close
to the surface in coastal areas or at depth in areas further
inland. If pumpage of ground water from wells is great
enough the original hydraulic gradient may be altered
enough to allow sea water to advance inland or brackish
water at depth to upcone at the pumping center. Large-scale
movement of salt water through an aquifer can occur, dis-
placing fresh water either permanently or temporarily.
Some of the mechanisms that can aggravate the problem
include: construction of fresh-water drainage canals
connected to coastlines, bays, or tidal streams; dredging of
relatively impermeable sediments from the bottoms of bays or
tidal streams; and presence of leaky or corroded well
casings.
Salt water occurs naturally in water-table and artesian
aquifers in some locales along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts.
The fresh water-salt water boundaries of the relatively
275
-------
shallow aquifers of Pleistocene and Holocene ages closely
correspond with the present-day shoreline. However, in some
of the deeper aquifers of Tertiary and Cretaceous ages,
natural salty water may occur many miles inland. At some
localities near the shore, deep wells may penetrate
alternating zones of fresh and salty water. In those inland
areas, the presence of natural saline water may be related
to one or more of the following: retention in rock
formation of the salty water in which the formation was
deposited (connate water); solution of salts from the forma-
tion or from adjacent formations; and subsequent exposure to
another source of salt water after the deposition of the
formation.170)
Water wells are not normally considered sources of ground-
water contamination. However, there are means through which
a well can become a vehicle for the introduction of con-
taminants. Some of them are: corroded or ruptured casings;
well screens or open boreholes interconnecting two separate
aquifers; improperly sealed surface casings; and flowing
artesian wells. An analysis of reported waterborne disease
outbreaks in the U. S. during the period 1946 to 1970 shows
that contaminated ground-water supplies were responsible for
44 percent of the cases. Over half of these waterborne
disease outbreaks are attributed to improper well location
and construction.171) in these instances, wells can serve
as a conduit for pollutants to migrate from one aquifer to
another or from the land surface to an aquifer. A single
well can be the focal point of contamination for the areas
immediately surrounding the well; contamination can be more
widespread in a locality containing many wells.
Case Histories
One case history of ground-water contamination due to
ground-water development concerned a municipal well in
Selma, North Carolina. In September 1953, the well was
drilled to 91 m (300 ft) in material consisting of sericite
schist and disseminated pyrite. Until October, 1954, the
well was pumped continually; this resulted in a drawdown of
37 m (120 ft) . The water had a relatively high iro*n content
and a low pH, but it was potable and there was no change in
quality during the pumping period. Then, for about four
months, the well was not pumped, and the water returned to
its natural level. In February, 1955, the well was pumped
again; the water was very acidic (pH of 2.5) and contained
abnormally high quantities of iron and sulfate (approximately
365 mg/1 and 1,330 mg/1, respectively). The change was
attributed to the oxidation of pyrite within the cone of
depression and the subsequent solution of iron and sulfate
276
-------
when the water level had recovered to its pre-pumping level.
The problem was alleviated by pumping the well on a con-
tinual basis.172)
Lowering the water table, or the potentiometric surface of a
confined aquifer, in carbonate material increases the
potential for the development of sinkholes. Generally,
sinkholes develop during periods of heavy rainfall; they
often occur in areas where the surface environment has been
modified. In Alabama there are approximately 4,000 man-
related sinkhole collapses.173) Within and around one
industrial subdivision in Birmingham, it is estimated that,
from 1963 to 1970, 200 collapses and subsidence areas
developed over less than 1.3 sq km (0.5 sq mi).174)
The formation of a sinkhole may directly cause ground-water
pollution, or it may provide a conduit for pollutants to
easily enter the aquifer. In the vicinity of Birmingham,
sinkhole development ruptured a major sanitary sewer line
and resulted in the introduction of raw sewage into a quarry.
The sinkhole was caused by ground-water withdrawals which
had lowered the water table 42.7 m (140 ft). During the
investigation of the problem, it was concluded that sinkhole
development is a major cause of ground-water pollution, and
it will continue to be a problem in that area.174)
The city of Columbiana, Alabama, had two minicipal-supply
wells which withdrew water from a limestone aquifer. Con-
tinuous pumping of the wells created coalescing cones of
depression. Subsequent problems related to land subsidence
included: development of cracks in the filter plant reser-
voir; threatened collapse of a 24,600 1 (6,500 gal)
elevated storage tank; valve breakage on a butane storage
tank; and development of foundation problems in a housing
project. In addition, even though the water supply from the
wells was adequate, the water often became turbid after
periods of rain. This was an indication of surface con-
nection with the aquifer. The State Geological Survey
studied the problem and recommended that new wells be
installed 12.9 km (8 mi) southeast of the town and that the
existing municipal wells be abandoned.175)
Intrusion of salty water is almost always a very slow
process. In some localities where encroachment has taken
place, records show that many decades elapsed before the
salt content of the ground water rose to a point where it
exceeded the recommended limit. Few cases of broad regional
encroachment are known in the study area. Table 62 is a
summary of known ground-water contamination cases in the
Southeast as a direct result of salt-water intrusion. It is
277
-------
Table 62. SUMMARY OF CASE HISTORIES ON SALT-WATER INTRUSION.17'55.127,176-213)
Location
Aquifer
Nature of Problem
Remedial Action
Alabama
Mobile-Gulf Coast
Region
Pleistocene -
Sand & Gravel
Overdevelopment of well field
and well point dewatering
system for excavation caused
lateral intrusion from Mobile
River
Marango County Not known Saline water migrated upward
within a fault
Florida
Escambia County
Escambia County
Okaloosa County
Bay County
Nassau County
Fernandina Beach
St. John's County
Flagler County
Sand and Heavy pumping of industrial
Gravel wells near bayou Chico
caused lateral intrusion
Sand and Pumping from industrial well
Gravel field reversed gradient and
salt water migrated laterally
from Escambia River
Floridan Decline in hydraulic head of
Upper Floridan Aquifer caused
upward migration of salt water
through abandoned wells and
confining beds
Secondary Saline surface water leaked
Artesian downward from bays contamin-
ating two wells completed in
artesian aquifer
Floridan Artesian pressure decline
resulted in vertical and
horizontal intrusion
Floridan Heavy pumpage caused salt
water to upcone
Floridan Highly mineralized water
migrated upward due to increase
in pumping
Pumping curtailed
Well field relocated
Replacement wells
drilled further from
bayou
Unknown
Abandoned wells
partially or com-
pletely plugged
Wells abandoned
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
278
-------
Table 62 (cont). SUMMARY OF CASE HISTORIES ON SALT-WATER INTRUSION.17'55'127'176"213'
Location
Aquifer
Nature of Problem
Remedial Action
Flagler County
Flagler Beach
Volusia County
Ormond Beach
Volusia County
Daytona Beach
Volusia County
Port Orange
Seminole County
Sanford area
Orange County
Cocoa Well Field
Brevard County
Indian River
County
Martin County
Shallow Municipal well field was re-
charged with wait water from
Floridan Aquifer
Floridan A decline in the potentio-
metric surface resulted in
an increase of chlorides in
water from 8 supply wells
Floridan Salt water upconed under
municipal well field
Floridan Salt water upconing of saline
wells
Floridan Heavy localized pumping re-
sulted in upconing of saline
water under city well field
Floridan Pumpage from municipal well
field resulted in lateral
and/or vertical intrusion
(eastern part of the county)
Floridan Pumping for irrigation and
municipal use resulted in up-
coning
Floridan Wells open in two zones allowed
salt water to move into shal-
lower section of aquifer due
to higher head in lower zone
Shallow Water Overpumpage of city wells
Table caused encroachment from St.
Lucie River
Unknown
Casing repaired
Unknown
Pumping rate con-
trolled
Unknown
Pumping curtailed
Unknown
Unknown
Pumpage terminated
Palm Beach
County
Biscayne Diversion of river water by Well field
irrigation canals caused salt abandoned
water to extend inland result-
ing in increases in chloride
content in wells
279
-------
Table 62 (cont). SUMMARY OF CASE HISTORIES ON SALT-WATER INTRUSION.17'55'127' 176-213)
Location
Aquifer
Nature of Problem
Remedial Action
Pasco County
Pinellas County
Floridan
Floridan
Overpumpage of fresh water
aquifer near coast caused
migration of salt water into
wells
Increasing pumpage from well
field resulted in salt-water
intrusion
Declared a water
shortage area;
tighter controls
imposed
Abandoned wells in
the area and re-
located well field
further inland
Sarasota County
Charlotte County
Floridan Well casings in shallow sands
corroded; salt water entered
well and moved down to deeper
aquifer
Shallow Lateral movement of salt water
from Gulf and estuaries; up-
ward vertical movement due in
part to poor well construction
and to abandonment
Well casings replaced
and grouted with
cement
Changed well con-
struction methods
and began plugging
abandoned wells
Lee County
Shallow and Saline water from deep arte-
Floridan sian aquifer moving up into
overlying aquifer through open
boreholes of abandoned wells
Program of plugging
abandoned wells
initiated
Hendry County
Palm Beach
County
Broward County
Ft. Lauderdale
Floridan Upward movement of residual
saline water caused by in-
tensive pumping and corroded
well casings
Biscayne Dry spell in 1970-71 caused
salt water wedge to migrate up
canals and intracoastal water-
ways thus contaminating aquifer
Biscayne Increasing drawdowns in munici-
pal well field posed the threat
of salt-water encroachment
Ceased ground-water
pumping in the area
Temporary termina-
tion of pumpage
from some wells in
well field
A feeder canal was
dredged to increase
recharge to well
field
280
-------
Table 62 (cont). SUMMARY OF CASE HISTORIES ON SALT-WATER INTRUSION. 17,55,127,176-213)
Location
Aquifer
Nature of Problem
Remedial Action
Broward County
Broward County
Dade County
Miami
Miami
Miami
Miami
Miami
Biscayne
Biscayne
Biscayne
Biscayne
Biscayne
Biscayne
Biscayne
Salt-water wedge has moved to
within 0.5 km of public well
field
Salt-water migration in coast-
al areas due to increase in
pumpage and to canal construc-
tion
Salt water moved up the Miami
Canal due to dry conditions;
four wells in the area contam-
inated
Unknown
Salinity control
structures built
on major canals
Temporary dam con-
structed on the
canal
Increased pumpage and dry con- Unknown
ditions caused salt water migra-
tion around control structure;
nearby wells were contaminated
Heavy pumpage during drought
caused salt water to move
around control structure;
aquifer contaminated locally
Heavy pumpage during drought
caused migration of mineralized
water toward a municipal well
field
Heavy pumpage during drought
caused sharp increases in
chloride content in monitor-
ing well
Unknown
Heavy rains raised
water levels; thus
no contamination of
well field occurred
Pumpage from wells
nearest the saline
front was curtailed;
water was pumped
from Lake Okeechobee
into the Miami canal
to raise water levels
in the well field
area
281
-------
Table 62 (cont). SUMMARY OF CASE HISTORIES ON SALT-WATER INTRUSION.17'55'127'176"213'
Location
Collier County
Naples area
Aauifer
Shallow
Nature of Problem
Lateral and vertical move-
ment of salt water due to
closely spaced and heavily
pumped wells
Remedial Action
Well field moved
Georgia
Savannah area
Brunswick area
Principal
Artesian
Principal
Artesian
Mississippi
Pascagoula area
Biloxi area
North Carolina
Miocene (Pas-
cagoula Form-
ation) and
Citronelle
Formation
Miocene
Large ground-water withdrawal
has reaulted in potential
lateral and upward movement of
salty water; leaky well casings
have caused local problems
Extensive ground-water develop-
ment has caused vertical move-
ment from residual salt water
zones into aquifers in two
areas; improperly cased wells
or corroded casings cause local
problems
Increasing ground-water with-
drawals and resulting water-
level declines resulted in
lateral intrusion from Gulf and
and the Pascagoula River
estuary at Moss Point
A few localities have had None
chloride increases
None yet; intrusion
has not affected
major production
wells
Unknown
None; monitoring
program established
Southeastern
Castle Hayne Large scale pumping to dewater
and Paleo- aquifer for mining operations
cene (Beau- resulted in the movement of
fort) brackish water into zones of
the aquifer both laterally^ and
vertically
Area was declared
a capacity use
area for water
management
282
-------
Table 62. (cont) SUMMARY OF CASE HISTORIES ON SALT-WATER INTRUSION.17 (55'12? '176~213'
Location Aquifer Nature of Problem Remedial Action
South Carolina
Beaufort and Santee and Heavy pumping caused upward Many wells abandoned;
Charleston areas Ocala Lime- and downward intrusion from some water supplies
stones and layered saline aquifer and imported
Peedee-Black lateral intrusion from coast
Creek Sands
Virginia
Newport News and Cretaceous Sea-water intrusion or residual Designated as
Cape Charles areas saline water contaminated wells critical ground-
water areas
283
-------
based on a review of 40 individual county and regional
ground-water resource reports and an Environmental
Protection Agency report entitled "Salt Water Intrusion in
the United States."
Within some sections of the Southeast, one of the most com-
mon problems related to abandoned or improperly cased water
wells as a source of contamination is the vertical movement
of saline water into a fresh-water aquifer. Thousands of
wells have penetrated artesian aquifers that either flow or
have sufficient hydraulic head to cause upward leakage into
overlying aquifers through corroded casings or around
improperly cased or grouted wells. Improperly cased or
corroded wells drilled near the sea, salt-water marshes, or
tidal streams have, in several instances, permitted salt
water to leak downward into a fresh-water aquifer. Over a
period of time, this salty water can migrate significant
lateral distances.
In the study area, numerous state ground-water evaluation
reports discuss the problem of uncontrolled flow from and
within abandoned water wells. In Florida, during the
period from 1955 to 1959, the State Geological Survey
conducted an inventory of flowing wells. Information was
collected on over 4,000 wells located in 45 counties, and
1,800 of these were found to have uncontrolled continuous
flow. The chloride content of the water from approximately
50 percent of the flowing wells exceeded the recommended
limit of 250 mg/1.2-'-4) At the present time in southwest
Florida alone, there are an estimated 2,000 to 3,000 wells
that flow poor quality water. About 100 of these wells have
been located and marked for inclusion in a water-quality
improvement project.215)
In 1958, an inventory was made of wells and water use in the
10 coastal counties of Georgia. In seven of the counties,
377 flowing wells were found; wells no longer flow in one
county, and very few, if any, flow in the remaining two
counties.216) Much of the uncontrolled flow from wells
serves no useful purpose.
At La Belle, Florida, upward leakage through five deep
artesian wells that were not in use and lateral movement
through a subsurface water-distribution system which acted
as a conduit were the probable sources of contamination of
the shallow aquifer over a broad area. Most of the supply
wells in La Belle range in depth from 18.3 to 36.6 m (60 to
120 ft) and are completed in a limestone horizon. The deep
wells were cased in the limestone to a depth of about 24.4 m
(80 ft) and completed with an open bore to depths of 183 to
284
-------
244 m (600 to 800 ft). Thus, a direct connection existed
between the open bore of the deep wells and the zone tapped
by the shallow wells. The potentioraetric surface in the
deep wells was approximately 7.6m (25 ft) above land
surface, and the water level in the shallow wells was below
land surface. Figure 51 shows the distribution of chlorides
in the shallow aquifer-21^'218)
At Highland Estates, Florida, several residents reported
that water from their shallow domestic-supply wells tasted
salty. The wells ranged from 6.1 to 7.6 m (20 to 25 f£)
deep in the water-table aquifer, except for one abandoned
irrigation well nearby which tapped the deep artesian
aquifer. Shown on Figure 52 are the locations of these
wells and the chloride concentrations in water samples
collected from them. Chloride concentrations in water from
the shallow wells ranged from 20 mg/1 for Well 3, located
outside the contaminated area, to 590 mg/1 from Well 2,
situated in the contaminated area. The chloride content of
water from the deep well was 1,800 mg/1. The potentiometric
surface in this well was approximately 5.8 m (19 ft) above
land surface. A control valve was installed to prevent flow
from the well, but the metal well casing was badly corroded
and leaking. The well was plugged with a cement grout which
stopped all visible leakage and, following this action, the
chlorides in the water from the shallow wells decreased as
shown on Figure SS.2-^)
In Greene County, Alabama, the Gordo and McShan Formations,
which consist chiefly of sands and clays, are two of six
geologic formations used as aquifers. The chloride concen-
tration in water from the Gordo Formation ranges from 4 to
3,700 mg/1, while the chloride concentration in water from
the McShan Formation ranges from 3.8 to 2,560 mg/1. Many
of the wells tapping these formations flowed at land surface
and yielded water with a chloride concentration that
exceeded the recommended limit of 250 mg/l.22°)
In several instances, improperly installed or corroded well
casings in wells drilled near tidal streams or salt-water
marshes permitted salt water to leak downward into a fresh-
water aquifer in the Savannah, Georgia, area.221) Another
case of contamination of the fresh water aquifer occurred
near Brunswick, Georgia; salt water under higher hydraulic
head leaked upward through an improperly cased exploratory
oil well. (This case history is discussed in more detail in
the chapter dealing with petroleum exploration and
development.)
