United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA-910-R-12-003 I www.epa.gov
Relation Between Nitrate
in Water Wells and Potential
Sources in the Lower Yakima
Valley, Washington
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
List of Tables iv
List of Figures vi
List of Appendices vi
Acronyms/Abbreviations ix
Acknowledgements xii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES-1
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. PURPOSE AND SCOPE 2
III. BACKGROUND 3
IV. NITROGEN CYCLE 5
V. STUDY AREA 5
A. Western Study Area - The Toppenish Basin 6
B. Eastern Study Area- The Benton Basin 6
C. Geology, Hydrogeology, and Geochemistry of the Study Area 7
VI. THREE STUDY PHASES 9
A. Phase 1: Geographic Information System (GIS) Tool Development and Screening
Analysis for Nitrogen Sources 10
1. Dairies 10
2. Irrigated Cropland 12
3. Septic Systems and Wastewater 12
4. Conclusion and Other Sources 13
B. Phase 2: Identification of Wells with High Nitrate Concentrations 13
C. Phase 3: Investigating Source Contributions to High Nitrate Concentrations in Drinking
Water Wells 14
1. Phase 3 Sampling Locations 16
VII. PHASE 3: COMPOUNDS AND ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES 18
A. General Chemistry 20
1. Nitrate and Other Forms of Nitrogen 20
2. Major Ions 21
3. Minor and Trace Inorganic Elements 21
4. Perchlorate 21
B. Microbiology 22
C. Organic Compounds 22
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
1. Pesticides 23
2. Trace Organics 23
3. Wastewater and Veterinary Pharmaceuticals 24
4. Hormones 26
D. Isotopic Analysis 28
E. Age Dating 29
VIII. QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL 30
IX. ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 30
A. R&M Haak Dairy 31
1. Haak Dairy: General Chemistry 36
2. Haak Dairy: Microbiology 38
3. Haak Dairy: Organic Compounds 39
4. Haak Dairy: Isotopic Analyses 42
5. Haak Dairy: Age Dating 43
6. Haak Dairy: Summary of Results for Residential Water Wells 44
B. Dairy Cluster 47
1. Dairy Cluster: General Chemistry 54
2. Dairy Cluster: Microbiology 56
3. Dairy Cluster: Organic Compounds 57
4. Dairy Cluster: Isotopic Analysis 62
5. Dairy Cluster: Age Dating 63
6. Dairy Cluster: Summary of Results for Residential Water Wells 64
C. Irrigated Cropland 68
1. Irrigated Cropland: General Chemistry 70
2. Irrigated Cropland: Microbiology 70
3. Irrigated Cropland: Organic Compounds 70
4. Irrigated Cropland: Isotopic Analyses 72
5. Irrigated Cropland: Age Dating 73
6. Irrigated Cropland: Summary of Results for Residential Wells 74
D. Residential Septic Systems 76
1. Septic Systems: General Chemistry 76
2. Septic Systems: Microbiology 77
3. Septic Systems: Organic Compounds 77
4. Septic Systems: Isotopic Analysis 80
5. Septic Systems: Age Dating 80
6. Septic Systems: Summary of Results for Residential Water Wells 81
iii
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
E. Water Wells WW-18 and WW-30 83
X. STUDY LIMITATIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES 84
XI. CONCLUSIONS 84
XII. REFERENCES 89
LIST OF TABLES
Table ES-1 :Overview of the Study Design to Investigate Suspected Sources of Nitrate in Water Wells
Near Dairies, Irrigated Cropland, and Septic Systems ES-11
Table ES-2: Summary of the Chemical Groups and Media Included in Phase 3 of the Study ES-12
Table 1: Overview of the Study Design to Investigate Potential Sources of Nitrate in Water Wells Near
Dairies, Irrigated Cropland, and Septic Systems 15
Table 2: Summary of the Chemical Groups and Media included in Phase 3 of the Study 19
Table 3: Wastewater Pharmaceuticals Analyzed and a Description of their Uses 24
Table 4: Veterinary Pharmaceuticals Analyzed and their FDA Approved Uses 25
Table 5: Hormonally Active Compounds Analyzed and Descriptions of their Origins and Current FDA
Approved Uses 27
Table 6: Haak Dairy - Approximate Numbers of Dairy Cattle, Annual Manure Production, and Annual
Nitrogen Production 32
Table 7: Haak Dairy - Lagoon System Surface Area, Storage Capacity, and Estimated Leakage Rate .... 33
Table 8: Haak Dairy - Washington State Department of Agriculture Inspection Dates and Reported
Values for Lagoon Capacity 34
Table 9: Haak Dairy - Distribution of Total Nitrogen in Wells, Lagoons, a Manure Pile, and an
Application Field 37
Table 10: Haak Dairy- Concentrations of Barium and Zinc in Wells and Lagoons 38
Table 11: Haak Dairy - Concentrations of Atrazine in Wells, a Manure Pile, and an Application Field .. 39
Table 12: Haak Dairy - Concentrations of Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons, a Manure Pile, and an
Application Field 41
Table 13: Haak Dairy - Concentrations of Testosterone in Wells, Lagoons, a Manure Pile, and an
Application Field 42
Table 14: Haak Dairy - Concentration of Nitrate in Wells, Isotopic Signatures, and the Interpreted
Dominant Source of the Nitrate 43
Table 15: Haak Dairy - Results of Age Dating Analyses Performed For Wells Reported in Years Since
the Water Infiltrated from the Surface to the Aquifer 43
Table 16: Haak Dairy - Comparisons of General Chemistry and Organic Compounds Detected in Wells
and Dairy Operations and Assessment of Nitrate Sources in the Residential Wells Using Isotopic
Analyses 45
IV
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Table 17: Dairy Cluster - Approximate Numbers of Dairy Cattle, Annual Manure Production, and Annual
Nitrogen Production 49
Table 18: Dairy Cluster - Lagoon System Surface Area, Storage Capacity, and Approximate Leakage
Rate 50
Table 19: Dairy Cluster - Washington State Department of Agriculture Inspection Dates and Reported
Values For Lagoon Capacity 52
Table 20: Dairy Cluster - Distribution of Total Nitrogen in Wells, Dairy Lagoons, Manure Piles, and
Application Fields 55
Table 21: Dairy Cluster - Concentrations of Five Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons, Manure
Piles, and Application Fields 58
Table 22: Dairy Cluster - Concentrations of Four Hormones in Wells, Lagoons, Manure Piles, and
Application Fields 61
Table 23: Dairy Cluster - Concentration of Nitrate in Water Wells, Isotopic Signatures, and the
Interpreted Dominant Source of the Nitrate Based on the Observed Values 62
Table 24: Dairy Cluster - Results of Age Dating Analyses Performed For Wells Reported in Years Since
the Water Infiltrated from the Surface to the Aquifer 63
Table 25: Dairy Cluster - Comparisons of Major Ions and Organic Compounds Detected in Samples from
Wells and Dairy Operations and Assessment of Nitrate Sources in the Wells Using Isotopic Analyses
65
Table 26: Irrigated Cropland -Well Sample Locations and Associated Soil Samples, Crop Types and Soil
Types 68
Table 27: Irrigated Cropland - Crop Field History and Fertilizer Use 69
Table 28: Irrigated Cropland - Concentrations of Nitrogen in Soil Samples Collected from Mint, Corn,
and Hop Fields Near Wells WW-23 to WW-28 70
Table 29: Irrigated Cropland - Concentrations of Atrazine and Bentazon in Wells WW-23 to WW- 28 and
in Nearby Crop Soil Samples 71
Table 30: Irrigated Cropland - Concentration of Nitrate in Wells, Isotopic Signatures, and the Interpreted
Dominant Source(s) of the Nitrate Based on Observed Values 73
Table 31: Irrigated Cropland - Results of Age Dating Analyses Performed for Wells Reported in Years
Since the Water infiltrated from the Surface to the Aquifer 73
Table 32: Irrigated Cropland - Comparisons of Organic Compounds Detected in Samples from Wells and
Croplands and Assessment of Nitrate Sources in the Wells Using Isotopic Analyses 75
Table 33: Septic Systems - Concentrations of Veterinary Pharmaceutical Detected in Wells and WWTP
Influents 78
Table 34: Septic Systems - Hormone Concentrations in Wells and WWTP Influents 79
Table 35: Septic Systems - Concentration of Nitrate in Wells, Isotopic Signatures, and the Interpreted
Dominant Source(s) of the Nitrate Based on Observed Values 80
Table 36: Septic Systems - Results of Age Dating Analyses Performed for Wells Reported in Years Since
the Water Infiltrated from the Surface to the Aquifer 81
Table 37: Septic Systems - Comparisons of Organic Compounds Detected in Wells and WWTP Influent,
and an Assessment of Dominant Source(s) of Nitrate in the Wells Based on Isotopic Analyses 82
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Table 38: WW-18 and WW-30 - Summary of Results Related to Nitrate Concentrations, Microbiology
Evaluation, Detected Organic Compounds, Isotopic Analysis, and Age Dating Analysis 83
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Conceptual Site Model for Lower Yakima Valley Project
Figure 2: Nitrogen Cycle
Figure 3: Study Area for EPA Lower Yakima Valley Project
Figure 4: Hydrogeology of Toppenish Basin
Figure 5: Hydrogeology of Benton Basin
Figure 6: Nitrogen Generated by Major Sources in Yakima County
Figure 7: Lower Yakima Valley Dairy Locations
Figure 8: Lower Yakima Valley Crop Inventory
Figure 9: Lower Yakima Valley Septic System Distribution
Figure 10: Lower Yakima Valley Phase 2 Nitrate Sampling Locations and Results
Figure 11: Lower Yakima Valley Phase 3 Sampling Locations
Figure 12: Haak Dairy: Total Nitrogen in Water Wells, Lagoons, Manure Piles, and Application Field
Samples
Figure 13: Haak Dairy: Concentration of Major Ions in Water Wells and Lagoons
Figure 14: Dairy Cluster: Dairy Property Boundaries
Figure 15: Dairy Cluster: Total Nitrogen Concentrations in Water Wells, Lagoons, Manure Piles, and
Application Fields
Figure 16a: Dairy Cluster: Calcium and Chloride Concentrations in Water Wells and Lagoons
Figure 16b: Dairy Cluster: Magnesium and Potassium Concentrations in Water Wells and Lagoons.
Figure 16c: Dairy Cluster: Sulfate and Sodium Concentrations in Water Wells and Lagoons
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Water Well Information
Table Al: Phase 3 - Water Well Information
VI
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Figure Al: Phase 3 - Relationship between Water Well Depth and Nitrate Concentrations
Figure A2: Phase 3 - Relationship between Water Well Depth and Age Dating Data
Appendix B: Surface Soil Characteristics of the Study Area
Appendix C: Data Summary Tables
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Analytical Results
Table C2: Phase 3 Summary of Sampling and Laboratory Analyses
Table C3: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrogen Compounds in Wells, Lagoons and Wastewater
Treatment Influents
Table C4: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrogen Compounds in Manure Piles and in Application Fields
and Crop Soils
Table C5: Comparison of Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrate Levels in Wells
Table C6: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Major and Minor Ions and Trace Inorganic Elements in Wells,
Dairy Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Table C7: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Perchlorate in Wells
Table C8: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Total Coliform, E. Coll, Fecal Coliform, and Microbial Source
Tracking in Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells, Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop
Soils
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment
Plant Influents
Table Cl 1: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons, Manure Piles,
Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons, Manure Piles,
Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Table C13: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons, Manure Piles, Dairy
Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Influents, and Crop Soils
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons, Manure Piles, Application
Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Table C15: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Isotopic Analyses in Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater
Treatment Plant Influents
Table C16: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Sulfur Hexafluoride Age Dating in Wells
vii
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Appendix D: Details on the Isotopic Analytical Results of the Study
Table Dl: Phase 3 Concentrations of Ammonium, and Isotopic Signatures in Dairy Lagoons,
Table D2: Phase 3 Nitrate Concentrations, Isotopic Signatures, and Interpreted Dominant Source(s) of
Nitrate in Wells
Table D3: Phase 3 Isotopic Signatures, and Nitrogen Enrichment in Wastewater Treatment Plants
Appendix E: Quality Assurance and Quality Control
Table El: Phase 3 - Deviations from the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)
Table E2: Phase 3 - Chemical Analyses Conducted and Analytical Methods Used by the EPA's
Manchester Environmental Laboratory
Table E3: Phase 3 - Chemical Analyses Conducted and Analytical Methods Used by the University of
Nebraska - Lincoln Water Science Laboratory
Appendix F: Dairies and Nitrogen
Appendix G: Irrigated Crops in the Yakima Valley
Figure Gl: Yakima Valley - Irrigation Type for Crops with Over 15,000 Acres
Figure G2: USDA Survey of Methods Used to Determine When to Irrigate Crop Fields
Vlll
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS
Ada - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Center in Ada,
Oklahoma
AOAC - Association of Analytical Communities
CARE - Community Action for a Renewed Environment
CFC - chlorofluorocarbon
CHRP - Center for Hispanic Health Promotion
DEHP - bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
DOH - Washington State Department of Health
DQO - data quality objective
Ecology - Washington State Department of Ecology
EJ - environmental justice
EPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FDA - U.S. Food and Drug Administration
GIS - Geographic Information System
GPS - Global Positioning System
"J" data qualifier - Compound was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an
estimate.
LG - dairy lagoon
MCL - maximum contaminant level
MDL - method detection limit
MEL - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Manchester Environmental Laboratory
mg/L - milligrams per liter
MST - microbial source tracking
NCEC - Northwest Communities Education Center
NRCS - Natural Resources Conservation Service
ng/g - nanograms per gram
ng/L - nanograms per liter
N2 - nitrogen gas
14N- nitrogen 14
15N-nitrogen 15
NH4 - ammonium
NO2~- nitrite
NO3" - nitrate
ND - not detected
NS - not sampled
ix
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
NMP - nutrient management plan
NWQL - USGS National Water Quality Laboratory
ORD - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development
PCB - polychlorinated biphenyls
ppm - parts per million
QA/QC - quality assurance/quality control
QAPP - Quality Assurance Project Plan
QC - quality control
"R" data qualifier - The data are unusable for all purposes
RARE - Regional Applied Research Effort
REDOX - oxidation/reduction potential
SDWA - Safe Drinking Water Act
SF6 - sulfur hexafluoride
SMOW - Standard Mean Ocean Water
SOP - standard operating procedure
TKN - total Kjeldahl nitrogen
"U" data qualifier - The analyte was not detected at or above the reported result.
(ig/kg - micrograms per kilogram
(ig/L - microgram per liter
UG - upgradient
"UJ" data qualifier - The analyte was not detected at or above the reported estimated result. The
associated numerical value is an estimate of the quantitation limit of the analyte in the sample.
UNL - University of Nebraska - Lincoln Water Sciences Laboratory
U.S.C. - United States Code
USDA - U.S. Department of Agriculture
USGS - U.S. Geological Survey
VIRE - Valley Institute for Research and Education
WSDA - Washington State Department of Agriculture
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
XI
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report was initiated as part of an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Regionally Applied
Research Effort (RARE) project with additional support from EPA's regional and national Office of
Compliance and Enforcement, including the Environmental Justice Showcase Community pilot program.
The report was prepared by EPA Region 10's Office of Environmental Assessment with assistance from
Region 10's Offices of Water and Watersheds, Regional Counsel, Ecosystems, Tribal, and Public Affairs,
Compliance and Enforcement and EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory at the Robert
S. Kerr Environmental Research Center in Ada, Oklahoma.
We would like to acknowledge the following individuals who provided an independent third party review
of the report: David Tarkalson, PhD, U.S. Department of Agriculture; Stephen Kraemer, PhD, US EPA
Office of Research and Development; Megan Young, PhD, U.S. Geological Survey; and Lorraine
Edmond, U.S. EPA Region 10.
xn
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
Xlll
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Several investigations relating to nitrate contamination in the Lower Yakima Valley in Washington State
have been conducted over the last 30 years. These studies have repeatedly shown nitrate levels in
drinking water above the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maximum contaminant level
(MCL) of 10 mg/L. Nitrate contamination in groundwater is primarily a health risk for rural populations
who rely on private wells for drinking water.
From February through April 2010, EPA conducted sampling of drinking water wells and potential
sources of nitrate contamination in the Lower Yakima Valley, which is in Yakima County in central
Washington State. The Yakama Reservation composes a large percentage of the Lower Yakima Valley.
EPA's effort entailed collecting over 331 samples from residential drinking water wells for nitrate and
bacteria, and multi-parameter sampling on 29 water wells (26 residential drinking water wells and three
dairy supply wells), 12 dairy lagoons (15 samples), 11 soil samples (five at dairy application fields and
six at irrigated and fertilized crop fields1), five dairy manure pile samples, and three wastewater treatment
plant (WWTP) influent samples. This report presents the results of these sampling efforts.
Purpose and Scope
The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the contribution from various land uses to the high
nitrate levels in groundwater and residential drinking water wells, which is the predominant source of
drinking water for many residents in the Lower Yakima Valley.
The study included sampling of residential drinking water wells, dairy supply water wells, and three
sources of nitrate: dairies; irrigated cropland; and residential septic systems. In addition to nitrate and
other forms of nitrogen, EPA analyzed samples for a variety of chemicals to evaluate whether chemicals
other than nitrate can be used to identify likely sources of the nitrate contamination in the groundwater
and drinking water wells.
EPA analyzed samples for chemicals that were expected to be associated with one or more of the sources.
These included pharmaceuticals (both veterinary and human medications), personal care products,
steroids and hormones, pesticides and herbicides, as well as other indicators of water quality such as total
nitrogen and major ions such as chloride and calcium.
EPA also used microbial analysis to determine whether the water wells, lagoons and WWTP influent
samples exhibited fecal contamination. If the samples were found to have fecal contamination, then
microbial source tracking (MST) was performed to identify the source of the fecal contamination (in this
case, human or ruminant). Isotopic analysis of water wells was conducted to identify the possible origin
of the nitrate in water wells. Age dating analysis on the well samples was conducted to estimate the time
since water infiltrated to the aquifer.
1 In this report, "application field" refers to fields owned or leased by the dairies and "crop field" or "irrigated cropland" refers to
fields owned or leased by other farmers. Both application fields and crop fields could receive applications of manure and/or
synthetic fertilizer.
ES-1
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
The Yakima Basin is a watershed of great diversity in climate, vegetation, and land use. More than 30
percent of the Yakima Basin is forested, 30 percent is sage-steppe rangeland, and 28 percent is in
agricultural production (USGS 2009). This investigation focused on a portion of the Yakima Basin
referred to as the Lower Yakima Valley. This broad valley is bounded by basalt ridgelines to the north
and south, the Cascade Mountains to the west, and encompasses two counties (Yakima and Benton) and
the million-acre Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation Reservation (Yakama
Reservation). The study area includes portions of the Toppenish Basin (western area) and the Benton
Basin (eastern area) along the Yakima River. Together, both areas cover approximately 368,600 acres
within Yakima County. The Lower Yakima Valley is home to about 75,000 people, of which about one-
third (24,000) use private, unregulated residential wells (Ecology 2010).
Background
Nitrate is an inorganic compound and a naturally occurring form of nitrogen. On a national scale nitrate
is typically found in shallow groundwater at concentrations up to 1.1 mg/L (Nolan and Hitt 2003).
Higher nitrate concentrations than this usually indicates that human activities have contributed additional
nitrate to the groundwater. Nitrate is highly soluble in water and mobile in soil, which makes it relatively
easy for nitrogen from a variety of point and non-point sources to move through the soil and into the
groundwater as nitrate.
EPA has established a MCL for nitrate in drinking water of 10 mg/L under the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA). EPA regulates nitrate in public drinking water systems because nitrate concentrations greater
than the MCL may cause health problems. Exposure to excess nitrate can result in methemoglobinemia
(blue-baby syndrome) in infants and susceptible individuals, which can lead to death in extreme cases
(Ward 2005). Some studies have shown a positive association between long-term exposure to nitrate in
drinking water and risk of cancer and certain reproductive outcomes, while other studies have shown no
association (Ward 2005).
Study Design
EPA designed a three-phased study. The purpose of Phase 1 was to identify the major sources of nitrogen
in the study area, based on historical records and available information. During Phase 1 EPA combined
information on land use with some simple calculations to estimate the amount of potential nitrogen
available from several sources. The estimates indicate that three sources — livestock (primarily dairy
cattle), irrigated cropland, and septic and biosolids — account for as much as 98 percent of the nitrogen
available for application to the land (EPA 2012b). Livestock (primarily dairy cattle) account for about 65
percent, irrigated cropland for about 30 percent and septic and biosolids about 3 percent of the available
nitrogen. The estimates do not account for losses of nitrogen from various biological, physical, and
chemical processes and do not account for crop utilization. Based on the estimates developed in Phase 1,
EPA focused the Phase 2 and 3 sampling on the three predominant sources: dairies; irrigated cropland;
and residential septic systems.
The objectives of Phase 2 were to: (1) evaluate nitrate contamination of groundwater at locations
downgradient of the three types of sources identified in Phase 1; (2) assist in identifying sampling
locations for Phase 3 sampling; and (3) provide residents with information on the nitrate levels in their
drinking water wells. EPA conducted Phase 2 sampling between February 22 and March 6, 2010. EPA
ES-2
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
found that water from wells at 67 homes, about 20 percent of the wells sampled in Phase 2, exceeded the
MCL of 10 mg/L for nitrate.
The results of Phases 1 and 2 were used in Phase 3 to identify residential drinking water wells with high
nitrate concentrations and potential upgradient sources of nitrogen. Once these locations were identified,
EPA collected and analyzed samples from the potential source areas and downgradient residential
drinking water wells. EPA also collected and analyzed representative drinking water wells upgradient of
the dairies (See Table ES-1). No drinking water wells upgradient of the crop fields or septic systems were
sampled..
EPA analyzed samples for nearly 200 chemicals and used several analytical techniques to investigate the
source of high levels of nitrate in water wells. The chemical analyses and analytical techniques were
grouped as follows: general chemistry; microbial data; organic compounds; isotopic analysis; and age
dating. The data for each of the analytical techniques were evaluated independently in an effort to
identify the specific likely sources of the high nitrate concentrations found in residential drinking water
wells (See Table ES-2).
Phase 3 Study Limitations and Uncertainties
Several limitations in the study are important to note. First, water well samples were collected from
existing wells. No new wells were installed for this study. Information on the depths and screened
intervals of the water wells is known for about a third of the wells that were sampled. In this report,
designations of upgradient and downgradient are based on regional groundwater flow data from the
United States Geological Survey (USGS). Lack of complete well information limits our ability to verify
if the wells upgradient and downgradient of the sources draw water from the same water bearing zone.
In addition, EPA lacks complete information regarding the dairies in this study. EPA requested
information on specific aspects of the dairy operations and the physical setting; however, the dairies in
this study did not provide this information. This information would have contributed to a more complete
understanding of the dairy facilities, practices, and use of specific chemicals. It would have allowed EPA
to provide actual values, or narrower ranges of estimates, for certain parameters in this report (for
example, numbers of animals, quantities of nitrogen, estimates of lagoon leakage). EPA has, however,
referenced general information regarding dairy operations, and specific information regarding the dairies
in the Yakima Valley to the extent it was available.
Finally, EPA has limited information about the irrigated crop fields in this study. Verifiable, detailed
crop production data, in terms of nutrients applied (the likely source of nitrate associated with irrigated
crops), were not available and no irrigation data were available. EPA has included information about the
crop fields to the extent it was available. In addition, the irrigated crop fields are surrounded by similar
agricultural uses, and many are situated downgradient of dairies, making more difficult EPA's ability to
discern the source of nitrate in drinking water wells downgradient of the irrigated crop fields.
ES-3
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Phase 3 Study Results
As stated previously, the primary purpose of the study was to investigate the contribution of various land
uses to the high nitrate levels in groundwater and residential drinking water wells in the Lower Yakima
Valley. The four main source areas sampled and the results of the sampling are discussed below.
Haak Dairy
The R&M Haak Dairy (Haak Dairy) is located in an agricultural area north of the Yakima River, about
four miles north of the community of Sunnyside. EPA selected the Haak Dairy for this study because it
generally met the criteria identified in the study plan for inclusion. Specifically, the dairy has a high
concentration of animals per acre; Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) inspectors noted
in their reports for the Haak Dairy that elevated levels of nitrogen were detected in its application fields2
in the past (WSDA 2012); it is located near the northern edge of cultivated land use and in a location with
relatively few upgradient potential sources of nitrogen; and drinking water wells downgradient of the
Haak Dairy showed levels of nitrate significantly above the MCL.
Several locations were sampled at the Haak Dairy during Phase 3: one dairy supply well; one dairy
manure pile located on the dairy; two dairy lagoons; and one dairy application field. During Phase 3 EPA
also resampled three of the residential drinking water wells downgradient of the Haak Dairy that
exceeded the MCL during Phase 2, and one residential drinking water well upgradient of the Haak Dairy.
Based on data from the WSDA (WSDA 2010), EPA estimated that the Haak Dairy generates an estimated
84 to 210 tons of nitrogen per year after accounting for losses from volatilization and denitrification
during storage.3 Based on information from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS 2008)
and a published report (Ham 2002), EPA estimated that the Haak Dairy lagoons leak 482,000 to
5,873,000 gallons4 of liquid waste per year into the underlying soils. The Dairy applies solid and liquid
animal wastes to its application fields. WSDA inspectors documented that the Haak Dairy has also used
inorganic fertilizer on its application fields (WSDA 2012).
Concentrations of total nitrogen increase in the direction of groundwater flow from the upgradient well to
three residential drinking water wells downgradient of the Haak Dairy, with the highest concentrations
detected in the dairy sources (lagoons, manure pile, and application field). The upgradient well was within
the expected background concentration for nitrate.
The three residential drinking water wells downgradient of the Haak Dairy all have nitrate levels greater
than EPA's MCL of 10 mg/L. Also, the concentration of six major ions (chloride, calcium, magnesium,
potassium, sodium, and sulfate) show a pattern of increasing concentrations from the upgradient well to
2 See footnote 1.
3 The Washington State Department of Agriculture can only provide information on the number of animals at each dairy in
ranges. Because of this, the estimated amount of nitrogen generated at the Haak Dairy is presented as a range. See Section IX.A
for a more detailed discussion.
4 The EPA estimates are presented in a range because the Ham 2002 study provided a range of lagoon leakage rates. The leakage
rates based on the NRCS standards fall within the estimated range. See Section IX.A for a more detailed discussion.
ES-4
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
the three downgradient residential wells, with the highest concentrations in the dairy sources (with the
exception of sulfate which was not detected in two lagoon samples). Alkalinity and the metals barium
and zinc show a similar pattern. Information on the construction and depth of the upgradient and one
downgradient well would be helpful to provide additional certainty regarding the likely sources.
However, review of the data suggests that the Haak Dairy is a likely source of the nitrate and major ions
in the three downgradient residential drinking water wells. Inorganic fertilizer used on the Haak Dairy's
application fields also could be a source of the nitrate observed in the downgradient wells.
Two Pharmaceuticals, tetracycline and monensin, were detected in all the dairy source samples collected
at the Haak Dairy, indicating that these compounds are used by the dairy. Tetracycline was detected in
two of the three downgradient residential drinking water wells but not in the upgradient well, indicating
the Haak Dairy is a likely source. Monensin was detected in the upgradient well and in the three
downgradient residential drinking water wells, although the upgradient residential drinking water well
had a higher concentration than two of the downgradient water wells. It is possible that the Haak Dairy is
a source of the monensin detected in the downgradient residential drinking water wells. Given the
presence of monensin in the upgradient well, another source of monensin is likely. Additional information
that supports that the dairy may be a source of monensin is that it was not detected in samples collected
from the WWTP influents that were collected as surrogates for rural septic systems.
The isotopic data provide strong evidence that animal (human or non-human) waste is the likely dominant
source of the nitrate contamination in at least one of the residential wells downgradient of the Haak Dairy.
However, since isotopic analysis alone cannot differentiate between human and non-human waste, both
could be sources of the nitrate in this downgradient well.
Several compounds that tend to be less mobile in groundwater than nitrate and some of the major ions
were detected in Haak Dairy lagoon, manure pile, and application field samples, but not detected in the
downgradient water wells (for example, trace organics and hormones). Fecal coliform was not detected in
any of the wells downgradient of the Haak Dairy.
Dairy Cluster
The "Dairy Cluster" refers to a group of dairies, including George DeRuyter & Son Dairy, D and A
Dairy, Cow Palace 1 and 2, Liberty Dairy, and Bosnia Dairy, situated north of the Yakima River. The
Dairy Cluster is located about 2 miles north of the town of Liberty, near the northern edge of the irrigated
area in the Yakima Valley. The facilities generally consist of cow pens, milking parlors, animal waste
lagoons, and animal waste application fields.5 Irrigation ditches run through the dairy properties.
EPA selected these dairies for this study because they generally met the criteria identified in the study
plan for inclusion. Specifically, the Dairy Cluster has; a high concentration of animals per acre; WSDA
inspectors noted in their reports for the Dairy Cluster that elevated levels of nitrogen were detected in its
application fields in the past (WSDA 2012); the dairies are located near the northern edge of cultivated
5 See footnote 1.
ES-5
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
land in the Lower Yakima Valley with relatively few upgradient potential sources of nitrogen; and
drinking water wells downgradient of the dairies showed levels of nitrate significantly above the MCL.
Several locations were sampled in the Dairy Cluster during Phase 3: three dairy supply wells; four dairy
manure piles; ten dairy lagoons; and four dairy application field samples. During Phase 3, EPA also
sampled eight downgradient residential drinking water wells that were found to exceed the MCL for
nitrate during Phase 2, and one upgradient residential drinking water well.6
Based on data from the Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA 2010), EPA estimated that
the Dairy Cluster generates more than 2,055 tons of nitrogen per year after accounting for losses from
volatilization and denitrification. Based on information from the Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS 2008) and a published report (Ham 2002), EPA estimated that the Dairy Cluster lagoons leak
between 3,330,000 and 39,600,000 gallons7 of liquid lagoon waste per year into the underlying soils. All
the dairies in the Dairy Cluster apply animal wastes as fertilizer onto application fields that they own or
lease according to WSDA inspection reports (WSDA 2012). The dairies, (except for Cow Palace) also
reported using synthetic fertilizer on some of their application fields.
Similar to the Haak Dairy, the results from the sampling indicate that the concentration of total nitrogen
increases in the direction of groundwater flow from the upgradient well to the downgradient residential
drinking water wells, with the highest concentrations detected in the dairy sources.8 The nitrate
concentrations in the residential drinking water wells downgradient of the Dairy Cluster, with the
exception of one unusually deep residential drinking water well, have nitrate levels greater than the EPA
MCL. The concentrations of five major ions, especially calcium and chloride, increase between the
upgradient well and the downgradient residential drinking water well, with the highest concentrations in
the dairy sources. Alkalinity and barium show a similar pattern. The relatively young water in the
upgradient well that EPA sampled in Phase 3 suggests that it is a shallow well.
As with the Haak Dairy, information on the construction and depth of the upgradient well and five of the
downgradient water wells sampled during Phase 3 would be helpful to clarify the contribution of sources
to the increased concentrations measured in the downgradient wells. However, the information presented
above indicates that the Dairy Cluster is a likely source of the nitrate, major ions, and other substances in
the downgradient residential drinking water wells.