In North Carolina, ground water from a private well was
contaminated. The well was located at the lowest point on
285
-------
GLADES COUNTY
HENDRY COUNTY
200-'' ISOCHLOR, IN MG/L
DASHED WHERE INFERRED
Figure 51.
Distribution of chlorides in the shallow aquifer
at La Belle, Florida, 1952-1953.217,218)
286
-------
9(35)'
I0(30)»
APPARENT BOUNDARY OF AREA
AFFECTED BY SALT WATER LEAKAGE
^(20)
I2<35) 13(30)
15(1800) «4(25)
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 M.
i I i i I I I
I r~^1 I 1
0 100 200 300 400 Ft.
• SHALLOW WELL AND NUMBER
(§) ARTESIAN WELL AND NUMBER
(30) CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION, MG/L
Figure 52.
Chloride concentrations of water in wells at
Highland Estates, Florida.219)
287
-------
M
00
OO
OT
cc
o
UJ
8
a
cc
o
i
o
600
500
400
300
200
100
WELL 2
A
\\/
WELL 8
\
-WELL I
X
\
"V \
1968
1969
1970
1971
(972
Figure 53. Decline of chloride concentration in water
samples from wells at Highland Estates, Florida,
after plugging leaky artesian wells.219)
-------
the property, approximately 6.1 m (20 ft) from a ditch that
received domestic waste water, and it did not have a sani-
tary seal at land surface. A bacteriological sample of
water from the well showed the well to be contaminated by
fecal coliform.57)
In Colbert County, Alabama, a large number of wells are
contaminated with bacteria which cause the precipitation of
iron hydroxide. The problem is most acute in water wells
that do not have surface casings extending above land
surface.222)
Future Trends
The use of ground water as a source of supply will continue
to increase in the future. Ground-water development imposes
a physical change on the hydrogeologic environment by
drawing down water levels; this results in either physical,
chemical, or biological reaction within the system. Large
ground-water developments, for industries or communities,
should require the preparation of an environmental impact
statement. However, because of cost, little can be done to
control environmental impacts by domestic wells, except
through greater participation of state ground-water geolo-
gists. Such participation may allow problems to be avoided
prior to the actual development.
Because of the close regulatory control over diversion of
ground water in coastal regions and because of the general
knowledge of the location of saline ground-water bodies, it
is unlikely that the number of problems of contamination
from this source will rise significantly. However, a
change in water-management attitudes might lead to the
establishment of new inland positions of salt-water fronts
in some areas. These changes might occur in response to
greater demands for water supply in coastal areas because of
continuing population growth.
Some of the counties within the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal
Plains may become water-short in the near future, and a
decision will have to be made on how to best meet increasing
water needs. One possibility is the importation of surface
water into those areas presently dependent upon ground
water. Another alternative would involve abandonment of the
present management concept of maintaining salt-water fronts
in a status-quo position and withdrawing more fresh ground
water for consumptive use; salt water would then move
inland to a new position. The cost of replacement of wells
lost in the process might be much less than the cost of
importing surface water or the cost involved with some other
289
-------
alternative proposed for solving water-supply needs. A
technical-economic evaluation of the feasibility of
withdrawing more ground water in coastal areas would be a
valuable aid to water managers.
More controls are needed over the construction of domestic
wells and the fate of abandoned wells. Stricter licensing
of well drillers in areas where regulations do not exist
would help to correct some of the faulty construction
practices now being used. Also, the arbitrary reasoning
behind some rules involving such protective codes as dis-
tances to potential sources of contamination should be
reevaluated. Some of these codes have been in existence for
many decades, and the occurrence and movement of ground
water under various hydrologic and geologic conditions was
not adequately understood at the time of their implementation.
PETROLEUM EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Exploration for petroleum has taken place in each of the
states in the study area. The principal producing areas are
found in Mississippi and Alabama, with some minor production
in Florida and Virginia. Georgia, North Carolina, and South
Carolina are non-producing states.223) Development of many
oil fields took place during the first half of this century.
Most production occurred during initial development which
was followed by a period of declining yields. At present,
many of the wells in these fields produce little oil and gas,
and much brine.
The large volumes of brine from these wells represent the
principal threat to water quality in fresh-water aquifers in
a petroleum recovery region. The natural brine from deep
strata is brought to the surface with the petroleum product
and is then separated from it. The brine waste is disposed
of in surface-water bodies, in unlined settling pits, in
injection wells for secondary recovery or disposal, or it is
pumped into the annulus between the production casing and
the surface casing. Pipelines and separation tanks may be
in a state of disrepair at these installations, and ^fluids
might therefore discharge onto the land surface, infiltrate
shallow fresh-water aquifers and cause contamination.
Brines flowing from and within abandoned oil and gas wells
can contaminate fresh-water aquifers. Even when an oil
company conscientiously applies a program of capping and/or
plugging abandoned wells, casings may eventually corrode and
leak, thus introducing brine or a brine-oil-gas mixture into
a usable aquifer.
290
-------
The chemical characteristics of brine are quite variable.
Oil field brines can be many times more saline than sea
water (Table 63) and they are highly corrosive to metals.
Only small quantities of brine can cause severe degradation
of fresh-water aquifers.
Most of the current oil and gas exploration and development
in the region is centered on the Gulf Coastal Plain. This
broad lowland plain is underlain by aquifer systems that are
extensively developed as primary sources of domestic,
municipal, and industrial water supplies. A non-degradable
pollutant, such as brine, disposed of on the land surface,
injected into annular spaces, or escaping through the well
itself, can eventually migrate to water-supply pumping
centers or natural discharge areas. The result can be
regional ground-water contamination.
Case Histories
The total number of cases in which water wells in the
Southeast have been contaminated as a result of petroleum
exploration and development is not known. Individual cases
and regional effects have been noted, but the overall
problem has not been studied in detail.
In Alabama, there are 19 oil fields with approximately 556
producing wells. About 1,000 exploratory wells have been
drilled outside the producing areas.225) Ground-water
contamination from brine has occurred in the Pollard,
Gilbertown, Citronelle, and South Carlton Oil Fields.226'
The three principal sources of contamination are unlined
disposal pits, leaks from pipelines, and spills. A problem
also originated from the improper design of a brine disposal
well.
The Pollard Oil Field encompasses 178 ha (440 acres); it is
estimated that 162 ha (400 acres) are affected by brine
contamination. The shallow aquifer in the area is composed
of about 15 m (50 ft) of sand and gravel and is a source of
water for domestic and stock supplies. It is underlain by
relatively thick beds of clay which have prevented the
downward movement of contaminated water to deeper aquifers
used as supply sources for the town of Pollard. The primary
method of brine disposal at the oil field is through wells.
However, there were 28 pits used for secondary disposal.
Field investigations have proven that the use of surface
pits was a major factor contributing to the contamination of
the shallow aquifer. From 1955 to 1962 the area of con-
tamination enlarged considerably (Figure 54). During this
period, one local resident relocated a domestic and stock
291
-------
Table 63. COMPARISON OF DISSOLVED SOLIDS IN SEA WATER AND
IN OIL FIELD BRINE, in mg/1. 224)
Element
Sodium
Potassium
Lithium
Rubidium
Cesium
Calcium
Magnesium
Strontium
Barium
Chloride
Bromine
Iodine
Sea water, mg/1
10,600
380
0.2
0.12
0.0005
400
1,300
8
0.03
19,000
65
0.05
Oil field
12,000
30
1
0.1
0.01
1,000
500
5
0
20,000
50
1
brine ,
to 150
to 4
to
to
to
to 120
to 25
to 5
to 1
to 250
to 5
to
mg/1
,000
,000
50
7
3
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
300
292
-------
SEC. 12
500
1000 FT.
• OIL WELL
© SALT WATER DISPOSAL WELL
9 MONITORING WELL
MONITORING SPRING
SALT-WATER FRONT 1955
SALT-WATER FRONT 1962
SALT-WATER FRONT 1971
Figure 54.
Salt-water contaminant fronts in part of the
Pollard Oil Field, Alabama.276,227)
293
-------
supply well three times because of high chloride content in
the water. In September, 1963, the State Oil and Gas Board
requested that the use of surface pits for the disposal of
brines be discontinued. Compliance with this request caused
the chloride concentrations in the shallow aquifer to
decrease, and the contaminant front began to recede (Figures
54 and 55). Numerous pipeline leaks and spills have also
occurred at the field. The effects of these incidents were
observed in nearby monitoring wells (Figure 55). Saline
water seeps and tree kills have also been observed in the
area contaminated by the brine.226/227/228)
At the Gilbertown Oil Field, a review of the construction of
one brine disposal well revealed that it was discharging
brine into an aquifer that contained good-quality water. In
addition, brine was disposed of in 21 pits. The storage
capacities and the construction of these pits were not
adequate for the quantity of brine they received. The dikes
around many pits were low; overflows commonly occurred
during rainstorms. Evidence of contamination was observed
as tree kills and in gaining streams that had poor-quality
water. In 1971, the State Oil and Gas Board issued an order
discontinuing surface disposal.226,227)
At the Citronelle Oil Field, waste water had been disposed
of through five wells and two pits. Apparently, no problems
have been encountered with the disposal wells. However, one
of the pits was losing water through seepage and the effect
was an increase in chloride concentration in a stream
approximately 457 m (1,500 ft) away.226,227)
In Mississippi, at the beginning of 1971, there were
approximately 386 oil and gas production pools. Total brine
production in the state up to January of 1971 amounted to
2,608,191 cu m (16,406,813 bbl)-229) Some brine disposal
was formerly accomplished by discharging into both pits and
disposal wells. In 1973, the use of pits was phased out,
except on an emergency basis.230)
Disposal wells utilized are of two types: (1) a well grilled
as a disposal well or converted from an oil or gas well, and
(2) a well in which brine is disposed of through the annulus
of a producing oil or gas well. At the end of 1971, there
were approximately 395 disposal wells located in 25
Mississippi counties. In 13 of the 25 counties, ground-
water contamination problems from oil field brines have been
reported. Injection wells used for secondary recovery were
not included in the total number of disposal wells.229)
Several oil fields have disposal wells that are injecting
through the annulus between the surface casing and the inner
294
-------
I6OO
1400
I2OO
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1 I I
DISCONTINUED USE
DISPOSAL PITS
SEPT. 6, 1963
440
420
180
IE 160
« 140
120
z 100
80
60
20
i ii r i i
DISCONTINUED USE OF
DISPOSAL PITS, SEPT. 6, 1963
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
I I F I
I I I
— SALT-WATER LINE LEAK DETECTED
DEC. 28, 1970
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
I I L I I I
DISCONTINUED USE OF
DISPOSAL PITS
SEPT. 6, 1963
W-I5I
I I I
I I I
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
60
50
40
30
20
j I
i i i i i
SALT-WATER
LINE LEAK
I I I I I I I I
1962 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71
1962 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71
Figure 55. Chloride concentration in water from monitoring
wells at Pollard Oil Field.227)
295
-------
or production casing. Fresh-water aquifers may not be
adequately protected around wells that inject through the
annulus, and sometimes records of wells do not exist so that
this determination can be made. The drilling of deep
water-supply wells revealed instances of apparent associated
pollution.229,231) jn southeastern Mississippi, two 549 m
(1,800 ft) deep water supply wells which originally produced
low-chloride water presently produce water with chlorides of
45 to 50 mg/1 and 225 to 250 mg/1, respectively. These
supply wells are located approximately 1.6 km (1 mi) and 4
km (2.5 mi) from a brine disposal well injecting through
the annulus.232) Several other cases of contamination
supply wells located near oil fields have been reported.
The extent of contamination of fresh-water aquifers by
improper or careless disposal well practices has not been
determined.
In Wayne, Wilkinson, and Yazoo Counties, Mississippi,
saline seeps and brine springs have been reported in areas
where there is oil production. The seeps and springs have
resulted from the use of unlined disposal pits.61,233,234)
An abandoned, unplugged oil test well in Glynn County,
Georgia, contaminated a fresh-water aquifer. The test well
was drilled to 1,407 m (4,615 ft) through both fresh- and
salt-water aquifers. The deepest casing setting was 186 m
(610 ft) and the well was completed open-bore to 1,407 m
(4,615 ft). A well survey showed that salt water was
flowing upward from aquifers deeper than 610 m (2,000 ft)
into a fresh-water aquifer between 186 and 280 m (610 and
920 ft). Water from the well contained a maximum chloride
concentration of 7,780 mg/1. Two nearby water-supply wells
showed a slight increase in chloride content, indicating a
lateral movement of the salt water.235)
Future Trends
In the region, oil and gas producing states have developed
controls to insure that minimal adverse environmental
effects from this source will occur in the future. For
example, the State Oil and Gas Boards of Mississippi and
Alabama, are responsible for oil and gas development and for
the regulation of brine disposal. However, these dual
functions of promoting development and of regulating dis-
posal practice could present problems. Appropriate state
water-quality control agencies might become involved in
disposal methods only after brines had been processed in
some manner and had thus fallen in the category of indus-
trial wastes. From an environmental standpoint, an
independent organization might control disposal activities
more appropriately.
296
-------
Much work still remains to be done, especially in delineating
more exactly the extent and magnitude of contamination in
polluted areas. For the most part, existing contamination
passes unnoticed because it usually occurs in sparsely
populated areas. However, as urban and suburban development
proceed, reports of contamination from past petroleum
exploration and development will probably increase. Also,
the corrosion of casings and the failure of seals in
abandoned oil and gas wells will continue to be a problem.
These problems may be partially offset by a growing effort
on the part of public agencies to have abandoned wells
properly plugged. However, little can be done about wells
abandoned before plugging regulations were adopted.
NATURAL BODIES OF SURFACE WATER
Throughout the Southeast, rivers and lakes may be a major
source of recharge to properly positioned public and
industrial well fields or may supply a large amount of water
to the aquifer. Where a surface-water body is hydraulically
connected with an aquifer, pumping from wells and the
resulting drawdown of water levels in the aquifer can induce
surface water to infiltrate through the stream or lake bed
and into the ground-water reservoir. This infiltrated water
can then migrate to the pumping wells. Studies have shown
that wells drilled within a few hundred to as many as a
thousand feet away from rivers and lakes can yield a high
percentage of water derived by induced infiltration.
If the infiltrated water passes through a large enough
volume of soil and aquifer material before arriving at the
pumping well, filtration, adsorption, and ion exchange can
take place. Turbidity, bacteria, and some chemical con-
stituents can be effectively removed or reduced. Thus,
usable ground-water supplies can sometimes be developed
adjacent to poor-quality streams. This fact plus the large
amount of potential recharge available from major streams
has made the siting of wells adjacent to surface-water
bodies attractive to water-works operators.
Unfortunately, few investigations have been made to
determine how far pollutants such as heavy metals, organic
compounds and viruses can migrate through aquifer materials
to pumped wells. Bacteria have been known to survive
infiltration from the surface-water source to the well.
Also, acid or reducing surface waters that come in contact
with some aquifer materials can dissolve minerals such as
iron and manganese which naturally occur in the sediments.
This has resulted in an increase in concentration of some
chemical constituents in the well water and necessitated the
297
-------
construction of treatment facilities for their reduction.
In some instances, the chemical concentrations have been
great enough to result in abandonment of the well supply.
The possibility of contamination of ground-water resources
is greatest under conditions where contaminants enter a
stream with low flow or where they are contained in surface
waters forming a large part of the flow into a closed lake.
Throughout the Southeast, and particularly in Florida,
various-sized lakes near centers of population may be
receiving treated municipal sewage waters and urban storm
runoff. Little is known of the natural capacity of lake
bottom sediments to retain some of the materials in storm
runoff. Adsorption on these sediments or metal-sulfide
processes occur on lake bottoms, and therefore trace metals
may remain in the lake system rather than enter the aquifer.
Since this subject has not been studied in great detail, the
possibility of infiltration of such substances must not be
discounted. Additionally, well fields located near such
lakes may induce flow from them sufficient enough to change
the geochemical conditions under which the contaminants
remain stable in the bottom sediments of the lake.
Another factor favoring contamination of ground-water
resources in the southeast states is the occurrence of lakes
and streams in areas underlain by cavernous carbonate rocks.
Many of these bodies of water, which would otherwise be
hydraulically connected to those rocks, have bottoms plugged
with silt, clay and organic matter. On occasions, the
bottoms of these water bodies collapse and a mixture of
sediments and water will move down into the cavernous
openings. If the sediments and waters contain contaminants,
the aquifer becomes locally contaminated. Movement of
contaminants can be quite rapid once they have entered the
cavernous zones due to natural regional flow or due to flow
induced by nearby pumping.
In Leon County, Florida the location of a number of large
lakes is controlled by the presence of active sinkhole
structures. Two of the lakes, Lake lamonia and Lake
Jackson, are hydraulically connected with the underlying
Floridan Aquifer. Occasionally, organic debris and clay
acting as a plug in sinkholes in the bottoms of the lakes
will come loose and the lake waters will drain out.45) This
occurs when heavy rains follow drought conditions. The lake
levels rise and there is a big head difference between those
levels and the lowered piezometric surface of the underlying
aquifer. Three other lakes in the area, Lafayette,
Miccosukee and Bradford, are either underlain by sinkholes,
298
-------
flow out into sinkholes during wet weather, or lose water to
sinkholes in the streams feeding the lake.
Over two-thirds of Leon County has pronounced sinkhole
development, particularly south of Tallahassee, where Lake
Munson is located. Urban storm runoff from approximately 65
percent of the 67 sq km (26 sq mi) area of Tallahassee,
drains into Lake Munson. Twenty percent of the area drains
into Lake Lafayette and the balance into Lake Jackson.236)
Additionally, 37,841 cu m/d (10 mgd) of treated municipal
sewage from Tallahassee drain into the lake. As much as
563,830 cu m (149 million gal) of storm runoff will enter
the lake as a result of a storm event.237) From both a
biological and chemical viewpoint, the 107-ha (264-acre)
lake is polluted. Except for solid wastes, the particulate
and dissolved wastes of 120,000 people are entering the lake
and are stored there.
A study of road surface runoff indicates that runoff from
the first hour of a moderate-to-heavy storm with brief peaks
to at least 12.7 mm (1/2 in) per hour would contribute
considerably more pollutional load than would the same
city's sanitary sewage during the same period of time (Table
64).238) The data presented in Table 64 are for a city of
comparable size and population to Tallahassee, Florida.
This same study determined the quantity and character of
contaminants found on street surfaces in 12 U. S. cities
(Table 65). It points out that the greatest pollution
potential is associated with the fine solids fraction of the
street surface contaminants, noting that current street-
cleaning practices are essentially for aesthetic purposes.
Cleaning efficiency in the removal of the dust and dirt
fraction of street surface contaminants is low even under
well operated street-sweeping programs. Also, catch basins
are ineffective in removing the fine solids which contribute
most heavily to water pollution.238)
In central Florida, a recharge area for the productive
Floridan Aquifer, lakes are abundant. Some of these lakes
are relatively independent of the effect of artesian
pressures due to the presence of underlying sediments which
restrict the upward or downward movement of water. Other
lakes are connected directly to the underlying artesian
Floridan Aquifer and lake levels fluctuate directly with
changes in the piezometric surface, except during periods of
surface flow.239) Contaminants entering the lakes have the
potential of downward movement into the artesian aquifer,
given sufficient head differences which may result in lake
bottom collapse or direct movement of contaminants into the
299
-------
Table 64. CALCULATED QUANTITIES OF POLLUTANTS WHICH WOULD ENTER RECEIVING WATERS
(HYPOTHETICAL CITY)a) 238)
o
o
Settleable plus sus-
pended solids
BOD
COD
Kjeldahl nitrogen
Phosphates
Total coliform
bacteria (org/hr)
Street Street Raw Raw
Surface Surface Sanitary Sanitary
Runoff Runoff Sewage Sewage
Ib/hr kg/hr Ib/hr kg/hr
560,000 254,000 1,300 590
5,600 2,540 1,100 499
13,000 5,897 1,200 544
880 399 210 95
440 200 50 22.7
4,000 X 1010 460,000 X 1010
Secondary Secondary
Plant Plant
Effluent Effluent
Ib/hr kg/hr
130 59.0
110 49.9
120 54.4
20 9.07
2.0 1.13
4.6 X 1010
a) The hypothetical city used for this comparison had the following characteristics:
Population: 100^000 persons
Total land area: 5,666 ha (14,000 acres)
Distribution of developed land residential: 75%,
commercial, 5%, industrial 20%
Streets (tributary to receiving waters): 644 curb km (400 curb miles)
Sanitary sewage: 45.4 X 106 I/day
-------
Table 65. QUANTITY AND CHARACTER OF CONTAMINANTS FOUND ON
STREET SURFACES.238) (12 U. S. Cities and Towns)
Measured Constituents
Weighted Mean for All Samples
kg/curb km Ib/curb mi
Total solids
Oxygen demand
BOD5
COD
Volatile solids
Algal nutrients
Phosphates
Nitrates
Kjeldahl nitrogen
Bacteriological
Total coliforms
km and mi)
Fecal coliforms
km and mi)
Heavy metals
Zinc
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Mercury
Chromium
Pesticides
p, p-DDD
p, p-DDT
Dieldrin
Polychlorinated
biphenyls
(org/curb
(org/curb
395
3.8
26.8
28.2
0.31
0.026
0.62
27.9 X 10-
1.58 X 10-
0.18
0.06
0.16
0.014
0.02
0.03
18.9 X 10
17.2 X 10
6.8 X 10
-6
-6
-6
1,400
13.5
95
100
1.1
0.094
2.2
99 X 109
5.6 X 10-
0.65
0.20
0.57
0.05
0.073
0.11
67 X 10
61 X 10
24 X 10
-6
-6
-6
310 X 10
-6
1100 X 10
-6
NOTE: "org'1 refers to the number of coliform organisms observed,
301
-------
aquifer due to recharge from the lakes. Fertilizers and
pesticides carried by surface and subsurface water draining
into the lakes are an increasing source of contamination.239)
Lake Dicie, in Lake County in central Florida, receives
urban storm runoff from the southeastern part of the town of
Eustis. This inflow accounts for almost 50 percent of the
total input which includes rainfall on the lake and other
storm runoff. Outflow from the lake consists primarily of
seepage and evaporation, with seepage almost twice the
evaporation. This seepage is probably outward through the
shallow aquifer as well as downward into the Floridan
Aquifer.240)
Most of the trace elements entering Lake Dicie do not remain
in solution but are adsorbed on particulate matter.
Concentrations of phosphorous, nitrogen, lead and trace ele-
ments are higher in the bottom sediments than in the water.
Lead concentrations in the runoff were 56 yg/1 and only
one yg/1 in the lake waters.240)
In the area of Florida where Lake Dicie is located, old
sinkholes and depressions, some of which are present-day
lakes, contain Miocene or more recent sand and sandy clay to
considerable depth.239) A well near Orlando has penetrated
a 27.4 m (90 ft) deep cavern at a depth of between 175 to
202 m (573 to 663 ft) below land surface, containing 3.7 m
(12 ft) of black organic muck.241) This is an indication
that surface materials do move downward into the Floridan
Aquifer. The entire region is pock-marked by sinkholes and
related features and underlain by extensive interconnected
cavernous limestone. The potential impact of infiltration
of contaminants through sinkhole lakes on local ground-water
quality is increased even more by practices such as those
occurring at Lake Dicie.
The purpose of the foregoing discussion is to point out poor
practices which can potentially cause ground-water con-
tamination. Similar conditions and practices exist in other
areas of the Southeast. The following case histories
illustrate problems that have occurred as a result*of
infiltration of contaminants from bodies of surface water or
by introduction of contaminants through sinkholes underlying
them.
Case Histories
A sinkhole opened up in the bottom of Lake Grady in
Hillsborough County, Florida, and drained lake water into
the underlying aquifer. Approximately 12 domestic supply
302
-------
wells in a neighborhood east of the lake were bacterially
contaminated and contained foreign matter similar to that
found in the lake. The sinkhole was to be filled in and
sealed with a clay barrier to prevent further seepage.242)
There are indications that surface water draining into
sinkholes located in the Masaryktown Canal in Hernando
County, Florida, during a period of great precipitation
(approximately 610 mm or 24 in during June, 1974) con-
taminated a nearby well with coliform bacteria. An investi-
gation and subsequent tests by the Southwest Florida Water
Management District using rhodamine dye were not conclusive.
However, water does move from the canal into the sinks and
contamination during the period was possible.243)
At Lake City, Florida, the municipal sewer system emptied
into a small creek that flowed into a sinkhole lake.
Polluted lake water drained through open sinkholes in the
lake bottom into the Floridan Aquifer, contaminating the
city well field located at the edge of the lake. The city
well field was moved upgradient from the source of con-
tamination and a sewage-treatment plant has been built.244)
Sewage effluent from a treatment plant in Dublin, Virginia,
discharged into a dry ditch and entered the ground-water
regime at a point approximately 229 m (750 ft) downstream
through a series of solution cavities. From this point, the
contaminant flowed along the axis of a syncline. The
majority of the contaminated water rose to the surface some
5 km (3.1 mi) from the point of entry. However, several
wells and springs used for water supply were affected. The
water-supply problem was resolved by extending the public
system to supply the citizens affected by the discharge.245)
A rather rare form of contamination occurred at Donalsonville,
Georgia, where primary effluent from a sewage treatment
plant entered a stream and flowed into a hole formed by a
piling that was driven into a previously undisclosed cavern.
The pilings were being driven for the construction of a
bridge crossing the stream. Bacterial contamination appeared
in 31 of 126 wells sampled which tap the principal artesian
aquifer of Georgia.246)
At Baconton, Georgia, a stream serving as an open sewer
contaminated the principal artesian aquifer. The discharge
flowed into a limestone sinkhole. Bacterial contamination
was found in nearby wells.61)
At a site along Town Creek in Athens, Alabama, there is
considerable stream pollution due to direct flow of waters
303
-------
from septic tanks and sewage dumped into the creek. This
contamination is drawn into the cone of depression of one of
the town wells where a bacteria count of 2,925 per cubic
centimeter was observed. Nitrate in this well was only 4
mg/1, which might be explained by the fact that nitrifica-
tion processes had not taken place and that the nitrogen
compounds remained in the less oxidized forms.247)
Future Trends
Cases similar to those described above are very common
throughout the Southeast. However, in spite of the cost for
treatment brought about by this type of problem, the
development of ground water as compared to surface water is
still economically favorable. The drilling of wells
recharged by rivers and lakes will continue, and infiltrated
ground water will remain as a vital source of supply for
municipalities and industries.
Unfortunately, few detailed chemical analyses are available
for water from wells which depend on a high percentage of
recharge from polluted bodies of surface water. More
information is needed on the fate of such trace substances
as heavy metals and organic compounds in waters that are
infiltrated from rivers and lakes. Pesticides, for example,
can concentrate in bottom sediments of surface-water bodies,
and data are lacking on whether these substances can be
leached by surface waters induced into underlying aquifers.
In addition, many of these ground-water supply systems have
been in operation for many years. Conceivably, the ion
exchange and adsorptive capacities of the aquifer sediments
for removal of potential pollutants may be nearly exhausted.
Information is lacking on the ability of various types of
sediments to treat infiltrated surface water and the time
factors involved.
Health agencies in the region generally rely on maintaining
an arbitrary distance between the well supply and the
surface-water source as a safeguard against ground-water
contamination. Also, codes covering well construction call
for sealing the well against possible leakage of surface
water along the annular space outside the casing and require
the site to be protected against flooding from the nearby
stream. Pumping tests of up to five days are another
requirement, the purpose of which, theoretically, is to
provide enough data for determination of the effects of
infiltrated surface water on ground-water quality.
Because of the highly complex geologic and hydrologic
conditions that occur in the study area, especially in the
304
-------
carbonate-rock portion, these safeguards may not be adequate,
The ability for surface water to infiltrate to high-capacity
wells varies greatly from place to place. For example, a
uniform distance of 61 m (200 ft) for wells located near two
polluted streams of similar quality may be safe in one
instance but not in the other, depending on the percentage
of surface water infiltrated, the time of travel for a drop
of water to migrate from the bottom of the stream bed to the
well screen, and the ability of the sediments in the aquifer
to modify the quality of the surface water. Weeks, and in
some cases months, of pumping may be required for a
de tectable volume of infiltrated surface water to reach a
particular well. Only then can a proper judgment be made on
long-term water-quality relationships between surface water
and ground water.
Regulation of well development adjacent to streams should be
based on a more specific and technical analysis of hydraulic
and water-quality conditions at each particular site under
consideration. In some cases, ground-water supplies that
may be perfectly safe for public consumption are not being
developed because they do not meet arbitrary location
requirements set by regulatory agencies. At other sites,
the parameters are being met but may not be protective
enough.
HIGHWAY DEICING SALT
During the winter, highway departments in the northern part
of the southeast study area apply salts (sodium chloride and
calcium chloride) to roads to control or eliminate ice and
snow. In many states of the northeast, problems caused by
this practice have showed up, and there is an increasing
concern about the resulting environmental dangers posed to
vegetation, soil, and water supplies. Deicing salts con-
taminate surface runoff, ponds, streams, and ground water,
principally near roadside areas. Substances added to
deicing salts to prevent caking or to inhibit corrosion,
such as sodium ferrocyanide and phosphorous compounds, can
be extremely toxic to human, animal, and fish life.
No more effective, economical, and easily handled substances
for maintaining a dry pavement have been found than salts,
and particularly sodium chloride. Because of the relatively
low cost, excessive application frequently occurs. However,
only three of the seven southeastern states reportedly use
highway deicing salt on a regular basis. During the winter
of 1973-74 Virginia used 56,940 tonnes (62,723 tons), North
Carolina 16,413 tonnes (18,080 tons), and South Carolina
45.4 tonnes (50 tons).
305
-------
Runoff from road surfaces eventually finds its way into
streams and rivers within the drainage basin occupied by the
highway or percolates into the soils adjacent to the high-
way. The sodium, calcium, and chloride ions in the soil can
be carried down to the water table by the runoff water
itself or, during periods of recharge, by rainfall. Con-
taminated water can then move through the saturated zone
until it is discharged into a surface-water body, is leaked
into an adjacent aquifer, or is pumped from a well. Although
sodium and chloride ions can both move through the
unsaturated and saturated zones, sodium is chemically more
attracted to a wider variety of soil types. This character-
istic accounts for the relatively higher ratio of chloride
to sodium encountered in contaminated ground water than is
normally found in surface waters receiving direct runoff of
salt-laden waters.
Another source of ground-water contamination related to
salts used for highway deicing is the storage of this
material in piles at central distribution points. There are
numerous storage sites throughout the northern part of the
study region and, in autumn, each holds from several hundred
to several thousand tonnes of salt. The nature of rock salt
permits outside storage over relatively long periods of time
without hard caking or noticeable loss in volume. Thus,
many such salt piles are left uncovered on open land. This
condition is especially common where the salt has been mixed
with sand, resulting in a large volume of stored material
that would require an expensive structure if the pile were
to be sheltered.
Rain falling on the stockpile dissolves a portion of the
salts and can carry them into the ground-water system.
Typically, salt-spreading trucks are washed at storage
areas, and infiltration of the resulting brine solution into
the ground can aggravate the contamination problem. In some
cases, drainage from salt piles and wash areas is collected
and disposed of in dry wells. Thus, the pollutant is intro-
duced directly into the geologic formation underlying the
site.
After the pollutant has arrived at a domestic supply well or
has moved into a municipal well field, an attempt generally
is made to deepen the existing well, especially when the
aquifer consists of consolidated rocks. Another procedure
is to move farther away from the suspected source of contam-
ination and construct a new well on the same property.
Because chlorides are not considered toxic, casing off the
affected aquifer zone and drilling deeper, or moving away
from the source but tapping the same formation, are accepted
306
-------
as reasonable risks. However, even though initial chloride
concentrations at greater depths or at new locations are
low, the salty ground-water body is still present and may be
within the influence of pumping of any new well. Ultimately,
it too may have to be abandoned.
Case Histories
Although considerable amounts of highway deicing salts are
applied in the states of North Carolina and Virginia, no
evidence of contamination along roads was uncovered during
the course of the study. However, it is most probable that
such contamination is occurring.
In both North Carolina and Virginia, ground-water contam-
ination by chlorides originating from highway salt stock-
piles has occurred. Chloride levels rose to 1,320 mg/1 in a
well on the opposite side of a valley from a stockpile in
Haywood County, North Carolina.6!) A well located in
Goochland County, Virginia, contained 1,140 mg/1 chloride as
a result of seepage of dissolved salt from a stockpile.248)
In Dinwiddie County, Virginia, a well located 100 ft from
a salt stockpile had chloride concentrations ranging from
484 to 1,400 mg/1.249)
Future Trends
At the present time, there are no readily available,
economical substitutes for salt as a snow- and ice-control
substance. Therefore, it seems reasonable to assume that
its use will continue in the northernmost states of the
region, but probably not at the accelerated rate experienced
in the past. However, if maximum benefits from its use are
to be realized without causing excessive water pollution,
control is needed in the areas of salt handling, spreading
and application. Concerted efforts should be directed
toward correcting wasteful and improper salt handling or
application practices of major salt users such as highway
maintenance departments.