The pharmaceuticals tetracycline and monensin were detected in all but one of the dairy source samples,
which indicate they are used by the dairies in the Dairy Cluster. Tetracycline was detected in two of the
downgradient residential drinking water wells, two dairy supply wells, dairy lagoons, manure piles and
application fields. The concentration of tetracycline found in the upgradient residential well was similar
to the concentrations detected in two of the downgradient residential wells. The dairies are a possible
6 The results for samples that EPA collected during Phase 2 from other wells located upgradient of the Dairy Cluster were also
below the MCL for nitrate. Those data are included in this report in Table Cl in Appendix C (sample locations WW-22103 and
WW-22085).
7 The EPA estimates are presented in a range because the Ham 2002 study provided a range of lagoon leakage rates. The leakage
rates based on the NRCS standards fall within the estimated range. See Section IX.B for a more detailed discussion.
8 See footnote 6.
ES-6
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
source of the tetracycline in the downgradient wells. However, given the concentration in the upgradient
well, another source of tetracycline likely exists.
Monensin was detected in two of the downgradient residential drinking water wells, two dairy supply
wells, dairy lagoons, manure piles and application fields. The Dairy Cluster is a likely source of
monensin because this antibiotic is used in dairy cows but not by people. Monensin was not detected in
samples from the WWTP influents which were collected as surrogates for residential septic systems,
further supporting that the dairies are the likely source.
The hormone testosterone was detected in downgradient residential drinking water wells and dairy
sources. The concentration of testosterone found in the upgradient residential drinking water well is
similar to the concentrations detected in the downgradient water wells. The dairies are a possible source
of the testosterone in the downgradient wells; however, given the concentration in the upgradient well,
another source of testosterone is likely.
The isotopic data provide strong evidence that animal (human or non-human) waste is the likely dominant
source of the nitrate in at least two of the residential drinking water wells downgradient of the Dairy
Cluster. Because isotopic analysis cannot differentiate between human and non-human waste, both could
be sources of the nitrate in this downgradient well.
Several other compounds that are generally less mobile in groundwater than nitrate and some of the major
ions, were detected in the Dairy Cluster sources, but not in the residential drinking water wells (for
example, the trace organics). Fecal coliform was not detected in any of the residential drinking water
wells.
Irrigated Cropland
Nitrogen-rich fertilizers, such as inorganic synthetic fertilizer and manure, are applied to irrigated
cropland and are a possible source of nitrate in drinking water wells. In Phase 3, EPA sampled six
irrigated crop fields9 (two mint, two hops, and two corn) and six residential drinking water wells
downgradient of these fields.
Irrigated crop field soil samples were analyzed for several forms of nitrogen, pesticides, pharmaceuticals,
and hormones. They were not analyzed for major ions, trace inorganic elements, perchlorate,
microbiology, trace organics, isotopic analysis, or age dating.
The six water wells downgradient from the irrigated crop fields and sampled by EPA during Phase 3 all
had nitrate levels greater than the MCL. Several organic compounds were detected in the crop soil
samples, but only bentazon and monensin were detected in a water well and its associated crop soil
sample. Bentazon was detected in two water wells and the associated soil samples. These results indicate
that bentazon was applied to the crop field and is likely migrating to groundwater and the water wells.
Monensin was the only veterinary pharmaceutical detected in one well and also in an associated soil
sample collected from a hop field. Possible manure application to the hop field could account for the
' See footnote 1.
ES-7
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
monensin detected in the downgradient residential well. The isotopic analysis indicated that the dominant
source of nitrate for one residential drinking water well was synthetic fertilizer.
Residential Septic Systems
Four residential wells located in Mabton, Harrah, and Sunnyside were selected for evaluation of impacts
from septic systems. However, all the residential drinking water wells sampled as part of Phase 3 of this
study were analyzed for the same suite of chemicals. EPA also collected influent samples from three
WWTPs located in Zillah, Mabton, and Toppenish. These WWTP samples were collected to serve as a
surrogate for septic system waste.10 The WWTP influent had no actual or potential hydrogeological
connection with the residential wells. This approach was used to determine whether the same compounds
are detected in WWTP influent samples and in water wells with high nitrate concentrations in areas with a
high density of septic systems or whether these wells are affected by other sources.
The majority of the trace organics (e.g., personal care products) and wastewater pharmaceuticals were
detected in the WWTP influent samples but only two of these compounds were detected in the residential
drinking water wells sampled by EPA in Phase 3. Specifically, bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP, a
plasticizer) was detected in four residential drinking water wells and DEET (an insect repellant) was
detected in one residential drinking water well. These results indicate that these compounds are being
used and can be found in wastewater, but with a few exceptions are not reaching residential drinking
water wells.
Four veterinary pharmaceutical compounds were detected in the WWTP influent samples, three of which
were also detected in one or more of the residential drinking water wells in the study. Specifically,
sulfamethazine (used for cattle, poultry and swine) was detected in two residential drinking water wells,
sulfamethoxazole (used for people) in one residential drinking water well, and tetracycline (used for
people, cattle, and several other animals) in six residential drinking water wells.
There were 10 additional veterinary pharmaceuticals detected in residential drinking water wells, but not
detected in WWTP influent samples. Monensin (used for cattle and poultry) and virginiamycin (used in
poultry and swine) were the most frequently detected veterinary pharmaceuticals: monensin was detected
in nine residential drinking water wells and virginiamycin in four. Monensin and virginiamycin were not
detected in the WWTP influent samples. Given the results, septic systems are a possible source of
tetracycline and sulfamethoxazole in the residential drinking water wells.
Of the 20 hormones analyzed, 14 were detected in at least one WWTP influent sample. Of those 14
hormones, seven were detected in residential drinking water wells. Testosterone and androsterone were
the most frequently detected hormones: testosterone was detected in nine wells and androsterone was
detected in four wells. Given both testosterone and androsterone are natural sex hormones it is possible
they came from septic systems in proximity to the residential drinking water wells.
10 EPA recognizes that the WWTP influent may contain substances that are not found in residential septic systems (for example
they may also receive commercial and industrial waste streams). The WWTPs sampled serve rural communities and are
sufficiently similar to residential septic systems for the purpose of EPA's study.
ES-8
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Microbial source tracking was not performed because there were no detectable concentrations of fecal
coliform in any of the residential drinking water wells. The isotopic data provide strong evidence that
animal (human or non-human) waste is a likely dominant source of the nitrate contamination in at least
six residential drinking water wells. Since isotopic analysis cannot differentiate between human and non-
human waste, both could be sources of the nitrate in this downgradient well based on the isotopic
analysis.
Conclusions
Nitrate levels above EPA's drinking water standard in residential drinking water wells in the Lower
Yakima Valley are well documented. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of
certain chemicals, microbial parameters, or analytical techniques to identify specific sources of the high
nitrate levels detected in residential drinking water wells.
Many of the chemicals and microbial parameters evaluated in this study were not detected in the
residential drinking water wells. There were no detections of fecal coliform in the Phase 3 residential
drinking water wells, although high concentrations were found in the dairy sources and WWTP influent.
There were very few trace inorganic elements, trace organics, or wastewater pharmaceuticals detected in
the residential drinking water wells or crop field soil samples, although many of these chemicals were
detected in the dairy sources and WWTPs. The isotopic data provide some indication of the likely nitrate
sources for seven of the 25 residential wells tested (six animal waste and one synthetic fertilizer).
Although the isotopic analysis identified animal waste as the source of the nitrate in six wells, this
analytical technique cannot differentiate between human and non-human waste.
There appears to be a correlation between the age dating data and the depths of the wells for which boring
logs are available. The water in the dairy supply wells that are known to be screened in the deeper
basaltic aquifer is older than in the downgradient residential wells which are commonly screened in the
shallower alluvial aquifer. The age dating results were not useful to determine when the nitrate
contamination was introduced into the well.
Given the historic and current volumes of wastes generated and stored by dairies, and the application of
nitrogen-rich fertilizers including dairy waste in the Lower Yakima Valley, it is expected that dairies are a
likely source of high nitrate levels in downgradient drinking water wells. The total nitrogen, major ions,
alkalinity and barium data provide strong evidence that the dairies evaluated in this study are likely
sources of the high nitrate levels in the drinking water wells downgradient of the dairies. Additional
information that supports this conclusion includes: there are few potential sources of nitrogen located
upgradient of the dairies; the dairy lagoons are likely leaking large quantities of nitrogen-rich liquid into
the subsurface; and Washington State Department of Agriculture inspectors have reported elevated levels
of nitrogen in application fields of the dairies in the study.
Given the historic and current application of nitrogen-rich fertilizers in the Lower Yakima Valley, it is
expected that irrigated crop fields would be a likely source of high nitrate levels in downgradient drinking
water wells. The data collected in this study provide some corroboration that irrigated crop fields are a
likely a source of nitrate in groundwater. The data supporting this conclusion is not as strong for the crop
fields as it is for the dairies. The reasons for this include: lack of upgradient well data; the irrigated crop
fields sampled are situated amongst other agricultural uses, including upgradient dairy operations; fewer
ES-9
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
analytes detected in both the crop field samples and the corresponding downgradient wells; more limited
information about crop field operations; and the crop fields' positions on the landscape relative to other
potential sources.
While septic systems could be a source of nitrate in drinking water wells, there is insufficient information
from this study to support this conclusion.
The high nitrate levels in residential drinking water wells in the Lower Yakima Valley are likely coming
from several sources. This study attempted to identify those sources. In some cases it was possible to
identify likely or possible sources of the nitrate contamination.
Evaluating actions to reduce nitrate concentrations in residential drinking water wells to safe levels is
beyond the scope of this report. Although actions to reduce nitrate are needed, it may take many years to
reduce the nitrate levels in residential drinking water wells to safe levels because of the extent of the
nitrate contamination in the Lower Yakima Valley and the persistence of nitrate in the environment.
ES-10
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table ES-1: Overview of the Study Design to Investigate Suspected Sources of Nitrate in Water Wells Near Dairies, Irrigated Cropland,
and Septic Systems
Source
Type
Dairies
Irrigated
Croplands
Septic
Systems
Sampling Area
Haak Dairy
Dairy Cluster
Schilperoort Farm
Havilah Farm
Wheeler Farm
DVM Sunny Dene
Ranch
Golden Gate Hops
Golden Gate Hops
Mabton
Harrah
Sunnyside
Up gradient
Well
Sample
WW-01
WW-06a
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Supply
Well
Sample
WW-02
WW-07,
WW-08,
andWW-
09
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Potential Sources of Nitrate
Lagoons (LG-01 to LG-03)
Manure Piles (SO-01)
Application Fields (SO-02)
Lagoons (LG-04 to LG-15)
Manure Piles (SO-03, SO-05,
SO-07, and SO-09)
Application Fields" (SO-04,
SO-06, SO-08, and SO-10)
SO-11 (Mint)
SO-12 (Mint)
SO-13 (Corn)
SO-14 (Corn)
SO-15 (Hops)
SO-16 (Hops)
Septic Systems
Septic Systems
Septic Systems
Downgradient
Well
Sample
WW-03 to
WW-05
WW-lOto
WW-17
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-28
WW-26
WW-27
WW-21
WW-19
WW-20 and
WW-22
Study Design c'd
Compare chemicals and
microbiology in upgradient wells
with sources and downgradient
wells. Conduct isotopic analyses
for water wells and lagoons and
age dating for water wells.
Compare chemicals in
downgradient wells with soil
samples from associated crop
fields.
Compare chemicals in water
wells with influent from 3
wastewater treatment plants
(Zillah, Mabton, and Toppenish).
aAs noted above, in footnote 2 of the text, EPA collected samples from other wells located upgradient of the Dairy Cluster which were also below the MCL for
nitrate during Phase 2. That data is included in this report in Table Cl in Appendix C (sample location WW-22103 and WW-22085).
bThirty soil samples per application field or crop field were collected at a depth of 1 inch and composited to obtain a representative sample.
°Two additional residential wells, WW-18 and WW-30, were sampled during this study, but were not included in the original study design or listed in this table.
The results for these two wells are documented in Section IX.E of this report.
dSee Table C2 in Appendix C and Table ES-2 for a description of the analytes for each source.
NA - not applicable.
ES-11
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table ES-2: Summary of the Chemical Groups and Media Included in Phase 3 of the Study
Compound or Analytical
Technique (Number of
Compounds Analyzed)
Water
Wells
Dairy
Lagoons
Dairy
Manure Piles
Dairy
Application Fields
WWTP
Influent"
Crop Soils
General Chemistry
Nitrate (1)
Other Nitrogen Forms3
Major Ions (9)
Trace Elements (12)
Perchlorate (1)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Microbiology
Bacteria (3)
Microbial Source Trackingb
X
X
X
X
X
X
Organic compounds
Pesticides (50)
Trace Organics (69)
Pharmaceuticals (31)
Hormones (20)
X
X
X
X
Xd
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Xd
X
X
X
X
X
X
Analytical Techniques
Isotopic Analysis (2)
Age Dating (NA)
X
X
X
X
aOther nitrogen forms for water wells and lagoons include ammonia, TKN, and nitrate plus nitrite. Other forms of nitrogen for manure piles, dairy application
fields, and crop samples include extractable nitrate, extractable ammonia, and total nitrogen by combustion.
b Microbial source tracking was conducted only if there was an indication of fecal contamination detected in the sample.
'Majority of influent from households but contribution from businesses and industry also expected.
dBecause of matrix interference, results for pesticide analysis for lagoon and wastewater treatment influent samples were not useable.
X - the compound or analytical technique was analyzed.
NA - not applicable
ES-12
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
I. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results for sampling conducted from February through April 2010 by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the Lower Yakima Valley in central Washington State. The
primary purpose of this study was to investigate the contribution of various sources from nearby land uses
to the high nitrate levels in groundwater and residential drinking water wells. The study looked at three
likely sources of nitrate: dairies; irrigated cropland; and residential septic systems.
EPA used standard investigation and analytical methods as well as several research methods. The
sampling was conducted as part of an EPA Regionally Applied Research Effort (RARE)11 grant (EPA
2009). Funding was also provided by EPA's regional and national Offices of Compliance and
Enforcement including the Environmental Justice (EJ) Showcase Community pilot program.12 Yakima is
one often communities in the nation to receive focused attention on disproportionate environmental
health burdens.
EPA's sampling effort in the Lower Yakima Valley was partially in response to concerns raised by
several agencies and community members who participated in the EPA Community Action for a
Renewed Environment (CARE) cooperative agreement with the Northwest Communities Education
Center (NCEC) in Yakima County, Washington. The objective of the cooperative agreement was to
assist the Yakima Valley community to establish its priorities for environmental health concerns.
Numerous meetings were held over a 2-year period from 2007 to 2009. One of the outcomes from the
cooperative agreement was that community members identified their top three environmental health
priorities as groundwater contamination, asthma, and children's exposure to pesticides.
In October 2008, the Yakima Herald Republic ran a series of articles titled "Flidden Wells, Dirty Water"
that examined a long history of groundwater contamination affecting public and private drinking water
wells, primarily in the Lower Yakima Valley. The reporter sent a letter requesting that EPA invoke
Section 1431 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) to address the problem. Section 1431 (42 U.S.C.
§ 300i) authorizes EPA to take action when, among other things, a contaminant is present or may enter a
public water system or underground source of drinking water that may present an imminent and
substantial endangerment to human health.
EPA facilitated the formation of a workgroup consisting of representatives from state and local agencies,
EPA, and the community. The workgroup released a report in February 2010 entitled, "Lower Yakima
Valley Groundwater Quality: Preliminary Assessment and Recommendations" (Ecology 2010)
("February 2010 Report"). One of the recommendations identified in the February 2010 Report was to
conduct an investigation to gather information to try to link high nitrate levels in drinking water wells
with specific sources.
11 The purpose of the RARE program is to provide EPA Regional Offices with support for near-term applied research projects
and enhance interactions and connections between regional staff and EPA's Office of Research and Development.
12 The EJ showcase projects focus on low income and minority communities experiencing disproportionate impacts from
environmental health burdens.
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
The February 2010 Report documented that groundwater data collected in the Lower Yakima Valley from
1990 to 2008 indicated that as many as 12 percent of private wells had nitrate levels above EPA's
drinking water standard for nitrate (10 mg/L) and about 20 percent of private wells demonstrated bacterial
contamination (Ecology 2010).
II. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
As discussed above, the primary purpose of this study was to collect data to investigate the contribution
of various sources from nearby land uses to the high nitrate levels in groundwater and residential drinking
water wells. To accomplish this, EPA sampled and analyzed sources of nitrate (dairies, irrigated
croplands, and residential septic systems) and private residential drinking water wells for a variety of
chemicals to evaluate whether chemicals, including nitrate, could be used to link the nitrate contamination
in groundwater and drinking water wells to the sources. The analysis included chemicals that are
expected to be associated with one or more of the likely sources, such as pharmaceuticals (both veterinary
and human medications), personal care products, steroids and hormones, pesticides and herbicides, as
well as other indicators of water quality such as nitrogen and major ions such as chloride and calcium.
EPA also used microbial analysis to determine whether the water wells, lagoons and WWTP influent
samples exhibited fecal contamination. If the samples were found to have fecal contamination, then
microbial source tracking (MST) was performed to identify the source of the fecal contamination (in this
case, human or ruminant). In addition, EPA performed isotopic analysis for the water wells to identify the
possible origin of the nitrate in water wells. Finally, an age dating analysis was completed for the water
wells to estimate the time since water infiltrated from the surface to the aquifer.
Figure 1 provides a conceptual site model for the project. The conceptual site model (in conjunction with
Figure 2 - Nitrogen Cycle) provides a graphic description of how nitrate from various sources can reach
groundwater and eventually drinking water wells. This study evaluated three likely sources of the nitrate
contamination in drinking water wells (dairies, irrigated cropland, and residential septic systems). The
main sources of nitrogen from the dairies include dairy waste lagoons; manure piles; and manure and
synthetic fertilizers applied to application fields on land controlled by the dairies. For irrigated crop
fields13, the main source is the synthetic fertilizers and manure14 applied to the land to promote plant
growth. For septic systems, it is the human waste that can migrate from septic systems into nearby
drinking water wells.
As described in Figure 2 (Nitrogen Cycle), nitrogen is applied to the land from different sources. The
different forms of nitrogen typically migrate through the unsaturated silts, sands, and gravels and arrive at
the water table via preferential pathways. The nitrogen is converted to nitrate through chemical and
biological processes. Groundwater contaminated with nitrate can be pumped up in drinking water wells
13 In this report, "application field" refers to fields owned or leased by the dairies and "crop field" or "cropland" refers to fields
owned or leased by other farmers. Both application fields and crop fields could receive applications of manure and/or synthetic
fertilizer.
14 Although initially EPA considered irrigated cropland to be a potential source of nitrate because of synthetic fertilizer
application, through this study, it became clear that several of the irrigated crop fields sampled had also received manure
applications.
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
where people consume the water. Groundwater contaminated with nitrate can also migrate to surface
water such as the Yakima River.
The scope of this study consists of an area approximately 40 miles long and ranging between 10 and 25
miles wide. The study area includes parts of Yakima County and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of
the Yakama Nation Reservation (Yakama Reservation). EPA identified areas with some of the highest
nitrate concentrations to conduct additional sampling to evaluate whether other chemicals are traveling
with the nitrate from the sources to the groundwater and drinking water wells. This report includes the
results for the sampling of 331 wells for nitrate and bacteria, and multi-parameter analysis of 29 wells (25
residential wells and four dairy supply wells), 12 dairy lagoons (15 samples), 11 soil samples (five at
dairy application fields and six at irrigated and fertilized crop fields), five dairy manure samples, and
three wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) influent samples. The sampling was conducted from February
through April 2010.
Several limitations in the study are important to note. First, water well samples were collected from
existing wells. No new wells were installed for this study. Information on the depths and screened
intervals of the water wells is known for about a third of the wells that were sampled. In this report,
designations of upgradient and downgradient are based on regional groundwater flow data from the
United States Geological Survey (USGS). Lack of complete well information limits our ability to verify
if the wells upgradient and downgradient of the sources draw water from the same water bearing zone.
In addition, EPA lacks complete information regarding the dairies in this study. EPA requested
information on specific aspects of the dairy operations and the physical setting; however, the dairies in
this study did not provide this information. This information would have contributed to a more complete
understanding of the dairy facilities, practices, and use of specific chemicals. It would have allowed EPA
to provide actual values, or narrower ranges of estimates, for certain parameters in this report (for
example, numbers of animals, quantities of nitrogen, estimates of lagoon leakage). EPA has, however,
referenced general information regarding dairy operations, and specific information regarding the dairies
in the Yakima Valley to the extent it was available and the ranges stated in the report are based on actual
data.
Finally, EPA has limited information about the irrigated crop fields in this study. Verifiable, detailed
crop production data, in terms of nutrients applied (the likely source of nitrate associated with irrigated
crops), were not available and no irrigation data were available. EPA has included information about the
crop fields to the extent it was available. In addition, the irrigated crop fields are surrounded by similar
agricultural uses, and many are situated downgradient of dairies, making more difficult EPA's ability to
discern the source of nitrate in drinking water wells downgradient of the irrigated crop fields.
III. BACKGROUND
Nitrate is an inorganic compound that is a naturally occurring form of nitrogen. On a national scale,
nitrate is typically found in unimpacted shallow groundwaters at concentrations of up to 1.1 mg/L (Nolan
and Hitt 2003). Nitrate concentrations higher than this range typically indicate that human activities have
contributed nitrate to the groundwater. Nitrate is highly soluble in water and mobile in soil, which makes
it relatively easy for nitrogen from a variety of point and non-point sources to move through the soil and
into the groundwater as nitrate.
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Nitrate is an acute contaminant, which means an immediate (within hours or days) health effect may
result from exposure. EPA has established a maximum contaminant level (MCL) for nitrate in drinking
water of 10 mg/L under the SDWA. EPA and state agencies regulate nitrate in public drinking water
systems because nitrate concentrations greater than the MCL may cause a number of health problems.
Exposure to excess nitrate can result in methemoglobinemia (blue-baby syndrome) in infants and
susceptible individuals, which can lead to death in extreme cases (Ward 2005). Methemoglobinemia is
caused by the reduction of nitrate to nitrite in the body. Nitrite binds to hemoglobin and lowers the
body's ability to carry oxygen in the blood. Some studies have shown a positive association between
long-term exposure to nitrate in drinking water and risk of cancer and certain reproductive outcomes,
while other studies have shown no association (Ward 2005).
Numerous water quality investigations have been conducted regarding nitrate over the last 30 years in the
Lower Yakima Valley, including a 2002 investigation by the Valley Institute for Research and Education
(VIRE). All of these studies were summarized in the February 2010 Report prepared by the Washington
State Departments of Agriculture, Ecology and Health; Yakima County Public Works Department; and
EPA (Ecology 2010). The February 2010 Report found nitrate levels above the EPA MCL of 10 mg/L in
about 12 percent of private wells. More than 2,000 people in the study area have private wells that
exceed the MCL (Ecology 2010).
Nitrate contamination in groundwater is primarily a health risk for rural populations in the Lower Yakima
Valley who rely on private unregulated wells for drinking water. Systems that meet the definition of
"public water system" fall under state or federal drinking water regulations. Public water systems are
required to test regularly for nitrate, and the data are reported to the Washington State Department of
Health. EPA defines a "public water system" under Section 1401(4) of the SDWA, as amended in 1996,
42 U.S.C. § 300f, as:
"... a system for the provision to the public of water for human consumption through
pipes or other constructed conveyances, if such has at least fifteen service connections or
regularly serves at least twenty-five people."
The State of Washington has established requirements for systems serving between three and fewer than
15 connections and fewer than 25 people. These water systems are called Group B (Chapter 246-291 of
the Washington Administrative Code), and the state Department of Health (DOH) and local health
jurisdictions share responsibility for administrating Group B requirements. The DOH does not regulate
wells with just one or two connections that are residential systems, but some local jurisdictions regulate
these systems. In 2009, the governor and state legislature set a new direction for regulating Group B
systems, however, by eliminating all state funding for this program. Users of Group B systems therefore
may be at risk.
Owners of drinking water wells that have fewer than three service connections (for example, a single,
residential well) are not required to test their drinking water for contaminants. However, EPA and the
Washington State Departments of Ecology and Health recommend that rural residents test their well water
regularly. If residents choose to test and find contamination levels that exceed the MCL, they are not
required to take action to address the situation.
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
IV. NITROGEN CYCLE
Nitrogen is an essential nutrient that is critical to plant growth. It aids in the formation and function of
cellular tissue, proteins, and reproductive structures. Nitrogen can be supplied to plants through the
organic decomposition of plants or animal waste products or by the application of synthetic fertilizers. It
is present in many chemical forms in the environment, including organic nitrogen, ammonium (NH/t),
nitrite (NO2-), nitrate (NO3-), and nitrogen gas (N2). Nitrogen gas composes about 78 percent of the
atmosphere. Atmospheric nitrogen must be processed, or fixed, to be used by plants. Some fixation is
done by lightning strikes, but the majority of fixation occurs by bacteria. Additional small quantities of
nitrate may wash out of the atmosphere from aerosol salt particles from the ocean or dusts from arid
regions, or from fossil fuel combustion.
Figure 2 shows the nitrogen cycle (adapted from Pidwirny 2006). The processes of the nitrogen cycle
transform nitrogen from one chemical form to another. Important processes in the nitrogen cycle include
nitrogen fixation, mineralization, nitrification, and denitrification. The mobility of nitrogen is highly
dependent on its form and the matrix it moves through.
In human-influenced systems, there are significant increases in the amount of nitrogen released to the soil,
which frequently leaches into groundwater from various land uses, including application of synthetic
fertilizers or animal waste. While many fertilizers may be composed of nitrate, urea or ammonia are
often used. The urea and ammonia are ultimately converted to nitrate by soil bacteria. Animal wastes are
another source of nitrogen frequently applied to the land or directly deposited by animals, and then often
managed by people, for example, in lagoons or manure piles at dairies. Infiltrating rain or irrigation water
can push excess nitrogen into groundwater from each of these sources, unless it is taken up by plants
while still in the shallow subsurface.
Organic nitrogen is nearly immobile. Mineralization occurs when organic nitrogen in the soil is
converted by bacteria into ammonium (NFLt). The ammonium is then converted to nitrite and then nitrate
by bacteria through nitrification. The ammonium ion, while much less mobile than nitrate due to its
positive charge, can be converted to nitrate as it moves through the vadose zone and oxygenated aquifer
surfaces.
In soils, nitrate is the most mobile form of nitrogen in both the unsaturated zone and the saturated zone.
In the saturated zone, it moves at nearly the speed of the migrating groundwater. The mobility of the
nitrate ion is enhanced by the action of negatively charged soil particles, which repel the negatively
charged nitrate (Frans 2000). The nitrate can then be converted back into nitrogen gas (N2) by bacteria
through denitrification. Denitrification, a process which can convert nitrate into nitrogen gas by bacteria,
can occur in low oxygen environments. In the absence of denitrification, nitrate moves with the
groundwater until the groundwater is discharged to surface water, or extracted from a well. For additional
information on the nitrogen cycle, see Stumm and Morgan 1996.
V. STUDY AREA
The broad Yakima Basin is bounded by basalt ridgelines to the north and south, the Cascade Mountains to
the west. The Yakima Basin is a watershed of great diversity in climate, vegetation, and land use. More
than 30 percent of the Yakima Basin is forested, about 30 percent is shrub-steppe rangeland, and about 28
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
percent is in agricultural production (USGS 2009). The Yakima River flows from its headwaters near the
Cascade Mountains crest to its mouth where it joins the Columbia River, 160 miles to the east.
Precipitation diminishes to less than 9 inches annually in the rain shadow of the Cascades (Yakima
County 2011), and irrigation plays a key role in the viability of agriculture. A series of high mountain
reservoirs captures snowmelt, which is released through the Yakima River into a complex set of irrigation
diversions and canals throughout the basin. Irrigation is supplied to fields during the March through
October growing season in a variety of methods, including flood, furrow, sprinkler, and drip systems.
The study area included a portion of the Yakima Valley, referred to as the Lower Yakima Valley
encompassing portions of the Toppenish Basin (western area) and the Benton Basin (eastern area) along
the Yakima River (Figure 3). Together, both areas cover approximately 368,600 acres within Yakima
County. The Lower Yakima Valley has about 75,000 people, of which about 24,000 use private,
unregulated residential wells (Ecology 2010).
In Yakima County, more than 20 percent of the population are at or below the poverty level (less than
$17,050 for a family of four in 2000) and a little more than 30 percent of adults have less than a high
school diploma. Approximately 41 percent of the population is Hispanic/Latino, which is more than four
times the state average of approximately 10 percent. American Indians and Alaskan Natives make up
slightly more than 5 percent of the county's population, which is three times the state average of almost 2
percent. English is not the primary language (written or spoken) in many households in Yakima County
(U.S. Census 2000). Economic viability depends on high-value agricultural production, irrigation, and a
reliable supply of farm laborers. Yakima County leads the nation in production of milk per cow and is a
top producer of apples, pears, sweet cherries, mint, and hops in the country (USDA 2007).
A. Western Study Area - The Toppenish Basin
Much of the Toppenish Basin is within the boundaries of the Yakama Indian Reservation. Land
ownership in the major floodplain of the Toppenish Basin is a checkerboard of Indian trust, Indian fee,
and deeded (privately held) parcels. Land use in this area is mixed, with open range and agriculture
predominating. The basin is bordered on the north by the Ahtanum Ridge and on the south by the
Toppenish Ridge.
B. Eastern Study Area - The Benton Basin
The Benton Basin includes some reservation lands and the non-reservation lands along the river and on
the southeast side of the valley. Approximately 60 percent of the valley population resides in this area,
which includes the Yakima County communities of Sunnyside, Granger, Grandview, and Mabton.
The Benton Basin lies in the southeastern part of the Lower Yakima Valley. The western boundary of the
basin abuts the eastern boundary of the Toppenish Basin. The southern boundary is bordered by the
Horse Heaven Hills, and the northeastern boundary generally follows the northern flank of the Cold Creek
Syncline.
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
C. Geology, Hydrogeology, and Geochemistry of the Study Area
The information presented below, unless otherwise noted, is summarized from the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) publication "Hydrogeologic Framework of the Yakima River Basin Aquifer System,
Washington (USGS 2009).
The Toppenish and Benton Basins consists of fine- and coarse-grained sediments overlying a sequence of
three major basalt flows. (See Figure 4 and Figure 5 for a general overview of the hydrogeology for the
Toppenish and Benton Basins.) The structural setting for the study area is created by bounding ridges
such as the Rattlesnake Mountains, Ahtanum Ridge, Toppenish Ridge, and Horse Heaven Hills. The
uppermost basalts of the Saddle Mountain Unit of the Columbia River Basalt Group are typically exposed
in these upland ridges. This unit averages more than 500 feet thick. The underlying Wanapum unit
averages 600 feet thick. These units are separated by the Mabton Interbed, with an average thickness of
70 feet.
The valley is filled with a variety of sediments that pinch out along the flanks of the ridges. These
sediments include Touchet Beds, loess and thick alluvial sands and gravels, and significant thickness of
Ellensburg Formation. The thickness of these sedimentary units decreases from an average of more than
500 feet in the Toppenish Basin to less than 200 feet in the lower Benton Basin.
Water is found in fractures and interbeds formed of clinkers, permeable lava, lake deposits or paleo-soils
and may occur at significant depths in the upland ridges, such as Horse Heaven Hills, and especially in
the basalts. The water table is found at shallower depths as the valley is approached from these ridges.