One of the first steps taken should be to inspect existing
and proposed salt storage sites to determine the pollution
potential of each site and to devise means of pollution
prevention or elimination if the inspections prove such
actions to be necessary. As a general rule, uncovered salt
storage piles should never be tolerated. Storage facilities
should always include a water tight pad strong enough to
support the weight of the salt and salt-handling equipment
and a waterproof system of ditches and sumps at the edge of
the storage pad to catch and hold for future use any brine
outflow.
307
-------
REFERENCES CITED
SECTION VI
1. Murray, C. R., and E. B. Reeves, "Estimated Use of
Water in the United States in 1970," U. S. Geological
Survey Circular 676, 1972.
2. Todd, D. K., "The Water Encyclopedia," Port Washington,
N. Y., Water Information Center, Inc., 1971.
3. Deutsch, Morris, "Ground-Water Contamination and Legal
Controls in Michigan," U. S. Geological Survey Water-
Supply Paper 1691, 1963.
4. Water & Petroleum Study Group, "Evaluation and Treat-
ment of Oil Spill Accidents on Land with a View to the
Protection of Water Resources," Bonn, West Germany,
Federal Ministry of the Interior, Second Edition,
December, 1970.
5. Gaun, G. R., and L. J. McCabe, "Review of the Causes of
Waterborne Disease Outbreaks," Journal American Water
Works Association, Vol. 65, No. 1, January 1973.
6. "Detailed Housing Characteristic 1970 Census of Housing,'
U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
7. Anonymous, "Drink Purified Sewage? No, Say Experts,"
Ground Water Age, August 1973.
8. Public Health Service, "Drinking Water Standards, 1962,"
U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1962.
9. Water Well Drillers in the Study Area, Personal
Communication, 1976.
•
10. Brunner, D. R., and D. J. Keller, "Sanitary Landfill
Design and Operation," U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1972.
11. Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, "Resource
Recovery and Waste Reduction," Third Report to Congress,
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, SW-161, 1975.
12. Mississippi Board of Water Commissioners, Personal
Communication, 1975.
308
-------
13. Alabama Water Improvement Commission, Personal Commun-
ication, 1976.
14. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental
Protection Division, Personal Communication, 1976.
15. Bureau of the Census, "1967 Census of Manufacturers
Water Use In Manufacturing," U. S. Department of
Commerce, 1971.
16. Environmental Protection Agency Technology Transfer,
"Handbook for Monitoring Industrial Waste Water,"
Washington, D. C., 1973.
17. Musgrove, R. H., J. T. Barraclough, and R. G. Grantham,
"Water Resources of Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties,
Florida," Florida Division of Geology, Report of In-
vestigations 40, 1965.
18. Trapp, H., Jr., U. S. Geological Survey, Personal
Communication, 1975.
19. Daniels, R. B., and others, "Nitrogen Movement in a
Shallow Aquifer System of the North Carolina Coastal
Plain," American Water Resources Association, Water
Resources Bulletin, Vol. 11, No. 6, pp. 1121-1130, 1975.
20. Reichert, S. 0., "Radionuclides in Ground Water at the
Savannah River Plant Waste Disposal Facilities,"
Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 67, pp. 4363-4374,
1962.
21. Warren, W. M., "Retention Basin Failures in Carbonate
Terranes," American Water Resources Association, Water
Resources Bulletin, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 22-31, 1974.
22. Pickering, S., Jr., State Geologist and Director,
Earth and Water Division, Georgia Department of Natural
Resources, Personal Communication, 1976.
23. Anon., "Exclusive Waste Age Survey of the Nation's
Disposal Sites," Waste Age, January, 1975.
24. Molz, F. J., S. R. Van Fleet, and V. D. Browning,
"Transpiration Drying of Sanitary Landfills," Ground
Water, Vol. 12, No. 6, pp. 394-398, 1974.
309
-------
25. Office of Water Supply, "The Report to Congress: Waste
Disposal Practices and Their Effects on Ground Water,"
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1975.
26. Emrich, G. H., "Guidelines for Sanitary Landfills -
Ground Water and Percolation," paper presented at En-
vironmental Conference on Research and Development on
Landfill Disposal of Solid Waste, Deerfield,
Massachusetts, October 24 - 28, 1970.
27. Mosher, D., U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Solid Waste Management, Personal Communica-
tion, 1976.
28. Schneider, J. J., "Effects on Water Quality in the
Shallow Aquifer due to the Operations of the Cross
State Dump, Palm Beach County, Florida," U. S. Geologi-
cal Survey Open-File Report 73011, 1973.
29. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic
Resources, Files.
30. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental
Protection Division, Files, 1972.
31. Georgia Department of Public Health, Files, 1972.
32. Pitt, W. A. J., Jr., "Effects of a Landfill Operation
on Ground-Water Quality in North Broward County,
Florida," U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
75-405, 1975.
33. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental
Protection Division, Personal Communication, 1976.
34. Doyle, F. L., and others, "Environmental Geology and
Hydrology, Huntsville and Madison County, Alabama,"
Geological Survey of Alabama, Atlas Series 8, 1975.
35. Florida Department of Pollution Control, Southeast
Regional Office, Personal Communication, 1975, and
Raw Data Generated by U. S. Geological Survey, Water
Resources Division, 1973.
36. "Landfills' Methane Threatens Public," Sarasota Herald-
Tribune, Sarasota, Florida, April 5, 1976.
310
-------
37. U. s. Environmental Protection Agency, "Compilation of
Industrial and Municipal Injection Wells in the United
States," Office of Water Program Operations, Oil and
Special Materials Control Division, Special Sources
Control Branch, EPA-520/9-74-020, 1974.
38. Faulkner, G. L, and C. A. Pascale, "Monitoring Regional
Effects of High Pressure Injection of Industrial Waste
Water in a Limestone Aquifer," Ground Water, Vol. 13,
No. 2, pp. 197-208, 1975.
39- Gardner, M. C., and C. E. Downs, "Evaluation of the
Project Dribble Site, Hattiesburg, Mississippi, for
Disposition Including Identification of Restrictions,"
NTIS: NVO-1229-145 (Part 1), 1971.
40. Kaufman, M. I., and D. J. McKenzie, "Upward Migration
of Deep-Well Injection Fluids in Floridan Aquifer,
South Florida," U. S. Geological Survey, Journal of
Research, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 261-271, 1975.
41. Kaufman, M. I., D. A. Goolsby, and G. L. Faulkner,
"Injection of Acidic Industrial Waste into a Saline
Carbonate Aquifer: Geochemical Aspects," in Braunstein,
J., Editor, Underground Waste Management and Artifi-
cial Recharge: Symposium, 2nd., New Orleans, Louisiana,
September 26-30, 1973, Preprints, Vol. 1, pp. 526-551,
1973.
42. Kaufman, M. I., "Subsurface Wastewater Injection,
Florida," American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal
of Irrigation and Drainage Division, Vol. 99, No. IRl,
Proceedings Paper 9598, pp. 53-70, 1973.
43. Peek, H. M., and R. C. Heath, "Feasibility Study of
Liquid-Waste Injection into Aquifers Containing Salt
Water, Wilmington, North Carolina," in Braunstein, J.,
Editor, Underground Waste Management and Artificial
Recharge: Symposium, 2nd., New Orleans, Louisiana,
September 26-30, 1973, Preprints, Vol. 2, pp. 851-875,
1973.
44. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Ocean Outfalls
and Other Methods of Treated Wastewater Disposal in
Southeast Florida," Final Environmental Impact State-
ment, EPA-Region IV, 1973.
45. Hendry, C. W., Jr., and C. R. Sproul, "Geology and
Ground-Water Resources of Leon County, Florida,"
Florida Division of Geology Bulletin No. 47, 1966.
311
-------
46. U. S. Energy Research and Development Administration,
"Long-Term Radiological Surveillance Program, Tatum
Dome Test Site, Hattiesburg, Lamar County, Mississippi,"
Nevada Operations Office, NVO-143, 1975.
47 Brown, J. D., and R. Forsythe, Bureau of Environmental
Health, Mississippi State Board of Health, Personal
Communication, 1975.
48. Vernon, R. 0., "The Beneficial Uses of Zones of High
Transmissivities in the Florida Subsurface for Water
Storage and Waste Disposal," Florida Bureau of Geology
Information Circular No. 70, 1970.
49. Lichtler, W. F., W. Anderson, and B. F- Joyner, "Water
Resources of Orange County, Florida," Florida Division
of Geology Report of Investigations No. 50, 1968.
50. Wood, W., U. S. Geological Survey, Winter Park, Florida,
Personal Communication, 1975.
51. Stoddart, T. L., Orange County Pollution Control
Department, Orlando, Florida, Personal Communication,
1975.
52. "Underground Dumps: Waste Disposal Wells, Once
Considered Safe, Now Seen as Polluters," Wall Street
Journal, New York, N. Y., May 21, 1970.
53. Lichtler, W. F., "Appraisal of Water Resources in
the East Central Florida Region," Florida Bureau of
Geology Report of Investigations No. 61, 1972.
54. U. S. House of Representatives, 93rd Congress, 1st
Session, "Safe Drinking Water Act-1973," Hearings
before the subcommittee on Public Health and Environ-
ment of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce, March 8 and 9, 1973, Serial No. 93-11, 1973.
55. Menke, C. G., E. W. Meredith, and W. S. Wetterfcall,
"Water Resources of Hillsborough County, Florida,"
Florida Geological Survey Report of Investigations
No. 25, 1961.
56. Faulkner, G. L., "Geohydrology of the Cross-Florida
Barge Ca_nal Area with Special Reference to the Ocala
Vicinity," U. S. Geological Survey Water-Resources
Investigations 1-73, 1973.
312
-------
57. Bingham, D., North Carolina State Highway Division,
Personal Communication, 1975.
58. Report to the Congress by the Comptroller General of
the United States, "Improvements Needed in the Land
Disposal of Radioactive Wastes - A Problem of
Centuries," 1976.
59. Environmental Emergencies Branch, "Monthly Statistical
Report," Environmental Protection Agency Region IV,
Atlanta, Georgia, 1975.
60. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic
Resources, Environmental Management Division, Enforce-
ment Section, Personal Communication and Files, 1975.
61. Vorhis, R. C., D. R. Rima, and L. F. Emmett, "Ground-
Water Contamination Southeastern States," U. S.
Geological Survey, Administrative Report, 1973.
62. Callahan, J. T., and H. E. Blanchard, Jr., "The Quality
of Ground Water, and Its Problems, In the Crystalline
Rocks of Georgia," Georgia Geological Survey Mineral
Newsletter, Vol. 16, Nos. 3-4, pp. 66-68, 1963.
63. Georgia Department of Environmental Protection, Water-
Quality Control Section, Industrial Waste Water Pro-
gram, Personal Communication, 1976.
64. Virginia Department of Health, Personal Communication,
1975.
65. McCollum, M. J., "Underground Accumulation of Refined
Gasoline—Savannah, Georgia," Georgia Geological Survey
Mineral Newsletter, Vol. 16, Nos. 3-4, pp. 81-86, 1963.
66. Geraghty & Miller, Inc., Private Consultant's Report,
1972.
67. "Minor Leaks Discovered in FPL Nuclear Fuel Pits,"
Miami Herald, Miami, Florida, March 14, 1976.
68. Baker, R., South Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control, Unpublished Report, 1974.
69. Virginia Water Control Board, Files.
70. The Ground Water Newsletter, Vol. 5, No. 8, 1976.
313
-------
71. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Atlanta,
Office of Water Programs, Water Supply Branch, Files.
72. South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental
Control, Division of Water Supply, Bureau of Special
Environmental Programs, Personal Communication, 1975.
73. "EPA Says Contamination From Kepone Plant Spreads,"
Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Sarasota, Florida, December
18, 1975.
74. Virginia State Water Control Board, Personal Communi-
cation, October, 1975.
75. Mississippi State Board of Health, Files.
76 Bailey, B. L. , and A. M. Malatino, "Contamination of
Ground Water in a Limestone Aquifer in the Stevenson
Area, Alabama," Geological Survey of Alabama, Circular
No. 76, 1971.
77. Westlund, C. W., Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources, Personal Communication, 1973.
78. Engineering and Technical Research Committee, "The
Migration of Petroleum Products in Soil and Ground
Water - Principles and Countermeasures," American
Petroleum Institute, 1972.
79. Water Resources Committee, "Guidelines for Chemical
Plants in the Prevention, Control, and Reporting of
Spills," Manufacturing Chemists' Association, Inc.,
1972.
80. Battelle Northeast, "Oil Spill Treating Agents - A Com-
pendium," American Petroleum Institute Committee for
Air and Water Conservation, 1970.
81. Scalf, M. R., V. L. Hauser, L. G. McMillion, W. J.
Dunlap, and J. W. Keeley, "Fate of DDT and Nitrate in
Ground Water," Federal Water Pollution Control Admin-
istration, and Soil and Water Conservation Division
of the Agricultural Research Service, 1968.
82. Walker, W. H., "Ground Water Nitrate Pollution in Rural
Areas," Ground Water, Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 19-22, 1974.
314
-------
83. Peele, T. C., and J. T. Gillingham, "Influence of
Fertilization and Crops on Nitrate Content of Ground
Water and Tile Drainage Effluent," Clemson University
Water Resources Research Institute Report No. 33, 1972.
84. Allison, F. E., "The Fate of Nitrogen Applied to Soils,"
Advances in Agronomy, 18:219-258, Academy Press, New
York, New York, 1966.
85. Gambrell, R. P., J. w. Gilliam, and S. B. Weed, "The
Fate of Fertilizer Nutrients as Related to Water Qual-
ity in the North Carolina Coastal Plain," University of
North Carolina Water Resources Research Institute
Report No. 93, 1974.
86. Jackson, W. A., and others, "Nitrate in Surface and
Subsurface Flow from a Small Agricultural Watershed,"
Journal of Environmental Quality, Vol. 2, No. 4,
pp. 480-482, 1973.
87. Wait, R. L. , "Source and Quality of Ground Water in
Southwestern Georgia," Georgia Geological Survey Infor-
mation Circular 18, 1960.
88. Hiltbold, A. E., B. F. Hajek, and G. A. Buchanan,
"Distribution of Arsenic in Soil Profiles after
Repeated Applications of MSMA," Weed Science, Vol. 22,
No. 3, pp. 272-275, 1974.
89. Hiltbold, A. E., and others, "Leaching of Picloram and
Nitrate in Two Alabama Soils," Auburn University, Agri-
cultural Experiment Station, Department of Agronomy
and Soils, Departmental Series No. 18, 1974.
90. LaFleur, K. S., G. A. Wojek, and W. R. McCaskill,
"Movement of Toxaphene and Fluometuron through Dunbar
Soil to Underlying Ground Water," Journal of Environ-
mental Quality, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1973.
91. Higer, A. L. , and M. C. Kolipinski, "Sources of
Pesticides in Florida Waters," U. S. Geological Survey
Open-File Report 70005, 1970.
92. Grantham, R. G., and C. B. Sherwood, "Chemical Quality
of Waters of Broward County, Florida," Florida Division
of Geology, Report of Investigations No. 51, 1968.
93. Williams, W. A., Pesticide Epidemiologist, North
Carolina Division of Health Services, Personal Communi-
cation and Files, 1975.
315
-------
94. Lewallen, M. J., "Pesticide Contamination of a Shallow
Bored Well in the Southeastern Coastal Plains," Ground
Water, Vol. 9, No. 6, pp. 45-49, 1971.
95. Coiner, D. , Virginia State Water Control Board, Personal
Communication, 1976.
96. McDermott, J. H., "The Home Ground-Water Supply Picture
as We See It," Ground Water, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 17-23,
1971.
97. Boggess, D. H., "Water-Supply Problems in Southwest
Florida," U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
68003, 1968.
98. Brown, D. W., and others, "Water Resources of Brevard
County, Florida," Florida Division of Geology, Report
of Investigations No. 28, 1962.
99. Florida Department of Natural Resources, "Report on
Water and Related Land Resources Availability and Use
in the St. Johns River Basin and Adjoining Coastal
Area," Florida Department of Natural Resources, 1970.
100. Brown, J. D., and J. McDonald, Mississippi Department
of Health, Personal Communication, 1975.
101. McCaskey, T. A., G. H. Rollins, and J. A. Little,
"Water Pollution by Dairy Farm Wastes as Related to
Method of Waste Disposal," Auburn University Water
Resources Research Institute Bulletin 18, 1973.
102. Chandler, R. V., Alabama Geological Survey, Personal
Communication, 1975.