Near the Yakima River, it may be less than 10 feet to water, especially during the irrigation season.
There are two main aquifer types underlying the study area. They include a surficial unconfined to semi-
confined alluvial aquifer and an extensive basalt aquifer of great thickness underlying the sedimentary
deposits. The basalt aquifer is believed to be semi-isolated from the surficial aquifer and stream systems.
Groundwater flow within the surficial aquifer generally follows topography, with natural recharge
occurring within the headlands and on the sides of the valley and discharge occurring to the Yakima
River. Flow within the uppermost portions of the underlying basaltic aquifer also generally follows this
pattern.
However, since the basalts extend to great depths, those deeper basaltic layers may convey waters across
local flow divides to more regionally significant discharge locations such as the Columbia River. This
pattern produces a major flow direction from northwest to southeast as water moves down the valley
parallel to the course of the Yakima River. Other, more localized directions of flow, typically at
shallower depths in the uppermost sediments, tend to flow toward the Yakima River. Locally, the flow
direction may be modified by geologic structures and by irrigation practices, drains, ditches, canals, and
other hydrologic features.
The Lower Yakima Valley is filled with sediments shed by the ridges at the margins of the study area and
those deposited in the valley bottom by the Yakima River. These sediments have an internal structure
that strongly controls groundwater movement. As the water moves through these sediments, it tends to
follow preferential flow paths composed of coarser sediments.
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Very frequently, there are 10- to 100-fold differences in groundwater velocities among aquifer materials
of such contrasting grain size (Freeze and Cherry 1979). These different preferential flow paths can have
different water chemistry, depending on their location below a source of contamination. A well that is
located along a preferential flow path may draw a substantial portion of its water from a particular source.
A well located on an adjacent, but different, preferential flow path may have markedly different
chemistry. For this reason, it is anticipated that upgradient sources of nitrate could produce different
downgradient effects in groundwater (such as nitrate in water wells), even in wells from neighboring
homes.
Shallower wells in the study area are more likely to be contaminated with nitrate than deeper wells
because the sources of most of the nitrogen are anthropogenic activities on the land surface (for example,
dairy lagoons and application of synthetic fertilizer). Well depths for about two thirds of the wells used in
this study are not known, but the well depths that are known confirm that nitrate concentrations tend to be
higher in shallower wells (See Appendix A2). The higher nitrate values in shallower wells were also
documented in the February 2010 Report (Ecology 2010). Some of the wells sampled in the study may
tap water from the deeper basalts. As water carries nitrogen from the surface through the soil column to
the water table, oxygenated conditions in the vadose zone and the aquifer facilitate the formation of
nitrate (See Figure 2).
The highest levels of nitrate generally occur in the shallow alluvial aquifer (Ecology 2010). Water-
bearing zones in the upper basaltic layers that underlie the alluvial aquifer may be vulnerable to
contamination from the shallow aquifer. Basaltic layers develop significant fracture permeability as they
cool after volcanic eruption. They are often referred to as "fractured basalts."
Examination of available well logs in the vicinity of the dairies that EPA studied, Haak Dairy and the
Dairy Cluster15, indicates that residential wells are typically screened in the shallow alluvial aquifer or in
the upper basalt layers (Appendix A2). Wells screened in these zones are vulnerable to anthropogenic
contamination. The fractured condition of the shallow basalts often means the water-bearing layers
between the shallow basaltic layers are likely to be in communication with the shallow aquifer. A well
pump set in a shallow basaltic water-bearing zone could, depending on conditions, pull contaminated
water down through the shallow upper layers.
A brief discussion of the subsurface soil types for the dairies and irrigated cropland is included in the
results section. A more detailed soil discussion of soil types for the dairies and irrigated croplands is
presented in Appendix B. A complete soil report for each dairy and irrigated crop field was compiled by
EPA (EPA 2012a) from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil data mart (NRCS
2012).
In addition to the variability caused by the physical characteristics of the aquifer, many compounds react
with the silts, sands, and gravels of the aquifer in a way that slows their transport. Some compounds,
such as nitrate and ions like chloride, tend to minimally adsorb and are transported nearly as fast as the
15 The "Dairy Cluster" refers to a group of dairies, including George DeRuyter & Son Dairy, D and A Dairy, Cow Palace 1 and 2,
Liberty Dairy, and Bosnia Dairy, situated north of the Yakima River. The Dairy Cluster is located about 2 miles north of the
town of Liberty, near the northern edge of the irrigated area in the Yakima Valley.
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
water flows in the aquifer. Nitrate does not break down unless it encounters denitrifying bacteria and
organic carbon, resulting in a low oxygen or anoxic environment. Other compounds, such as iron or
manganese, often participate in chemical reactions and can create relatively immobile minerals, which
can change their concentrations as measured in water wells (Fetter 1980).
Organic compounds, which are any gaseous, liquid, or solid chemical compounds containing carbon, are
typically less mobile in water than inorganic compounds. Organic compounds tend to adsorb to organic
carbon in the aquifer and may be degraded by bacteria and either disappear entirely or may be greatly
reduced in concentrations. Even if not broken down, most organic compounds will move much slower
than nitrate because they tend to adsorb to other organic matter in the aquifer. As a result, in general, they
are unlikely to be transported as far or as fast as the nitrate (Stumm and Morgan 1996).
VI. THREE STUDY PHASES
Several sampling efforts conducted to date in the Lower Yakima Valley by various agencies and groups
have focused on nitrate. Although these studies have been useful to document the problem of high nitrate
levels in groundwater and private wells, they did not evaluate the link between the various sources and the
high nitrate levels. The objective of this study was to conduct sampling to evaluate whether chemicals
other than nitrate that are associated with specific sources can be used to link the nitrate contamination in
groundwater and drinking water wells to those sources. In addition, the study used several other
analytical techniques (microbial source tracking, isotopic analysis, and age dating) to evaluate the
contribution of various sources to high nitrate levels in drinking water wells.
To accomplish these objectives, EPA designed a three-phased study within two contiguous segments of
the Yakima River Basin extending approximately 40 miles from the town of Union Gap to the Yakima
County line near the town of Byron. The upper segment comprises the entire Toppenish Basin, and the
lower segment comprises the northern portion of the Benton Basin. The width of the study area was
defined by the width of the Toppenish and Benton Basins along the selected segment, which varies
between approximately 10 and 25 miles (Figure 3).
The main focus of this report is the Phase 3 sampling. Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the study are summarized
below to provide context for the Phase 3 sampling. The purpose of Phase 1 was to identify the major
sources of nitrate in the study area, based on historical records. In Phase 2, the residential wells in closest
proximity to the potential sources were identified, sampled, and the samples analyzed for nitrate using
screening-level analytical protocols and confirmatory laboratory analysis.
Phase 3 involved using the results of Phases 1 and 2 to identify residential wells with high nitrate
concentrations and locate potential upgradient nitrogen sources. Once these source areas were selected,
Phase 3 involved the collection and analyses of numerous samples from the potential source areas,
downgradient wells, and upgradient wells near the dairies. The following subsections provide details
about each phase of the study.
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
A. Phase 1: Geographic Information System (GIS) Tool Development and Screening
Analysis for Nitrogen Sources
The purpose of Phase 1 was to identify the major sources of nitrate in the study area based on historical
records. Phase 1 included the development of a Geographic Information System (GIS) tool to organize a
large amount of historical information and allow the examination of the landscape for spatial patterns in
the data. EPA used the GIS tool to identify sites to be sampled in Phases 2 and 3 of the project. The tool
incorporates information from the Lower Yakima Valley about known nitrate, bacteria, and general
chemistry data. It also includes information on locations of wells, land ownership, parcels with septic
systems, land elevation, depth to groundwater, crop type, estimated fertilizer application rates, dairy and
animal feeding operation locations, roads, and an aerial photo layer.
Phase 1 included a screening analysis to identify the potential major sources of nitrogen in Yakima
County. The estimates for the different sources were used as a relative value to compare with other
source estimates to assist in the study design.
The screening analysis, described below, combined information on land use with some simple
calculations to estimate the amount of potential nitrogen loading from several sources that can be applied
to the land. The estimates indicate three sources — livestock with dairy cattle as the largest contributor,
irrigated cropland, and septic and biosoilds — account for as much as 98 percent of the nitrogen available
for application to the land and potentially delivered to the aquifer (EPA 2012b). Livestock are prevalent
throughout the Yakima Valley study area and accounted for about 65% of the nitrogen. Of this, dairy
cows accounted for 89% of the nitrogen produced by livestock, while beef cattle were estimated at 9%
and all other livestock (sheep, goats) at less than 1% each (EPA 2012b). The estimates were used as
guidelines for the screening and do not account for losses of nitrogen from various biological, physical,
and chemical processes. Based on this screening, EPA focused the Phase 3 sampling on three sources:
dairies, irrigated cropland, and residential septic systems. Although there are other sources of nitrogen in
the Lower Yakima Valley, EPA focused on the three sources believed to contribute the largest quantities
of nitrogen (See Figure 6).
EPA is working to further refine these estimates and further evaluate nitrogen fate and transport in a
collaborative project between EPA and the USGS. A report is due in the winter of 2012. The project
focuses on better characterizing the sources of nitrogen applied to the land and the relationship between
changes in nitrogen loading on the land and levels of nitrate in drinking water wells.
1. DAIRIES
As a result of economies of scale, the total number of dairy operations in the United States has been
declining over time16 while the average number of cows per dairy operation has been increasing (EPA
1998 and USDA 2010). In Yakima County, the number of dairies has decreased from 71 dairies in 1998
to 67 dairies in 2010 (WSDA 2010).
'http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications
10
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
For the Phase 1 analysis, EPA used the 2008 Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA)
estimates of the number of dairies, number of animals per dairy, and total nitrogen produced. In 2008,
there were 69 dairies in Yakima County (Figure 7) registered with the WSDA (WSDA 2009). These
facilities had over 130,000 animals (WSDA 2009), an average of almost 2,000 milking animal units per
dairy. Modern dairies generate large quantities of animal wastes, which must be managed appropriately
to prevent pollution, including pollution of surface and groundwater. Greater concentrations of animals
and competition for available land have made it increasingly challenging to effectively manage animal
wastes to prevent adverse impacts to public resources (Harner and others 2007).
In addition to generating large quantities of manure, dairies also generate large amounts of liquid waste
from flushing waste from pens and parlors to collection sites. Liquid wastes are typically stored in a
series of lagoons before they are sprayed on nearby fields as fertilizer.
Dairy wastes contain key components of fertilizer, including nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium.
When used as a fertilizer, dairy wastes are often supplemented with synthetic fertilizer to meet specific
nutrient needs of the crop being grown. In the lower parts of the Yakima Valley, dairies are concentrated
around the cities of Sunnyside, Grandview, Mabton and Granger, although some are in more sparsely
populated areas of the valley and on the Yakama Indian Reservation.
The total annual nitrogen production associated with dairies in Yakima County in 2008, without
accounting for estimated losses, is approximately 36 million pounds per year. This amount was
calculated by multiplying the number of dairy cows by the estimated nitrogen production rate per cow
provided by the WSDA (WSDA 2009).
In addition to the animal waste lagoons, manure piles, and application fields that EPA sampled for this
study, there are other potential sources on a dairy that could contribute to groundwater nitrogen loading.
Other potential nitrogen sources include, but are not limited to: silage leachate, cow pens, dry wells, and
ditches and pipelines between lagoon solids separators.
Large dairies employ many workers - the Cow Palace has more than 85 employees, for example.17
Presumably the dairies in the study have substantial human waste septic systems because the area is
unsewered.
Ponded water on soils mixed with manure could result in infiltration of nitrogen into the soil column.
WSDA inspection reports for some dairies indicate that roof runoff is generally not directed away from
areas contaminated with manure (WSDA 2012), so roof runoff could flush nitrogen into the soil column
during rain or snowmelt events.
Some of the dairies in the study may be a source of inorganic nitrogen from synthetic fertilizer. WSDA
inspection reports indicate the George DeRuyter & Sons Dairy, D and A Dairy, and the Liberty and
Bosnia Dairies use synthetic fertilizer to supplement manure applications (WSDA 2012).
7 Cow Palace website - http://cowpalacedairy.com/index.cfm?pid=inc_management
11
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
2. IRRIGATED CROPLAND
Yakima County is one of the world's most fertile growing regions, with more than 240,000 acres of
cropland. Agriculture is the primary economic activity in Yakima County, accounting for approximately
70 to 80 percent of land use. Most of the cropland in the area is irrigated. The major irrigation districts
include Roza, Sunny side Valley, Wapato Irrigation Project, Grandview, and Zillah. Major commodities
grown in the valley include apples, alfalfa, corn for silage and grain, grapes, hops, cherries, and mint (see
Figure 8).
Inorganic fertilizers can contain high amounts of nitrogen. Nitrogen application is essential to crop
growth and development. Application of nutrients or water at rates greater than plant demand can result in
excess nitrogen infiltrating through the soil below the root zone into the groundwater. Also, nitrogen
applied at appropriate rates but with high irrigation rates can move rapidly through the vadose zone, prior
to full crop uptake. The amount, timing, frequency, and type of fertilizer, as well as the timing and
amount of irrigation relative to the application of fertilizer and plant water demand affect the contribution
to groundwater from fertilizer. Other factors such as denitrification in the soil by microorganisms, soil
type, and volatilization to the atmosphere, also affect the amount of nitrate in groundwater.
EPA estimates that about 18.5 million pounds of nitrogen are applied to irrigated cropland each year in
Yakima County. This estimate was derived by taking the total acreage for each crop in Yakima County in
2007 and multiplying the acreage by the Washington State University recommended average nitrogen
application rate for each crop (EPA 2012b). With this methodology, EPA estimated that corn, mint and
hops in Yakima County receive about 6.0, 2.1, and 1.6 million pounds of nitrogen per year respectively.
Irrigated crop fields accounted for approximately 30% of the all nitrogen available for application to the
land in Yakima County. These rates are general and the specific application rates and management
practices by farmers could vary greatly.
3. SEPTIC SYSTEMS AND WASTEWATER
Septic systems and domestic wastewater account for about three percent of the total amount of nitrogen
applied to the land in Yakima County. Domestic wastewater is managed by city wastewater treatment
plants in Yakima County, but a large percentage of the rural population relies on septic systems (see
Figure 9). As of 2009, there were about 22,000 septic systems registered with Yakima County (EPA
2012b). Septic systems in Yakima County are generally designed for an average number of occupants per
home based on the square footage.
There are 16 permitted wastewater treatment facilities in Yakima County (EPA 2012b). As wastewater
treatment facilities process and treat wastewater, they produce biosolids, which are nutrient-rich organic
material. After the solids have been processed and treated, they are recycled as fertilizer and soil
amendment. Biosolids land application requires a permit from Washington State Department of Ecology.
About 200,000 pounds of nitrogen in biosolids are applied in Yakima County per year, which includes
biosolids imported from metropolitan municipalities in Western Washington State (EPA 2012b).
An estimated 1.4 million pounds per year of potential nitrogen from human waste was calculated by
multiplying the 2007 population in Yakima County (234,564) by the rate of 6 pounds of nitrogen per
person per year (EPA 2012b). This approach provides an overall estimate of 1.6 million pounds per year
of nitrogen from biosolids and septic systems combined.
12
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
4. CONCLUSION AND OTHER SOURCES
This screening analysis showed that about 65 percent of the nitrogen generated in Yakima County comes
from livestock predominantly as dairy cattle, about 30 percent from fertilizers applied to irrigated crops,
about 3 percent from septic and wastewater systems, and the rest, less than two percent, from other
relatively minor sources.
These minor sources include nitrogen deposited by precipitation and non-cropland application of fertilizer
to lawns, public parks, and golf courses. Application of nitrogen fertilizers was not estimated for dryland
wheat crops grown in the valley because they are not irrigated and the low natural precipitation for the
area limits the leaching potential of nitrate.
B. Phase 2: Identification of Wells with High Nitrate Concentrations
The objective of Phase 2 was to sample wells that were downgradient of the potential nitrogen sources
identified in Phase 1, to assist in identifying sampling locations for Phase 3 sampling, and to provide
residents with information on the nitrate levels in their drinking water wells. The GIS tool developed in
Phase 1 was used to help identify sampling locations for Phase 2. EPA conducted the Phase 2 sampling
between February 22 and March 6, 2010. Figure 10 provides a map of the locations and nitrate
concentrations for the Phase 2 sampling, Table Cl in Appendix C contains a summary of the results for
the compounds evaluated in Phase 2.
EPA developed a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for Phase 2 (EPA 2010a). It identifies the data
quality objectives, sampling process design, sample collection procedures, sample handling and custody
requirements, analytical methods, instrument calibration, data management, and standard operating
procedures for instrument calibration, shipping container preparation, and chain-of-custody process. The
Center for Hispanic Health Promotion (CHHP), a local bilingual, bicultural organization affiliated with
the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, was contracted to assist in recruiting residences for
sampling, scheduling, and Spanish interpretation assistance.
A series of public meetings, newspaper articles, and radio announcements notified the community of
EPA's Phase 2 work. Samples were collected by two-person teams trained for the project. Sample teams
verified consent for access from the homeowner, collected a global positioning system (GPS) location at
the well, and completed a data collection form developed by EPA. Each sampling team maintained a
field logbook to document sampling activities. Water quality parameters were measured in the field using
a Horiba multi-parameter probe for each well.
The parameters measured included dissolved oxygen, oxidation/reduction potential, total dissolved solids,
pH, and temperature. The sampling team also used nitrate colorimetric test strips (Hach® test strips) as a
field screening tool to provide an indication of whether the water exceeded the MCL of 10 mg/L for
nitrate. The Hach® test strips measure nitrate concentrations in increments of 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, and 50
mg/L. If the Hach® test strip indicated the water may exceed the MCL (10 mg/L), samples were collected
for analysis by EPA's Manchester Environmental Laboratory ("EPA's Manchester Laboratory").
Samples submitted to the laboratory were also analyzed for enumeration and quantification of total
coliform using EPA's mobile microbiology laboratory. If total coliform bacteria were present, the
samples were also analyzed for E. coll and fecal coliform bacteria.
1?
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
During the two weeks EPA was in the field, 331 homes were visited and all were screened for nitrate
levels using the Hach® test strips. EPA's Manchester Laboratory received 189 samples for analysis. Of
these 189 samples, 102 were analyzed for nitrate and chloride, two were analyzed for nitrate and nitrite,
and 123 were analyzed for total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN). Samples for 67 of those homes, or about 20
percent, were found to exceed the MCL of 10 mg/L for nitrate (Figure 10).
The percentage of homes with nitrate levels in wells above the MCL in this study were higher than the 12
percent from earlier studies because the homes sampled in Phase 2 were selected based on their proximity
to likely sources. This method of selection would be expected to bias the results compared with a study
where the sampling locations were selected randomly. If potential upgradient sources such as dairy
lagoons, dairy application fields, irrigated crop fields, or septic systems were likely sources of nitrate to
the aquifer, this would help explain the higher percentage of residences with nitrate levels over the MCL.
Another possible explanation for the higher percentages of water wells with nitrate levels above the MCL
in this study is that the previous studies were completed several years ago and the areas with nitrate levels
above the MCL may have increased in size.
Eight wells, or 2 percent, were found to have fecal coliform bacterial contamination or contamination
with E. coli. This result is less than the 20 percent frequency found in past studies.
Residents were informed of the nitrate results from the Hach® test strips immediately. Residents of all of
the homes with nitrate levels greater than 10 mg/L or with bacterial contamination were provided with
written laboratory results.
The Phase 2 sampling was informative in several ways. The results confirmed that nitrate concentrations
in many residential drinking water wells were above the EPA drinking water standard of 10 mg/L and
provided information to the residents on the levels of nitrate in their wells. In addition, the Phase 2 results
were used to identify the Phase 3 sampling locations.
C. Phase 3: Investigating Source Contributions to High Nitrate Concentrations in Drinking
Water Wells
The objective of Phase 3 was to investigate the contribution of various sources from nearby land uses to
high nitrate levels found in water wells using a wide array of sampling and analysis techniques. The
water wells shown in Figure 10 with the highest nitrate concentrations were selected for more extensive
Phase 3 sampling and analyses.
Drinking water samples were collected from existing wells. No new wells were installed for this study.
Available information on well depths is summarized in Appendix Al.
EPA evaluated three types of sources (dairies, irrigated cropland, and residential septic system) (See
Figure 11). The three source types and sampling areas are shown in Table 1. Table 1 also illustrates
how the study design varied, depending on the waste source type (dairy, irrigated cropland, or septic
systems). EPA also collected and analyzed representative residential drinking water wells upgradient of
the dairies. No drinking water wells upgradient of the crop fields or septic systems were sampled.
14
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 1: Overview of the Study Design to Investigate Potential Sources of Nitrate in Water Wells Near Dairies, Irrigated Cropland, and
Septic Systems
Source
Type
Dairies
Irrigated
Croplands
Septic
Systems
Sampling Area
Haak Dairy
Dairy Cluster
Schilperoort Farm
Havilah Farm
Wheeler Farm
DVM Sunny Dene
Ranch
Golden Gate Hops
Golden Gate Hops
Mabton
Harrah
Sunnyside
Upgradient
Well
Sample
WW-01
WW-063
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Supply
Well
Sample
WW-02
WW-07,
WW-08,
andWW-
09
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Potential Sources of Nitrate
Lagoons (LG-01 to LG-03)
Manure Piles (SO-01)
Application Fields (SO-02)
Lagoons (LG-04 to LG-15)
Manure Piles (SO-03, SO-05, SO-
07, and SO-09)
Application Fields'5 (SO-04, SO-
06, SO-08, and SO-10)
SO- 11 (Mint)
SO-12 (Mint)
SO- 13 (Corn)
SO-14 (Corn)
SO-15 (Hops)
SO-16 (Hops)
Septic Systems
Septic Systems
Septic Systems
Downgradient
Well Samples
WW-03 to
WW-05
WW-lOto
WW-17
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-28
WW-26
WW-27
WW-21
WW-19
WW-20 and
WW-22
Study Design c'd
Compare chemicals and
microbiology in upgradient
wells and sources with
downgradient wells.
Conduct isotopic analyses
for water wells and lagoons
and age dating for water
wells.
Compare chemicals in
downgradient wells with soil
samples from associated
crop fields.
Compare chemicals in water
wells with influent from 3
wastewater treatment plants
(Zillah, Mabton, and
Toppenish).
aAs noted above, in footnote 2 of the text, EPA collected samples from other wells located upgradient of the Dairy Cluster which were also below the MCL for
nitrate during Phase 2. That data is included in this report in Table Cl in Appendix C (sample location WW-22103 and WW-22085).
bThirry soil samples per application field or crop field were collected at a depth of 1 inch and composited to obtain a representative sample.
°Two additional residential wells, WW-18 and WW-30, were sampled during this study, but were not included in the original study design or listed in this table.
The results for these two wells are documented in Section IX.E of this report.
dSee Table C2 in Appendix C and Table C ES-2 for a description of the analytes for each source.
NA - not applicable.
15
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
In general:
• Investigation of each of the two dairy areas (Haak Dairy and the Dairy Cluster) included
sampling a number of downgradient wells, dairy animal waste lagoons, dairy manure piles, and
dairy application fields. In addition one upgradient well was sampled in each dairy area. The
well and waste samples were analyzed for many different chemicals and microbes using several
analytical techniques. The data for the downgradient wells were compared to the data for the
upgradient wells and the various waste sources to show the relative nitrate contamination and to
determine if any of the different compounds could be used to identify specific sources.18
• The investigation of six irrigated crop fields (two hops, two mint, and two corn) included
sampling six downgradient wells, one downgradient of each crop field. A soil sample was
collected from each of the six irrigated crop fields. The chemicals detected in each downgradient
well were compared with the chemicals detected in the corresponding soil sample from each of
the six crop fields.
• The investigation of the three septic waste areas included sampling residential wells
downgradient from septic systems. The chemicals detected in the downgradient wells were
compared to samples collected from the influent to wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) located
in Toppenish, Mabton and Zillah. These WWTP influent samples were selected to be
representative of the types of chemicals that could be released from residential septic systems,
while recognizing that these WWTPs also may receive commercial and industrial waste streams.
The water well, dairy lagoon, dairy manure pile, dairy application field, crop field, and WWTP influent
samples were evaluated for several general water chemistry parameters, microbiology parameters, and
organic chemicals. Not all samples were evaluated for all of the general chemistry, microbiology
parameters, or organic chemicals. The water well, dairy lagoons, and WWTP influent samples were
evaluated using isotopic analysis and the water well samples were evaluated using age dating techniques
(See Section VII).
1. PHASE 3 SAMPLING LOCATIONS
EPA used the Phase 1 GIS tool, Phase 2 sampling results, and a set of selection criteria to identify 63
sampling locations for Phase 3. (See Figure 11 for the location for each of the sampling sites). Table C2
in Appendix C provides the sample location, sample location type, description of the sample medium, and
a summary of analytes at each location. For more information on the sampling locations and sampling
procedures see the Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yakima Basin Nitrate Study, Phase 3 -
Comprehensive Analytical Source Tracer Sampling, April 2010 (EPA 201 Ob).
18 Note that during Phase 2, for both the Haak Dairy and the Dairy Cluster focus areas, nitrate data was collected from additional
downgradient residential drinking water wells and, for the Dairy Cluster, nitrate data was collected from two additional
upgradient drinking water wells (see Appendix Cl for results from sample locations WW-22103 and WW-22085).
16
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Criteria for Selection of Dairies and Associated Sampling Locations
EPA collected samples at several dairies. Dairies were selected based on data from Phases 1 and 2 of the
project, considering the following criteria:
• High concentration of animals per acre.
• Indication of over-application of nutrients to fields associated with the dairies based on
information contained in WSDA inspection reports. (WSDA 2012).
• Relatively consistent direction of groundwater flow from season to season.
• Minimal upgradient nitrate sources to the extent possible.
• Existence of private drinking water wells along the downgradient side, or sides, of the dairy.
• History of nitrate levels above the MCL in downgradient drinking water wells.
Samples were collected from dairy animal waste lagoons, dairy manure piles, dairy application fields, and
supply wells associated with the dairies. In general, one sample was collected at the influent to the lagoon
system, and two samples were collected at the outlet from the lagoon system. The dairy manure pile
samples were collected on site at each dairy. The dairy application field samples were collected where
lagoon waste had recently been applied. Residential drinking water wells upgradient and downgradient of
the dairies were also sampled.
Selection of upgradient and downgradient wells for this study was based on groundwater flow direction
and gradient data compiled by USGS. According to USGS, the generalized direction of groundwater
flow in the study area in both the shallow sedimentary hydrogeologic unit and the deeper basalts is toward
the Yakima River (USGS 2009). Flow directions can vary locally due to canal/lateral leakage, irrigation,
drains, streams, pumpage, variations in recharge, spatially varying hydraulic characteristics, and
topographic setting (USGS 2009). Groundwater flow directions were determined by USGS by measuring
depth to water and reflecting these localized influences at the time it was measured. In this study, EPA
sampled residential drinking water from a tap and depth to water was not measured.
Criteria for Selection of Irrigated Cropland Areas and Associated Sampling Locations
Soil samples were collected from two fields each of corn, hops, and mint.19 These crops were selected
because they require significant quantities of nitrogen to produce the large amounts of plant biomass for
yield in contrast with other crops such as tree fruit. Thirty shallow soil samples per field were collected at
a depth of 1 inch and composited to obtain a representative soil sample. One well situated downgradient
of each crop field was selected for sampling. The criteria used for selection of the six crop fields were as
follows:
19 The owners of the six crop fields sampled are indicated in Table 1.
17
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
• History of high fertilizer application rates, use of agricultural chemicals, and irrigation water
applied for crop growth.
• Relatively consistent direction of groundwater flow from season to season.
• Minimal upgradient nitrate sources.
• History of nitrate levels above the MCL in downgradient drinking water wells.
Criteria for Selection of Residential Septic System Areas and Associated Sampling Locations
Samples were collected from four private drinking water wells that had high nitrate concentrations in
Phase 2 and were located downgradient of areas with a high density of residential septic systems.
Additionally, samples were collected from the influent to three small wastewater treatment plants in the
Lower Yakima Valley (Zillah, Mabton, and Toppenish) to serve as a surrogate for septic system influent
and to characterize compounds found in rural septic systems. The criteria used to select the water well
sampling locations in the residential septic system areas included:
• High density of homes not served by sanitary sewers.
• Relatively consistent direction of groundwater flow from season to season.
• Minimal upgradient nitrate sources other than septic.
VII. PHASE 3: COMPOUNDS AND ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES
EPA analyzed for nearly 200 chemicals and used several analytical techniques to investigate the source of
high levels of nitrate in water wells. The chemical analyses and analytical techniques were grouped as
follows: general chemistry; microbial data; organic compounds; isotopic analysis; and age dating. The
data for each of the analytical techniques are evaluated independently in an effort to identify the specific
sources of the high nitrate concentrations found in residential drinking water wells. Table 2 summarizes
the chemicals analyzed and the techniques used to analyze the samples collected from the water wells,
dairy sources (dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, and dairy application fields), wastewater treatment
plants and irrigated crop fields.
This section describes the analyses that make up each of the five groups, the rationale for performing each
of the analyses, and the issues or challenges associated with specific analyses and techniques. The
analytical results are summarized in Appendix C and a discussion of the results is provided in Section IX.
18
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 2: Summary of the Chemical Groups and Media Included in Phase 3 of the Study
Compound or Analytical
Technique (Number of
Compounds Analyzed)
Water
Wells
Dairy
Lagoons
Dairy
Manure Piles
Dairy
Application Fields
WWTP
Influent"
Crop Soils
General Chemistry
Nitrate (1)
Other Nitrogen Forms3
Major Ions (9)
Trace Elements (12)
Perchlorate (1)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Microbiology
Bacteria (3)
Microbial Source Trackingb
X
X
X
X
X
X
Organic compounds
Pesticides (50)
Trace Organics (69)
Pharmaceuticals (31)
Hormones (20)
X
X
X
X
Xd
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Xd
X
X
X
X
X
X
Analytical Techniques
Isotopic Analysis (2)
Age Dating (NA)
X
X
X
X
aOther nitrogen forms for water wells and lagoons include ammonia, TKN, and nitrate plus nitrite. Other forms of nitrogen for manure piles, dairy application
fields, and crop samples include extractable nitrate, extractable ammonia, and total nitrogen by combustion.
b Microbial source tracking was conducted only if there was an indication of fecal contamination detected in the sample.
'Majority of influent from households but contribution from businesses and industry also expected.
dBecause of matrix interference, results for pesticide analysis for lagoon and wastewater treatment influent samples were not useable.
X - the compound or analytical technique was analyzed.
NA - not applicable
19
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
A. General Chemistry
The study evaluated four areas of general chemistry: nitrate and other forms of nitrogen; major ions;
minor and trace inorganic elements; and perchlorate. Each is discussed below.
1. NITRATE AND OTHER FORMS OF NITROGEN
Water well samples were analyzed for nitrate, nitrate plus nitrite, ammonia, and TKN. TKN is the total
concentration of organic nitrogen and ammonia. TKN was analyzed to ensure all major forms of nitrogen
were quantified. Samples from the dairy lagoons and WWTP influent were analyzed for nitrate plus
nitrite, ammonia, and TKN. Nitrate alone was not analyzed in the lagoon and WWTP influent samples
because nitrate would not be expected to be present in these media because of the anoxic (lack of oxygen)
conditions.
In addition, the total nitrogen concentration for each sample was calculated by summing the
concentrations of nitrate, nitrite, and TKN. These values were used to compare total nitrogen
concentrations in upgradient and downgradient water wells with total nitrogen concentrations in sources,
such as dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, and dairy application fields, located between the up- and down-
gradient wells, and to evaluate whether patterns exist. The results for the water wells, dairy lagoons, and
WWTP influent samples are summarized in Table C3 in Appendix C.
Dairy manure piles, dairy application field, and crop field samples were analyzed for extractable nitrate
(reported as Nitrate-N/Nitrite), extractable ammonia (reported as Ammonium-N), and total nitrogen by
combustion (reported as Total Nitrogen/Solid). These analyses were conducted to provide an indication
of the total nitrogen concentration in the dairy manure piles, dairy application field, and crop field
samples. The results for the dairy manure piles, dairy application field samples, and crop field samples
are included in Table C4 in Appendix C. Nitrate was analyzed at three different laboratories using
different methods. Cascade Analytical Laboratory in Union Gap analyzed the water wells samples for
nitrate using EPA Method 300.0 because this method is specified for evaluating nitrate concentrations in
drinking water. Method 300.0 provides for measurement of nitrate alone. Method 300.0 requires the
sample to be analyzed within 48 hours after it is collected; therefore, samples were shipped to Cascade
Analytical Laboratory because of its proximity to the study area.
EPA's Manchester Laboratory analyzed the water well samples for nitrate using Method 353.2. Method
353.2 measures nitrate plus nitrite. Finally, the University of Nebraska - Lincoln Water Sciences
Laboratory ("UNL" or "UNL Laboratory"), also analyzed the water well samples for nitrate as part of the
isotopic analysis. The UNL Laboratory used Distillation and Determination of Ammonium and Nitrate
Nitrogen in Water for Nitrogen Isotope Analysis (SOP# Analyte-DISTN15-004) for their analysis.
Table C5 in Appendix C provides a summary of the nitrate concentrations reported by each of the three
laboratories for the water wells sampled in Phase 3. The results for the nitrate analysis are similar among
the three laboratories, with one exception: sample WW-18 where there was good agreement between two
of the three results.
20
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
2. MAJOR IONS
All water wells, dairy lagoons, and WWTP influent samples were analyzed for the major ions by EPA's
Manchester Laboratory. The major ions were not analyzed in the soil and manure samples because, in
general, the purpose for analyzing the major ions is to track the chemical evolution of migrating
groundwater.
An ion is an electrically charged species consisting of a single atom or a group of atoms. It is formed
when a neutral atom or group of atoms either gains or loses electrons. The major ions evaluated included
calcium, chloride, fluoride, iron, magnesium, nitrate, potassium, sodium, and sulfate. The results for the
major ions are included in Table C6 in Appendix C.
Different ions have different chemistries and transport mechanisms. For example, chloride does not
generally sorb to particles or participate in reactions with the aquifer material. Other ions, such as
potassium and sodium, are much more likely to react with minerals and sorb to aquifer materials.
For this study, the results for major ions in the various samples were compared to determine whether a
spatial pattern was observed in the concentrations. If the concentrations of specific ions in the
downgradient wells are higher than in the upgradient wells, and those same ions are abundant in a specific
source then the source is a likely contributor to those higher levels. For example, if chloride is detected at
high levels in a dairy lagoon and the concentrations of chloride in a water well downgradient of the dairy
lagoon are higher than in a well upgradient of the dairy lagoon, it indicates the dairy lagoon is a likely
source of chloride to the downgradient well.
3. MINOR AND TRACE INORGANIC ELEMENTS
EPA's Manchester Laboratory analyzed the samples from all water wells, dairy lagoons, and WWTP
influents for minor and trace inorganic elements. Twelve minor and trace inorganic elements were
evaluated: arsenic, barium, bromide, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, manganese, mercury, selenium,
silver, and zinc. Minor and trace inorganic elements were not analyzed in the samples from crop fields or
manure piles. The results for the minor and trace inorganic elements are included in Table C6 in
Appendix C.
The trace inorganic elements were included in this study to evaluate the potential influence of organic
carbon sources. The mobility of certain metals is controlled by oxidation/reduction potential (how oxygen
rich the waters are), which in turn is controlled by the amount of organic carbon consumed in microbial
reactions. For example, if the metal concentrations in downgradient water wells are elevated compared
with the upgradient wells, it may indicate the influence of an organic carbon source such as a dairy
lagoon.
4. PERCHLORATE
All wells were tested for perchlorate and analyzed by the EPA's Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research
Center in Ada, Oklahoma ("EPA's Ada Laboratory" or "Ada"). The results for perchlorate are in Table
C7 in Appendix C. Perchlorate is the most highly oxidized form of chlorine and tends to accumulate in
caliche-associated soils in arid regions such as Eastern Washington and Oregon (Rao and others 2007).
In this study, it was used as an indicator for potential naturally occurring nitrate.
21
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
There is a very slight, but steady, deposition of nitrate and perchlorate from the atmosphere. Much of the
deposition starts as aerosol salt particles released from combustion in transportation or power generation
or carried off the oceans as aerosols or dust particles from deserts by winds (Prospero and Lamb 2003).
In this region, the National Atmospheric Deposition Program (http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/) calculates aerial
deposition of atmospherically derived nitrate at approximately 0.9 pound per acre per year. Perchlorate
accumulates at much lower rates but has not been studied to the same extent, so data are lacking.
This accumulation of nitrate and perchlorate has been occurring since the end of the last glacial period,
approximately 10,000 years ago. In areas of higher rainfall, both these compounds are sufficiently
soluble to be carried into the subsurface and potentially into groundwater. However, these compounds
can build up in the shallow subsurface with the calcium carbonate that forms the cement-like caliche layer
in arid regions such as the Lower Yakima Valley. The same conditions that would wash the nitrate out of
a caliche soil horizon (the first application of irrigation water to a new field converted from sage habitat)
would flush out perchlorate as well.
B. Microbiology
All water wells, dairy lagoons, and WWTP influent samples were analyzed for either total coliform, fecal
coliform, or Escherichia coli (E. coif) as an indicator of fecal contamination. The results for
microbiology are in Table C8 in Appendix C. EPA's mobile microbiology laboratory from its
Manchester Laboratory or Cascade Analytical Laboratory in Union Gap conducted the analysis. MST
was performed for nine of the dairy lagoons and all three of the WWTP influent samples because they
tested positive for fecal contamination. Six of the lagoons were not tested for MST, even though they
tested positive for fecal contamination, because of limited resources. MST was not conducted for the
Phase 3 water well samples because fecal coliform was not detected.
MST is a means of identifying the source of the fecal contamination in a water sample. The method used
in this study is genotypic and is used to detect the presence of host-specific Bacteroides species shed in
the fecal material of humans or ruminants. This method allows a presence or absence reporting format for
these two sources. A common way of referring to the host-specific genetic identifier for each of these
species is a "biomarker."
Because the MST method used in this case is limited to presence or absence reporting only for human and
ruminant sources, the data cannot be used to: (1) identify the quantity or proportional levels of
contamination from either source; (2) identify specific sources other than human or ruminant; or (3)
differentiate between the various kinds of ruminants — cattle, goats, sheep, deer, or elk.
However, the data can be used to: (1) identify the frequency of identification of either of the sources from
a particular sampling site if more than one set of samples is collected from the same site; (2) identify
human or ruminant source contamination; and (3) confirm that recent fecal contamination has occurred.
C. Organic Compounds
The study looked at four groups of organic compounds: pesticides; trace organics; pharmaceuticals; and
hormones. Organic compounds are subject to a number of factors that affect their fate and transport
22"
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
properties and would cause them to travel differently from nitrate in groundwater. Organic molecules are
much more likely to sorb to materials in the aquifer, which could retard their migration compared to
nitrate. In addition, organic compounds are subject to microbial degradation, which would reduce their
concentration in groundwater overtime.
1. PESTICIDES
Fifty pesticides were analyzed in water wells, dairy lagoons, WWTP influents, dairy manure piles, dairy
application field samples, and crop soil samples by EPA's Manchester Laboratory. The term "pesticide"
refers to insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, and various other substances used to control pests. The
pesticide analysis conducted as part of this investigation included insecticides and herbicides. The results
for the pesticides are included in Table C9 in Appendix C.
The pesticides selected for analysis were those that USGS reported had been used in the Yakima Valley
and are considered mobile in groundwater, persistent, or both (Nakagaki and Wolock 2005). Many of the
pesticides are used on specific crops and during specific times of the year. This pattern of usage can be
an advantage, as it can assist to identify the specific crop where the pesticide was applied. At the same
time, it is possible that a particular pesticide, though used in the area, was not applied before the time of
sample collection and may not have been detected in the soil samples collected by EPA.
EPA's Manchester Laboratory reported that the sample matrices provided significant interferences that
made pesticide analysis difficult for dairy lagoons and WWTP influent samples. Because of this problem,
the pesticide concentrations could not be quantified in the dairy lagoons or WWTP influent samples. The
laboratory attempted to develop an extraction and cleanup procedure for the dairy lagoon and WWTP
sample matrix; however, a procedure to resolve the matrix interference could not be developed within the
maximum holding time specified for these samples. The maximum sample holding times would have
been exceeded by the time the laboratory could have developed and tested an effective and reliable
procedure. Therefore, the pesticide results for the dairy lagoon and WWTP samples are considered
unusable for all purposes.
2. TRACE ORGANICS
Each water well, dairy lagoon, and WWTP influent sample was tested for 69 trace organic compounds by
the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory in Denver ("USGS NWQ Laboratory"). The trace organics
were not analyzed in soil or manure samples because the USGS NWQ Laboratory was not equipped for
this type of analysis and the methods for extraction of such samples are complex. The results for the trace
organics and a description of their main use are included in Table CIO in Appendix C.
The USGS developed a method for analyzing a large number of trace organics because USGS and other
researchers had found them in domestic and industrial wastewater (Zaugg and others 2006) as well as
groundwater and surface waters (Kolpin and others 2002, Barnes and others 2008). EPA believed the
trace organics would help to differentiate water wells affected by septic systems (humans) from water
wells influenced by other sources such as dairy lagoons or irrigated cropland. The compounds analyzed
include many that can be associated with human usage, including caffeine, bisphenol A, cholesterol,
menthol, phenol, various flame retardants, acetophenone (fragrance in detergent), benzophenone (fixative
for perfumes), camphor (flavor, oxidant), isoborneol (fragrance in perfume), and many others.
23
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
3. WASTEWATER AND VETERINARY PHARMACEUTICALS
The sample from each water well, dairy lagoon, WWTP influent, dairy manure pile, dairy application
field, and crop sample was analyzed for 14 wastewater pharmaceuticals (see Table 3). UNL performed
the analysis. The results are included in Table Cl 1 in Appendix C.
Table 3: Wastewater Pharmaceuticals Analyzed and a Description of their Uses
Compound Name"
Acetaminophen
Amphetamine
Azithromycin
Caffeine
Carbamazepine
Cotinine
DEBT
Diphenhydramine
Ibuprofen
Methamphetamine
Naproxen
Paraxanthine
Thiabendazole
Triclosan
Description
Pain reliever (Tylenol)
Psychostimulant (Dexedrine)
Antibiotics (Zithromax)
Stimulant
Anticonvulsant
Metabolite of nicotine
Insect repellent
Antihistamine
Pain reliever
Psychostimulant
Pain reliever (Aleve)
Stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Parasiticide (mintezol)
Antibacterial
aThe University of Nebraska - Lincoln Water Sciences Laboratory (UNL) conducted the analyses for these
compounds.
The group is identified as "wastewater pharmaceuticals" because they are generally used by people for
therapeutic reasons and have been detected in municipal wastewater (Ternes and others 2004), surface
waters (Kolpin and others 2002), groundwater (Barnes and others 2008), and drinking water (Benotti and
others 2009). Many of the compounds are for over-the-counter use (for example, acetaminophen and
ibuprofen) and are ingested, but a few are applied topically (DEBT and triclosan). Two of the compounds
may be used in other animals (thiabendazole and DEET).
People typically excrete 50 to 90 percent of the active ingredients in ingested drugs, either as
unmetabolized pharmaceuticals or as metabolites (McGovern and McDonald 2003). These excreted
compounds can enter a municipal WWTP or a septic system. Detection of these compounds in water
wells may provide evidence that septic systems are a likely source of nitrate. If detected in the influent to
the WWTPs, it can establish whether these compounds are being excreted by humans and ending up in
municipal sewage waste. If the compounds are detected in the WWTP influent, they can be compared
with detected compounds in water wells to evaluate whether septic systems may contribute to the
presence of these compounds in well water.
In addition, the sample from each water well, dairy lagoon, WWTP influent, dairy manure pile, dairy
application field, and crop sample was analyzed for 17 additional pharmaceuticals and classified as
"veterinary pharmaceuticals" for this study. Table 4 lists the compounds and the current U.S. Food and
24
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Drug Administration (FDA) approved uses (FDA 201 la and FDA 201 Ib). Many of the pharmaceuticals
shown in Table 4 do not require a veterinarian's prescription and are available for over-the-counter
purchase (FDA 201 la and FDA 201 Ib).20 The majority of the over-the-counter pharmaceuticals are
included in animal feed. The UNL Laboratory also conducted these analyses. The results are included in
Table C12 in Appendix C.
Table 4: Veterinary Pharmaceuticals Analyzed and their FDA Approved Uses
Compound Name3
Chlortetracycline (total)
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Oxytetracycline
Ractopamine
Sulfachloropyridazine
Sulfadimethoxine
Sulfamerazine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethizole
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracycline
Tiamulin
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
Current FDA Approved Useb
Cattle (beef, dairy),
poultry, swine, and sheep
Cattle (beef, dairy) and humans
Swine, poultry, and
Cattle (beef, dairy),
Cattle (beef, dairy),
Cattle (beef), swine
Cattle (beef), swine
Cattle (beef, dairy),
humans
and poultry
poultry, sheep, and humans
, and poultry.
, and sheep
and poultry
Poultry
Cattle (beef, dairy),
poultry, and swine
Dogs and cats
Humans
Swine
Cattle (beef, dairy),
poultry, sheep, swine, and humans
Swine
Cattle (beef, dairy),
poultry, and swine
Swine and poultry
aThe University of Nebraska - Lincoln Water Sciences Laboratory (UNL) conducted the analyses for these
compounds.
bApproved as of November 2011.
Detections of the compounds in Table 4 in water wells would provide evidence that dairy cattle or other
animals are a likely source of those compounds. For example, if monensin is detected in water wells,
then it is coming from a source other than people (monensin is not approved for use in humans). If the
compounds are detected in dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, or dairy application fields, it is a good
indication that the dairy is using the compound.
The UNL Laboratory analyzed the compounds in Table 4 because they are used in livestock production
at therapeutic doses to treat and prevent disease and at sub-therapeutic doses as prophylactics and growth
20 Compounds that can be obtained over-the-counter include chlortetracycline; erythromycin; lincomycin; monensin;
ractopamine; Sulfadimethoxine; sulfamethazine; sulfathiazole; tetracycline; tiamulin; trenbolone; tylosin; and virginiamycin.
25
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
promoters (Meyer 2004) and have been found at low levels in various environmental media: groundwater
(Barnes and others 2008 and Kummerer 2009); surface water (Koplin and others 2002; Christina and
others 2003; and Kummerer, 2009); and wastewater treatment facilities (Ternes and others 2004; and
Lubliner and others 2010). More specifically, several of the compounds have been found in dairy lagoons
(Watanabe and others 2008 and Watanabe and others 2010); soil and surface samples from dairies
(Watanabe and others 2010); private wells nearby a beef cattle operation (Bart and others 2006); and in
groundwater underlying swine and beef cattle facilities (Bartlet-Hunt and others 2011). Some of the
compounds in Table 4 (such as tetracycline and erythromycin) are also used by people (Kummerer 2009).
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Animal Health Monitoring System conducted a
survey to evaluate the use of antibiotics in dairy operations for disease prevention, disease treatment, and
growth promotion in pre-weaned heifers, weaned heifers, and mature cows (USDA 2008). The survey
represented 17 of the nation's major dairy states (Washington was included) and represented about 82
percent of the U.S. dairy cows. The results indicate that the majority of dairy operations use antibiotics to
treat for diarrhea, digestive problems, respiratory problems, mastitis, reproductive disorders, and
lameness.
EPA requested information from the dairies on the use of pharmaceuticals in their operations to identify
which of the pharmaceuticals might be used by the dairies in this study. The dairies declined to provide
this information to EPA; therefore, there is no specific information from the dairies on their use of these
compounds.
4. HORMONES
Each water well, lagoon, and WWTP influent sample was analyzed for five estrogen hormones (17-a-
estradiol, 17-a-ethynyl-estradiol; 17-(3-estradiol; estriol; and estrone) by EPA's Robert S. Ken-
Environmental Research Center in Ada, Oklahoma. The results for these hormones are in Table C13 in
Appendix C.
In addition, each water well, dairy lagoon, WWTP influent, dairy manure pile, dairy application
field sample, and crop sample was tested for 20 estrogen, androgen, and progestin hormones by the
UNL Laboratory, including the five estrogen hormones analyzed by EPA's Ada Laboratory. The
results for these analytes are in Table C14 in Appendix C. Table 5 shows all the compounds
evaluated and their natural source or general use. The table also provides information on the FDA
approved uses for certain of the analytes as of November 1, 2011 (FDA 201 la and FDA 201 Ib).
Analytes were selected both as a result of laboratory method development showing success at analysis
and because of the frequent detections in the environment. Most of these hormones are produced naturally
by humans and other animals (Williams and Stancel, 1996; Wilson, 1996; Lange and others, 2002;
Johnson and others, 2006), and some are even produced by plants or fungi (Carson and others, 2008).
Many of these hormones can be used as pharmaceuticals in human and veterinary clinical practices
(Zheng and others 2008).
26
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 5: Hormonally Active Compounds Analyzed and Descriptions of their Origins and Current
FDA Approved Uses
Compound Name"
Description (Current FDA Approved Use)
Analyzed at both EPA's Ada Laboratory and the UNL Laboratory
17-p-Estradiol
17-a-Estradiol
Estriol
Estrone
17-a-Ethynyl Estradiol
Estrogen, natural female sex hormone - many animals
Estrogen, natural isomer of 17- (3-estradiol - many animals
Estrogen, natural female sex hormone - many animals
Estrogen, natural female sex hormone - many animals
Estrogen, synthetic analogue of estradiol used for birth control (human)
Analyzed at the UNL Laboratory Only
1 1-Keto Testosterone
1 7-a-Hydroxyprogesterone
4-Androstenedione
Androsterone
Epitestosterone
Progesterone
Testosterone
17-a-trenbolone
17-(3-trenbolone
Androstadienedione
a-Zearalanol
a-Zearalenol
(3-Zearalanol
(3-Zearalenol
Melengesterol Acetate
Androgen, oxidized metabolite of natural testosterone - many animals
Inactive metabolite of natural progesterone - many animals
Androgen, natural precursor in producing testosterone and estrogens -
many animals
Androgen, natural metabolite of testosterone - many animals
Inactive isomer of natural testosterone - many animals
Progestin, natural female sex hormone - many animals; also used as a
growth promoter (beef cattle)
Androgen, natural male sex hormone - many animals
Androgen, synthetic growth promoter (beef cattle)
Androgen, synthetic growth promoter (beef cattle)
Androgen, metabolite of natural progesterone and testosterone - many
animals; also used as precursor for producing synthetic boldenone, a
growth promoter (horse)
Estrogen, naturally produced by plant fungi and found in pasture animals
- many animals; also produced synthetically as a growth promoter (beef
cattle and sheep)
Estrogen, precursor of natural a-zearalanol- many animals
Estrogen, isomer of a-zearalanol naturally produced by plant fungi and
found in pasture animals - many animals
Estrogen, precursor of natural (3-zearalanol- many animals
Progestin, synthetic growth promoter (beef cattle)
aEPA's Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Center (EPA's Ada Laboratory) and the University of Nebraska -
Lincoln Water Sciences Laboratory (UNL Laboratory) both conducted the analyses for these compounds.
Many of the compounds have been detected at low levels in various environmental media or sources,
including surface waters (Kolpin and others 2002); dairy lagoons (Kolodziej and others 2004; Arnon and
others 2008; Hutchins and others 2007, and Zheng and others 2008); groundwater associated with dairies
(Kolodziej and others 2004, Arnon and others 2008); and manure at dairy facilities (Raman and others
2004).
27
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Some of the synthetic hormones analyzed could be indicative of specific animal sources. For example,
17-a-ethynyl-estradiol is a synthetic analogue of 17-a-estradiol and is used in hormonal contraception
exclusively in humans. This compound would not be expected to be found in dairy lagoons, unless the
lagoons also receive human waste, but could be found in WWTP influent and septic systems.
Another example includes the synthetic growth hormones trenbolone and melengesterol acetate, which
are used to promote growth in beef cattle. These compounds are not approved for use in dairy cows, and
would not be expected to be detected in dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, or dairy application fields. If
these compounds are detected in water wells, it is an indication that there is a source other than dairy
cows or people.
In addition to these compounds, there are some hormones that might indicate a specific animal source, but
are not necessarily conclusive. For example, 17-a-estradiol is predominantly produced by dairy cows and
could be useful for source tracking (Hanselman and others, 2003), but it is also found in smaller amounts
in other animals and in fact can be produced during biotransformation of other natural hormones (Czajka
and Londry, 2006). Another example is a-zearalanol and its isomers and precursors; this is produced
synthetically as a growth promoter for sheep and beef cattle, but is also produced naturally by plant fungi
and can be found in pasture-grazed animals not subject to hormone treatment (Erasmuson and others,
1994).
D. Isotopic Analysis
Samples from all the water wells, dairy lagoons, and WWTPs were submitted to the UNL Laboratory for
isotopic analysis. The results of the isotopic analyses are presented in Table C15 in Appendix C. A
detailed discussion regarding the interpretation of the isotopic data can be found in Appendix D.
Stable isotopes of the various nitrogen species that make up dissolved inorganic nitrogen (nitrate, nitrite,
and ammonium) in water can indicate the general source, or combination of sources, or dominant
processes acting on nitrogen in groundwater (Kendall 1998; Kendall and Aravena 1999; Michener and
Lajtha 2007). Stable isotopes of nitrate and ammonium can explain the possible origin and process that
formed the dissolved inorganic nitrogen in water wells. The ability to attribute nitrate in water wells to
specific sources using isotopic analysis maybe a useful supplement to other methods used to identify
possible sources.
The interpretation of isotopic data is complex. Multiple studies have shown that different nitrate sources
can have overlapping isotopic composition (Kendall and others 2007). In many cases, it is not possible to
distinguish the different nitrate sources using isotopic analysis alone if the isotopic ranges overlap.
Extensive sampling within a specific study area is needed to allow different nitrate sources to be
identified with more confidence.
Isotopes are forms of the same element that have a different number of neutrons and thus a different mass.
As an example, the atomic weight of nitrogen is 14.0067 because the most common isotope of nitrogen is
the form with seven neutrons and seven protons and a mass number of 14, written as 14N. 14N makes up
99.636 percent of the total nitrogen in the atmosphere and is referred to as the "light isotope" because it
has a lower atomic weight than 15N. Nitrogen 15 consists of seven protons and eight neutrons and,
28
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
written as 15N, makes up the rest of the total nitrogen in the atmosphere at 0.364 percent and is referred to
as the "heavy" isotope."
Isotopic values are reported as the ratio of the heavy isotope (in this case, 15N) to the light isotope (in this
case, 14N) in the sample compared with that ratio in a chosen standard. For nitrogen, the standard is the
pool of nitrogen in the earth's atmosphere, referred to as the atmospheric standard. Nitrogen isotopic
composition is expressed in terms of "delta 15N," which is written as 515N and is expressed as parts per
thousand differences from the atmospheric standard stated as, "per mil" or written as %o.
(15N/14N)sample - (15N/14N)stmdard
515N (%«) = * 1000
(15N/14N)stmdard
515N will be positive (for example, +6. l%o) and therefore heavier if there is more of the 15N compared
with the atmospheric standard in the sample. 515N will be negative (for example, -0.2%o), or lighter, if
there is less of 15N in the sample compared with the atmospheric standard. The 515N values are reported
as either 515N-NO3 (for nitrate) or 515N-NH4 (for ammonium).
Isotopes of oxygen (18O) have also been used to provide information on the source of nitrate in a sample.
The standard for 18O is "Standard Mean Ocean Water," or SMOW. The 518O of O2 gas in the atmosphere
is 23.5%o, which is heavier than the 18O-NO3 typically found in nitrate sources without atmospheric
influence. Nitrate derived from atmospheric deposition has much heavier 518O-NO3 values in comparison
to other nitrate sources of 60%o to 95%o (Kendall and others 2007). The 18O values are reported as 18O-
NO3 (for nitrate).
E. Age Dating
Several methods are available to measure the age of groundwater in a well, meaning the amount of time
that has elapsed between the initial infiltration of the water into the ground and when it was sampled in
the well. The measured age of the water may be useful in determining whether the nitrate in water wells
is associated with either past or current practices. For this study, EPA used a method involving the
analysis of sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). SF6 is used for age dating because it has been steadily increasing in
the atmosphere as it is released by human activities. To determine the age of the water, the laboratory
measures the concentration of SF6 in the water sample and compares it to measured atmospheric
concentrations of SF6 over time.
SF6 is a liquid at room temperature and can occur naturally in igneous formations. Industrial production
began in the early 1950s. Significant production of SF6 began in the 1960s for use in high-voltage
electrical switches as a replacement for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). SF6is extremely stable, with
an estimated atmospheric lifetime of 800 years (Morris and others 1995) to 3,200 years (Ravishankara
and others 1993). As more of it is produced, more of it is found in the atmosphere. SF6 is very persistent
in the atmosphere, so the concentration has been steadily increasing. The SF6 age dating method used in
this study can estimate the age of water up to about 40 years, since approximately 1970.
All water wells samples were analyzed for SF6. The analysis was completed by the USGS laboratory in
Reston, Virginia ("USGS Reston Laboratory"). The USGS Reston Laboratory was selected because this
29"
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
laboratory has developed a method that had been used successfully by USGS in Washington State. This
analysis is not conducted by commercial laboratories.
In addition to the SF6 analysis, five gas studies were conducted. These studies involved filling containers
with water for the analysis of nitrogen and argon gas to measure the temperature and elevation of the
recharge zone for the groundwater. These data are used to correct the SF6 measurement for excess
nitrogen, which can be dissolved when groundwater elevations fluctuate rapidly. It also provides a means
to determine if nitrogen gas has been added to the sample from denitrifying bacteria breaking down
nitrate in an anoxic setting. None of the EPA samples showed evidence of denitrification based on
measured nitrogen to argon ratios. A summary of the results for the age dating is in Table C16 in
Appendix C.
SF6 values were not reported for WW-01, WW-11, WW-12, WW-23, WW-27, and WW-28 (see Table
C16 in Appendix C). Values were not reported for these samples because the concentration of SF6 in the
groundwater exceeded the highest expected concentration based on average atmospheric concentrations
of SF6. These samples may indicate areas where localized human-caused releases of SF6 occurred. For
example, there could have been an accidental release during servicing of high-voltage equipment or the
intentional introduction of SF6 into water for localized fate and transport studies or for tracing leaking
pipes. Based on USGS SF6 age dating research, the high values of SF6 observed in certain samples are
likely from anthropogenic sources and not related to background levels seen in some volcanic regions.
VIII. QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL
As discussed previously, the project was implemented in three phases. In Phase 1, a GIS screening
application was developed and used to identify potential sample locations and sites in the Lower Yakima
Valley for Phase 2 sampling. Phase 1 also developed estimates of the nitrogen available for application to
the land from different sources. Phase 2 and Phase 3 involved sampling and analysis as described in
Sections V, VI, and VII. A discussion of the quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures
followed in Phase 2 and Phase 3 and a summary of the data validation process conducted by EPA QA
chemists is presented in Appendix E. All of the chemical analyses conducted for the Phase 3 study met
project data quality goals and criteria and are useable for all purposes, except as noted in Appendix E.
IX. ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The following subsections present the analytical results for the Phase 3 sampling and are organized by the
type and location of the source area. The three types of source areas include: dairies; irrigated cropland;
and residential septic systems. In addition, one well was sampled that was not related to a specific dairy
or crop field (WW-18) and one well was sampled that was not included in the QAPP (WW-30). The
locations sampled are illustrated on Figure 11 and include the following:
• Haak Dairy.
• Dairy Cluster (composed of a group of dairies in close proximity).
• Irrigated and fertilized crop fields (three locations: Mabton [three separate crops], Harrah [one
crop], and Sunnyside [two separate crops]).
30"
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
• Septic Systems (four downgradient wells: one in Mabton; one in Harrah; and two in Sunnyside;
plus influent from the WWTPs located in Zillah, Mabton, and Toppenish).
• Two residential drinking water wells (WW-18 and WW-30) not associated with a specific dairy
or irrigated cropland.
The analytical data for each of the five locations listed above are presented according to the analytical
groups described in Section VII: general chemistry; microbiology; organic chemicals; isotopic analyses,
and age dating. Each section provides a summary of all of the results for each location.
A. R&M Haak Dairy
The R&M Haak Dairy (Haak Dairy) is located in an agricultural area north of the Yakima River, about
four miles north of the community of Sunnyside. It is in the Benton groundwater basin, which includes
the communities of Sunnyside, Grandview, Satus, Kiona, Prosser, Mabton, and Richland. A ditch runs
from north to south through the Haak Dairy. Cow pens, a milking parlor, and three animal waste lagoons
lie west of the ditch. There are several large structures where cows are kept. East of the ditch, a center-
pivot irrigation system is installed on a large application field that the dairy uses to apply animal waste.
EPA selected this dairy for this study because it generally met the criteria identified in the study plan (see
Section VI.C. 1). Specifically, the Haak Dairy has: a high concentration of animals per acre; WSDA
inspectors noted in their reports for the Haak Dairy that elevated levels of nitrogen were detected in its
application fields in the past (WSDA 2012); the Haak Dairy is located near the northern edge of
cultivated land use and in a location with relatively few upgradient potential sources of nitrogen; and
drinking water wells downgradient of the Haak Dairy showed nitrate levels above the MCL.
NUMBERS OF ANIMALS AND AMOUNT OF WASTE GENERATED
In the past 30 years, the average U.S. dairy herd has increased from 29 to 139 head per farm (USDA
2009). While this is a sizable increase, the dairies in this study are considerably larger. In general, the
WSDA is prohibited by state law from providing information to the public identifying the number of
animals; the volume of livestock nutrients generated; the number of acres covered by a Nutrient
Management Plan (NMP) or used for land application of livestock nutrients; quantities of livestock
nutrients transferred to other persons; and crop yields in plans, records, and reports obtained by the state
and local agencies from dairies, Animal Feeding Operations (AFOs) or Concentrated Animal Feeding
Operations (CAFOs). They can provide some of this information in ranges (WSDA 1996 and WSDA
2010). Table 6 provides information on the number of animals and the amount of dairy waste generated
at the Haak Dairy before and after factoring in estimated losses during storage from volatilization or
denitrification.