103. Nordstedt, R. A., and others, "Multistage Lagoon Sys-
tems for Treatment of Dairy Farm Waste," Proceedings
International Symposium on Livestock Waste Management,
American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Publica-
tion PROC-271, 77, 1971.
104. Nordstedt, R. A., and L. B. Baldwin, "Lagoon Disposal
of Dairy Wastes in Florida," Proceedings National Dairy
Housing Conference, American Society of Agricultural
Engineers, Publication SP-01-73, 359, 1973.
105. Stewart, B. A., and others, "Nitrate and Other Water
Pollutants under Fields and Feedlots," Environmental
S_cience and Technology, Vol. 1, No. 9, pp. 736-739,
1967.
316
-------
106. Smith, G. E., "How Much is Agriculture to Blame?
Pollution Problems," Agricultural Nitrogen News, March-
April, 1968.
107. Keller, W. D., and G. E. Smith, "Ground-Water Contam-
ination by Dissolved Nitrate," Geological Society of
America Special Paper 90, pp. 47-59, 1967.
108. Miller, W. D., "Infiltration Rates and Ground Water
Quality Beneath Cattle Feedlots, Texas High Plains,"
Environmental Protection Agency Water Pollution Control
Research Series 16060 EGS 01/71, 1971.
109- U. S. Department of Agriculture, Statistical Reporting
Service, "Commercial Fertilizers," 1971, 1975 and
"Agricultural Statistics," 1972, 1973, 1974.
110. Grim, E. C., and R. D. Hill, "Environmental Protection
in Surface Mining of Coal," U. S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Office of Research & Development,
EPA-670/2-74-093, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1974.
111. U. S. Department of the Interior, "Surface Mining and
Environment," U. S. Department of the Interior, 1967.
112. National Field Investigations Center Denver, "Recon-
naissance Study of Radiological Pollution from Phosphate
Rock Mining and Milling," Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Enforcement, 1974 (revised).
113. Shearer, S. D., B. Smith, and D. E. Rushing, "Draft
Report on Radium-226 and Radon-222 Concentrations in
Central Florida Ground Waters (1966), appendix B in
"Reconnaissance Study of Radiological Pollution from
Phosphate Rock Mining and Milling," National Field
Investigations Center (Denver), Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Office of Enforcement, 1974 (revised).
114. "Phosphate Peril Upgraded," Tampa Tribune, Tampa,
Florida, February 27, 1976.
115. Bates, R. L., "Geology of the Industrial Rock and
Minerals," Dover Publication, N.Y., N.Y., pp. 178-201,
430-431, 1969.
116. Bureau of Mines, "Radiation Monitoring," U. S. Depart-
ment of the Interior, Denver, Colorado, 1971.
117. Habashi, F., "Uranium in Phosphate Rock," Montana Bureau
of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 52, 1970.
317
-------
118. Kennedy, R. H., "Recovery of Uranium from Low-Grade
Sandstone Ores and Phosphate Rocks," in Processing
of Low-Grade Uranium Ores, International Atomic Energy
Agency, Vienna, Austria, 1967.
119. Spalding, R. F., "The Contemporary Geochemistry of
Uranium in the Gulf of Mexico Distribution Province,"
Ph.D. Thesis, Texas A & M University, 1972.
120. Carroll, D., "Rainwater as a Chemical Agent of Geologic
Processes—A Review," U. S. Geological Survey Water-
Supply Paper 1535-G, 1962.
121. Hyde, L. W., "Acid Mine Drainage in Cane Creek Basin,
near Oakman, Walker County, Alabama," Geological Survey
of Alabama, Circular 64, 1970.
122. Butler, J. R., "Geology and Mineral Resources of York
County, South Carolina," South Carolina State Develop-
ment Board, Division of Geology, Bulletin 33, 1966.
123. Epps, S., "Source of Chlorides in Saltville Ponds and
Drainage from Olin Settling Ponds," Virginia State
Water Control Board, Internal Memorandum, 1973.
124. North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources,
"Fifth Biennial Report—July 1, 1966 to June 30, 1968,"
1968.
125. Hird, J. M., "Control of Artesian Ground Water in Strip
Mining Phosphate Ores, Eastern North Carolina,"
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical and Petro-
leum Engineers Transactions, Vol. 250, pp. 149-156,
1971.
126. Peek, H. M., "Effects of Large-Scale Mining Withdrawals
of Ground Water," Ground Water, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 12-
20, 1969.
127. North Carolina Department of Natural and Econgmic
Resources, Ground Water Section, "Status Report on
Ground Water Conditions in Capacity Use Area No. 1,
Central Coastal Plain, North Carolina," Ground Water
Bulletin 21, 1974.
128. Boatwright, B. A., Southwest Florida Water Management
District, Personal Communication, 1976.
129. U. S. Bureau of Mines, "Minerals Yearbook 1972," U. S.
Government Printing Office, pp. 50-65, 1973.
318
-------
130. "General Population Characteristics, 1970 Census of
Population," U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
Census.
131. Pitt, w. A. J., H. C. Mattraw, Jr., and H. Klein,
"Ground-Water Quality in Selected Areas Serviced by
Septic Tanks, Bade County, Florida," U. S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 75-607, 1975.
132. Bouma, J., and others, "Soil Absorption of Septic Tank
Effluent," University of Wisconsin, Soil Survey
Division, Information Circular No. 20, 1972.
133. Feth, J. H., "Nitrogen Compounds in Natural Water - A
review," Water Resources Research, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1966.
134. Smith, G. E., "Contribution of Fertilizers to Water
Pollution," Seminar on water pollution as related to
Agriculture, sponsored by University of Missouri and
Missouri Water Pollution Board, April 9, 1968, pp. 13-
28, 1968.
135. Miller, J. C. , "Nitrate Contamination of the Water-
Table Aquifer in Delaware," Delaware Geological Survey
Report of Investigations No. 20, 1972.
136. Miller, J. C., "Nitrate Contamination of the Water-
Table Aquifer by Septic-Tank Systems in the Coastal
Plain of Delaware," in Water Pollution Control in
Low Density Areas, Edited by W. J. Jewell and
R. Swan, University Press of New England, Hanover,
N. H., pp. 121-134, 1975.
137. Walker, W. A., and others, "Nitrogen Transformations
During Subsurface Disposal of Septic Tank Effluent in
Sands, I. Soil Transformations," Journal of Environ-
mental Quality, 2:475-480, 1973.
138. Walker, W. A., and others, "Nitrogen Transformations
During Subsurface Disposal of Septic Tank Effluent in
Sands, II. Ground-Water Quality," Journal of Environ-
mental Quality, 2:521-525, 1973.
139. Bouma, J., "Use of Soil for Disposal and Treatment of
Septic Tank Effluent," in Water Pollution Control in
Low Density Areas, Edited by W. J. Jewell and R. Swan,
University Press of New England, Hanover, N. H., pp.
89-94, 1975.
319
-------
140. Cressler, C. W., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources
of Gordon, Whitfield, and Murray Counties, Georgia,"
Georgia Geological Survey Information Circular 47, 1974.
141. Davis, B., and R. A. Stephenson, "Contamination of the
Rural Domestic Water Supply in Bartow County, Georgia,"
Georgia Academy of Science Bulletin, Vol. 28, No. 2,
p. 20, 1970.
142. Cressler, C. W., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Floyd and Polk Counties, Georgia," Georgia Geological
Survey Information Circular 39, 1970.
143. Sandhu, S. S., W. J. Warren, and P. Nelson, "Pollutant
Burden of Rural Drinking Water," a paper presented at
the Chemical Congress, Mexico City, Mexico, 1975.
144. Floyd, E. 0., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
the Monroe Area, North Carolina," North Carolina
Department of Water Resources, Ground-Water Bulletin 5,
1965.
145. Chemerys, J. C., "Effect of Urban Development on Qual-
ity of Ground Water, Raleigh, North Carolina," in U. S.
Geological Survey Research 1967: U. S. Geological
Survey Professional Paper 575-B, p. B212-B216, 1967.
146. Miller, D. W., F. A. DeLuca, and T. L. Tessier,
"Ground-Water Contamination in the Northeast States,"
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Environmental Protection Technology Series,
EPA-660/2-74-056, 1974.
147. Trapp, H., Jr., "Availability of Ground Water for
Public-Water Supply in the Pensacola Area, Florida,"
U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 72002 1972.
148. Geological Survey of Alabama, Water Resources Division,
Personal Communication, 1975.
149. McMaster, W. M., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
the Athens Area, Alabama," Geological Survey of Alabama,
Bulletin 71, 1963.
150. Graham Brothers, Inc., West End, North Carolina,
Personal Communication, 1976.
151. Hutchins, W. A., "Sewage Irrigation as Practiced in the
Western States", U. S. Department of Agriculture Tech-
nical Bulletin No. 675, 1939.
320
-------
152. Hutchins, W. A., "Municipal Waste Facilities in the
United States", U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Open-File Report, 1972.
153. Thomas, R. E., "An Overview of Land Treatment Methods",
Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation,
July, 1973, p. 1476-1484, 1973.
154. Reed, S. C., and others, "Waste Water Management by
Disposal on the Land", USA Cold Regions Research and
Engineering Laboratory (Hanover, New Hampshire),
Special Report No. 171, 1972.
]55. Pound, C. E., and R. W. Crites, "Waste Water Treatment
and Reuse by Land Application", Vol. II, Environmental
Protection Agency, August, 1973.
156. Christman, R. F., and others, "Assessment of the Effec-
tiveness and Effects of Land Disposal Methodologies of
Wastewater Management", U. S. Department of the Army,
Corps of Engineers, Wastewater Management Report 72-1,
1972.
157. Hartigan, J. P., Jr., "Land Disposal of Waste Water:
Processes, Design Criteria, and Planning Considera-
tions" , Georgia Institute of Technology, Environmental
Resources Center, Report No. ERC-1074, 1974.
158. Gilde, L., "A Spray Irrigation System for Treatment of
Cannery Wastes", Journal of Water Pollution Control
Federation, Vol. 43, p. 2011-2023, 1971.
159. McGauhey, P., and R. Krone, "Soil Mantle as a Wastewater
Treatment System", University of California (Berkeley),
SERL Report No. 67-11, 1967.
160. Godfrey, K. A., "Land Treatment of Municipal Sewage",
Journal of the American Society of Civil Engineers,
Vol. 43, No. 9, 1973.
161. Slack, L.J., "Hydrologic Environmental Effect of Sprayed
Sewage Effluent, Tallahassee, Florida", U. S. Geological
Survey Water-Resources Investigations 55-75, 1975.
162. Cherry, R. N., and others, "Hydrobiochemical Effects of
Spraying Waste-Treatment Effluent in St. Petersburg,
Florida" , iri proceedings 1973 Workshop Landspreading
Municipal Effluent and Sludge in Florida, p. 170-186,
1973.
321
-------
163. EPA, "Preliminary Assessment of Suspected Carcinogens
in Drinking Water—An Interim Report to Congress" ,
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Toxic Sub-
stances, June, 1975.
164. Jungclaus, R., Water Supply Branch, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region IV, personal communication,
1976.
165. Bower, R. F., Virginia State Water Control Board,
internal memorandum of Areas of Major Ground-Water
Contamination, James River Basin, 1975.
166. MacEwan, A., Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation, files, 1975.
167. LeGrand, H. E., "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Wilmington—New Bern Area", North Carolina Department
of Water Resources, Ground-Water Bulletin No. 1, 1960.
168. Williams, W. A., "Farmville Pesticide Fire—Report of
the Pesticides Program Investigation of F. S. Royster
Company Pesticide and Fertilizer Warehouse Fire and
Cleanup Operations", North Carolina Department of
Health, Division of Epidemiology, Pesticides Program,
unpublished report, 1971.
169. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic
Resources, Ground-Water Division, files, 1971-1975.
170. Krieger, R. A., J. L. Hatchett, and J- L. Poole,
"Preliminary Survey of the Saline-Water Resources of
the United States", U. S. Geological Survey Water
Supply Paper 1374, 1957.
171. Craun, G. F., and L. J. McCabe, "Review of the Causes
of Waterborne-disease Outbreaks," Journal of American
Water Works Association, Vol. 65, pp. 74-83, 1973.
172. Le Grand, H. E., "Chemical Character of Water.in the
Igneous and Metamorphic Rocks of North Carolina",
Economic Geology, Vol. 53, No. 2, pp. 178-189, 1958.
173. Newton, J. G., U. S. Geological Survey, Tuscaloosa,
Alabama, Personal Communication, 1975.
174. Newton, J. G., and Hyde, L. W., "Sinkhole Problem In
and Near Roberts Industrial Subdivision, Birmingham,
Alabama", Geological Survey of Alabama Circular No.
68, 1971.
322
-------
175. Powell, W. J., and P. E. La Moreaux, "A Problem of Sub-
sidence in a Limestone Terrane at Columbiana, Alabama",
Geological Survey of Alabama Circular No. 56, 1969.
176. Riccio, J. F., J. D. Hardin, and G. M. Lamb, "Develop-
ment of a Hydrologic Concept for the Greater Mobile
Metropolitan Area", Geological Survey of Alabama
Bulletin No. 106, 1973.
177. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Salt Water
Intrusion In The United States", Subsurface Environ-
mental Branch, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research
Laboratory, National Environmental Research Center,
1975.
178. Barraclough, J. T., and O. T. Marsh, "Aquifers and
Quality of Ground Water Along the Gulf Coast of Western
Florida," Florida Geological Survey Report of Inves-
tigation No. 29, 1962.
179. Musgrove, T. J., J. B. Foster, and T. G. Toler, "Water
Resources of the Econfina Creek Basin Area in North-
western Florida," Florida Geological Survey Report of
Investigations No. 41, 1965.
180. Leve, G. W., "Ground Water in Duval and Nassau Counties,
Florida," Florida Bureau of Geology Report of Inves-
tigations No. 43, 1966.
181. Tarver, G. R., "Interim Report of the Ground-Water
Resources of St. Johns County, Florida," Florida Bureau
of Geology Information Circular No. 14, 1958.
182. Bermes, B. J., "Interim Report on the Ground-Water
Resources of Flagler County, Florida," Florida Bureau
of Geology Information Circular No. 13, 1958.
183. Bermes, B. J., G. W. Leve, and G. R. Tarver, "Geology
and Ground-Water Resources of Flagler, Putnam, and
St. Johns Counties, Florida," Florida Division of
Geology Report of Investigations No. 32, 1963.
184. Wyrick, G. G., "The Ground-Water Resources of Volusia
County, Florida," Florida Geological Survey Report of
Investigations No. 22, 1960.
185. Barraclough, J. T., "Ground-Water Resources of Seminole
County, Florida," Florida Division of Geology Report
of Investigations No* 27, 1962.
323
-------
186. Florida Department of Natural Resources, "Report on
Water and Related Land Resources Availability and Use
in the St. Johns River Basin and Adjoining Coastal
Area," Florida Department of Natural Resources, 1970.
187. Bermes, B. J., "Interim Report on Geology and Ground-
Water Resources of Indian River County, Florida,"
Florida Geological Survey Information Circular No. 18,
1958.
188. Lichtler, W. F., "Ground-Water Resources of the Stuart
Area, Martin County, Florida," Florida Geological Sur-
vey Information Circular No. 12, 1957.
189. Land, L. F., H. G. Rodis, and J. J. Schneider, "Apprai-
sal of the Water Resources of Eastern Palm Beach
County, Florida," Florida Bureau of Geology Report of
Investigations No. 67, 1973.
190. Rodis, H. G., "Encroaching Salt Water in Northeast Palm
Beach County, Florida," Florida Bureau of Geology Map
Series No. 59, 1973.
191. McCoy, J., "Effects of the Feeder Canal on the Water
Resources of the Fort Lauderdale Prospect Well-Field
Area," U. S. Geological Survey Open File Report No.
73019, 1973.
192. Bearden, H. W., "Ground Water in the Hallandale Area,
Florida," Florida Bureau of Geology Information
Circular No. 77, 1972.
193. Grantham, R. G., and C. B. Sherwood, "Chemical Quality
of Waters of Broward County, Florida," Florida Division
of Geology Report of Investigations No. 51, 1968.
194. Meyer, F. W., "Preliminary Evaluation of Infiltration
from the Miami Canal to Well Fields in the Miami
Springs-Hialeah Area, Dade County, Florida," U. S.
Geological Survey Open File Report No. 72027, 19^72.
195. Reichenbaugh, R. C., "Sea-Water Intrusion in the Upper
Part of the Floridan Aquifer in Coastal Pasco County,
Florida," Florida Bureau of Geology Map Series No. 47,
1969, 1972.
196. "West Pasco's Water Salty," The Tampa Tribune, Tampa,
Florida, August 14, 1975.
324
-------
197. Heath, R. C., and P. c. Smith, "Ground Water Resources
of Pinellas County, Florida," Florida Geological Sur-
vey Report of Investigations No. 12, 1954.