31
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 6: Haak Dairy - Approximate Numbers of Dairy Cattle, Annual Manure Production, and
Annual Nitrogen Production
Mature Dairy
Cattle
700 to 1,699
Heifers/Calves
300 to 399
Annual Manure
Production3
(tons)
20,573 - 52,220
Annual Nitrogen
Production as
Excretedb
(tons)
129-323
Annual Nitrogen
After 35% Losses
Occurc
(tons)
84-210
aAnnual manure production is calculated using the following formula: [((# of milking cows)* 1.4* 108) + ((# of dry
cows)*1.4*51) + ((# of heifers)*0.97*56) + ((# of calves *0.33*83)]*365/2000 (WSDA 2010)
bNitrogen production is calculated using the following formula: [((# of milking cows)*1.4*.71) + ((# of dry
cows)*1.4*.3) + ((# of heifers)*0.97*.27) + ((# of calves *0.33*.42)]*365/2000 (WSDA 2010)
°Losses due to volatilization or denitrification during storage are estimated at 35%. This does not include
application losses.
Applying this estimate to the range of 700 to 1,699 mature dairy cattle, the Haak Dairy produces an
amount of waste similar to a community of 115,000 to 278,000 people.21 This estimate is based only
upon the numbers of mature dairy cattle. It does not include the additional waste load of heifers and
calves. For comparison, the human population of Yakima County in 2010 was 243,231.22
Sizable amounts of nitrogen, a component of manure, are generated by the Haak Dairy. Nitrogen
production can be roughly estimated by applying the ranges of the numbers of animals to formulas used
by the WSDA to estimate manure and nitrogen production. The WSDA estimates that during storage at a
typical dairy, about 35 percent of the nitrogen in dairy waste is "lost" through the process of volatilization
or denitrification (WSDA 2010). The formula does not assume any leakage into the subsoils from the
lagoons or other structures or conveyances. If the remaining nitrogen is not taken up by crops or is
transported off site to another location, it can migrate to groundwater after being mobilized by irrigation
water or precipitation.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
The Haak Dairy uses a variety of animal waste storage methods, including a solids separator, a lagoon
system, and dry stacking. The surface area of the Haak Dairy's lagoons is approximately 269,000 square
feet, which is equivalent to about 5 football fields (assumes a football field is 57,600 square feet). EPA
estimated the surface area of the lagoon system using aerial photographs. The storage capacity of the
Haak Dairy's lagoon systems was derived from WSDA inspection reports (WSDA 2012). The Haak
Dairy's lagoon system storage capacity is 9,400,000 gallons which is equivalent to the volume of about
14 Olympic-size swimming pools (assumes the capacity of an Olympic-size swimming pool is 660,000
gallons).
21 Calculations: 411,000 persons divided by 2500 dairy cows equals 164 persons per cow. 700 cows times 164 persons per cow
equals 115,000 persons. 1.699 cows times 164 persons per cow equals 278,000 persons.
22 U.S. Census Bureau: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/53/53077.html
32
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
NRCS recommends avoiding the use of "agricultural waste storage ponds" (lagoons) at locations like the
Haak Dairy where there is an aquifer that serves as a domestic water supply (NRCS 2004). If no
reasonable alternative exists, NRCS recommends consideration of: 1) a clay liner designed in accordance
with procedures of Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook Appendix 10D with a thickness and
coefficient of permeability so that specific discharge is less than 1 x 10 ~6 cm/sec; 2) a flexible membrane
liner over a clay liner; 3) a geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) flexible membrane liner; or 4) a concrete liner
designed in accordance with slab on grade criteria for fabricated structures requiring water tightness.
NRCS assumes the effect of manure "sealing" will reduce the permeability of the liner by an additional
order of magnitude (NRCS 2008). The general recommendation of the NRCS is to design and build for
IxlO"6 cm/sec, with the assumption that the effect of manure "sealing" will further reduce the
permeability to IxlO"7. NRCS states that this level of impermeability (IxlO"7 cm/sec) equates to 500
gallons of seepage per acre per day, which is equivalent to 1/56 inch of seepage per day. Converting 1/56
inch of seepage per day to millimeters of seepage per day yields 0.45 mm of seepage per day. Assuming
all of the Haak lagoons are lined in accordance with NRCS standards, a likely best case scenario, the
amount of seepage from the lagoons can be estimated by applying the NRCS seepage rate to the surface
area of the Haak lagoons. The estimated seepage would be about 1,080,000 gallons per year, the
equivalent of about 1.6 volumes of an Olympic-size swimming pool annually, as shown in Table 7.
Table 7: Haak Dairy - Lagoon System Surface Area, Storage Capacity, and Estimated Leakage
Rate
Approximate Lagoon
System Liquid
Surface Area
(square feet)
269,000
Lagoon System
Storage Capacity
(gallons)23
9,400,000
Estimated Lagoon
System Leakage, if
Liner System Exists
with a
Permeability of
1x10 7 cm/sec
(gallons per year)24
1,080,000
Estimated Range of
Lagoon System
Leakage,
Based on Ham Seepage
Rate Range
(gallons per year)
482,000 to 5,873,000
Leakage rates of lagoon systems with compacted soil liners were estimated in the field by Ham and
DeSutter (Ham 2002). The leakage rates they derived were based on field measurements of animal waste
lagoons lined with compacted soil liners with an average hydraulic conductivity of 1.8 x 10"7 centimeters
per second. Based on field observations, they concluded that lined dairy lagoons leak at a rate of 0.2 to
2.4 millimeters per day (Ham 2002). Applying the Ham and DeSutter rates to the surface area of the Haak
Dairy lagoons, leakage rates can be estimated and are presented in Table 7.
23 Lagoon systems are generally designed to hold about one third of a dairy's annual liquid waste generation (the amount that
would be generated over a four month time period).
24 Assumes liner designed to achieve IxlO"6 cm/sec, with additional order of magnitude permeability reduction from "sealing" for
an effective permeability of 1x10" cm/sec.
33
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Based on the liner infiltration rates developed by the Ham and DeSutter study (Ham 2002), a lined lagoon
system of the size of the Haak Dairy's would release approximately 482,000 to 5,873,000 gallons per year
into the underlying soils and could threaten groundwater. This amount is the equivalent of about 1 to 9
volumes of Olympic-size swimming pools annually.
The current NRCS standard for liner permeability, 0.45 mm/day, falls within the Ham and DeSutter range
of 0.2 to 2.4 mm/day. Leakage rates for the Haak Dairy lagoons would likely be greater than the above
estimates if the lagoons are unlined. If the lagoons are lined with a plastic liner, the actual leakage rates
could be lower, although plastic liners can be punctured during construction and lagoon maintenance,
especially during periodic dredging activities.
EPA requested information from the Haak Dairy about how its lagoons were constructed, but the Dairy
declined to provide this information. EPA has asked Yakima County, the WSDA, the Washington
Department of Ecology, and the NRCS if any of the Haak lagoons have engineered liners, but none of the
agencies could affirm that they do. Many states require lagoons to meet permeability requirements.
However, EPA is unaware of any state or local requirements that would compel dairies in Yakima County
to construct lagoons to any specific level of permeability.
Utilization rates of the lagoon systems (the percent of lagoon capacity occupied by liquid waste) at the
time of the inspection are also provided in the inspection reports. Lagoon utilization rates tend to vary
throughout the year. One purpose of the lagoons is to provide storage of liquid dairy waste during the
winter months. Such storage is needed to avoid applying dairy wastes to fields during the winter, which
can result in the contamination of groundwater if there are no plants growing to take up the nutrients in
the waste. Dairy operators generally try to pump out their lagoons toward the end of the growing season
so they have sufficient lagoon capacity to store waste through the winter months. Lagoon utilization rates
noted in recent inspection reports for the Haak Dairy are summarized in Table 8. A dashed line indicates
there was no entry in the report for that particular data element.
Table 8: Haak Dairy - Washington State Department of Agriculture Inspection Dates and
Reported Values for Lagoon Capacity
Date of
Inspection
3/25/2010
19/1 8/9008
7/7/2008
9/5/2006
Lagoon Capacity
(gallons)
9,400,000
9,400,000
9,400,000
Number of Days of
Lagoon Capacity25
4 months plus
4 months plus
120 days
Percent of Lagoon Capacity
Utilized at Time of Inspection
75%
60%
80%
100%
25 "Number of Days of Lagoon Capacity" is an estimate of the maximum number of days a lagoon system could accept liquid
dairy waste under normal operating conditions without having to be pumped out. It is intended to assess whether a lagoon system
is sufficiently large enough to hold liquid waste generated by the dairy throughout the winter months, without having to be
pumped out to the waste application fields when there are no crops growing that could take up the nutrients in the waste. It
assumes the lagoon system was completely pumped out at the beginning of the time period.
34
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
SURFACE SOILS
Surface soils in Yakima County have been characterized and mapped by the U.S. NRCS (NRCS 2012).
A soil report has been developed for the Haak Dairy (EPA 2012a) and is summarized in Appendix B. All
of the surface soils underlying the Haak Dairy have a "well drained" classification, which means water
moves readily through the soil.
Most of the surface soils on which the Haak Dairy operates have a high saturated hydraulic conductivity.
The percentage of surface soils with a "high" saturated hydraulic conductivity at the Haak Dairy is 82
percent while the percent of surface soils with a "low" saturated hydraulic conductivity is 18 percent. The
permeability of the surface soils at the Haak Dairy is more fully described in Appendix B.
Animal waste applied to crop fields can be a significant source of nitrogen loading to the soil,
groundwater and surface water. Applying large quantities of animal wastes on highly permeable surface
soil (i.e., soil with a high hydraulic conductivity) increases the risk of groundwater contamination because
water from irrigation or precipitation can readily infiltrate the soil and carry nitrogen past the root zone
before it can be taken up by plants (EPA 2004). "Agronomic" nitrogen application rates are typically
based on soil types and crop yield goals. However, agronomic nitrogen application rates are not
necessarily protective of drinking water. Even with agronomic application rates, mismanagement of
irrigation water can move nitrogen through the vadose zone.
APPLICATION FIELDS
The Haak Dairy applies animal wastes as fertilizer onto between 121 and 300 acres of application fields
that it owns or leases (WSDA 2010). The WSDA does not disclose exact acreages of the application
fields to the public. Corn and triticale (a cross of wheat and rye) are grown in these fields. These crops
have relatively high nitrogen needs and can be used as feed. At the time of inspection, WSDA inspectors
documented in inspection reports that animal wastes were applied to six fields using a spreader "honey
wagon", a sprinkler irrigation system, and a dry spreader (WSDA 2012). Because the Haak Dairy did
not provide the information EPA requested about its operations, it is unknown how much manure or
liquid dairy lagoon waste the Haak Dairy applies to its fields. However, WSDA inspectors documented
that the Haak Dairy measured and recorded elevated levels of nitrogen on some of the its application
fields (WSDA 2012). State records also indicate the Haak Dairy exported some of its animal waste to
other landowners.
Figure 11 and Figure 12 show the Phase 3 sample locations associated with the Haak Dairy. The
sampling locations include:
• One residential drinking water well upgradient of the dairy (WW-01);
• One dairy supply well (WW-02);
• One dairy manure pile located on the dairy (SO-01);
• Two dairy lagoons from which three samples were collected (LG-01, LG-02, and LG-03).
Lagoon samples LG-02 and LG-03 are from the same lagoon;
• One dairy application field sample (SO-02) and;
• Three downgradient residential drinking water wells (WW-03, WW-04, and WW-05).
35
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
1. HAAK DAIRY: GENERAL CHEMISTRY
The four types of general chemistry data collected at the Haak Dairy were: nitrate and other forms of
nitrogen; major ions; minor ions and trace inorganic elements; and perchlorate. The results for each of
these analyses are discussed below.
Haak Dairy: Nitrate and Other Forms of Nitrogen
Five water well samples, three dairy lagoon samples, one dairy manure pile sample, and one dairy
application field sample were analyzed for several forms of nitrogen. The water wells and lagoons were
analyzed for nitrate, nitrate plus nitrite, ammonia or ammonium (if in an aqueous solution), and TKN.
The dairy manure pile and the dairy application field samples that were receiving dairy waste were
analyzed for extractable nitrate-N (Nitrate-N Solid), extractable ammonia-N (Ammonia-N Solid), and
total nitrogen by combustion (Total Nitrogen Solid).
In addition, the total nitrogen was calculated for each sample. Total nitrogen is the sum of nitrate, nitrite,
and TKN. Using total nitrogen values allows a comparison between different locations. These calculated
values are presented as "Calculated Total Nitrogen" in Table 9. The manure sample, SO-01, contained
only 22 percent solids and was analyzed for TKN rather than total nitrogen by combustion. For SO-02,
the total nitrogen equals the nitrate plus the TKN value. The total nitrogen for all other solid samples
equals the nitrogen by combustion result.
Organic forms of nitrogen were not detected in the five water wells and therefore the total nitrogen values
in Table 9 for the water wells are the sum of the nitrate plus nitrite concentrations. Nitrate and nitrite
were not detected in the lagoon samples LG-01 or LG-03 and therefore the total nitrogen values in Table
9 for the two dairy lagoons are reflected by the TKN values. There is an increase in concentrations of
total nitrogen between the upgradient well and the downgradient wells (Figure 12 and Table 9).
The dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, and dairy application fields at the Haak Dairy are located between
the upgradient and downgradient wells sampled and are a likely source of the increased nitrogen levels in
the downgradient residential water wells. A WSDA inspection report indicates the Haak Dairy has used
inorganic fertilizer on its application fields, in addition to animal wastes (WSDA 2012). In addition, the
alkalinity concentrations are greater in the downgradient wells compared to the upgradient well, with the
highest concentrations in the dairy lagoons.
Available information about the construction and depth of WW-03 and WW-04, the downgradient wells,
suggest they are completed in the alluvial aquifer at depths of 95 feet and 88 feet. Information about the
upgradient well, WW-01, is limited. Information on the construction of the dairy lagoons (if they are
lined, and if so, with what material) would be useful to determine the extent to which they may be
contributing to the increase in nitrogen concentrations. EPA formally requested this information from the
Haak Dairy, but the information was not provided.
36
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 9: Haak Dairy - Distribution of Total Nitrogen in Wells, Lagoons, a Manure Pile, and an
Application Field.
Sample Location
Nitrate as
N
(ppm)
Nitrate +
Nitrite as N
(ppm)
Ammonia
asN
(ppm)
TKN as
N
(ppm)
Calculated
Total
Nitrogen
(ppm)
Water Wells and Lagoons
WW-01:UpgradientWell
WW-02: Dairy Supply Well
LG-0 1 : Dairy Lagoon
LG-02: Dairy Lagoon
LG-03 : Dairy Lagoon
WW-03: DowngradientWell
WW-04: DowngradientWell
WW-05: DowngradientWell
0.38
3.1
NA
NA
NA
33.1
51.9
12.8
0.39
3.4
ND
1.2(J)
ND
35.5
55.0
13.4
ND
ND
1000 (J)
870 (J)
870 (J)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1200
1400
1400
(J)
(J)
(J)
ND
ND
ND
0.39
3.4
1200
1401
1400
35.5
55.0
13.4
Dairy Manure Pile
Sample Location
SO-01: Dairy Manure
Pile
Ammonia-N
Solid
(ppm)
10,100
Nitrate-N
Solid
(ppm)
ND
Total
Nitrogen
Solid
(ppm)
29,700
(as TKN)
Dairy Application Field
Sample Location
SO-02: Dairy
Application Field
Ammonium
as N
(ppm)
4.6
Nitrate +
Nitrite as N
(ppm)
71.7
Total Nitrogen
(ppm)
29,700
Total Nitrogen
Solid
(ppm)
2760
Total
Nitrogen
(ppm)
2760
NA - Not analyzed.
ND - Not detected.
J - the analyte was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
Haak Dairy: Major Ions
Five wells and three dairy lagoon samples were analyzed for the major ions. Figure 13 shows the
concentrations of six major ions (calcium, chloride, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and sulfate) in the
upgradient well, the dairy lagoons, and the downgradient wells. The concentrations of these six ions all
have higher concentrations in the downgradient wells and one or more of the lagoons than the upgradient
well. Alkalinity shows a similar pattern.
The difference in concentrations from the upgradient well to downgradient wells ranges from up to a 3-
fold increase for potassium; an 8-fold increase for magnesium; more than a 10-fold increase for calcium
and sodium; more than a 30-fold increase for chloride and more than a 65-fold increase for sulfate.
37
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Chloride is considered a conservatively transported ion (Freeze and Cherry 1979; Gooddy and others
2002), meaning that it typically flows with the groundwater unchanged and is unlikely to participate in
reactions or be electrically attracted to minerals making up the aquifer matrix. Based on the observed
concentrations, chloride and other ions are being introduced to the aquifer between the upgradient and
downgradient wells at the Haak Dairy. One explanation for the observed increase in these major ions is
that the dairy lagoons are introducing these ions to the groundwater. As with total nitrogen, this indicates
that the Haak Dairy is a likely source of the major ions in the three downgradient residential drinking
water wells at the Haak Dairy.
Haak Dairy: Minor and Trace Inorganic Elements
Five water well and three dairy lagoon samples were analyzed for minor and trace inorganic elements.
Two metals, barium and zinc, which may be used at dairies, were detected in both the water wells and
dairy lagoons (see Table 10). There is an increase in the concentrations from the upgradient to the
downgradient wells for both barium and zinc, with the highest concentrations in the lagoons. Other
metals (chromium, copper, iron, and manganese) were detected in dairy lagoons, but were not found in
the water wells. The dairy manure pile and dairy application field samples were not analyzed for minor
or trace inorganic elements.
Table 10: Haak Dairy - Concentrations of Barium and Zinc in Wells and Lagoons
Location
WW-01 - Upgradient Well
WW-02 - Dairy Supply Well
LG-0 1 - Dairy lagoon
LG-02 - Dairy lagoon
LG-03 - Dairy lagoon
WW-03 - Downgradient Well
WW-04 - Downgradient Well
WW-05 - Downgradient Well
Barium (ug/L)
13.5
32.7
297
931
907
135
178
164
Zinc (jig/L)
Not detected
5.4
1790
5410
5260
21
12
15
Haak Dairy: Perchlorate
Perchlorate was analyzed only in the water well samples (see Table C7 in Appendix C). The
concentrations ranged from 0.14 micrograms per liter ((ig/L) (WW-01) to 1.96 (ig/L (WW-03). The
results for the perchlorate analysis are evaluated together with the isotopic data because perchlorate was
used as an indicator of potential accumulation of atmospherically derived nitrate associated with caliche
soils (see Appendix D). Perchlorate was not evaluated in the dairy lagoon system because it is not
expected to persist in the anoxic environment of a dairy lagoon.
2. HAAK DAIRY: MICROBIOLOGY
The water well samples were analyzed for total coliform and E. coll (see Table C8 in Appendix C). Only
one well (WW-04) had a detectable level of total coliform, but E. coll was not detected. MST was not
completed for this well because E. coll, a form of fecal coliform, was not detected.
38
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Samples from the three dairy lagoons were analyzed for fecal coliform. As would be expected, high
concentrations of fecal coliform were found in the dairy lagoons. MST was performed on the samples
from the three dairy lagoons. One of the samples (LG-01) indicated a ruminant source, while two of the
samples (LG-02 and LG-03) indicated both human and ruminant sources. Lagoon samples LG-02 and
LG-03 are collocated, so similar results for these samples are expected; however, it is unknown why the
MST results for this dairy lagoon indicate human sources.
3. HAAK DAIRY: ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
The organic compounds evaluated included: pesticides; trace organics; pharmaceuticals; and hormones.
Haak Dairy: Pesticides
All the samples collected at the Haak Dairy were analyzed for pesticides; however, the laboratory was
unable to quantify pesticide concentrations in the lagoon samples because of matrix interference (Table
C9 in Appendix C).
Atrazine was the only pesticide detected in the water wells. Atrazine also was detected in one of the dairy
application field samples. The concentrations of atrazine detected in the water wells and dairy application
field sample at the Haak Dairy are summarized in Table 11. None of the water well samples exceeded the
MCL for atrazine of 3.0 (ig/L.
Table 11: Haak Dairy - Concentrations of Atrazine in Wells, a Manure Pile, and an Application
Field
Location
WW-01
WW-02
WW-03
WW-04
WW-05
SO-01 -
SO-02 -
- Upgradient Well
- Dairy Supply Well
- Downgradient Well
- Downgradient Well
- Downgradient Well
Dairy Manure Pile
Dairy Application Field
Atrazine
0.015 (J) ug/L
0.041 (J) ug/L
Not Detected
0.015 (J) ug/L
0.11(J)ug/L
Not Detected
1.1 (J) Mg/kg
J - the analyte was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
Atrazine is an herbicide commonly used on corn fields and is frequently detected in groundwater beneath
both urban and agricultural land uses (Barbash and others 1999). Both grain and silage corn is significant
in dairy and other cattle livestock operations. The detection of atrazine at a higher concentration in one of
the downgradient wells compared with the upgradient well indicates that there likely is a source from a
crop field associated with the Haak Dairy; however, the presence of atrazine in the upgradient well
indicates that the Haak Dairy is not the only source.
Three pesticides (Dicamba, Dacthal-DCPA, and 2,4-D) were found in the dairy manure pile sample from
the Haak Dairy (SO-01). In addition to atrazine, five other compounds were detected in the dairy
application field sample collected adjacent to the Haak Dairy (SO-02): 4-nitrophenol; pentachlorophenol;
39"
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
endosulfan sulfate; chlorpyrifos ethyl; and diuron. The dairy application field was historically planted
with corn and triticale.
Haak Dairy: Trace Organics
Trace organic analysis was performed on the water well and lagoon samples, but not on the manure or
soil samples collected at the Haak Dairy (Table CIO in Appendix C). One compound, bis-(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate, (DEHP) was detected in WW-01 (upgradient well) at a concentration of 2.66 (ig/L and in WW-
03 (downgradient well) at a concentration of 5.26 (ig/L. The MCL for DEHP is 6.0 (ig/L. Phthalates,
such as DEHP, are compounds used in the manufacture of plastics to decrease the brittleness of containers
and other objects. They are increasingly ubiquitous in the environment (EPA 2011).
Other trace organics were detected in the three Haak Dairy lagoons but not detected in any of the
downgradient wells (Table CIO in Appendix C). Compounds found in all three dairy lagoons included
fecal indicators (such as 3-beta-coprostanol and 3-methyl-lh-indole); plant sterols (for example, beta-
sitosterol, beta-stigmastanol, and cholesterol); p-creosol; 4-nonylphenol-monoethoxylate; and phenol.
Haak Dairy: Pharmaceuticals
Analyses were conducted for two suites of pharmaceutical chemicals: wastewater pharmaceuticals and
veterinary pharmaceuticals. The wastewater pharmaceuticals analyzed in this study are generally used by
humans. Veterinary pharmaceuticals are used in veterinary practice and many can also be used to treat
people.
There were no wastewater pharmaceuticals detected in the water well, dairy manure pile, or dairy
application field samples. Thiabendzadole, which is used to treat worm infections in both livestock and
humans and can be used as a pesticide (Mayo Clinic 2011), was detected in one dairy lagoon (LG-01)
sample. DEET, an insect repellent, was detected in one dairy lagoon (LG-03) sample. A summary of the
wastewater pharmaceutical data is provided in Table Cl 1 in Appendix C.
Three veterinary pharmaceuticals (tetracycline, chlortetracycline, and monensin) were detected in one or
more water wells, dairy lagoon, dairy application field or dairy manure pile sample. Detected
concentrations for these three compounds are summarized in Table 12. Several additional veterinary
compounds were detected in the dairy lagoons: LG-01 (eight compounds); LG-02 (nine compounds), and
LG-03 (six compounds). Several compounds were also detected in the manure sample (SO-01: four
compounds) and dairy application field sample (SO-02: five compounds). A summary of the veterinary
pharmaceutical data is provided in Table C12 in Appendix C.
Tetracycline was detected in two of the downgradient wells (WW-03 and WW-04) and in the dairy
lagoon, dairy manure pile, and dairy application field samples. The detections in all the dairy supply
sources provides a good indication that tetracycline is used at the Haak Dairy. These data indicate that the
Haak Dairy is a likely source of tetracycline in the two downgradient residential water wells.
40
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 12: Haak Dairy - Concentrations of Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons, a Manure Pile, and
an Application Field
Sample Location
WW-01-UpgradientWell
WW-02 - Dairy Supply Well
LG-01 - Dairy Lagoon
LG-02 - Dairy Lagoon
LG-03 - Dairy Lagoon
SO-01 -Dairy Manure Pile
SO-02 - Dairy Application Field
WW-03 - Downgradient Well
WW-04 - Downgradient Well
WW-05 - Downgradient Well
Tetracycline
ND
ND
1. 96 (J) ug/L
5.83 (J) ug/L
2.88 (J) ug/L
178 ug/kg
26.9 ug/kg
0.041 (J) ug/L
0.075 (J) ug/L
ND
Chlortetracycline
ND
ND
R
0.067 (J) ug/L
R
ND
45.6 ug/kg
ND
0.049 ug/L
ND
Monensin
0.027 ug/L
ND
45.0(J)ug/L
1086 (J) ug/L
420 (J) ug/L
441 ug/kg
2.9 ug/kg
0.028 ug/L
0.023 ug/L
0.022 ug/L
J - the compound was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
ND - Not detected
R - the data is unusable for all purposes because of analytical problems with the sample.
Monensin was detected in the upgradient well (WW-01) and all three of the downgradient wells (WW-03,
WW-04, and WW-05). Monensin was also detected in the Haak dairy lagoons, manure sample, and
application field sample. The detection of monensin in the upgradient well indicates there is an upgradient
source of this compound. The high concentrations of monensin seen in the Haak Dairy lagoon samples,
manure pile, and application field sample indicate that it is used at the Haak Dairy. The data indicate that
the Haak Dairy is a possible source of monensin in the three downgradient residential drinking water
wells. Given the presence of monensin in the upgradient well, another source of monensin is likely.
Haak Dairy: Hormones
Hormone analysis was conducted by two laboratories. EPA's Ada Laboratory, analyzed water well and
dairy lagoon samples for five hormones (Table C13 in Appendix C). Solid samples (soil and manure)
were not analyzed by EPA's Ada Laboratory because the laboratory specializes in liquid samples and had
not developed solid extraction techniques at the time of the study. Hormone analysis also was conducted
by the UNL Laboratory. The UNL Laboratory analyzed both the liquid and solid samples, including the
samples collected from water wells, dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, and dairy application fields. The
UNL's Laboratory hormone analysis includes 20 compounds (Table C14 in Appendix C), including the
five hormones analyzed by EPA's Ada Laboratory.
EPA's Ada Laboratory did not detect hormones in any of the water well samples. EPA's Ada Laboratory
detected 17-(3-estradiol, 17-a-estradiol, and estrone in the three lagoons at the Haak Dairy, but did not
detect 17-a-ethynyl-estradiol or estriol in the dairy lagoons.
41
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
The UNL Laboratory did not detect any of the five hormones analyzed by EPA's Ada Laboratory in water
well samples. The UNL Laboratory detected testosterone in samples from all five wells and
epitestosterone in one well (WW-04). Testosterone also was detected in LG-01 (See Table 13).
Epistesterone was not detected in any of the dairy sources. Four hormones were detected in all three dairy
lagoons (17-a-estradiol, a-zearalanol, and progesterone) and two hormones were detected in both the
dairy manure pile and dairy application field samples (4-androstenedione, 17-a-estradiol) (Table C14 in
Appendix C). The concentration of testosterone in the upgradient well (WW-01) was greater than in the
downgradient wells (WW-03 to WW-05), although the highest concentrations were in LG-01.
Table 13: Haak Dairy - Concentrations of Testosterone in Wells, Lagoons, a Manure Pile,
and an Application Field
Location
WW-01 - Upgradient Well
WW-02 - Dairy Supply Well
LG-0 1 - Dairy Lagoon
LG-02 - Dairy Lagoon
LG-03 - Dairy Lagoon
SO-01 - Dairy Manure Sample
SO-02 - Dairy Application Field Sample
WW-03 - Downgradient Well
WW-04 - Downgradient Well
WW-05 - Downgradient Well
Testosterone
21 ng/L
16 ng/L
32 ng/L
Not Detected
Not Detected
Not Detected
Not Detected
9 ng/L
12 ng/L
7 ng/L
ng/L - Nanograms per liter
4. HAAK DAIRY: ISOTOPIC ANALYSES
As discussed in Section VII.D, isotopic analysis can indicate the general source, or combination of sources,
or dominant processes acting on nitrogen in groundwater (Kendall 1998; Michener and Lajtha 2007).
Stable isotopes of nitrate and ammonium can explain the possible origin and process that formed the nitrate
in water wells. The ability to attribute nitrate in water wells to specific sources using isotopic analysis may
be a useful supplement to other methods used to determine possible sources.
The three main sources of nitrate evaluated for their contribution to water wells using isotopic analysis were
animal waste, synthetic fertilizer, and atmospheric deposition. Animal waste can include both human and
non-human animal waste. Based on the isotopic results from this study, and the scientific literature, a 515N-
NO3 value greater than 8.4%o indicate that the likely dominant source of nitrate in water wells is animal
waste. A 515N-NO3 value less than 2.0%o indicate that the likely dominant source of
nitrate in water wells is synthetic fertilizer. Values of 515N-NO3 between 2.0%o and 8.4%o indicate that
the nitrate source is animal waste, synthetic fertilizer, or a combination of the two. 518O-NO3 values of
20%o or higher were interpreted as evidence of some atmospheric contribution. The rationale for the
selection of these values is in Appendix D. Table 14 below provides the specific results for the five water
wells.
42"
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 14: Haak Dairy - Concentration of Nitrate in Wells, Isotopic Signatures, and the Interpreted
Dominant Source of the Nitrate
Well
Number
WW-01
WW-02
WW-03
WW-04
WW-05
Nitrate-N
(mg/L)a
0.2
3.0
34
49.9
12.8
515N-NO3
(%»)
NM
2.7
2.3
3.5
9.7
518O-NO3
(%»)
NM
15
29
-4.5
7.1
Interpreted Dominant Source(s)b
NM
Indeterminate
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste0 with Some
Atmospheric Contribution
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste
Animal Waste
aThe nitrate concentrations are from the UNL isotopic analysis.
blnterpretation of dominant sources is based on the following:
• 515N-NO3. Values less than 2.0 = dominated by synthetic fertilizer; values between 2.0 to 8.4 =
undetermined mixture of synthetic fertilizer and/or animal waste; values greater than 8.4 = dominated by
animal waste.
• 518O-NO3 values greater than 20.0%o provide evidence for some atmospheric contribution. 518O-NO3
values below 20.0%o could have an atmospheric contribution, but it becomes indistinguishable from other
sources.
0 Animal waste can be either human or non-human waste
NM - the sample was not measured because of the low nitrate concentrations.
The dominant source of nitrate for WW-05 is likely animal waste based on the interpretation of dominant
sources indicated above for animal waste. The dominant sources for WW-02 are indeterminate given the
low nitrate value. The dominant sources for WW-03 are likely synthetic fertilizer and/or animal waste
with some atmospheric contribution, while the dominant sources for WW-04 are likely synthetic fertilizer
and/or animal waste.
5. HAAK DAIRY: AGE DATING
Age dating analysis was conducted on the water well samples to estimate the length of time since the
water infiltrated from the surface to the aquifer, including transport time to the wells. The reported ages
may not correspond to when the water became contaminated. Two SF6 samples were collected from each
well and the values were averaged (see Table 15). The age of the water in the Haak Dairy supply well
and the downgradient wells ranged from approximately 16 to 25 years.
43
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 15: Haak Dairy - Results of Age Dating Analyses Performed for Wells Reported in Years
Since the Water Infiltrated From the Surface to the Aquifer.
Sample Location
WW-01:UpgradientWell
WW-02: Supply Well
WW-03: DowngradientWell
WW-04: DowngradientWell
WW-05: DowngradientWell
Sample Age
(years)
Over Value3
15.8
24.8 (J)
21.8(J)
18.3 (J)
Duplicate Age
(years)
Over Value
16.3
25.8 (J)
23.3 (J)
20.8 (J)
Average
(years)
NA
16.1
25.3
22.6
19.6
a Over value means that the sample contained more SF6 than can be explained by equilibrium with modern air.
J - the analyte was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
6.
HAAK DAIRY: SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR RESIDENTIAL WATER WELLS
Table 16 summarizes the nitrate levels and compounds detected in the water wells upgradient and
downgradient of the Haak Dairy and the compounds also detected in the source areas sampled on the
dairy along with conclusions from the isotopic analysis. No microbial contamination was found in the
downgradient wells. The age of the water in the Haak Dairy supply well and the downgradient wells
ranged from approximately 16 to 25 years.
All of the residential water wells except WW-01, the upgradient well, have nitrate levels that exceed the
MCL of 10 mg/L. The concentration of total nitrogen, six major ions (chloride, calcium, magnesium,
potassium, sodium, and sulfate), and two metals (barium and zinc) increased from the upgradient well to
the downgradient wells at the Haak Dairy, with the highest concentrations detected in the dairy lagoon,
dairy manure pile, and dairy application field samples. Alkalinity showed a similar pattern. Sample LG-
01 was taken from liquid waste in a ditch just before entering the lagoon system and contained sulfate.
Sulfate was not detected in co-located samples LG-02 and LG-03, likely because of anoxic conditions in
the lagoon.
EPA evaluated four groups of organic compounds: pesticides; trace organics; pharmaceuticals; and
hormones as part of this study. Atrazine was the only pesticide detected in the water well samples.
Atrazine is widely used throughout the area, and the source is likely historical and current use of the
pesticide, which may or may not be associated with dairy operations. EPA's Manchester Laboratory was
unable to quantify the pesticide concentrations in the lagoon samples as a result of matrix interference.
Atrazine was detected in the dairy field application sample. Several other pesticides were detected in the
manure pile samples and application field samples but were not detected in the water wells.
The only trace organic detected in the water wells was bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP). DEHP was
not detected in any of the dairy lagoons and was not analyzed for in the dairy manure pile or application
field samples. Several trace organics were detected in all three dairy lagoons (for example, beta-
sitosterol, beta-stigmastanol, and phenol) but not in the water wells.
44
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 16: Haak Dairy - Comparisons of General Chemistry and Organic Compounds Detected in Wells and Dairy Operations and
Assessment of Nitrate Sources in the Residential Wells Using Isotopic Analyses
Residential
Well Number
WW-01
Upgradient
Well
WW-03
Downgradient
Well
WW-04
Downgradient
Well
Nitrate
Concentration
(mg/L)a
0.38
34
49.9
General Chemistry
in Well
No trends in total
nitrogen or major ions
as this is an upgradient
well
Total nitrogen
concentrations increased
90 -fold compared with
the upgradient well.
Three- to 6 5 -fold
increase in
concentrations of six
major ions compared
with the upgradient
well.
Total nitrogen
concentrations increased
over 100-fold compared
with the upgradient
well.
Four- to 45-fold increase
in concentrations of six
major ions compared
with the upgradient
well.
Organic
Compounds
Detected in Well
Atrazine
DEHP
Testosterone
Monensin
Atrazine
DEHP
Tetracycline,
Testosterone
Monensin
Atrazine
Tetracycline
Chlortetracycline
Testosterone
Monensin
Organic Compounds
also Detected in
Dairy Sources
Not applicable. WW-01
is an upgradient well.
Atrazine (SO-02)
Tetracycline (all dairy
sources)
Testosterone (LG-01)
Monensin (all dairy
sources)
Atrazine (SO-02)
Tetracycline (all dairy
sources)
Chlortetracycline (LG-
02 and SO-02)
Testosterone (LG-01)
Monensin (all dairy
Dominant
Source(s) of
Nitrate Based on
Isotopic Analyses
Not measured
because lack of
nitrate in sample
Fertilizer and/or
Animal Waste
with Some
Atmospheric
Contribution
Fertilizer and/or
Animal Waste
45
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Residential
Well Number
WW-05
Downgradient
Well
Nitrate
Concentration
(mg/L)a
12.8
General Chemistry
in Well
Total nitrogen
concentrations increased
more than 30-fold
compared with the
upgradientwell.
Four- to over 10-fold
increase in
concentrations of six
major ions compared
with the upgradient
well.
Organic
Compounds
Detected in Well
Atrazine
Testosterone
Monensin
Organic Compounds
also Detected in
Dairy Sources
Atrazine (SO-02)
Testosterone (LG-01)
Monensin (all dairy
sources)
Dominant
Source(s) of
Nitrate Based on
Isotopic Analyses
Animal waste
a Nitrate results are from Cascade Analytical Laboratory
46
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
There were no wastewater pharmaceuticals detected in the water wells associated with the Haak
Dairy. Thiabendzadole and DEBT were each detected in one dairy lagoon while no compounds
were detected in the manure pile or application field samples. For the veterinary pharmaceuticals,
three compounds were detected in the water wells (chlortetracycline, tetracycline and monensin).
Chlortetracycline was detected in one downgradient well and in one dairy lagoon and the
application field sample. Tetracycline was detected in two of the three downgradient wells and in
all three dairy lagoons, the dairy manure pile, and the dairy application field samples. Monensin
was detected in the upgradient well and in the three downgradient wells. Monensin was detected
in all the dairy lagoons and the dairy manure pile and dairy application field samples. Several
additional compounds were detected in the dairy lagoons, dairy manure pile, and application field
samples.
Two hormones were detected in water wells (testosterone and epitestosterone). Testosterone was
detected in all five water wells with the highest concentration in the upgradient well, and in one
lagoon but not in the manure pile or application field samples. Epitestosterone was detected in
one downgradient well but not in any other source.
The isotopic data indicates that the source of nitrate in each of the wells varies. For WW-02, the
source is indeterminate given the low nitrate value. The possible likely sources in WW-03 are
fertilizer and/or animal waste with an atmospheric contribution. The dominant sources in WW-
04 are likely fertilizer and/or animal waste. The likely dominant source in water well WW-05 is
animal waste.
In conclusion, all of the residential water wells except WW-01 (the upgradient well as determined
by general USGS flow direction) have nitrate levels above the MCL. The total nitrogen and major
ions data indicate that the Haak Dairy is likely releasing nitrogen and six major ions to the
groundwater and is a likely source of those higher levels in downgradient wells. The metals
barium and zinc and alkalinity show a similar pattern. Information on the construction and depth
of the upgradient well would be helpful to verify groundwater flow direction and clarify the
contributions of sources to the higher concentrations seen from the upgradient well to the
downgradient wells.
The Haak Dairy is a likely source of the tetracycline detected in the two downgradient residential
water wells. The multiple detections of monensin in the Haak Dairy sources and in the
downgradient wells indicates monensin is being used at the Haak Dairy and is a possible source
in the downgradient wells. The isotopic data provide good evidence that animal waste (human or
non-human) is a dominant contributor to the nitrate contamination for WW-05.
B. Dairy Cluster
The "Dairy Cluster" refers to a group of dairies north of the Yakima River. The Dairy Cluster is
located about 2 miles north of the town of Liberty, near the northern edge of the irrigated area in
the Yakima Valley. George DeRuyter & Son Dairy and the D and A Dairy are treated as two
separate facilities, although they have some common ownership ("DeRuyter Dairy" and "D and A
Dairy"- see Figure 14). Cow Palace 1 and 2 comprise a single facility ("Cow Palace" - see Figure
4?"
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
14). Liberty Dairy and Bosma Dairy are adjacent to one another and share some facilities and so
are treated as a single facility ("Liberty and Bosma Dairies" - see Figure 14). The facilities
generally consist of cow pens, milking parlors, animal waste lagoons, and animal waste
application fields. Irrigation ditches run through the dairy properties.
EPA selected these dairies for this study because they met the criteria identified in the study plan
(see Section VI.C. 1). Specifically, the Dairy Cluster has: high concentration of animals per
acre26; dairy inspection reports (WSDA 2012) indicate that elevated levels of nitrogen had been
measured in dairy application fields in the past; the dairies are located near the northern edge of
cultivated land in the Valley with relatively few upgradient potential sources of nitrogen; and
drinking water wells downgradient of the dairies showed levels of nitrate significantly elevated
above the MCL.
Numbers of Animals and Amount of Waste Generated
The WSDA provides the ranges for the number of animals at the Dairy Cluster facilities and the
amount of waste generated including the estimated losses during storage of the waste (WSDA
2010) (See Table 17).
As a group, in 2009 the dairy cluster had more than 17,240 mature dairy cattle, and more than
7,000 heifers/calves. As discussed above, a farm with 2500 dairy cattle is similar in waste load to
a city of 411,000 people (EPA 2004). A difference lies in the fact that human waste is treated
before discharge into the environment, but animal waste is either not treated at all or minimally
treated before discharge into the environment (EPA 2004). Applying this estimate to the Dairy
Cluster range of 17,240 to 19,378 mature dairy cattle, the Dairy Cluster produces an amount of
waste similar to a community of more than 2,827,000 people.27 This estimate is based only upon
the numbers of mature dairy cattle. It does not include the additional waste load of heifers and
calves. For comparison, the human population of Yakima County in 2010 was 243,231.28
Sizable amounts of nitrogen, a component of manure, are generated by the dairies. Nitrogen
production can be roughly estimated for each dairy by applying the ranges of the numbers of
animals to formulas used by the WSDA to estimate manure and nitrogen production (WSDA
2010). As a whole, the Dairy Cluster generates more than 500,000 tons of manure each year
equating to more than 3,100 tons of nitrogen.
26 Cow Palace had 23 cows per acre. The number of cows per acre at specific Yakima County dairies ranged from 1 to
34. Cow Palace had the second-highest ratio in the county (WSDA 2010). Cows per acre ratios are not static and have
changed since EPA began this study.
27 Calculations: "Mature dairy cattle estimate": 5,700 cows + 6,840 cows+4,700 cows = 17,240 cows (low end of
range for each dairy). 411,000 persons divided by 2500 dairy cows equals 164 persons per cow. 17,240 cows times
164 persons per cow equals 2,827,360 persons. Rounded off to the nearest thousand equals 2,827,000 persons.
28 U.S. Census Bureau: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/53/53077.html
48
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 17: Dairy Cluster - Approximate Numbers of Dairy Cattle, Annual Manure
Production, and Annual Nitrogen Production
Mature
Dairy
Cattle
Heifers
and
Calves
Annual Manure
Production
(tons) a
Annual Nitrogen
Production as
Excreted b
(tons)
Annual Nitrogen
After 35% Losses
Occur c
(tons)
Liberty and Bosnia Dairies
5,700 to
6,839
1,000 to
1,999
155,040 to 193,950
984 to 1,220
640 to 793
Cow Palace
More than
6,840
2,000 to
2,999
More than 188,570
More than 1,200
More than 780
DeRuyter and D and A Dairies
4,700 to
5,699
More than
4,000
More than 161,460
More than 977
More than 635
aAnnual manure production is calculated using the following formula: [((# of milking cows)* 1.4* 108) +
((# of dry cows)*1.4*51) + ((# of heifers)*0.97*56) + ((# of calves *0.33*83)]*365/2000 (WSDA 2010)
bNitrogen production is calculated using the following formula: [((# of milking cows)* 1.4*.71) + ((# of
dry cows)*1.4*.3) + ((# of heifers)*0.97*.27) + ((# of calves *0.33*.42)]*365/2000 (WSDA 2010)
°Losses caused by volatilization or denitrification during storage are estimated at 35%. This estimate does
not include application losses.
The WSDA estimates that during storage at atypical dairy, about 35 percent of the nitrogen in
dairy waste is "lost" through the process of volatilization or denitrification (WSDA 2010). The
formula does not assume any leakage into the subsoils from the lagoons or other structures or
conveyances. If the remaining nitrogen is not taken up by crops grown on application fields or
transported offsite to another location, it may end up in the groundwater. For the Dairy Cluster as
a whole, more than 2,050 tons of nitrogen remain after losses.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
The dairies in the Dairy Cluster use a variety of animal waste storage methods, including lagoon
systems, dry stacking, manure pits, composting, above ground tanks, and (at the DeRuyter Dairy)
an anaerobic digester.
All the facilities in the Dairy Cluster use their own lagoon systems to store animal wastes. The
nitrogen-rich liquids that leak through the bottom and sides of the lagoons can migrate downward
through the soil column to the drinking water aquifer. EPA estimated the surface areas of the
Dairy Cluster lagoon systems using aerial photographs. The lagoon systems' storage capacities
were derived from WSDA inspection reports (see Table 18).
49
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 18: Dairy Cluster - Lagoon System Surface Area, Storage Capacity, and
Approximate Leakage Rate
Dairy
Liberty and
Bosma
Dairies
Cow Palace
DeRuyter
and D and A
Dairies
Approximate
Lagoon
System
Liquid
Surface Area
(square feet)
932,600
400,000
508,400
Lagoon
System
Storage
Capacity
(gallons)29
67,000,000
40,800,000
33,000,000
Estimated Lagoon
System Leakage, if
Liner System Exists
with Permeability of
1x10 7 cm/sec
(gallons per year)30
3,744,000
1,606,000
2,041,000
Estimated Range of
Lagoon System
Leakage,
Based on Ham
Seepage Rate Range
(gallons per year)
1,700,000 to
20,000,000
720,000 to 8,600,000
9 10,000 to
11,000,000
In combination, the Dairy Cluster lagoon systems have a surface area of approximately 1,841,000
square feet (equivalent to about 32 football fields - assumes a football field is 57,600 square feet).
The lagoons have a combined maximum storage capacity of about 126,800,000 gallons, the
equivalent volume of about 192 Olympic-size swimming pools (assumes the capacity of an
Olympic-size swimming pool is 660,000 gallons).
As discussed previously, the NRCS recommends avoiding the use of "agricultural waste storage
ponds" (lagoons) at locations like the Dairy Cluster where there is an aquifer that serves as a
domestic water supply (NRCS 2004). If no reasonable alternative exists, NRCS recommends
consideration of several alternatives including construction of a clay liner with a thickness and
coefficient of permeability so that specific discharge is less than IxlO"6 cm/sec. Assuming all of
the Dairy Cluster lagoons are lined in accordance with this current NRCS standard, a best likely
case scenario, seepage would be about 7,391,000 gallons per year from the Dairy Cluster. This is
the equivalent volume of about 11 Olympic-size swimming pools annually.
Based on the Ham and DeSutter study (Ham 2002), a lined lagoon system with a similar surface
area would release approximately 3,330,000 to 39,600,000 gallons per year into the underlying
soils, the equivalent of about five to 60 volumes of Olympic-size swimming pools annually.
Leakage rates for the Dairy Cluster lagoons would likely be greater than the above estimates if
the lagoons are unlined, especially if they are constructed in well drained, highly permeable soils.
29 Lagoon systems are generally designed to hold about one third of a dairy's annual liquid waste generation (the
amount that would be generated over a four month time period).
30 Assumes liner designed to achieve IxlO"6 cm/sec, with additional order of magnitude permeability reduction from
"sealing" for an effective permeability of IxlO"7 cm/sec.
50
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
If the lagoons are lined with a plastic liner, the actual leakage rates could be lower, although
plastic liners are easily punctured during construction and lagoon maintenance and, therefore,
also leak. The most effective liner system incorporates both plastic and clay layers.
EPA requested information from the Dairy Cluster dairies about how their lagoons are
constructed, but they declined to provide the information. EPA has asked Yakima County, the
WSDA, the Washington Department of Ecology, and the NRCS if any of the Dairy Cluster
lagoons have engineered liners, but none of the agencies could affirm that they do. EPA is
unaware of any state or local requirements that would compel dairies in Yakima County to
construct lagoons to any specific level of permeability.
Utilization rates of the lagoon systems vary and are indicated in the WSDA inspection reports
(WSDA 2012). Table 19 provides a summary of the lagoon system information contained in the
inspection reports. A dashed line indicates no information was provided in the reports for a
particular data element.
SURFACE SOILS
Surface soils in Yakima County have been characterized and mapped by the U.S. NRCS (NRCS
2012). A soil report has been developed for each of the dairies (EPA 2012a) and is summarized
in Appendix B. Almost all the surface soils underlying the Dairy Cluster have a "well drained"
classification, which means water moves readily through the soil.
More than 80 percent of the surface soils underlying the Dairy Cluster have a high saturated
hydraulic conductivity. The percentage of surface soils with a "high" saturated hydraulic
conductivity at the dairies is approximately: 88 percent at the Liberty and Bosnia Dairies; 82
percent at the Cow Palace; and 93 percent at the DeRuyter and D and A Dairies. The
permeability of the surface soils at the different dairies is more fully described in Appendix B.
Animal waste applied to crop fields can be a significant source of nitrogen loading to the soil,
groundwater, and surface water. Applying large quantities of animal wastes on highly permeable
surface soils (i.e., soil with a high hydraulic conductivity) increases the risk of groundwater
contamination because water from irrigation or precipitation can readily infiltrate the soil surface
and carry nitrogen past the root zone before it can be taken up by plants (EPA 2004). Agronomic
nitrogen application rates are typically based on soil types and crop yield goals. However,
agronomic nitrogen application rates are not necessarily protective of drinking water.
APPLICATION FIELDS
All the dairies in the Dairy Cluster apply animal wastes as fertilizer onto application fields that
they own or lease according to WSDA inspection reports (WSDA 2012). Corn and triticale (a
cross of wheat and rye) are typical crops grown by dairies because they have high nitrogen needs
and can be used as feed. Animal waste application fields can be a significant source of nitrogen
loading to the soil and potentially the groundwater and surface water.
51
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 19: Dairy Cluster - Washington State Department of Agriculture Inspection Dates
and Reported Values for Lagoon Capacity
Date of
Inspection
Lagoon
Capacity
(gallons)
Number of Days of
Lagoon Capacity"
Percent of Lagoon
Capacity Utilized at
Time of Inspection
Number of
Lagoons
Liberty and Bosnia Dairies
3/2/1011
1/26/2010
4/24/2008
7/18/2006
67,000,000
67,000,000
67,000,000
67,000,000
120 days plus
120 days plus
1 year plus
60%
60%
60%
17
13
Cow Palace
3/25/2010
12/18/2008
7/7/2008
9/5/2006
9,400,000
9,400,000
9,400,000
4 months plus
4 months plus
120 days
75%
60%
80%
100%
DeRuyter Dairy
1/25/2011
12/4/2008
1/11/2007
25,000,000
19,000,000
4 months plus
30%
70%
4
D and A Dairy
1/25/2011
12/4/2008
1/11/2007
8,000,000
9,000,000
4 months plus
35%
60%
5
a"Number of Days of Lagoon Capacity" is an estimate of the maximum number of days a lagoon system
could accept liquid dairy waste under normal operating conditions without having to be pumped out. It is
intended to assess whether a lagoon system is sufficiently large enough to hold liquid waste generated by
the dairy throughout the winter months, without having to be pumped out to the waste application fields
when there are no crops growing that could take up the nutrients in the waste. It assumes the lagoon system
was completely pumped out at the beginning of the time period.
In general, Washington law restricts WSDA ability to disclose to the public the exact size of
application fields, but WSDA can release the information in ranges (WSDA 1996). The Liberty
Dairy and Bosnia Dairy own or lease between 1,800 and 2,500 acres of application fields; the
Cow Palace owns or leases between 551 and 900 acres; and the DeRuyter Dairy and D and A
Farms Dairy own or lease between 3,201 and 4,000 acres (WSDA 2010).
The dairies employ a variety of animal waste application methods, including spreaders ("honey
wagons"), "big gun" sprinklers, sprinkler irrigation systems, dry spreaders, and custom
applicators. If a dairy does not have enough land on which to apply the waste within agronomic
rates, excess waste may be transferred offsite to another user.
52
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
WSDA inspectors noted in their reports for the Dairy Cluster that elevated levels of nitrogen were
detected in some of its application fields in the past (WSDA 2012). Excessive amounts of
nitrogen on highly permeable, irrigated surface soils pose a threat to groundwater. In addition,
WSDA records indicate the dairies in the Dairy Cluster exported some of their animal wastes to
other landowners.
For this study, the samples were collected from the following dairies: DeRuyter Dairy; D and A
Dairy; Cow Palace; and Liberty and Bosnia Dairies. Figure 11 and Figures 15 shows the sample
locations for the Dairy Cluster. The sampling locations include:
• One upgradient drinking water well (WW-06) located north (upgradient) of the other
sample locations in the Dairy Cluster.
• Dairy supply wells located on the DeRuyter Dairy (WW-07); D and A Dairy (WW-08);
and Cow Palace (WW-09). The supply well at the Liberty and Bosnia Dairies was not
sampled because it has a water treatment system.
• One dairy manure pile sample was collected from each of the following dairies:
DeRuyter Dairy (SO-03), D and A Dairy (SO-05); Cow Palace (SO-07); and Liberty
and Bosnia Dairies (SO-09).
• Twelve dairy lagoon samples:
DeRuyter Dairy (LG-04, LG-05, and LG-06. These samples were collected from
three separate lagoons);
- D and A Dairy (LG-07, LG-08, and LG-09. LG-08 and LG-09 were collocated);
- Cow Palace (LG-10, LG-11, and LG-12. LG-11 and LG-12 were collocated); and
Liberty Dairy (LG-13 and LG-14) and Bosnia Dairy (LG-15). These samples
were collected from three separate lagoons.
• Four dairy application field samples;
- DeRuyter Dairy (SO-04);
- D and A Dairy (SO-06);
- Cow Palace (SO-08); and
Liberty and Bosnia Dairies (SO-10).
• Eight downgradient residential drinking water wells (WW-10 to WW-17).
53
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
1. DAIRY CLUSTER: GENERAL CHEMISTRY
The four types of general chemistry data collected at the Dairy Cluster were: nitrate and other
forms of nitrogen; major ions; minor ions and trace inorganic elements; and perchlorate. Each of
these is discussed below.
Dairy Cluster: Nitrate and Other Forms of Nitrogen
Twelve water well and 12 dairy lagoon samples were analyzed for nitrate, nitrate plus nitrite,
ammonia or ammonium, and TKN. The dairy manure pile and dairy application field samples
were analyzed for extractable nitrate-N (Nitrate-N Solid), extractable ammonia-N (Ammonia-N
Solid), and total nitrogen by combustion (Total Nitrogen Solid). Table 20 summarizes the nitrate
and other forms of nitrogen data. In addition, total nitrogen from all forms was calculated for
each sample and is presented as "Calculated Total Nitrogen" in Table 20.
Figure 15 shows the concentration of total nitrogen for the samples collected at the Dairy Cluster.
As with the Haak Dairy, the total nitrogen concentrations are higher in the downgradient wells
compared with the upgradient well, with several significant sources of nitrogen in between (such
as dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, and dairy application fields). The concentration of nitrate in
the upgradient well is within background range. Nitrate concentrations in some downgradient
wells are more than four times the MCL. The data suggest that the Dairy Cluster is a likely
source of the increased nitrogen levels in the downgradient wells.
Dairy Cluster: Major Ions
Figures 16a, 16b, and 16c shows the concentrations of several major ions in the upgradient water
wells, the supply wells, the lagoons, and the downgradient wells. An average concentration for
the three lagoon samples collected in each of the four areas was calculated (LG-04, LG-05, and
LG-06; LG-07, LG-08, and LG-09; LG-10, LG-11, and LG-12; and LG-13, LG-14, and LG-15).
The average concentrations were calculated for the four sets of lagoon samples to allow for easier
comparison of the data.
The figures show a similar pattern to that observed at the Haak Dairy, with elevated
concentrations in the downgradient wells (WW-10 to WW-17) compared with the upgradient
wells (WW-06) and the supply wells (WW-07 to WW-09), with the highest concentrations in the
lagoons. Alkalinity also showed a similar pattern. The increase in the concentrations ranges
from up to: seven-fold for sodium; nine-fold for magnesium; 10-fold for calcium; and more than
30-fold for chloride. Potassium showed a slight increase. As with the Haak Dairy, sulfate showed
the largest increase in concentration between the upgradient and downgradient wells. As with the
Haak Dairy, the dairy sources are a likely source of major ions in the downgradient water wells.
54
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 20: Dairy Cluster - Distribution of Total Nitrogen in Wells, Dairy Lagoons, Manure
Piles, and Application Fields
Location
Nitrate
asN
(ppm)
Nitrate +
Nitrite as N
(ppm)
Ammonia
as N
(ppm)
TKN
as N
(ppm)
Calculated
Total Nitrogen
(ppm)
Water Wells and Lagoons
WW-06:UpgradientWell
WW-07: Supply Well
WW-08: Supply Well
WW-09: Supply Well
LG-04: Lagoon
LG-05: Lagoon
LG-06: Lagoon
LG-07: Lagoon
LG-08: Lagoon
LG-09: Lagoon
LG-10: Lagoon
LG-11: Lagoon
LG-12: Lagoon
LG-13: Lagoon
LG-14: Lagoon
LG-15: Lagoon
WW-10: Downgradient Well
WW-1 1 : Downgradient Well
WW-12: Downgradient Well
WW-1 3: Downgradient Well
WW-14: Downgradient Well
WW-1 5: Downgradient Well
WW-1 6: Downgradient Well
WW-1 7: Downgradient Well
0.71
1.02
11.7
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
22.3
45
41.4
40.9
29.4
22.3
21.7
0.73
1.19
12.9
ND
ND
ND
ND
3.1 (J)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.5 (J)
ND
ND
ND
23
46.7
44
43.4
30.2
23.4
22.7
ND
ND
ND
ND
920 (J)
1200 (J)
1200 (J)
950 (J)
730 (J)
760 (J)
190 (J)
240 (J)
240 (J)
970 (J)
860 (J)
560 (J)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1600 (J)
1600 (J)
1800(J)
1700 (J)
1200 (J)
1100(J)
380 (J)
500 (J)
290 (J)
1700 (J)
1400 (J)
900 (J)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.73
1.19
12.9
ND
1600
1600
1800
1703
1200
1100
380
500
290
1703
1400
900
ND
23
46.7
44
43.4
30.2
23.4
22.7
Dairy Manure Piles
T ,. Ammonia-N
Location „ ... , ,
Solid (ppm)
SO-03: Manure 1470
SO-05: Manure 1060
SO-07: Manure 3600
SO-09: Manure 1700
Nitrate-N solid Total Nitrogen
(ppm) Solid (ppm)
32.8 9210
43.1 13600
18.9 16100
5.69 13700
Total Nitrogen
(ppm)
9210
13600
16100
13700
Dairy Application Fields
T ,. Ammonium
Location -T , ,
as N (ppm)
SO-04: Application field 7.3
SO-06: Application field 6.8
SO-08: Application field 2.9
SO-10: Application field 7. 1
Nitrate + Nitrite Total Nitrogen
as N (ppm) Solid (ppm)
247 2110
45.6 960
84.3 3040
139 3590
Total Nitrogen
(ppm)
2110
960
3040
3590
J - the analyte was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
55
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Dairy Cluster: Minor Ions and Trace Inorganic Elements
All water well and dairy lagoon samples were analyzed for minor ions and trace elements, but the
dairy manure pile and dairy application field samples were not analyzed (see Table C6 in
Appendix C). The trace inorganic elements found in both the water wells and the dairy lagoons
included barium, iron, manganese, mercury, and zinc. Barium was detected in all 11 wells, iron
was detected in five wells, manganese was detected in four wells, mercury was detected in one
well, and zinc was detected in eight wells. Barium was the only trace inorganic element that
increased between the upgradient well and the downgradient wells, with the highest
concentrations in the lagoons.
Dairy Cluster: Perchlorate
Perchlorate analysis was performed on all of the water samples collected from wells near the
dairies (see Table C7 in Appendix C). The concentrations ranged from less than the detection
limit (0.003 (ig/L) to 3.08 (ig/L (WW-17). Perchlorate analysis was conducted to augment the
isotopic data as an indicator of potential accumulation of atmospherically derived nitrate
associated with caliche soils. The dairy lagoon samples were not analyzed for perchlorate
because this compound is rapidly degraded in anoxic environments, such as a dairy lagoon.
2. DAIRY CLUSTER: MICROBIOLOGY
There were no detections of total coliform, fecal coliform, or E. coli in the water well or supply
well samples associated with the Dairy Cluster with the exception of water well WW-06 which
had a detectable level of total coliform. E. coli was not detected in WW-06 and therefore MST
was not completed for this well or for any of the wells because there was no indication of fecal
contamination.
All the dairy lagoons in the Dairy Cluster were analyzed for fecal coliform. Samples LG-04
through LG-09 also were analyzed for E. coli and MST was performed. E. coli or MST analyses
were not performed on the other lagoon samples (LG-10 to LG-15) because EPA's mobile
microbiology laboratory was available to participate in the sampling effort for only a limited
period of time (see Table C8 in Appendix C).
All the dairy lagoons had high levels of fecal coliform. Of the six dairy lagoons evaluated using
MST, five indicated a ruminant source (LG-04, LG-05, LG-06, LG-07, and LG-08) while one
indicated both a ruminant and a human source (LG-09). It is unknown why human waste was
detected in LG-09 at the D and A Dairy, given that this facility likely is on a septic system.
56
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
3. DAIRY CLUSTER: ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
Dairy Cluster: Pesticides
Four pesticides (atrazine, bentazon, alachlor, and ioxynil) were detected in the water wells
associated with the Dairy Cluster. Atrazine, bentazon, and alachlor are pesticides commonly used
in agricultural crop production. Ioxynil is not registered for use in the United States (PAN 2011).
• Atrazine: WW-06 (upgradient well) and downgradient wells WW-12, WW-13, WW-14,
WW-15, WW-16, and WW-17
• Bentazon:WW-08 (dairy supply well)
• Alachlor: WW-13 and WW-17
• Ioxynil: WW-13
No results are reported for pesticides in the dairy lagoon samples because the laboratory
experienced problems with interferences as a result of the complex nature of the sample media.
The four pesticides detected in the water wells were not detected in the dairy manure pile or dairy
application field samples.
The concentrations of atrazine found in the water wells ranged from 0.016 (ig/L to 0.19 (ig/L.
None of the samples exceed the MCL for atrazine of 3 (ig/L. Alachlor levels found in two water
wells were 0.048 (ig/L and 0.057 (ig/L. None of the samples exceed the MCL for alachlor of 2
(ig/L. The concentration of bentazon in water well WW-08 was 0.036 (ig/L. The concentration of
ioxynil in well sample WW-13 was 0.063(ig/L. There are no MCLs established for bentazon or
ioxynil.
The four pesticides are not anticipated to be used in animal operations at the dairies for pest
control (Pike 2004), but atrazine, alachlor, and bentazon are commonly used in corn production.
Each of the dairies includes crop land where pesticides may have been applied. Given the
historical use of these pesticides and the detection of these compounds in other studies, it is likely
that these pesticides are from the current and historical use of pesticides for agriculture, which
could include application by the dairies on the associated fields. See Table C9 in Appendix C for
all the results.