198. Black, A. P., and others, "Salt Water Intrusion in
Florida-1953," Florida Division of Water Survey and
Research Paper No. 9, 1953.
199. Joyner, B. F., and H. Sutcliffe, Jr., "Salt-Water Con-
tamination in Wells in the Sara-Sands Area on Siesta
Key, Sarasota County, Florida," Journal American Water
Works Association, Vol. 59, No. 12, pp. 1504-1512, 1967.
200. Sutcliffe, H., Jr., "Appraisal of the Water Resources
of Charlotte County, Florida," U. S. Geological Survey
Open File Report No. 73010, 1973.
201. Sproul, C. R., D. H. Boggess, and H. J. Woodard,
"Saline-Water Intrusion from Deep Artesian Sources in
the McGregor Isles Area of Lee County, Florida,"
Florida Bureau of Geology Information Circular No. 75,
1972.
202. McCoy, H. J., "Ground-Water Resources of Collier
County, Florida," Florida Division of Geology Report
of Investigations No. 31, 1962.
203. Counts, H. B., and Donsky, E., "Salt-Water Encroach-
ment, Geology, and Ground-Water Resources of Savannah
Area, Georgia and South Carolina—A Summary," Georgia
Geological Survey, Georgia Mineral Newsletter, Vol. 12,
No. 3, 1959.
204. Me Collum, M. J., "Salt-Water Movement in the Principal
Artesian Aquifer of the Savannah Area, Georgia and
South Carolina," Ground Water, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 4-8,
1964.
205. Stewart, J. W., "Relation of Salty Ground Water to
Fresh Artesian Water in the Brunswick Area, Glynn
County, Georgia," Georgia Geological Survey Informa-
tion Circular No. 20, 1960.
206. Wait, R. L., "Interim Report on Test Drilling and Water
Sampling in the Brunswick Area, Glynn County, Georgia,"
Georgia Geological Survey Information Circular No. 23,
1962.
207. Gregg, D. 0., "Protective Pumping to Reduce Aquifer
Pollution, Glynn County, Georgia," Ground Water, Vol.
9, No. 5, p. 21-29, 1971. ~ ~
325
-------
208. Wait, R. L., and Gregg, D. 0., "Hydrology and Chloride
Contamination of the Principal Artesian Aquifer in
Glynn County, Georgia," Earth and Water Division,
Water Resources Survey of Georgia, Hydrologic Report 1,
1973.
209. Gregg, D. O., and Zimmerman, E. A., "Geologic and
Hydrologic Control of Chloride Contamination in Aquifers
at Brunswick, Glynn County, Georgia," U. S. Geological
Survey Water-Supply Paper 2029-D, 1974.
210. Shattles, D. E., J. A. Callahan, and W. L. Broussard,
"Water Use and Development in Jackson County,
Mississippi, 1964-1967," Mississippi Board of Water
Commissioners Bulletin 67-3, 1967.
211. Shattles, D. E., and Callahan, J. A., "Water-Level and
Water-Quality Trends in Aquifers Along the Mississippi
Gulf Coast," Mississippi Board of Water Commissioners
Bulletin 70-1, 1970.
212. Siple, G. E., "Salt-Water Encroachment of Tertiary
Limestones Along Coastal South Carolina," South
Carolina Development Board, Division of Geology,
Geological Notes, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1969.
213. Brown, G. A., and 0. J. Cosner, "Ground-Water Con-
ditions in the Franklin Area, Southeastern Virginia,"
U. S. Geological Survey, Hydrologic Investigations
Atlas HA-538, 1974.
214. Hendry, C. W., Jr., and J. A. Lavendar, "Final Report
on an Inventory of Flowing Artesian Wells in Florida,"
Florida Geological Survey Information Circular No. 21,
1959.
215. Boatwright, B. A., Southwest Florida Water Management
District, Personal Communication, 1975.
216. Callahan, J. T. , "Wild Flowing Wells Waste Watea»,"
Georgia Geological Survey, Georgia Mineral Newsletter,
Vol. 13, No. 1, 1960.
217. Boggess, D. H., "Water-Supply Problems in Southwest
Florida," U. S. Geological Survey Open File Report No.
68003, 1968.
218. Klein, H., M. C. Schroeder, and W. F. Lichtler,
"Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Glades and
Hendry Counties, Florida," Florida Division of Geology
Report of Investigations No. 37, 1964.
326
-------
219. Boggess, D. H., "The Effects of Plugging A Deep
Artesian Well on the Concentration of Chloride in Water
in the Water-Table Aquifer at Highland Estates, Lee
County, Florida," U. S. Geological Survey Open File
Report No. 73003, 1973.
220. Wahl, K. D. , "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Green County, Alabama," Geological Survey of Alabama
Bulletin No. 86, 1966.
221. Counts, H. B., and E. Donsky, "Salt-Water Encroachment
Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Savannah Area,
Georgia and South Carolina," U. S. Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 1611, 1963.
222. Downey, J., Alabama Bureau of Environmental Health,
Division of Public Water Supplies, Personal Communica-
tion, 1975.
223. D. S. Geological Survey, "The National Atlas of the
United States of America", U. S. Department of the
Interior, 1970.
224. Reid, G. W. and L. E. Streebin, "Evaluation of Waste
Waters from Petroleum and Coal Processing", Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Monitoring, EPA-R2-72-001, 1972.
225. Tucker, W. E., and R. E. Kidd, "Deep-Well Disposal In
Alabama", Geological Survey of Alabama, Bulletin No.
104, 1973.
226. Powell, W. J., L. F. Carroon, and J. R. Avrett, "Water
Problems Associated with Oil Production in Alabama",
Geological Survey of Alabama, Circular No. 22, 1963.
227. Powell, W. J., and others, "Water Resources Monitoring
and Evaluation, A Key to Environmental Protection in
Alabama Oil Fields", Geological Survey of Alabama,
Information Series No. 44, 1973.
228. Knowles, D. B., "Hydrologic Aspects of the Disposal of
Oil-Field Brines in Alabama", Ground Water, Vol. 3, No.
2, pp. 22-27, 1965.
229. Bicker, A. R., Jr. "Salt Water Disposal Wells in
Mississippi", Mississippi Geological, Economic and
Topographical Survey, 1972.
327
-------
230. Hodges, Q., State Oil and Gas Board, Personal Communi-
cation, 1975.
231. Mississippi Board of Water Commissioners, "The Ground-
Water Situation in Mississippi, 1973", A report to the
Mississippi Legislature, 1974.
232. Mississippi Geological, Economic and Topographic
Survey, Personal Communication, 1975.
233. May, J. H., and others, "Wayne County Geology and
Mineral Resources", Mississippi Geological, Economic
and Topographic Survey, Bulletin No. 117, 1974.
234. Shows, T. A., W. L. Broussard, and C. P- Humphreys, Jr.,
"Water for Industrial Development In Forrest, Green,
Jones, Perry and Wayne Counties, Mississippi",
Mississippi Research and Development Center, 1966.
235. Wait, R. L., and M. J. McCollum, "Contamination of
Fresh Water Aquifers Through An Unplugged Oil-Test Well
in Glynn County, Georgia", Georgia Geological Survey
Mineral Newsletter, Vol. 16, Nos. 3-4, 1963.
236. Florida Bureau of Geology, "Environmental Geology and
Hydrology, Tallahassee, Florida," Florida Bureau of
Geology, Special Publication No. 16, 1972.
237. "The Dying of a Lake", Tampa Tribune-Times, Tampa,
Florida, March 14, 1976.
238. Sartor, J. D., and G. B. Boyd, "Water Quality Improve-
ment Through Control of Road Surface Runoff," iri Water
Pollution Control in Low Density Areas; Edited by
W. J. Jewell and R. Swan, University Press of New
England, Hanover, N. H., pp. 301-316, 1975.
239- Snell, L. J., and W. Anderson, "Water Resources of
Northeast Florida," Florida Bureau of Geology Report of
Investigations No. 54, 1970.
240. Lamonds, A. G., "Chemical and Biological Quality of
Lake Dicie at Eustis, Florida," U. S. Geological Survey
Water-Resources Investigations 36-74, 1974.
241. Lichtler, W. F., "Appraisal of Water Resources in the
East Central Florida Region," Florida Bureau of Geology
Report of Investigations No. 61, 1972.
328
-------
242. "Wells Around Lake Grady About Back to Normal," Tampa
Times, Tampa, Florida, September 12, 1974.
243. Vandell, T., Southwest Florida Water Management
District, Personal Communication, 1976.
244. Meyer, F. W., "Reconnaissance of the Geology and
Ground-Water Resources of Columbia County, Florida,"
Florida Division of Geology, Report of Investigations
No. 30, 1962.
245. Breeding, N. K., Jr., Virginia State Water Control
Board, Personal Communication, 1976.
24-6. Fernstrom, J. , Georgia Department of Environmental
Protection, Personal Communication, 1976.
247. McMaster, W. M. , "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
the Athens Area, Alabama," Geological Survey of Alabama,
Bulletin No. 71, 1963.
248. Virginia Water Control Board, Files, 1974.
249. Virginia State Department of Health, Files, 1973.
329
-------
SECTION VII
RESEARCH AND OTHER NEEDS
GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION TRENDS
The ability to resolve ground-water contamination problems
comes from an awareness of the sources of contamination
resulting from man's past, present, and future activities.
Many of these problems become more difficult to resolve
because mode and range of human activities are considered
for the present only. There is an awareness of today's
activities because they are occurring now; there is less
awareness of past activities because the minor events of
man's existence are so poorly documented; there is a belief
that some future activities can be anticipated.
Past activities do come back to haunt us: leachates from
landfills constructed in the first half of the 20th century/-
nitrates and chlorides under old corrals and livery stables
of the late 1800's;l) phenols from seepage related to gas-
work plants operating in the early 1800"s;2) and hydrogen
sulfide from drainage of a seventeenth century Black Plague
burial pit.3) Future contamination resulting from today's
activities can be controlled by the foresight of today's
individuals. Thorough records, particularly of disposal
sites, need to be kept so that planners will be aware of
past land use. Additionally, researchers should attempt to
anticipate how future activities will cause ground-water
quality problems.
In the past, the approach toward solving problems has been
to apply corrective action after the contamination has been
discovered. In the future, foresight and imagination should
be used to locate and eliminate the potential causes of
contamination.
•
The increasing incidence of ground-water contamination is in
a large part controlled by a society which is both expanding
in population and in demand for materials and services. The
primary sources of contaminants will be those related to
waste disposal activities (domestic, municipal, and indus-
trial) .
330
-------
Population in the Southeast will grow faster than public
sewerage can serve each new dwelling. The result will be
more septic tanks, regardless of the potential for ground-
water contamination.
The number of industrial and municipal landfills will
increase, which today are under closer surveillance by state
environmental and health departments. Proper engineering
design should minimize leachate production from these sources
and reduce contamination potential.
According to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ment of 1972, discharge of toxic pollutants by industry will
be controlled by effluent standards set by the Environmental
Protection Agency, and industries must use the "best prac-
ticable" water-pollution control technology by July 1, 1977.
The result has been that industry is storing wastes in
surface impoundments rather than discharging them into
flowing surface water. Leakage from these surface impound-
ments is almost certain, and increased ground-water con-
tamination will result. This problem will be compounded by
the growing use of land disposal of waste waters by both
industry and municipalities.
Ground-water contamination related to increased underground
waste disposal will increase as this method of disposal
becomes more popular. Additionally, there will be a greater
volume of leaks and spills, although the percentage of total
volume actually lost or spilled should remain about the
same.
Mining of coal and phosphate, and associated contamination
will definitely increase. The extent and impact of contami-
nation by phosphate mining and processing is only little
known. It is likely that this will be an area of extensive
research over the next five years. Reworking of old tailings
will result in the removal of many minerals that could be
potential contaminants. The extraction of minerals from
deposits which are economically marginal at present-day
values will increase as demand for such minerals becomes
greater. This will result in new areas of contamination.
Drilling of deep exploratory oil and gas wells will probably
increase as will potential ground-water pollution from
improperly plugged holes. Brine handling and disposal
practices may cause aquifer contamination by surface spills
and by disposal in deep wells.
331
-------
Greater withdrawals of ground water in coastal areas, if
allowed, will result in increased salt-water encroachment.
Plugging of flowing wells may have long-term beneficial
effects by possibly countering salt-water encroachment in
some areas. Most states have regulations regarding the
plugging of abandoned wells; strict enforcement should favor
a decrease in contamination from this source. Additionally,
heavy pumping in karst areas may cause surface collapse and
subsidence, thereby allowing a wide variety of contaminants
to enter the fractures and cavernous carbonate aquifers.
Greater knowledge of the hydraulic connection between lakes
and aquifers will favor the preservation of the quality of
ground water. Improvements in surface-water quality should
lessen the chances of ground-water contamination from
surface waters that have moved downward in response to the
effects of pumping wells.
Increasing demand for food has caused a need for larger crop
yields per acre of land, which will result in larger appli-
cations (total and per acre) of fertilizers and pesticides.
Hopefully, the incidence of direct pesticide contamination
of wells will decrease with better public education and
proper training of termite and pest control personnel.
Expanding communities will require additional wells located
in areas formerly used for agricultural purposes. As in the
case of any area being considered for a well field, prior
land uses should be taken into account in order to antici-
pate potential contaminants already in or migrating toward
aquifers.
GENERAL RESEARCH NEEDS
Continued studies of the hydrogeologic framework in each
state, combined with background water-quality data and an
inventory of present and potential sources of contamination,
are needed to provide the basis for actions that can reduce
the number of problems in the future. Some areas are most
susceptible to ground-water contamination from land surface
sources; emphasis should be placed on evaluating these areas
first.
Not all states in the study area were represented by a case
history for each source of contamination in Section VI of
this report. Yet, hydrogeologic conditions throughout the
region are such that except for regionally limited activities
(mining, petroleum development, and the application of high-
way deicing salts, the potential for contamination is there
and agencies responsible for assessing and maintaining ground-
water quality should assume that contamination exists and
332
-------
should initiate programs to combat it. For every known
J-eachate-producing landfill and every known leaking impound-
ment, there are literally hundreds of others that are
contaminating ground water in a similar manner, but have not
ceen discovered because no water-quality samples were taken
from nearby wells.
Inventory of all actual and potential sources of ground-
water contamination is a practice that should be adopted by
each state within the region. Techniques, such as aerial
photography, remote sensing, and multispectral photography,
can be useful. Much scattered data already exist throughout
the files of many agencies: septic tank density data;
routes of buried pipelines; locations of present and some
abandoned mines and oil and gas wells; industrial sites with
a listing of products; patterns of distribution of fertilizer
and pesticide application; location of sewage and industrial
waste lagoons; and major centers of municipal pumping. The
last item is most important; in these areas of large ground-
water withdrawals, steps should be taken to protect the
water supplies. Finally, a review and analysis of presently
available ground-water quality data should be conducted to
locate water-quality degradation that has already taken
place.
Many ground-water contamination sources can be controlled to
limit the severity of the problem; salt-water intrusion can
be stopped by restricting pumpage; leakage from surface
impoundments can be halted by installing suitable lining,
and pollutants from spills can be removed by excavating
affected soils. However, contamination sources such as
existing landfills and the spreading of highway deicing
salts are more difficult to deal with.
A better understanding of the uses and purposes of moni-
toring wells is essential; they are not cures nor protective
devices. Placement of monitoring wells at test sites is
critical to the evaluation of potential contamination.
Inspection of many reports has revealed that the siting of
monitor wells was done with a lack of knowledge of the
ground-water system. Unfortunately, in these cases, the
conclusions derived are at best only partially correct.
These methods of monitoring and the conclusions drawn are
often published and later used to develop new systems that
are equally improper.
More detailed analyses of water samples obtained from wells
are needed; most include only non-toxic parameters. Con-
taminants affecting ground water come from such a wide
variety of sources that standard analyses do not truly
333
-------
assess ground-water quality. Selection of constituents for
analysis, should reflect local potential sources of contami-
nation and the most common contaminants associated with
them.
There appears to have been little or no follow-up on the
contamination events discussed as case histories in Section
VI. It is assumed that in the majority of the events,
unless contamination was massive or critical, little more
than a field inspection was conducted by the appropriate
state or local agency- Various questions should be asked
and appropriate actions taken: what needs to be done; what
was done; what caused the event; what should be done to
prevent a reoccurrence at the site or elsewhere; who was
affected by the contamination and, what was the economic
cost as a result of cleanup or loss of water supply due to
contamination?
Large national or state agencies seem unable to handle many
problems related to ground-water contamination because of a
lack of time to study the day-to-day individual local
situations. Yet, the public assumes that such agencies were
created to handle such problems. Often problems go unre-
solved except for the incidents which attract widespread
attention. It has been stated that this occurs because of
insufficient funding to provide the necessary staff; the
case may be that funding is adequate but the responsibility
and orientation of work is misdirected.