Seven pesticides were detected in one or more of the dairy manure pile samples. These pesticides
were not detected in the water well samples. Seven pesticides were also detected in one or more
of the field application samples, but they were not detected in the water well samples.
Dairy Cluster: Trace Organics
Three compounds were detected in water well samples associated with the Dairy Cluster:
57
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
• Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) in WW-06 (upgradient well), WW-11, and WW-17
• Naphthalene in WW-07 (supply well)
• Tetrachloroethylene in WW-07 (supply well).
Of the three compounds found in water wells, only DEHP was found in one dairy lagoon sample
(LG-10). DEHP is a common plasticizer and could come from a variety of sources. Naphthalene
and tetrachloroethylene were not detected in any of the dairy lagoons.
All 12 dairy lagoons associated with the Dairy Cluster had one or more detection of trace
organics (see Table CIO in Appendix C). Eight compounds were detected in all 12 dairy lagoons
associated with the Dairy Cluster. These compounds are generally the same as those detected at
the Haak Dairy: 3-beta-coprostanol; 3-methyl-lh-indole (skatol); 4-nonyphenol monoethoxylate;
beta-sitosterol; beta-stigmastanol; cholesterol; p-cresol; and phenol. Trace organics were not
analyzed in manure or soil samples.
Dairy Cluster: Pharmaceuticals
Only one wastewater pharmaceutical, DEBT, was detected in a single downgradient well (WW-
10). There were no detections of any of the wastewater pharmaceuticals in the dairy manure pile
or dairy field application samples. Three wastewater pharmaceutical compounds were detected in
dairy lagoons associated with the Dairy Cluster: DEBT (eight dairy lagoons); diphenhydramine
(two dairy lagoons); and thiabendazole (three dairy lagoons). The source of the DEBT could be
its use as an insect repellent. The source of the diphenhydramine in the dairy lagoons is
unknown. Diphenhydramine is a common antihistamine used by people and can be used on dogs
and cats. Thiabendzadole is a parasiticide that is used to treat worm infections in both livestock
and humans and can be used as a pesticide (Mayo Clinic 2011).
Table 21 indicates the veterinary pharmaceuticals that were detected in one or more water well
samples and in the dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, and dairy application field samples. Five
veterinary pharmaceuticals were detected in the water wells (chlortetracycline, monensin,
tetracycline, tylosin, and virginiamycin). Veterinary pharmaceuticals were not detected in water
wells WW-12 and WW-16 and lagoon sample LG-04.
Monensin was not detected in the upgradient well. Monensin was detected in WW-10 and WW-
14, and was also detected in all the dairy lagoons (exception of LG-07), dairy manure piles, and
dairy application field samples. These detections indicate that monensin is likely used at the
dairies in the Dairy Cluster. The dairies are a likely source of the monensin in WW-10 and WW-
14. This conclusion is reinforced by the isotopic findings, which indicate that the source of
nitrate for WW-14 is animal waste (although animal waste can be either human or non-human).
58
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 21: Dairy Cluster - Concentrations of Five Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells,
Lagoons, Manure Piles, and Application Fields
Sample
Location"
Chlortetracycline
Monensin
Tetracycline
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
Upgradient Water Well (reported as fig/L)
WW-06
ND
ND
0.051 (J)
ND
ND
Dairy Supply Wells (reported as fig/L)
WW-07
WW-08
WW-09
ND
ND
ND
0.109
ND
0.023
0.041 (J)
5.17
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.023 (J)
ND
ND
Dairy Lagoons (reported as fig/L)
LG-05
LG-06
LG-07
LG-08
LG-09
LG-10
LG-11
LG-12
LG-13
LG-14
LG-15
0.075 (J)
ND
R
R
R
0.079 (J)
R
R
R
R
R
430.2 (J)
463.8 (J)
R
449.6 (J)
337.7 (J)
2.24 (J)
85 (J)
135 (J)
662 (J)
498 (J)
426 (J)
4.48 (J)
5.41 (J)
0.442 (J)
6.07 (J)
3.6 (J)
6.55 (J)
1.76 (J)
1.91 (J)
10.3 (J)
8.6 (J)
7.55 (J)
1.7(J)
10.22(J)
0.184(J)
R
1.07 (J)
R
R
R
0.139(J)
R
R
0.334 (J)
R
R
R
R
0.816 (J)
0.413 (J)
0.3 14 (J)
0.184(J)
R
1.0 (J)
Dairy Manure Piles and Dairy Application Fields (reported as fig/kg)
SO-03
SO-04
SO-05
SO-06
SO-07
SO-08
SO-09
SO-10
0.7
0.6
17.7
3.0
2303
13.5
ND
ND
109
5.1
1329
5.1
283
7.9
437
7
954
27.4
17.9
16.5
2484
104
309
53
14.8
2.1
ND
ND
21.1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Downgradient Water Wells (reported as fig/L)
WW-10
WW-11
WW-13
WW-14
WW-15
WW-17
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.119
ND
0.499
ND
ND
0.033
ND
ND
ND
0.038
ND
ND
ND
0.049
ND
0.029
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.041
0.024
ND
ND
aWater wells WW-12 and WW-16 had no detections and dairy lagoon sample LG-04 had no detections of
these five compounds.
J - the compound was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
ND - not detected.
R - the data are unusable for all purposes because of analytical problems with the sample.
59
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Tetracycline was detected in the upgradient well (WW-06) and in two downgradient wells, which
had lower concentrations than the upgradient well (WW-11 and WW-17). Tetracycline was
detected in all of the dairy lagoon samples, dairy manure pile samples, and dairy application field
samples, indicating that tetracycline is used at the dairies. It is possible that the dairy sources are
one of the sources of the tetracycline in the downgradient wells. However, given that the
concentrations in the upgradient well are higher than the downgradient wells, another source for
the tetracycline is likely.
Tylosin was detected in one downgradient well (WW-11) and five of the dairy lagoons, along
with several dairy manure pile and dairy application field samples. Virginiamycin was detected in
two downgradient wells (WW-13 and WW-14) and six dairy lagoons but not in any of the dairy
manure piles or application field samples. Chlortetracycline was detected in dairy lagoons and
manure and soil samples and in one downgradient well (WW-15). The data suggest the dairies
are possible sources of these substances in the downgradient wells.
Several other veterinary pharmaceutical compounds (ractopamine, sulfachloropyridazine,
sulfadimethoxine, sulfamethazine, and sulfathiazole) were detected in the majority of dairy
lagoon, dairy manure pile, and dairy application field samples but were not detected in
downgradient water wells. This finding would indicate they are being used by the dairies in the
Dairy Cluster.
Dairy Cluster: Hormones
EPA's Ada Laboratory analyzed the liquids samples (water wells and dairy lagoons), but not the
solids samples (dairy manure pile and dairy application fields) for five hormones. The laboratory
did not detect any of the five hormones in water wells associated with the Dairy Cluster; however
three of these five hormones (17-a-estradiol, 17-(3-estradiol, and estrone) were detected in all 12
of the dairy lagoons. The hormones 17-a-ethyl-estradiol and estriol were not detected in any of
the Dairy Cluster lagoon samples (see Table C13 in Appendix C).
The UNL Laboratory analyzed the Dairy Cluster liquids and solids samples for 20 hormones,
including the five hormones that the EPA's laboratory analyzed. The UNL Laboratory detected
17-a-estradiol in the upgradient well (WW-06) and in one supply well (WW-08) but not in any of
the downgradient wells. The UNL Laboratory also detected 17-(3-estradiol and estrone in one
supply well (WW-09).
For all the 20 hormones analyzed by UNL, four were detected in an upgradient well or in a
downgradient well (17-a-estradiol, androstadienedione, androsterone, and testosterone) (see
Table 22).
60
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 22: Dairy Cluster - Concentrations of Four Hormones in Wells, Lagoons, Manure
Piles, and Application Fields
Sample
Location3
17-a-
Estradiolb
Androstadienedioneb
Androsteroneb
Testosterone15
Upgradient Water Well (reported as ug/L)
WW-06
0.003
ND
ND
0.005
Dairy Supply Wells (reported as jig/L)
WW-08
WW-09
0.003
ND
0.002 (J)
ND
ND
0.005 (J)
0.003
0.008
Dairy Lagoons (reported as ug/L)
LG-05
LG-06
LG-07
LG-08
LG-09
LG-10
LG-11
LG-12
LG-13
LG-14
LG-15
ND
ND
ND
0.383
0.844
0.459
2.92
3.27
ND
ND
ND
3.50
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.166
0.20
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Dairy Manure Piles and Dairy Application Fields (reported as
SO-03
SO-05
SO-06
SO-07
SO-09
34.7
ND
0.11
18.7
16.9
29.4
15.4
ND
13.5
19.3
Downgradient Water Wells (re
WW-11
WW-12
WW-15
WW-17
WW-18
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.004 (J)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.193
0.195
0.016
0.090
0.007
0.028
ND
0.024
0.262
0.170
ND
ug/kg)
2.95
ND
ND
ND
ND
ported as ug/L)
ND
0.018 (J)
0.019 (J)
0.008 (J)
ND
0.004
ND
ND
ND
0.003
aThe four hormones were not detected in dairy supply well (WW-07), four downgradient water wells (WW-
10, WW-13, WW-14, and WW-16), one dairy lagoon (LG-04) and three dairy application field samples
(SO-04, SO-08, and SO-10).
b Analyses were conducted by the UNL Laboratory
J - the compound was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
ND - not detected.
The hormone 17-a-Estradiol was detected in the upgradient well and in several of the dairy
lagoons and dairy manure pile samples but not in any of the downgradient wells.
61
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Androstadienedione was detected in one downgradient water well and several dairy lagoons and
dairy manure pile samples. Androsterone was detected in three downgradient wells but not in any
of the dairy sources. Testosterone was detected in the upgradient well and two downgradient
wells and in the majority of the dairy lagoons. The concentration in the upgradient well was
greater than the downgradient wells. It is possible that the dairies are a source of
androstadienedione and testosterone in the downgradient wells; however, given the detection of
testosterone in an upgradient well, other sources are likely.
4. DAIRY CLUSTER: ISOTOPIC ANALYSIS
Isotopic analyses were completed for water wells WW-06 to WW-17 (Table 23) by the UNL
Laboratory. There was insufficient nitrate in WW-06, WW-09, and WW-10 to complete the
analysis. Additional details on the results of isotopic analyses conducted for this study are
provided in Appendix D of this report.
Table 23: Dairy Cluster - Concentration of Nitrate in Water Wells, Isotopic Signatures, and
the Interpreted Dominant Source of the Nitrate Based on the Observed Values
Location
WW-06
WW-07
WW-08
WW-09
WW-10
WW-11
WW-12
WW-13
WW-14
WW-15
WW-16
WW-17
Nitrate-N
(mg/L)a
0.6
1.1
11.7
NM
NM
21.6
43.6
42
40.7
27.4
23
23.3
515N-NO3
(%»)
NM
-0.1
5.3
NM
NM
3.0
6.2
11
10
5.2
5.9
6.9
518O-NO3
(%»)
NM
NM
23
NM
NM
18
-1.4
16
8.5
30
5.8
2.5
Interpreted Dominant Source(s)b
NM
Fertilizer
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste0 with
Some Atmospheric Contribution
NM
NM
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste
Animal Waste
Animal Waste
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste with
Some Atmospheric Contribution
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste
a The nitrate concentrations are from the UNL isotopic analysis.
b Interpretation of dominant sources is based on the following:
• 515N-NO3. Values less than 2.0 = dominated by synthetic fertilizer; values between 2.0 to 8.4 =
undetermined mixture of synthetic fertilizer or animal waste; values greater than 8.4 = dominated by
animal waste.
• 5 O-NO3 values greater than 20.0%o provide evidence for some atmospheric contribution. 5 O-NO3
values below 20.0%o could have an atmospheric contribution, but it becomes indistinguishable from
other sources.
0 Animal waste can include both human and non-human waste
NM - the sample was not measured because of the low nitrate concentrations.
62
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
The dominant source of nitrate for WW-13 and WW-14 is likely animal waste while the
dominant source of nitrate for WW-07 is likely fertilizer. The dominant sources of nitrate for
WW-11, WW-12, WW-16, and WW-17 is likely a combination of synthetic fertilizer and/or
animal waste while the dominant sources for WW-08 and WW-15 is likely a combination of
synthetic fertilizer and/or animal waste with some atmospheric contributions.
5.
DAIRY CLUSTER: AGE DATING
Table 24 presents the age dating data and, similar to the Haak Dairy, two samples were collected
for each water well.
Table 24: Dairy Cluster - Results of Age Dating Analyses Performed for Wells Reported in
Years Since the Water Infiltrated From the Surface to the Aquifer
Location
WW-06 - Upgradient
WW-07 - Supply Well
WW-08 - Supply Well
WW-09- Supply Well
WW-10 - Downgradient Well
WW-1 1 - Downgradient Well
WW-12 - Downgradient Well
WW-13 - Downgradient Well
WW-14- Downgradient Well
WW-1 5 - Downgradient Well
WW-16 - Downgradient Well
WW-17 - Downgradient Well
Sample Age
16.3 (J)
36.3 (J)
35.3 (J)
58.3 (J)
44.3 (J)
Over Value3
Over Value3
24.3 (J)
30.8
27.8 (J)
29.8 (J)
33.3 (J)
Duplicate
Age
15.8 (J)
32.8 (J)
40.8 (J)
51.3(J)
44.8 (J)
Over Value3
Over Value3
23.8 (J)
29.3
28.3 (J)
28.8 (J)
33.8 (J)
Average of
Samples
16.1
34.6
38.1
54.8
44.6
NA
NA
24.1
30.1
28.1
29.3
33.6
Average of
Group
16.1
42.5
31.6
3 "Over value" means that the sample contained more SF6 than can be explained by equilibrium with
modern air.
J - the compound was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
Averages were calculated for the upgradient well (WW-06), three supply wells (WW-07, WW-
08, and WW-09), and the six downgradient wells with reported values (WW-10, WW-13, WW-
14, WW-15, WW-16, and WW-17). The results indicate the youngest water was sampled in the
upgradient well, with an average age of 16.1 years, which suggests that it is a relatively shallow
well and is consistent with its upgradient location. The reported ages may not correspond to when
the water became contaminated. The oldest waters were in supply wells associated with the
Dairy Cluster, with an average age greater than 40 years. The average age of the waters in the
downgradient wells was 31.6 years. These relative ages are generally consistent with available
well log information indicating that the dairy supply wells are typically screened in the basaltic
aquifer, and the downgradient residential wells are commonly screened in the shallower alluvial
aquifer.
63
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
6. DAIRY CLUSTER: SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR RESIDENTIAL WATER WELLS
Table 25 provides a summary of the groups of compounds (general chemistry and organic
compounds) and analytical techniques (isotopic analyses) that provide information useful to
address the question of the likely sources of the nitrate for the nine residential water wells
associated with the Dairy Cluster. No microbial contamination was found in the downgradient
wells. There appears to be a correlation between the age dating data and the well depths for those
water wells that have well depth information (see Appendix A3).
As with the Haak Dairy, the nitrate levels in residential wells downgradient of the Dairy Cluster
are greater than EPA's MCL for nitrate with the exception WW-10. Nitrate levels in the Dairy
Cluster supply wells were generally low, with the exception of WW-08. This well serves the
DeRuyter Dairy and D and A Dairy and was measured at 11.7 mg/L, which exceeds the MCL for
nitrate. The well is located immediately downgradient of one of the DeRuyter Dairy's waste
application fields.
The total nitrogen data show increasing concentrations from the upgradient well, past several
sources of nitrogen, and to the downgradient wells. The downgradient wells contain substantially
more nitrogen than is present in the upgradient well. The major ion concentrations, especially for
calcium and chloride, increase between the dairy sources (dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, and
dairy application fields) and the downgradient wells with high nitrate. This pattern was also seen
for barium and alkalinity.
For the organic compounds, four pesticides were detected in the water wells associated with the
Dairy Cluster. However, none of these pesticides was detected in the dairy manure pile or dairy
application field samples and as stated above the lagoon samples could not be quantified because
of matrix interference problems.
Three trace organics were detected in water wells (DEHP, naphthalene, and tetrachloroethylene).
Naphthalene and tetracycline were detected in a dairy supply well, while DEHP was detected in
one downgradient well. Several of the trace organic compounds were found in all of the 12 dairy
lagoons (for example, 3-beta-coprostanol; beta-sitosterol, and phenol).
For the wastewater pharmaceuticals, one water well had a detected level of DEBT while there
were three compounds detected in dairy lagoons (DEET; diphenhydramine; and thiabendazole).
There were no detected levels in the dairy manure piles or application field samples.
Veterinary pharmaceuticals were detected in 10 water wells. Chlortetracycline was detected in
one downgradient well, two dairy lagoons, and six manure pile or application field samples.
Monensin was detected in two supply wells and two downgradient wells and in all but one of the
dairy sources. Tetracycline was detected in the upgradient water well, two supply wells, and two
downgradient wells and all of the dairy sources. Tylosin was detected in one downgradient well
and several dairy sources while virginiamycin was detected in one supply well and two
downgradient wells and several dairy lagoon samples.
64
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 25: Dairy
and Assessment
Cluster - Comparisons of Major Ions and Organic Compounds Detected in Samples from Wells and Dairy Operations
of Nitrate Sources in the Wells Using Isotopic Analyses
Residential
Well Number
WW-06
Upgradient
Well
WW-10
Downgradient
Well
WW-11
Downgradient
Well
WW-12
Downgradient
Well
Nitrate
Concentration
(mg/L)a
0.6
Not Detected
21.6
43.6
General Chemistry in Well
No trends in total nitrogen or
major ions as this is an upgradient
well
No large trends in total nitrogen
or major ions between WW-06
and WW-10
Total nitrogen concentration
increased 30-fold compared with
the upgradient well
Three to 25-fold increase in
concentration of five major ions
compared with the upgradient
well.
Total nitrogen concentration
increased more than 60-fold
compared with the upgradient
well
Five to almost 20-fold increase in
concentration of five major ions
compared with the upgradient
well.
Organic
Compounds
Detected in Well
Atrazine, DEHP,
tetracycline, a-
Estradiol and
testosterone
DEBT
Monensin
DEHP
Tetracycline
Tylosin
Testosterone
Atrazine
Androstadienedione
Androsterone
Organic Compounds also
Detected in Dairy Sources
Not applicable. WW-06 is an
upgradient well
DEBT (8 lagoons)
Monensin (All the dairy
sources except LG-07)
DEHP (LG-10)
Tetracycline (All dairy sources)
Tylosin (5 lagoons, 2 manure
pile, and one application field
sample)
Testosterone (9 lagoons and
one manure pile sample)
Androstadienedione (three
lagoons and 4 manure samples)
Dominant Source(s) of
Nitrate Based on Isotopic
Analyses
Not measured because lack
of nitrate in sample
Not measured because lack
of nitrate in sample
Fertilizer and/or Animal
Waste
Fertilizer and/or Animal
Waste
65
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Residential
Well Number
WW-13
Downgradient
Well
WW-14
Downgradient
Well
WW-15
Downgradient
Well
Nitrate
Concentration
(mg/L)a
42.0
40.7
27.4
General Chemistry in Well
Total nitrogen concentration
increased more than 60-fold
compared with the upgradient
well
Six to more than 3 5 -fold increase
in concentration of five major
ions compared with the
upgradient well.
Total nitrogen concentration
increased almost 60-fold
compared with the upgradient
well.
Two to almost 50-fold increase in
concentration of six major ions
compared with the upgradient
well.
Total nitrogen concentration
increased more than 40-fold
between compared with the
upgradient well.
Two to more than 20-fold
increase in concentration of six
major ions compared with the
upgradient well.
Organic
Compounds
Detected in Well
Alachlor
Atrazine
loxynil
Virginiamycin
Atrazine
Monensin
Atrazine
Chlortetracycline
Androsterone
Organic Compounds also
Detected in Dairy Sources
Virginiamycin (6 lagoons)
Monensin (All the dairy
sources except LG-07)
Chlortetracycline (2 lagoons,
all manure and application
fields except SO-09 and SO-10)
Dominant Source(s) of
Nitrate Based on Isotopic
Analyses
Animal waste
Animal waste
Fertilizer and/or Animal
Waste with Some
Atmospheric Contribution
66
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Residential
Well Number
WW-16
Downgradient
Well
WW-17
Downgradient
Well
Nitrate
Concentration
(mg/L)a
23.0
23.3
General Chemistry in Well
Total nitrogen concentration
increased more than 30-fold
compared with the upgradient
well.
Three to almost 30-fold increase
in concentration of five major
ions compared with the
upgradient well.
Total nitrogen concentration
increased more than 30-fold
compared with the upgradient
well.
Four to almost 30-fold increase in
concentration of five major ions
compared with the upgradient
well.
Organic
Compounds
Detected in Well
Atrazine
Alachlor
Atrazine
DEHP
Tetracycline
Androsterone
Organic Compounds also
Detected in Dairy Sources
DEHP (LG-10)
Tetracycline (All dairy sources)
Dominant Source(s) of
Nitrate Based on Isotopic
Analyses
Fertilizer and/or animal
waste
Fertilizer and/or Animal
waste
"Nitrate results are from Cascade Analytical Laboratory
ND - Not Detected
67
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Four hormones were detected in either the upgradient well or downgradient water wells and in a dairy
source. The hormone 17-a-Estradiol was detected in the upgradient well and in several of the dairy sources
but not in the downgradient wells. Androstadienedione was detected in one supply well, one
downgradient well, and several dairy sources. Androsterone was detected in one supply well and three
downgradient wells but not in any dairy sources. The concentration of testosterone was higher in the
upgradient well than in the one downgradient well where testosterone was detected. The majority of
dairy lagoons had testosterone detections.
The isotopic analysis indicates that the dominant nitrogen source for two downgradient wells is animal
waste (WW-13 and WW-14) while the dominant source for dairy supply well WW-07 is fertilizer. The
other wells show a mixture of animal waste and fertilizer as a source. Wells WW-08 and WW-15 have
some atmospheric nitrogen contribution in addition to animal waste and fertilizer.
In conclusion, all the downgradient residential water wells (with the exception of WW-10) associated
with the Dairy Cluster have nitrate levels greater than the MCL. The data for total nitrogen and major
ions indicate an increase in concentrations from the upgradient well to the downgradient wells, with the
dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, or dairy application fields likely sources. Barium and total alkalinity
also show similar patterns.
Monensin and tetracycline were detected in the majority of dairy sources and in downgradient wells.
Tetracycline was detected in two of the downgradient residential water wells and at a similar
concentration in the upgradient well. It is possible that the dairies are sources of tetracycline, but given
the concentration of tetracycline in the upgradient well was higher than the concentrations in the
downgradient residential water wells, another source of tetracycline is likely. The dairy sources are a
likely source of the monensin detected in the downgradient wells. These compounds were not detected in
samples from the wastewater treatment plants influents, which suggests septic systems are not a likely
source.
The hormone testosterone was detected in downgradient residential drinking water wells and dairy
sources, although the concentration in the upgradient well is similar to the concentrations in the
downgradient wells. It is possible that the dairies are a source of testosterone, but given the concentration
of testosterone in the upgradient well, another source is likely.
C. Irrigated Cropland
Another likely source of nitrate in drinking water wells is nitrogen-rich fertilizers, such as inorganic
synthetic fertilizer and manure applied to irrigated crops. As part of this study EPA looked at two fields
each for three crops: mint, hops, and corn. EPA collected soil samples from six fields that were located
upgradient from six residential drinking water wells which had been tested and found to exceed the MCL
for nitrate. In each field, thirty soil subsamples at a depth of approximately one inch were collected and
composited for analysis. Each downgradient water well and its associated soil sample is shown in Figure
11 and Table 26 along with the USDA NRCS soil type.
68
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 26: Irrigated Cropland -Well Sample Locations and Associated Soil Samples, Crop Types
and Soil Types
Water Well
Sample
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-28
WW-26
WW-27
Associated
Soil Sample
SO-11
SO-12
SO-13
SO-14
SO-15
SO-16
Crop Owner
Schilperoort
Farm
Havilah Farm
Wheeler Farm
DVM Sunny
Dene Ranch
Golden Gate
Hops
Golden Gate
Hops
Crop
Type
Mint
Mint
Corn
Corn
Hops
Hops
USDA NRCS Soil Type
Warden Silty Loam
Warden Silty Loam
Warden Silty Loam
Hezel Loamy Fine Sand & Cleman
Very Fine Sandy Loam
Hezel Loamy Fine Sand
Warden Silty Loam
EPA contacted the cropland owners about crop history and fertilizer use. Information about the corn and
mint fields is presented in Table 27; however, the hop field owners did not respond. All farmers stated
that the application of fertilizer was determined by periodic crop or soil sampling. In addition, one of the
corn field owners (SO-14) identified his field as an application field for waste from his dairy.
Table 27: Irrigated Cropland - Crop Field History and Fertilizer Use
Soil Sample
ID
SO-11
SO-12
SO-13
SO-14
SO-15
SO-16
Current
Crop
Mint
Mint
Corn
Corn
Hops
Hops
Crop Field History
Planted with mint for past 23 years.
Planted with mint for past 4 years.
Planted with corn for at least the past 5
years.
Planted with corn since 2010. Planted
with alfalfa in 2008 and 2009. Planted
with hops prior to 2008.
No information was provided by the
crop field owner.
No information was provided by the
crop field owner.
Fertilizer History
Synthetic fertilizer only.
Mix of compost and synthetic fertilizer.
Synthetic fertilizer only.
Manure in the fall and synthetic fertilizer
during the growing season.
No information was provided by the crop
field owner.
No information was provided by the crop
field owner.
Soil types in the parcels selected for sampling in this study were from two USDA NRCS soil units.
Warden soils are silt loams which are wind deposited silts, which lie on terraces of the Yakima River or
on lake sediments deposited during the last glacial period. Warden soils are deep and well drained with
little likelihood to retain nutrients which infiltrate beyond the root zone. Hezel soil is loamy fine sand.
Hezel soils are formed in lacustrine sediment and have a mantel of eolian sand. Hezel soils are well
drained with rapid permeability in the upper loamy fine sand part, dropping to moderately slow in the
underlying stratified material. The rapid infiltration provides little opportunity for attenuation of any
excess nutrients moving beyond the root zone. (See EPA 2012a for detailed soil reports for the six crops.)
69
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
The soil samples were analyzed for several forms of nitrogen, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, and hormones.
They were not analyzed for major ions, trace inorganic elements, perchlorate, microbiology, trace
organics, isotopic analysis, or age dating analysis.
1. IRRIGATED CROPLAND : GENERAL CHEMISTRY
Irrigated Cropland: Nitrate and Other Forms of Nitrogen
All of the water wells sampled downgradient of the irrigated cropland had nitrate levels greater than the
MCL of 10 mg/L. Soil samples were analyzed for several forms of nitrogen, including extractable nitrate
(nitrate-N), extractable ammonium (ammonia-N), and total nitrogen by combustion. Table 28 shows the
measured values for these forms of nitrogen in these crop soils. If irrigation is applied above crop demand
the levels of nitrate in the soils, if not reduced either by uptake by growing plants, volatilization, or
denitrification, could ultimately move out of the root zone and become a source of groundwater
contamination.
Table 28: Irrigated Cropland - Concentrations of Nitrogen in Soil Samples Collected From Mint,
Corn, and Hop Fields Near Wells WW-23 to WW-28
Soil Sample/Crop
SO- 1 I/Mint
SO-12/Mint
SO-13/Corn
SO-14/Corn
SO-15/Hops
SO-16/Hops
Nitrate-N (ppm)
245
191
24.3
6.3
83.5
26.5
Ammonium-N
(ppm)
210
8.2
7.5
12
21
7.7
Total N by Combustion
(ppm)
3330
2350
1100
1180
2210
3000
2. IRRIGATED CROPLAND: MICROBIOLOGY
There were no detections of total coliform, fecal coliform, or E. coli in the six water wells. The crop
samples were not evaluated for microbiology.
3. IRRIGATED CROPLAND: ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
Irrigated Cropland: Pesticides
Atrazine and bentazon were the only pesticides detected in the water wells. Atrazine was detected in
WW-24 and WW-26 and bentazon was detected in WW-23 and WW-24. Atrazine was not detected in
any of the crop soil samples, while bentazon was detected in SO-11 (mint field) and SO-12 (mint field).
Bentazon is used for selective control of weeds in beans, rice, corn, peanuts, and mint (ETN 1993).
Bentazon was detected in two water wells and crop soil samples associated with each other (WW-23 and
SO-11 and WW-24 and SO-12) (Table 29). This result indicates that the bentazon applied to the mint
fields is likely migrating to groundwater and the water wells. Fifteen other pesticides were detected in
crop soil samples, but not detected in the associated water wells (see Table C9 in Appendix C).
70
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 29: Irrigated Cropland - Concentrations of Atrazine and Bentazon in Wells WW-23 to
WW- 28 and in Nearby Crop Soil Samples
Water Well and Soil Sample
Location (Crop)
WW-23
SO- 11 (Mint)
WW-24
SO-12 (Mint)
WW-25
SO-13 (Corn)
WW-26
SO- 15 (Hops)
WW-27
SO- 16 (Hops)
WW-28
SO-14 (Corn)
Concentration of Atrazine
ND
ND
0.017 (J) ug/L
ND
ND
1.6(J)ug/kg
0.025 (J) ug/L
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.7 (J) ug/kg
Concentration of
Bentazon
0.028 (J) ug/L
38
0.033 (J) ug/L
2 (J) Mg/kg
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
J - the compound was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
Irrigated Cropland: Pharmaceuticals
There were no detections of wastewater pharmaceuticals in the water wells or the crop soil samples.
Nine veterinary pharmaceuticals were detected in one well (WW-26). Monensin was the only compound
detected in a water well (WW-26 at 0.319 ug/L) and its associated soil sample (SO-15 at 4.5 ug/kg). The
other compounds detected in water well WW-26 (erythromycin, lincomycin, ractopamine,
sulfamethazine, sulfamethoxazole, sulfathiazole, tiamulin, and virginiamycin) were not detected in the
associated crop soil sample. There were no detections of any veterinary pharmaceuticals in any of the
other water wells.
Four veterinary pharmaceuticals were detected in the crop soil samples.
• SO-11: Oxytetracycline
• SO-12: Oxytetracycline
• SO-13: No detections
• SO-14: Oxytetracycline
• SO-15: Monensin, Oxytetracycline, and tetracycline
• SO-16: Monensin, Oxytetracycline, tylosin, and tetracycline.
71
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Irrigated Cropland: Hormones
EPA's Ada Laboratory analyzed the six water well samples for five hormones (17-a-estradiol, 17-J3-
estradiol, estrone, 17-a-ethyl-estradiol and estriol). The laboratory did not detect any of the five
hormones in the water wells.
The UNL Laboratory analyzed the water wells and associated soil samples for 20 hormones, including the
five hormones that the EPA's Ada Laboratory analyzed. The UNL Laboratory detected six hormones in
one well WW-27 (17-a-estradiol, androstadienedione, 17-(3-trenbolone, androsterone, epitestosterone, and
testosterone). These six compounds were not detected in the crop soil sample (SO-16) associated with
WW-27. The UNL Laboratory did not detect any hormones in the other five water wells.
Five hormones were detected in crop soil samples (see Table C14 in Appendix C).