State and Federal agencies can serve to regulate overall
activities and solve large-scale problems, but should not be
expected to participate in the solution of local problems.
Their specialists should be available for advice and assis-
tance, but the resolution of most problems should be at the
regional and local levels. Local agencies (water districts,
river basin boards, or counties) are more aware of activ-
ities within their boundaries and in nearby areas.
Along similar lines, the public agency established to review
and comment on environmental impact statements is generally
staffed with people of limited experience. Thus, reports
often are not subjected to critical review by qualified
people. Many projects with the potential for ground-water
contamination are approved after improper evaluation. It
has been pointed out that "the continued application of such
studies can have several effects, including increased
prices for natural resources, a declining credibility for
environmental science and scientists; a reduction in the
overall quality of scientific personnel; and the degradation
of our natural resources, not as the result of the direct
334
-------
activities of industry and government, but because of the
ineffectual groping of environmental scientists."4)
Another subject that needs consideration is the economic and
social assessment of environmental regulations. It is
possible for quick judgements and too broad regulations to
have a greater adverse effect upon society than contamina-
tion of ground water. Socio-economic assessments should
consider future society, as well as the present, and the
needs of that society.
SPECIFIC NEEDS
Priorities for additional research and control of the
principal sources of ground-water contamination in the
Southeast are presented in Table 66. Some of these prob-
lems, such as salt-water encroachment and petroleum develop-
ment activities, were recognized long ago and have been
extensively researched and are generally presently controlled.
Other problems, such as landfills, septic tanks, and leaks
and spills, are in need of immediate research and control.
New problems, such as surface impoundments, underground
storage, and land disposal of waste waters, require antic-
ipatory research and control. Specific needs for additional
research, regulation, and control of each source are item-
ized below.
Surface Impoundments
1. Evaluate surface impoundments as a means of treat-
ment of municipal and industrial wastes in the
Southeast versus their potential for causing
ground-water quality degradation. Research into
soil adsorption-absorption processes and the
potential for renovation of the various fluids
from the major industries: paper and allied
products; petroleum and coal products; primary
metals, and chemicals and allied products.
2. Prepare inventories of existing surface impound-
ments, obtain information on the character of
materials being stored, and determine lining
conditions and volumes of wastes discharged.
Inventories of surface impoundments and public
supply wells should be correlated with each other
to anticipate possible contamination problems.
Approval of future surface impoundments should be
considered according to their pollution potential
and proximity to water-supply wells.
335
-------
Table 66. PRINCIPAL SOURCES OF GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION
AND THE PRIORITY FOR ADDITIONAL RESEARCH AND
CONTROL IN THE SOUTHEAST.
Sources Research Control
Surface Impoundments I I
Landfills (urban & industrial) I I
Underground Storage of Waste
Fluids & Surplus Water I I
Leaks & Spills I I
Agricultural Activities II II
Mining Activities II I
Septic Tanks I I
Land Disposal of Waste Waters I I
Miscellaneous Sources II II
Ground-Water Development II II
Petroleum Development Activities III II
Natural Bodies of Surface Water II II
Highway Deicing III III
I - High
II - Moderate
III - Low
336
-------
3. Assess hydrogeological conditions of each pro-
posed, existing, and abandoned surface impoundment
area to evaluate potential contamination of ground
water.
4. Monitor ground-water quality in the vicinity of
surface impoundments and determine liquid losses
to the ground-water system from surface impound-
ments .
5. Develop long-life impervious liners that are
better able to withstand attack by impounded
material.
6. Research into the treatment required for the
various fluids escaping from surface impoundments
in which recovery by wells is necessary -
Landfills
1. Prepare industrial and municipal landfill inven-
tories and review the hydrogeologic and physical
conditions at each inactive, existing, and planned
landfill site to determine possible threats to
ground-water quality- Inventory wells located
near landfill sites and establish stricter
monitoring of the water quality in these wells.
2. Modify existing guidelines governing the siting
and design of new landfills as new research
findings are brought forth.
3. Increase monitoring of the ground-water quality in
the immediate vicinity of landfills. Establish
ground-water flow patterns to determine if monitor-
ing wells are properly located.
4. Staff state agencies with hazardous waste sections
to deal with such problems. At the end of FY
1975, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi and South
Carolina were staffed in such a manner.
5. Define, in each state, hazardous materials by cri-
teria and not name (i.e., define what constitutes
toxicity, explosiveness, etc.). In this manner
all wastes are classifiable and can be better
controlled.
337
-------
6. Require anyone involved with the generation,
transport, and disposal of hazardous waste to
submit reports on the nature, volume and destination
of the specific materials. These data would
provide information on the ultimate fate of
hazardous materials.
7. Require pre-treatment of hazardous waste before
landfilling when feasible.
8. Enforce regulations prohibiting disposal of toxic
wastes in municipal landfills unless approved by
a regulatory agency based on site conditions and
type of disposed materials.
9. Control industrial disposal sites located on
private properties. Many states have little or no
control.
10. Increase research into the use and composition of
clay and synthetic liners, methods of leachate
collection, and processes for treatment of
leachate.
11. Increase research on methane gas buildup and elim-
ination of the explosion hazard of such gas gen-
eration by proper venting techniques.
Underground Storage of Waste and Surplus Waters
1. Determine areas that are geologically and hydro-
logically suitable for underground storage of
liquid wastes.
2. Assess, in greater detail, the impact on ground-
water quality of discharge of excess surface
waters and urban storm runoff into drainage wells.
3. Research further into the chemical and biologic
reactions between the injected fluids and th'e
receiving fluids and rock. Attention should be
given to pressure buildup resulting from gas
generation due to breakdown of organics in municipal
and industrial waste waters by organisms contained
in the receiving waters.
4. Intensify local investigation and data collection
for site approval.
338
-------
5. Assess the effect of pressure buildup and possible
reversal of hydraulic gradient in waste injection
zones utilized by many injectors.
6. Continue research into the various methodologies
available for recharge of treated municipal wastes
into shallow and deep aquifers.
7. Research the legal aspects of requiring the
injector to pay a fee based in part on the design
and type of waste storage site and in part on the
volume of waste injected. This fund should
accumulate until the site is abandoned by the
industry. And, in order to protect the public
from the cost of long-term maintenance should the
site be abandoned before sufficient funds are
available to care for it, injectors could execute
a performance bond, the amount of which decreases
as the long-term care fund grows.
Leaks and Spills
1. Set up guidelines for reporting spills and initi-
ating clean-up operations to reduce the threat to
ground-water quality. Establish public information
programs to change attitudes and publicize the
reason for reporting spills and to whom the spills
should be reported.
2. Establish regulatory task force systems to investi-
gate spills and supervise cleanup.
3. Formulate a more detailed field breakdown of
spills to show what is spilled, what portion is
recovered from the ground or stream, and how much
remains in the ground-water system (potentially or
actually) and the surface-water body.
4. Evaluate soil and ground-water conditions along
oil, gas and mining product pipelines to assess
potential hazard from spills or pipeline breaks,
with consideration given to the use of liners in
excavations containing buried pipelines and stor-
age tanks bearing substances that can readily
degrade or contaminate ground water.
5. Enforce good housekeeping and handling procedures
at sites where toxic pollutants and highly miner-
alized waters can affect ground-water quality.
339
-------
6. Improve efficiency of monitoring of potential
fluid losses, and regulate reporting of tank and
pipeline failures.
7. Institute controls and training in hydrocarbon and
hazardous material product transferral, transport,
storage and cleanup.
8. Regulate closely the disposal of used oil from
service stations and monitoring of gasoline and
underground tanks.
9. Increase research into ways to remove hydrocarbons
from unconsolidated and rock aquifers and methods
of chemical or biological breakdown of hydro-
carbons .
10. Increase research of the effects of leaky sanitary
and storm sewers on ground-water quality.
Agricultural Activities
1. Investigate the effects of the application of
fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides in urban
areas on ground-water quality. The public should
be made more aware of the potential for ground-
water contamination from improper use of pesti-
cides.
2. Research further the fate of contaminants from
application of fertilizers and pesticides in soils
overlying recharge zones of regional aquifers.
3. Inventory feedlots and review hydrogeologic con-
ditions at existing and planned feedlot sites to
assess the possible danger of ground-water contam-
ination.
4. Evaluate the effect of the use of low-quality
irrigation waters on watertable aquifers.
5. Control animal waste lagoons strictly. Determine
the sealing or clogging of various soils by organics
generated by the lagoons. Consideration should be
given to the use of artificial liners where it is
obvious that natural sealing will not occur.
6. Prepare fertilizer and pesticide application maps
(rate and type) to assess potential impact on
ground water.
340
-------
7. Increase control over persons licensed to apply
insecticides for termite and insect control.
Personnel in this field need to be made more aware
of the potential for ground-water contamination.
Training programs should be expanded to include
this subject, and they should be assisted by
guidelines prepared by soils scientists and hydro-
geologists.
Mining Activities
1. Continue research into the control of acid mine
drainage, and minimizing leachate from mine tail-
ings by such methods as: grading, revegetation,
and surface and subsurface drainage of the dis-
turbed mining areas.
2. Expand research in the field of mineral beneficia-
tion processes to reduce mineral content in tail-
ings, thus cutting back on potential groundwater
contamination. Assess the impact of reworking
tailings piles.
3. Conduct an inventory of surface and ground-water
quality prior to commencement of new mining
operations, with an assessment of the impact on
ground- and surface-water resources. Studies
should also include a definition of the local
hydrologic framework and occurrence and movement
of ground water.
4. Research and define ground-water contamination
from surface and subsurface mining of different
minerals.
5. Inventory old mining sites that may serve as
sources of ground-water contamination. Many of
these sites will be overgrown, but will serve as a
means of evaluating the time needed for contam-
inant levels to decline from the levels observed
around active or recently active mines.
Septic Tanks
1. Improve or modify the septic-tank system to pro-
vide greater treatment of nutrients and other
effluent constituents.
2. Develop criteria for determining septic tank
feasibility and proper density in various geologic
and hydrologic settings.
341
-------
3. Research the possibility of additional on-site
tests, supplementing the percolation test, to
assess the potential for ground-water contam-
ination. Utilization of oxidation-reduction
potential (ORP) measurement of ground water
underlying a proposed site may be one additional
test.
4. Require regional hydrogeologic reports providing
such data as depth to bedrock, major joint
patterns, soils conditions, and aquifer charac-
teristics, to assist in evaluation of permit
applications for septic system where large-scale
development is proposed.
5. Consider requiring a developer to provide either,
a) public water and septic tanks, or b) private
wells and public sewers.
6. Enforce a ban on discharge of hazardous wastes to
septic-tank systems at industrial sites.
Land Disposal of Waste Waters
1. Continue evaluation of guidelines presently used to
control site selection and the type of waste
tolerated where municipal and industrial effluent
is applied to the land.
2. Avoid standardizing methods. Individual site
evaluation by a multi-disciplinary group should be
undertaken to avoid ground-water contamination
problems. The assessment of the site suitability
and design requires the interaction of geologists,
sanitary engineers, hydraulic engineers and
hydrologists, agronomists and soil scientists,
land planners, water resource planners, and social
planners.
3. Increase monitoring of the effects on ground-water
quality at existing sites where treated seWage is
being disposed of on the land.
4. Supervise and properly maintain active waste
disposal sites. This will require trained per-
sonnel, with the ability to anticipate problems.
342
-------
5. Continue research into loading rates (application)
of different waste fluids to different types of
soils, and assess impact of renovated water on
ground-water quality.
Miscellaneous Sources
1. Establish emergency task forces composed of a
multi-disciplinary group that would be available
to assist in resolving unforeseen contamination
events.
2. Explore the possibility of training programs in
each state that utilize existing, or proposed,
hazardous materials personnel. Training should be
by means of hypothetical contamination events or
scenarios, attempting to devise the best cleanup
procedures in the shortest amount of time.
Ground-Water Development
1. Control the plugging and/or capping of abandoned
and flowing wells more effectively.
2. Require the development of multiple aquifers in
different zones to be subject to review and regu-
lation.
3. Control well siting and construction practices
more uniformly and effectively.
4. Continue control in the coastal region over diver-
sion of ground water in areas susceptible to salt-
water intrusion.
5. Research the effects of heavy pumping in karst
regions. Study collapse and associated contam-
ination from the point of withdrawal and consider
the need to inventory potential contaminant
sources prior to extensive development in such
areas.
6. Require an environmental impact statement for any
large ground-water development.
7 Continue licensing well drillers, on an individual
and corporate basis. A licensed driller should be
at any job site during periods of active well
construction or development.
343
-------
8. Evaluate rules covering the distance from a well
to a potential source of contamination. They are
often old rules based on generalized or rule-of-
thumb practices without knowledge of hydrologic
and geologic controls of ground-water occurrence
and movement. In many cases the distance is too
little, and in some cases too great.
Petroleum Development Activities
1. Determine further the extent of ground-water
quality degradation from petroleum exploration and
development activities, including those relating
to leaky oil and gas wells, surface impoundments,
leaky tanks, etc.
2. Enforce the plugging of abandoned wells using
procedures that will actually prevent the inter-
aquifer exchange of pollutants.
3. Require filing records of locations of abandoned
oil wells, geologic and geophysical holes, together
with relevant subsurface and construction details
at state environmental agencies, to be available
for consultation in the event of a contamination
problem in a particular area.
4. Consider joint state and industry programs for
selecting abandoned wells for conversion to
ground-water monitoring wells.
5. Prohibit the practice of brine disposal through
the annulus between the surface casing and the
production casing. Such an operation favors
corrosion of surface casings and the introduction
of brines into fresh-water aquifers.
6. Supervise the plugging and abandonment of petro-
leum exploration and development holes which might
be done more efficiently by environmental agencies
than by oil and gas boards.
Natural Bodies of Surface Water
1. Research the possible presence of toxic substances
in infiltrated water supplies.
2. Research the ability, over the long term, of
natural sediments to reduce .concentrations of
heavy metals and organic compounds in waters that
infiltrate from rivers, lakes, and canals.
344
-------
3. Review and evaluate the guidelines presently used
by hydrogeologists to determine the safety of
inducing infiltrated surface water toward wells.
4. Institute studies related to collapse of sinkhole
lakes and introduction of contaminants into
aquifers.
5. Inventory lakes receiving, intentionally or acci-
dentally, treated sewage wastes and other poten-
tial ground-water contaminants.
6. Research the hydraulic relationship between lakes
and the various types of aquifers, giving con-
sideration to contaminant movement.
7. Improve surface-water quality, if necessary,
wherever surface-water bodies, contribute quanti-
ties of water to the ground-water system as a
result of pumping by wells.
Highway Deicing Salt
1. Assess the extent of ground-water contamination by
highway deicing salts along the major transporta-
tion routes in the northern parts of the region.
2. Adopt practices to prevent leaching of salt from
salt-storage areas.
345
-------
REFERENCES CITED
SECTION VII
Pettyjohn, W. A., "Good Coffee Water Needs Body," in
Water Quality in a Stressed Environment, ed. W. A.
Pettyjohn, Burgess Publishing Company, (Minneapolis),
1972.
Wood, E. C., "Pollution of Ground Water by Gasworks
Waste," in. Proceedings Society of Water Treatment
and Examination, 11:32-33, 1962.
Nash, G. J. C., "Discussion of Paper by E. C. Wood," in
Proceedings Society of Water Treatment and Examination,
11:33, 1962.
Schindler, D. W., "The Impact Statement Boondoogle,"
Science, Vol. 192, No. 4239, p. 509, 1976.
346
-------
SECTION VIII
APPENDIX A - GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Adsorptive Capacity - Physical limit of adhesion of mole-
cules of gases, or of ions or molecules in solution, to the
surfaces of solid bodies with which they are in contact.
Aerobic - Living or active only in the presence of oxygen.
Alkalinity - A measure of the power of a solution to neutra-
lize hydrogen ions expressed in terms of an equivalent
amount of calcium carbonate. Alkalinity is caused by the
presence of carbonate, bicarbonates, silicates, phosphates,
and organic substances.
Alluvium - Clay, silt, sand, gravel, or other rock materials
transported by flowing water and deposited in comparatively
recent geologic time as sorted or semi-sorted sediments in
riverbeds, estuaries, floodplains, and in fans at the base
of mountain slopes.
Anaerobic - Living or active in the absence of free oxygen.
Annular Space (Annulus) - The space between casing or well
screen and the wall of the drilled hole or between casings
of different diameters.
Aquifer - A geologic formation, group of formations, or part
of a formation that is water yielding.
Artesian - The occurrence of ground water under greater than
atmospheric pressure.
Artesian (Confined) Aquifer - An aquifer overlain by confin-
ing beds and containing water under artesian conditions.
Base Flow - The flow of streams composed solely of ground-
water discharge.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) - A measure of the dissolved
oxygen consumed by microbial life while assimilating and
oxidizing the organic matter present in water.
Borehole - An uncased drilled hole.
Brackish Water - Water containing dissolved minerals (1,000
to 10,000 mg/1) in excess of acceptable potable water
standards, but less than that of sea water.
347
-------
Brine - A highly mineralized (usually greater than 100,000
mg/1) solution, especially of chloride salts.
Casing - Steel or plastic pipe or tubing that is welded or
screwed together and lowered into a borehole to prevent
entry of loose rock, gas, or liquid or to prevent loss of
drilling fluid into porous, cavernous, or fractured strata.
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) - The amount of oxygen, expressed
in milligrams per litre, consumed under specific conditions
in the total oxidation of organic and oxidizable inorganic
matter in waste water, corrected for the influence of
chlorides.
Chemical Water Quality - The nature of water as determined
by the concentration of chemical constituents.
Coliform Group - Group of several types of bacteria, some of
which (fecal) are found in the alimentary tract of warm-
blooded animals. Fecal coliform are often used as an indi-
cator of animal and human contamination of water.
Concentration - The weight of solute dissolved in a unit
volume of solution.
Cone of Depression - The depression, approximately conical
in shape, that is formed in a water-table or potentiometric
surface when water is removed from an aquifer.
Confining bed - A saturated, but poorly permeable bed,
formation, or group of formations that impedes ground-water
movement and does not yield water freely to a well or
spring. However, a confining bed may transmit appreciable
water to or from adjacent aquifers, and where sufficiently
thick, may constitute an important ground-water storage
unit. Used synonymously with aquiclude and aquitard.
Connate Water - Water that was deposited simultaneously with
the sediments, and has not since then existed as surface
water or as atmospheric moisture.
Consumptive Use - That part of the water withdrawn that is
no longer available because it has been either evaporated,
transpired, incorporated into products and crops, or other-
wise removed from the immediate water environment.
Contamination - The degradation of natural water quality as
a result of man's activities, to the extent that its useful-
ness is impaired. There is no implication of any specific
limits, since the degree of permissible contamination depends
upon the intended end use, or uses, of the water.
348
-------
Crystalline Rock - A general term for igneous and metamorphic
rocks as opposed to sedimentary rocks.
Curie - The quantity of any radioactive material giving 3.7
xlOTO disintegrations per second. A picocurie is one
trillionth (10~12) of a curie, or a quantity of radioactive
material giving 2.22 disintegrations per minute.
Degradable - Capable of being decomposed, deteriorated, or
decayed into simpler forms with characteristics different
from the original. Also referred to as biodegradable when
readily decomposed by organisms.
Degradation of Water Quality - The act or process of re-
ducing the level of water quality so as to impair its original
usefulness.
Drainage Well - A well that is installed for the purpose of
draining swampy land or disposing of storm water, sewage, or
other waste water at or near the land surface.
Drawdown - The lowering of the water table or piezometric
surface caused by pumping or artesian flow.
Effluent - A waste liquid, in its natural state or partially
or completely treated, that discharges into the environment.
Evapotranspiration - The combined processes of evaporation
from land, water, and other surfaces, and transpiration by
plants.
Fall Line - A line joining the waterfalls on a number of
successive rivers that marks the point where each river
descends from the upland (Piedmont) to the lowland (Coastal
Plain).
Feedlot - A relatively small, confined land area for raising
and fattening cattle.
Greensand - A sedimentary deposit consisting, when pure, of
grains of the mineral glauconite.
Ground Watery - Water beneath the land surface in the
saturated zone that is under atmospheric or artesian pressure.
The water that enters wells and issues from springs.
Ground-Water Reservoir - The earth materials and the inter-
vening open spaces that contain ground water.
349
-------
Grout - To fill, or the material filling, the space around
the pipe in a well, usually between the pipe and the drilled
hole. The material is ordinarily a mixture of Portland
cement and water.
Hardness - A property of water caused by the presence of
calcium and magnesium, which is reflected in the amount of
soap necessary to form suds and produces incrustation in
appliances and pipes when the water is heated. It is
expressed as an equivalent amount of calcium carbonate.
Hazardous Waste - Any waste or combination of wastes (which
pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human
health or living organisms) whose properties include flamma-
bility, evolution of toxic or irritating vapors, contact
irritation, or human or animal toxicity.
Heavy Metals - Metallic elements, including the transition
series, which include many elements required for plant and
animal nutrition in trace concentrations, but which become
toxic at higher concentrations. Examples are: mercury,
chromium, cadmium, and lead.
Hydraulic Conductivity - The quantity of water that will
flow through a unit cross-sectional area of a porous material
per unit of time under a hydraulic gradient of 1.00 at a
specified temperature.
Hydraulic Gradient - The change in static head per unit of
distance along a flow path.
Igneous Rock - Rock formed by the solidification of molten
material that originated within the earth.
Infiltration - The flow of a liquid into soil or rock
through pores or small openings.
Injection Well (Disposal Well) - A well used for injecting
fluids into an underground stratum.
Ion Exchange - Reversible exchange of ions absorbed on a
mineral or synthetic polymer surface with ions in solution
in contact with the surface. In the case of clay minerals,
polyvalent ions tend to exchange for monovalent ions.
Iron Bacteria - Bacteria capable of oxidizing ferrous iron
to ferric iron as part of their metabolic process.
350
-------
Karst - A limestone plateau marked by sinks, or karst holes,
interspersed with abrupt ridges and irregular protuberant
rocks, usually underlain by caverns and underground streams.
Lagoon - A shallow pond, usually man-made, to treat or store
municipal or industrial waste water.
Leachate - The liquid that has percolated through solid
waste or other man-emplaced medium and has extracted dis-
solved or suspended material from it.
Lignite - A brownish-black coal in which the alteration of
vegetal material has proceeded further than in peat but not
so far as sub-bituminous coal.
Lysimeter - An instrument for measuring the water percolating
through soils and determining the materials dissolved by the
water.
Metamorphic Rock - A rock which has been altered by heat or
intense pressure, causing new minerals to be formed and new
structures in the rock.
Milligrams Per Litre - The weight in milligrams of any
substance contained in one litre of liquid. Approximately
equivalent to parts per million when the liquid is water.
Mineralization - Increases in concentration of one or more
constituents as the natural result of contact of ground
water with geologic formations.
Nonpoint Source - A source from which the contaminant enters
the receiving water in an intermittent and/or diffuse manner.
Nutrients - Compounds of nitrogen, phosphorus, and other
elements essential for plant growth.
Organic - Being, containing, or relating to carbon compounds,
especially in which hydrogen is attached to carbon, whether
derived from living organisms or not; usually distinguished
from inorganic or mineral.
Oxidation - A chemical reaction in which there is an increase
in positive valence resulting from a loss of electrons; in
contrast to reduction.
Percolation - Movement under hydrostatic pressure of water
through unsaturated interstices of rock or soil.
351
-------
Permeability - A measure of the capacity of a porous medium
to transmit fluid.
Piezometric Surface - The surface defined by the levels to
which water under artesian conditions will rise in tightly
cased wells. Also called potentiometric surface.
Plume - A body of contaminated ground water originating from
a specific source and influenced by such factors as the
local ground-water flow pattern, density of contaminant, and
character of the aquifer.
Point Source - Any discernible, confined and discrete con-
veyance,including but not limited to any pipe, ditch,
channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container,
rolling stock, or concentrated animal feeding operation from
which contaminants are or may be discharged.
Pollutants - Substances that may become dissolved, suspended,
absorbed or otherwise contained in water, and impair its
usefulness.
Pollution - The degradation of natural water quality, as a
result of man's activities, to the extent that its usefulness
is impaired.
Pore - An open space in rock or soil.
Porosity - The relative volume of the pore spaces between
mineral grains in a rock as compared to the total rock
volume.
Primary Treatment (Sewage) - The removal of larger solids by
screening, and of more finely divided solids by sedimentation.
Recharge - The addition of water to the ground-water system
by natural or artificial processes.
Reduction - A chemical reaction in which there is a decrease
in positive valence as a result of gaining of electrons^.
Runoff - Direct or overland runoff is that portion of rainfall
which is not absorbed by soil, evaporated or transpired by
plants, but finds its way into streams as surface flow.
That portion which is absorbed by soil and later discharged
to surface streams is ground-water runoff.
Salt-Water Intrusion (or Encroachment) - Movement of salty
ground water so that it replaces fresh ground water.
352
-------
Saturated Zone - The zone in which interconnected interstices
are saturated with water under pressure equal to or greater
than atmospheric.
Sedimentary Rock - Rocks formed by the accumulation of
sediment.
Sludge - The residue resulting from waste-water treatment
which also produces a liquid stream (effluent).
Solution Channels (holes or cavities) - Fractures, joints,
bedding planes, or other planar openings in soluble rocks,
such as limestones which have been enlarged, particularly at
intersections of these planes, by moving, slightly acid
ground water.
Sorption - A general term used to encompass processes of
adsorption, absorption, desorption, ion exchange, ion
exclusion, ion retardation, chemisorption, and dialysis.
Specific Conductance - The ability of a cubic centimetre of
water to conduct electricity; varies directly with the
amount of ionized minerals in the water.
Subsidence - Surface caving or distortion brought about by
collapse of deep mine workings or cavernous carbonate forma-
tions, or from overpumping of certain types of aquifers.
Surface Water - That portion of water that appears on the
land surface, i.e., oceans, lakes, rivers.
Toxicity - The ability of a material to produce injury or
disease upon exposure, ingestion, inhalation or assimilation
by a living organism.
Transmissivity - The rate at which water is transmitted
through a unit width of an aquifer under a unit hydraulic
gradient.
Unsaturated Zone (Zone of Aeration; - Consists of interstices
occupied partially by water and partially by air, and is
limited above by the land surface and below by the water
table.
Upconing - The upward migration of ground water from under-
lying strata into an aquifer caused by reduced hydrostatic
pressure in the aquifer as a result of pumping.
Water Quality - Pertaining to the chemical, physical and
biological constituents found in water and its suitability
for a particular purpose.
353
-------
Water Table - That surface in an unconfined ground-water
body at which the pressure is atmospheric. It defines the
top of the saturated zone.
Water-Table Aquifer - An aquifer containing water under
atmospheric conditions.
Weathered Zone - Thickness of rock which has been subjected
to a group of processes, such as the chemical action of air
and rain water, of plants and bacteria, and the mechanical
changes resulting from temperature fluctuations, whereby
rock on exposure to the weather changes in character, decays,
and finally crumbles into soil.
354
-------
SECTION VIII
APPENDIX B - ABBREVIATIONS
10b
109
1CT6
acre-ft
bbl
bgd
BOD
Ca
CaC03
Ci
Cl
cm
C02
COD
cu cm
cu ft
cu hm
cu m
F
ft
g
gal
gpd
gpm
ha
hm
in
kg
km
1
Ib
1/s
m
mCi
mgd
mg/1
mi
ml
mm
N
NH3
N02
NO3
NO -N
million
billion
millionth
acre-foot
barrel (oil or brine, 42 gal)
billion gallons per day
Biochemical oxygen demand
calcium
calcium carbonate
curie
chloride
centimetre
carbon dioxide
chemical oxygen demand
cubic centimetre
cubic foot
cubic hectometre
cubic metre
fluoride
foot
gram
gallon
gallons per day
gallons per minute
hectare
hectometre
inch
kilogram
kilometre
litre
pound
litre per second
metre
millicurie
million gallons per day
milligrams per litre
mile
millilitre
millimetre
nitrogen
ammonia
nitrite
nitrate
nitrate nitrogen
355
-------
OH - hydroxide
pCi - picocurie
PC>4 - phosphate
ppb - parts per billion
ppm - parts per million
psi - pounds per square inch
Ra - radium
Rn - radon
s - second
sq cm - square centimetre
sq ft - square foot
sq m - square metre
sq km - square kilometre
sq mi - square mile
TDS - total dissolved solids
TOC - total organic carbon
yd - yard
yr - year
°C - degrees Celsius
°F - degrees Fahrenheit
yg/1 - micrograms per litre
356
-------
SECTION VIII
APPENDIX C - CONVERSION FACTORS
Basic Metric Units
metre measures length
gram measures mass
litre measures volume
Metric Prefixes
megi
kilo
hecto
deka
deci
To convert
centimetres
cubic metres
1,000,000
1,000
100
cubic hectometres
per day
cubic metres per
second
10
0.1
centi
milli
micro
nano
pico
grams
hectares
kilograms
kilograms per square
centimetre
into
inches
cubic feet
gallons
barrels
billion gallons
per day
million gallons
per day
million gallons
per day
cubic feet
per second
pounds
acres
pounds
pounds per
square inch
0.01
0.001
0.000001
0.000000001
0.000000000001
Multiply by
0.3937
35.31
264.2
6.29
0.2642
264.2
4.386 x 10~2
2.833 x 10~2
2.205 x 10~3
2.471
2.205
14.22
357
-------
To convert
kilometres
litres
litres per second
metres
micrograms per litre
milligrams per litre
millimetres
square centimetres
square kilometres
square metres
tonnes
into
miles (statute)
gallons
cubic feet
per second
gallons per
minute
acre-feet
per day
feet
parts per billion
parts per million
inches
square inches
acres
square miles
square feet
tons (short)
-2
Multiply by
0.621
0.2642
3.53 x 10
15.85
7.042 x 10~2
3.281
1.0
1.0
3.937 x 10~2
0.155
247.1
0.3861
10.76
1.10
358
-------
SECTION VIII
APPENDIX D - WATER-QUALITY STANDARDS
The levels of mineralization or contamination which can be
tolerated in ground water are dependent upon the intended
use for the supply. Recommended water-quality standards are
available for agricultural, industrial, and public-supply
needs. Certain chemical constituents can be tolerated
through a wide range of concentrations without adverse
effects even in stringent cases requiring excellent water
quality, while other constituents can be acceptable only at
a minute levels or not at all. The water-quality standards
for any particular use are varied and in most cases well
documented. It is evident that to list each and every guide-
line is beyond the scope of this report.
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency has National
Interim Primary Drinking Water Standards for certain constit-
uents and is currently in the process of updating the 1962
Public Health Service recommended limits for others. The
new standards and the 1962 recommended limits are shown in
the following two tables.
359
-------
U. S. PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE CHEMICAL STANDARDS OF
DRINKING WATER, 1962.
Recommended maximum allowable concentrations
where other more suitable supplies are, or
can be made available:
Substance
Alkyl Benzene Sulfonate (ABS)
Arsenic (As)
Chloride (Cl)
Copper (Cu)
Carbon Chloroform Extract (CCE)
Cyanide (CN)
Iron (Fe)
Manganese (Mn)
Phenols
Sulfate (SO A)
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
Zinc (Zn)
Concentration in mg/1
0.5
0.01
250
1
0.2
0.01
0.3
0.05
0.001
250
500
5
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL
INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS,
DECEMBER, 1975.
Maximum contaminant level which shall
constitute grounds for outright
rejection of the supply:
Substance
Arsenic (As)
Barium (Ba)
Cadmium (Cd)
Total Chromium (Cr)
Fluoride (F)
Lead (Pb)
Mercury (Hg)
Nitrate (as N)
Selenium (Se)
Silver (Ag)
Concentration in mg/1
0.05
1
0.01
0.05
1.4 to 2.4a)
0.05
0.002
10
0.01
0.05
a)
Varies with annual average of maximum daily air
temperature.
360
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
_EPAz600/3-77-012
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSI ON> NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
GROUND-WATER POLLUTION PROBLEMS IN THE
SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
5. REPORT DATE
January 1977 issuing dat
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
John C. Miller, Paul S. Hackenberry, and
Frank A. DeLuca
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Port Washington, New York
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1BA609
11050
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-2193
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Robert S. Kerr Environ. Research Lab.-Ada, OK
Office of Research & Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ada, Oklahoma 74820
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/15
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
An evaluation of principal sources of ground-water contamination
has been carried out in seven southeastern States--Alabama, Florida,
Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia.
Natural ground-water quality is good to excellent, except for the
presence of saline water in some coastal aquifers. Principal sources
of man-caused ground water quality problems in order of severity are:
surface impoundments, landfills, underground storage of waste fluids
and surplus water, leaks and spills, agricultural activities, mining
activities, and septic tanks.
This investigation indicates that the cases of ground-water
contamination recorded to date and referenced in this report represent
only a very small percentage of those that actually exist.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Ground Water (*); Pollution (*);
Aquifers; Water Quality;
Water Supplies.
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
13 B
3. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to public.
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21 . NO. OF PAGES
379
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
361
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1977-757-056/560lt Reg ion No. 5-11
------- |