• SO-11: Androstadienedione and progesterone
• SO-12: 4-androstenedione, 17-a-estradiol, and progesterone
• SO-13: Melengesterol acetate
• SO-14: No detections
• SO-15: 4-androstenedione, androstadienedione, and progesterone
• SO-16: 4-androstenedione and progesterone
4. IRRIGATED CROPLAND: ISOTOPIC ANALYSES
An isotopic analysis was performed for six wells associated with the irrigated croplands. Table 30
provides the results for these six wells. Additional details on the results of isotopic analyses conducted
for this study are provided in Appendix D of this report.
The dominant source for WW-24 is fertilizer, while the dominant source for WW-27 is animal waste. For
the other water wells, the potential sources are likely to be a combination of fertilizer and animal waste
for WW-23, WW-25, and WW-26 and a combination of fertilizer and animal waste with some
atmospheric contribution for WW-28.
72
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 30: Irrigated Cropland - Concentration of Nitrate in Wells, Isotopic Signatures, and the
Interpreted Dominant Source(s) of the Nitrate Based on Observed Values
Location
WW-23 (Mint)
WW-24 (Mint)
WW-25 (Corn)
WW-26 (Hops)
WW-27 (Hops)
WW-28 (Corn)
Nitrate-N
(mg/L)a
17.3
14
32.9
15.1
19.9
69.6
515N-NO3
(%.)
2.2
-0.3
2.4
7.5
8.8
5.5
518O-NO3
(%.)
18.0
12
15
6.3
17
44
Interpreted Dominant Source(s)b
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste
Fertilizer
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste
Animal Waste
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste with
Some Atmospheric Contribution
aThe nitrate concentrations are from the UNL isotopic analysis.
blnterpretation of dominant sources is based on the following:
• 515N-NO3. Values less than 2.0 = dominated by synthetic fertilizer; values between 2.0 to 8.4 =
undetermined mixture of synthetic fertilizer and/or animal waste; values greater than 8.4 = dominated by
animal waste.
• 518O-NO3 values greater than 20.0%o provide evidence for some atmospheric contribution. 518O-NO3
values below 20.0%o could have an atmospheric contribution, but it becomes indistinguishable from other
sources.
5.
IRRIGATED CROPLAND: AGE DATING
The age dating data for the six wells associated with the irrigated crops is presented in Table 31. The
values for the water wells are younger than for any other group of samples in the study. The reported
ages may not correspond to when the water became contaminated.
Table 31: Irrigated Cropland - Results of Age Dating Analyses Performed for Wells Reported in
Years Since the Water Infiltrated From the Surface to the Aquifer
Location
WW-23 (Mint)
WW-24 (Mint)
WW-25 (Corn)
WW-26 (Hops)
WW-27 (Hops)
WW-28 (Corn)
Sample Age
Over Value3
14.8 (J)
10.3
12.8 (J)
Over Value
Over Value
Duplicate Age
Over Value
15.8 (J)
9.8
11.8(J)
14.3 (J)
Over Value
Average
NA
15.3
10.1
12.3
14.3
NA
a"Over Value" means that the sample contained more SF6 than can be explained by equilibrium with modern air.
J - the analyte was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
73
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
6. IRRIGATED CROPLAND : SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR RESIDENTIAL WELLS
Table 32 summarizes information on the nitrate concentrations in the water wells along with any organic
compounds detected in the water wells and the associated crop soil samples and the dominant source of
nitrate based on the isotopic analysis. No microbial contamination was found in the downgradient wells.
Bentazon and atrazine were the only pesticides detected in the water wells associated with the six crop
field soil samples. Bentazon was detected in the soil samples associated with water wells at two sites:
SO-1 l/WW-23 and SO-12/WW-24. Atrazine was detected in two of the wells, but not in the associated
soil samples.
Nine veterinary pharmaceuticals were detected in one well (WW-26). Monensin was the only veterinary
pharmaceutical detected in the associated soil sample (SO-15) which was collected from a hop field.
There were no detections of any veterinary pharmaceuticals in the other five water wells. Three hormones
were detected in one well (WW-27) but were not detected in the associated soil sample (SO-16). Of these
three hormones, 17- (3-trenbolone is a synthetic growth hormone used exclusively in beef cattle (not dairy
cows), while the other two hormones are natural compounds. The source of the 17- (3-trenbolone is
unknown. There were no detections in any hormones in the other five water wells.
The isotopic data indicate that fertilizer is a dominant source of nitrate in water well WW-24 which is
downgradient of a mint field. The dominant source of nitrate in water well WW-27 which is
downgradient of a hops field is animal waste (human or non-human).
In conclusion, the nitrate levels in all the water wells associated with the crop samples were above the
nitrate MCL. Bentazon and monensin were the only compounds detected in water wells and the
associated crop soil samples. This finding suggests that bentazon and monensin detected in the crop field
soil are likely migrating to groundwater and nearby water wells. Possible manure application to the hop
field could account for the monensin detected in the downgradient residential well.
Some of the cropland soils are well drained and highly permeable. High nitrogen crops planted on such
soils and especially those that utilize rill irrigation may pose a threat to the aquifer (see Appendix G,
Figure 1).
74
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 32: Irrigated Cropland - Comparisons of Organic Compounds Detected in Samples from Wells and Croplands and Assessment of
Nitrate Sources in the Wells Using Isotopic Analyses
Water Well
Location
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-26
WW-27
WW-28
Nitrate
Concentration
in Wells
(mg/L)a
16.0
13.8
33.4
15.3
19.8
71.2
Summary of Organic Compounds
Detected in Water Wells
Bentazon
Atrazine
Bentazon
No detects
Atrazine, erythromycin, lincomycin,
monensin, ractopamine,
sulfamethazine, sulfathiazole,
tiamulin, and virginiamycin
17-a-estradiol, androstadienedione
17- p-trenbolone, testosterone,
androsterone, and epitestosterone
No detects
Associated
Crop Location
SO- 11 (mint)
SO- 12 (mint)
SO-13 (corn)
SO-15 (hops)
SO-16 (hops)
SO-14 (corn)
Summary of Organic
Compounds Detected in
Wells and
Associated Crop Fields
Bentazon
Bentazon
Nothing to compare
Monensin only compound
also detected in soil sample
These compounds were not
detected in soil samples
Nothing to compare
Dominant Source(s) of
Nitrate in Wells Based on
Isotopic Analyses
Fertilizer and/or Animal
Waste
Fertilizer
Fertilizer and/or Animal
Waste
Fertilizer and/or Animal
Waste
Animal Waste
Fertilizer and/or Animal
Waste with Atmospheric
Contribution
aNitrate results are from Cascade Analytical Laboratory
75
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
D. Residential Septic Systems
Four residential water wells (WW-19, WW-20, WW-21, and WW-22) were identified to evaluate whether
high nitrate concentrations could be coming from septic systems (Figure 11). These wells were selected
because they are in residential areas served by septic systems, but are not located near dairies or crop
fields. To conduct this evaluation, samples were collected from the wastewater entering the treatment
plants located in Zillah (SP-01), Mabton (SP-02), and Toppenish (SP-03 and SP-04). Sample SP-04 was
collected because additional sample volume was requested for SP-03 by EPA's Manchester Laboratory.
Sample SP-04 was collected on a different day and was assigned a different sample number. The
laboratory did not need the extra volume to supplement sample SP-03 so sample SP-04 was analyzed for
the same compounds as SP-03. Samples SP-03 and SP-04 are not duplicate samples because they were
collected at different times.
The treatment plant influent samples were collected to serve as surrogates for septic systems by providing
a characterization and quantification of compounds that are found in rural septage. EPA recognizes that
these WWTPs may receive substances that are not found in residential septic systems (for example they
may also receive commercial and industrial waste streams). The WWTPs sampled serve rural
communities and are sufficiently similar to residential septic systems for the purposes of this study. This
approach was used to determine whether the compounds detected in wells with high nitrate concentrations
in areas with a high density of septic systems are similar to the compounds detected in WWTP influent or
whether these wells are affected by other sources.
Samples collected from the WWTPs were analyzed for the same compounds as the water well samples,
excluding the analysis for nitrate, pesticides, perchlorate, and age dating (Table C2). Nitrate was not
analyzed in the WWTP influent samples as there would be very little formation of nitrate from the
organic nitrogen in the waste because of the low oxygen environment of the sewer system. EPA's
Manchester Laboratory attempted to analyze the pesticides in the WWTPs influent samples. However,
the laboratory reported that because of significant interferences from the large number of organic
compounds present in the waste, the pesticide concentrations could not be quantified. Perchlorate and age
dating analyses were not conducted because the influent was composed of water co-mingled from many
sources.
Although four wells were selected for this evaluation, all of the residential wells were compared with the
WWTP data to determine whether septic systems are a likely source of the nitrate found in any Phase 3
well in the study.
1. SEPTIC SYSTEMS: GENERAL CHEMISTRY
The WWTP influent samples were collected to serve as surrogates for septic system influent and to
characterize compounds found in rural septic systems. While the major ions and trace elements were
measured for the WWTP and water wells, the results are not summarized here as there are no upgradient
wells that can be used to compare the results.
76
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Septic Systems: Nitrate and other Forms of Nitrogen
The nitrate levels in the four water wells were all greater than the MCL of 10 mg/L. The water wells also
were evaluated for different forms of nitrogen. Ammonium and TKN were not detected in any of these
wells indicating all detectable nitrogen was in the form of nitrate. No analysis similar to that conducted
for the Haak Dairy and Dairy Cluster is possible because no upgradient wells were sampled for
comparison.
2. SEPTIC SYSTEMS: MICROBIOLOGY
As found with other water wells in the study, neither total coliform, fecal coliform nor E. coli were
detected in the four selected water wells. The WWTP influent samples were analyzed for fecal coliform
and E. coli. (see Table C8 in Appendix C). As expected, very high concentrations of both fecal coliform
and E. coli were found in the influent to the WWTPs. Samples were also analyzed using MST to identify
the source of the fecal contamination. Three of the samples indicated human sources, while one sample
indicated both human and ruminant sources.
3. SEPTIC SYSTEMS: ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
Septic Systems: Pesticides
Atrazine and bentazon were detected in one well (WW-20). There were no pesticides detected in the
other three water wells (WW-19, WW-21, and WW-22).
EPA's Manchester Laboratory attempted to analyze the pesticides in the WWTPs influent samples;
however, the laboratory reported that the WWTP sample matrix was too difficult to analyze because of
significant interferences from the large number of organic compounds present in the waste. Therefore,
the pesticide concentrations could not be quantified from the WWTP influent samples.
Septic Systems: Trace Organics
The trace organics analysis includes compounds such as caffeine, fragrances, and disinfectants, which
would be expected to be found in domestic wastewater. Trace organics were not detected in any of the
four selected water wells. For the entire study, four residential wells had detectable levels of DEHP.
Thirty-seven trace organics were detected in the WWTP influents (see Table CIO in Appendix C).
Nineteen of the trace organics were detected in all of the WWTP influent samples. This indicates that
trace organics are being used and can be found in wastewater entering WWTP, but with a few exceptions
these compounds were not detected in residential water wells.
Septic Systems: Pharmaceuticals
No wastewater pharmaceutical compounds were detected in the four selected water wells. For the entire
study one wastewater pharmaceutical (DEET) was detected in one residential water well. Nine
wastewater pharmaceuticals compounds were detected in at least one WWTP influent sample, with six of
the compounds detected in all three WWTP influent samples (acetaminophen, cotinine, DEET, ibuprofen,
naproxen, and triclosan) (Table Cl 1 in Appendix C). As with the trace organics, the wastewater
pharmaceuticals were detected in the WWTP influent, but not in the residential water wells.
77
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Table 33 shows the veterinary pharmaceuticals detected in three water wells and the WWTP influent
samples. Water well WW-22 contained no detected veterinary pharmaceuticals.
Table 33: Septic Systems - Concentrations of Veterinary Pharmaceutical Detected in Wells and
WWTP Influents
Compound
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Ractopamine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracycline
Tiamulin
Virginiamycin
Wells3
WWTP Influent"
Units: ug/L
WW-19
ND
ND
1.62
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
WW-20
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.04 (J)
ND
ND
WW-21
0.11
0.371
0.194
0.079
0.053
0.04
0.051
ND
0.05
0.162
SP-01
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.55 (J)
ND
ND
SP-02
R
R
R
R
R
0.106(J)
R
ND
R
R
SP-03
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.086
0.662
ND
ND
ND
ND
"Water well WW-22 had no detected veterinary pharmaceuticals.
bSample SP-04 was not analyzed for veterinary pharmaceuticals.
J - the compound was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
ND - not detected.
R - the sample was unusable.
Three compounds were detected in the water wells and in at least one WWTP influent sample
(sulfamethazine, Sulfamethoxazole, and tetracycline). Eight compounds were detected in the water wells,
but not in the WWTPs. Nine compounds were detected in WW-21. Water well WW-21 is surrounded by
possible septic sources; it is also downgradient from several hop yards and at a greater distance,
downgradient from several large dairies. The residents raise poultry and beef cattle. Many of the
compounds detected in WW-21 were not found in the WWTP influent samples. The data suggest that
septic systems are not the source of many of the compounds detected in this well.
For the entire study, four veterinary pharmaceuticals were detected in the WWTP influent samples with
three of those also detected in one or more residential water wells: sulfamethazine (two water wells);
Sulfamethoxazole (one water wells); and tetracycline (five water wells). Sulfamethoxazole and
tetracycline are used by humans and it is possible that septic systems could be a source of these
compounds in the residential wells.
78
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Septic Systems: Hormones
EPA's Ada Laboratory analyzed the four water well samples and the WWTP influent samples for five
hormones (17-a-estradiol, 17-(3-estradiol, estrone, 17-a-ethyl-estradiol and estriol). The laboratory did
not detect any of the five hormones in the water wells, but detected three of the hormones in all three of
WWTP influent samples (17-(3-estradiol, estriol, and estrone) (see Table C13 in Appendix C).
The UNL Laboratory analyzed samples from the same four water wells and the WWTP influent samples
for 20 hormones, including the same five hormones as the EPA's Ada Laboratory (see Table C14 in
Appendix C). The UNL Laboratory detected 17-a-estradiol, 17-(3-estradiol, and estrone in water well
WW-22 along with several other compounds. Androsterone was the only other hormone detected in any
of the four water wells (WW-20).
Table 34 shows the concentrations of the compounds detected in water wells WW-20 and WW-22 and the
corresponding concentrations in WWTP influent samples. No hormones were detected in water wells
WW-19andWW-21.
Table 34: Septic Systems - Hormone Concentrations in Wells and WWTP Influents
Compound
17-(3-estradiol
Estrone
Estriol
17-a-estradiol
Androsterone
Androstadienedione
(3-Zearalanol
Testosterone
1 1-Keto Testosterone
Epitestosterone
WW-20
WW-22
SP-01
SP-02
SP-03
(Units: ug/L)
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.004(J)
(UNL)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.006 (UNL)
0.004 (UNL)
ND
0.005 (UNL)
ND
0.003 (UNL)
0.003 (UNL)
0.01 (UNL)
0.005 (UNL)
0.004 (UNL)
0.021 (Ada)
0.077 (Ada)
1.030 (Ada)
0.263 (UNL)
5.049(J)
(UNL)
0.255(J)
(UNL)
ND
0.053 (UNL)
0.1 (UNL)
ND
0.035 (Ada)
0.096 (Ada)
0.863 (Ada)
ND
2.137(J)
(UNL)
0.614(J)
(UNL)
ND
0.059 (UNL)
0.043 (UNL)
0.06 (UNL)
0.034 (Ada)
0.073 (Ada)
0.640 (Ada)
ND
3.187(J)
(UNL)
14.1 (J)
(UNL)
ND
0.045 (UNL)
ND
ND
J - the compound was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
ND - not detected.
Androsterone was detected in water well WW-20 and in the three WWTP influent samples. Eight
compounds were detected in water well WW-22. It is possible that septic systems are a source of several
of the compounds found in WW-22 and the androsterone in WW-20. Many of these compounds are
naturally produced by humans (for example 17-(3-estradiol, estrone, estriol, androsterone, and
testosterone). All of these compounds were detected in the WWTP influent samples.
79
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
For the entire study, 14 hormones were detected in WWTP influent samples with seven of those detected
in residential water wells. Testosterone and androsterone were the most frequently detected hormones:
testosterone in nine water wells and androsterone in four water wells. Given that both of these
compounds are natural sex hormones, the septic systems are a possible source of the hormones detected in
the residential water wells.
4. SEPTIC SYSTEMS: ISOTOPIC ANALYSIS
Isotopic analysis was performed for wells WW-19 to WW-22 by the UNL Laboratory. Table 35 provides
the results for these four wells. Additional details on the results of isotopic analysis conducted for this
study are provided in Appendix D of this report.
Table 35: Septic Systems - Concentration of Nitrate in Wells, Isotopic Signatures, and the
Interpreted Dominant Source(s) of the Nitrate Based on Observed Values
Location
WW-19
WW-20
WW-21
WW-22
Nitrate-N
(mg/L)a
36.4
15
36.5
16.6
515N-NO3
(%»)
8.7
6.3
7.7
10
518O-NO3
(%»)
15.4
52.9
12.2
11.0
Interpreted Dominant Source(s)b
Animal Waste0
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste with
Some Atmospheric Contribution
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste
Animal Waste
aThe nitrate concentrations are from the UNL isotopic analysis.
blnterpretation of dominant sources is based on the following:
• 515N-NO3. Values less than 2.0 = dominated by synthetic fertilizer; values between 2.0 to 8.4 =
undetermined mixture of synthetic fertilizer and/or animal waste; values greater than 8.4 = dominated by
animal waste.
• 518O-NO3 values greater than 20.0%o provide evidence for some atmospheric contribution. 518O-NO3
values below 20.0%o could have an atmospheric contribution, but it becomes indistinguishable from other
sources.
0 Animal waste can be either human or non-human waste
The dominant source of nitrate for WW-19 and WW-22 appears to be animal waste (human or non-
human). For WW-20 the dominant sources are likely a combination of synthetic fertilizer and/or animal
waste with some atmospheric contribution for WW-20. The likely source of nitrate in well WW-21 is a
combination of synthetic fertilizer and/or animal waste. The probable sources of nitrate for these water
wells match the variety of land uses surrounding these highly scattered water wells.
5. SEPTIC SYSTEMS: AGE DATING
Table 36 provides the age dating results for the four selected water wells. There is a wide scatter of ages
in the water wells, with age measurements ranging from 14.3 years to 44.3 years. As previously
discussed, the age dating indicates the number of years since the water infiltrated from the surface to the
aquifer, not the time that has elapsed since the water became contaminated. The method used in this
study can determine the age of water up to about 40 years, or approximately 1970. Beginning in the
80
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
1960s, SF6 concentrations in the environment began increasing as a result of its use in electrical
equipment as a replacement for PCBs. Prior to 1970, atmospheric concentrations of SF6 were generally
below the analytical method detection limit. Ages older than 40 years are considered approximations.
Table 36: Septic Systems - Results of Age Dating Analyses Performed for Wells Reported in Years
Since the Water Infiltrated from the Surface to the Aquifer
Location
WW-19
WW-20
WW-21
WW-22
Sample Age
44.3 (J)
14.3 (J)
31.3
29.3 (J)
Duplicate Sample Age
34.3 (J)
14.3 (J)
28.8
29.3 (J)
Average
39.3
14.3
30.1
29.3
J - the analyte was positively identified, but the associated numerical value is an estimate.
6. SEPTIC SYSTEMS: SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR RESIDENTIAL WATER WELLS
Table 37 summarizes the nitrate concentrations for the four water wells along with a summary of the
organic compounds detected in both the four water wells and the WWTP influents. The dominant sources
of nitrate based on the isotopic data are also included in Table 37. Although microbial contamination is
often observed in situations where septic systems contaminate residential wells, no microbial
contamination was found in the downgradient wells. There appears to be a correlation between the age
dating data and the well depths for those water wells that have well depth information (see Appendix A3).
Older water suggests a deeper well.
All four water wells had nitrate concentrations greater than the nitrate MCL. These four water wells were
sampled in isolation - that is, without a pairing with an upgradient well with a specific source separating
them. For this reason, no chemical or temporal evolution along a flow path can be demonstrated from
these data.
The pesticides atrazine and bentazon were detected in WW-20; however, the WWTP influent samples
could not be analyzed for pesticides because of matrix interference so there are no wastewater data with
which to compare these results.
There were no detections of any trace organics for the water wells selected for the septic systems.
WWTP influent had detections of multiple trace organics. Nineteen of the trace organics were detected in
all of the WWTP influent samples.
No wastewater pharmaceuticals were detected in the four water wells, while several of the wastewater
Pharmaceuticals were detected in the WWTP influent samples. Three water wells had veterinary
Pharmaceuticals detected. Water well WW-21 had nine detected compounds. Veterinary pharmaceuticals
that were detected in the water wells and one or more WWTP influent samples were sulfamethazine
(WW-21 and SP-03), sulfamethoxazole (WW-21 and SP-02 and SP-03), and tetracycline (WW-20 and
SP-01).
81
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
Eight hormones were detected in water well WW-22 and each of those hormones was detected in one or
more WWTP influent samples, except for p-Zearalanol. All of these hormones can be produced naturally
by many different animals, and the detections in the water well could therefore arise from a variety of
sources.
Table 37: Septic Systems - Comparisons of Organic Compounds Detected in Wells and WWTP
Influent, and an Assessment of Dominant Source(s) of Nitrate in the Wells Based on Isotopic
Analyses
Sample
Location
WW-19
WW-20
WW-21
WW-22
Nitrate
Concentration
in Water Wells
(mg/L)a
38.2
15
38
16.4
Summary of
Organic
Compounds
Detected in Well
Monensin
Atrazine and
bentazon
Tetracycline
Androsterone
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethoxazole
Erythromycin,
lincomycin,
monensin,
ractopamine,
sulfathiazole,
tiamulin, and
virgimamycm
1 1-keto testosterone
17-(3-estradiol
17-a-estradiol
Androstadienedione
(3-zearalanol
Estrone
Testosterone
Epitestosterone
Summary of
Organic Compounds
Detected in Well and
WWTPs Influent
None.
(Atrazine and bentazon not
analyzed)
Tetracycline (SP-01)
Androsterone (All
WWTPs)
Sulfamethazine (SP-03)
Sulfamethoxazole
(SP-02 and SP-03)
Other organics detected in
wells were not detected in
WWTP influents
1 1-keto testosterone (SP-
01 and SP-02)
17-a-estradiol (SP-01)
Androstadienedione
(All WTPs)
Testosterone (All WWTPs)
Epitestosterone (SP-02)
Dominant Source
of Nitrate Based
on Isotopic
Analyses
Fertilizer and/or
Animal Waste
Animal Waste
and/or Fertilizer
with Some
Atmospheric
Contribution
Fertilizer and/or
Animal Waste
Animal waste
aNitrate results are from Cascade Analytical Laboratory
82
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
September 2012
The isotopic data indicate that the dominant source of nitrate for WW-19 and WW-22 is animal waste
(human or non-human) while the dominant sources for WW-20 is a combination of fertilizer, animal
waste and/or atmospheric. The dominant source for WW-21 is fertilizer and/or animal waste.
In conclusion, the four water wells had nitrate levels greater than the MCL of 10 mg/L. Drinking water
well WW-21 had nine pharmaceuticals detected, is surrounded by possible septic sources, and the family
raises cattle and poultry on their parcel. Well WW-21 is also downgradient from several hop yards and at
a greater distance downgradient from a dairy. Well WW-22 is not in close proximity to a current
livestock operation. It is also possible that the detections for WW-22 are from a septic system.
E. Water Wells WW-18 and WW-30
Two other residential water wells were evaluated: WW-18 and WW-30. These water wells were not in
the original study design. Water well WW-18 was sampled because the owner was aware of the study
and volunteered his property for sampling. Water well WW-30 was sampled because it is located in an
area not otherwise sampled, was high in nitrate, and the homeowner was willing to participate in the
study.
Water well WW-18 was analyzed for all the compounds, including an isotopic and age dating analysis.
Sample WW-30 was not evaluated for hormones, pharmaceuticals, isotopic, or age dating as the location
was added later in the study. The summary results for the two wells are included in Table 38.
Table 38: WW-18 and WW-30 - Summary of Results Related to Nitrate Concentrations,
Microbiology Evaluation, Detected Organic Compounds, Isotopic Analysis, and Age Dating
Analysis
Compounds
Nitrate"
Microbiology
Organic Compounds
Isotopic Analysis
Age Dating
WW-18
72.2 Mg/L
No detects
Atrazine, tetracycline, and
testosterone
Fertilizer and/or Animal Waste
with Some Atmospheric
Contribution
28.1 years
WW-30
23.4 ng/L
No detects
Atrazine, bentazon, and phenol
Not conducted
Not conducted
"Nitrate results are from Cascade Analytical Laboratory
While the major ions and different nitrogen forms were measured for both of these samples, the results
are not included here as there were no upgradient wells or potential sources sampled that could be used
for comparison.
Neither fecal coliform nor E. coll was detected in the WW-18 or WW-30. Atrazine, tetracycline, and
testosterone were detected in WW-18. Atrazine, bentazon, and phenol were detected in WW-30.
Phenol was abundant in the dairy lagoons sampled and can also be found in household wastewater.
83
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Sample WW-30 is not located in the vicinity of a dairy. Sample WW-30 was not analyzed for
wastewater pharmaceuticals because of its late addition at the end of the study.
X. STUDY LIMITATIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES
Several limitations in the study are important to note. First, water well samples were collected from
existing wells. No new wells were installed for this study. Information on the depths and screened
intervals of the water wells is known for about a third of the wells that were sampled. In this report,
designations of upgradient and downgradient are based on regional groundwater flow data from the
USGS. Lack of complete well information limits our ability to verify if the wells upgradient and
downgradient of the sources draw water from the same water bearing zone.
In addition, EPA lacks complete information regarding the dairies in this study. EPA requested
information on specific aspects of the dairy operations and the physical setting; however, the dairies in
this study did not provide this information. This information would have contributed to a more complete
understanding of the dairy facilities, practices, and use of specific chemicals. It would have allowed EPA
to provide actual values, or narrower ranges of estimates, for certain parameters in this report (for
example, numbers of animals, quantities of nitrogen, estimates of lagoon leakage). EPA has, however,
referenced general information regarding dairy operations, and specific information regarding the dairies
in the study to the extent it was available.
Finally, EPA has limited information about the irrigated crop fields in this study. Verifiable, detailed
crop production data, in terms of nutrients applied (the likely source of nitrate associated with irrigated
crops), were not available and no irrigation data were available. EPA has included information about the
crop fields to the extent it was available. In addition, the irrigated crop fields are surrounded by similar
agricultural uses, and many are situated downgradient of dairies, making more difficult EPA's ability to
discern the source of nitrate in drinking water wells downgradient of the irrigated crop fields.
XL CONCLUSIONS
Nitrate levels above EPA's drinking water standard in residential drinking water wells in the Lower
Yakima Valley are well documented. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of
certain chemicals, microbial parameters, or analytical techniques to identify specific sources of the high
nitrate levels detected in residential drinking water wells.
Many of the chemicals and microbial parameters evaluated in this study were not detected in the
residential drinking water wells. There were no detections of fecal coliform in the residential drinking
water wells, although high concentrations were found in the dairy sources and WWTP influent. There
were very few trace inorganic elements, trace organics, or wastewater pharmaceuticals detected in the
residential drinking water wells or crop field soil samples, although many of these chemicals were
detected in the dairy sources and WWTPs. The isotopic data provide some indication of the likely nitrate
sources for seven of the 25 residential wells tested (six animal waste and one synthetic fertilizer).
Although the isotopic analysis identified animal waste as the source of the nitrate in six wells, this
analytical technique cannot differentiate between human and non-human waste.
84
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
There appears to be a correlation between the age dating data and the depths of the wells for which boring
logs are available. The water in the dairy supply wells that are known to be screened in the deeper
basaltic aquifer is older than in the downgradient residential wells which are commonly screened in the
shallower alluvial aquifer. The age dating results were not useful to determine when the nitrate
contamination was introduced into the well.
Haak Dairy
There are large quantities of nitrogen-rich materials on the Haak Dairy that could serve as sources of
nitrate in groundwater and residential drinking water wells. The dairy lagoons are likely leaking nitrogen-
rich wastewater into the underlying soils. Also, WSDA inspection reports show that the Haak Dairy has
reported elevated nitrogen levels in some of their application fields. This poses a threat to groundwater
because irrigation water or precipitation can carry excess nitrogen through the soil and into the aquifer.
The prevalence of highly permeable surface soils at the Haak Dairy increases the risk of nitrogen
migrating past the crop root zone to the aquifer resulting in groundwater contamination.
All three residential drinking water wells downgradient of the Haak Dairy that were sampled have nitrate
levels greater than the MCL. Samples collected at the Haak Dairy show that the concentrations of total
nitrogen and several of the major ions increase between the upgradient and downgradient wells, with the
highest concentrations detected in the samples collected from the dairy lagoons, dairy manure pile, and
dairy application fields. Barium, zinc and alkalinity show a similar pattern. These data indicate that the
Haak Dairy is a likely source of the nitrate contamination in the three downgradient residential drinking
water wells. Inorganic fertilizer used on the Haak Dairy's application fields also could be a source of
nitrate observed in the downgradient wells.
Two Pharmaceuticals, tetracycline and monensin, were detected in all of the dairy source samples
collected at the Haak Dairy, indicating that these compounds are used by the dairy. Tetracycline was
detected in two of the three downgradient residential water wells, but not in the upgradient well,
indicating the Haak Dairy is a likely source.
Monensin was detected in the upgradient well and in the three downgradient residential water wells,
although the upgradient residential drinking water well had a higher concentration than two of the
downgradient wells. It is possible that the Haak Dairy is a possible source of the monensin detected in the
downgradient residential drinking water wells. Given the presence of monensin in the upgradient well,
another source of monensin is likely. Additional information that supports that the dairy source is a
possible source of monensin is that it was not detected in samples collected from the WWTP influents
that were collected as surrogates for rural septic systems.
The isotopic data provide strong evidence that animal waste (human or non-human) is the likely dominant
source of the nitrate contamination in at least one of the residential water wells (WW-05) downgradient of
the Haak Dairy. However, since isotopic analysis cannot differentiate between human and non-human
waste, both could be sources of the nitrate in the downgradient well. Isotopic data for the other two
residential drinking water wells downgradient of the Haak Dairy indicate that the source of the nitrate
could be animal waste, fertilizer, derived from the atmosphere, or some combination of these sources.
85
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Several other compounds that tend to be less mobile in groundwater were detected in the Haak Dairy
lagoon, manure pile, and application field samples, but not detected in the downgradient water wells (for
example trace organics and hormones). Fecal coliform was not detected in any of the wells downgradient
of the Haak Dairy.
Dairy Cluster
Similar to the Haak Dairy, the Dairy Cluster has large quantities of nitrogen-rich materials that could
serve as sources of the nitrate found in the groundwater and residential drinking water wells. The lagoons
at the Dairy Cluster are likely leaking nitrogen-rich wastewater into the underlying soils. WSDA
inspection reports show that the Dairy Cluster dairies have reported elevated nitrogen levels in some of
their application fields. This poses a threat to groundwater because irrigation water or precipitation can
carry excess nitrogen through the soil and to the aquifer.
Similar to the Haak Dairy, the results from the sampling indicate that the concentration of total nitrogen
and several of the major ions increase between the upgradient and downgradient wells, with the highest
concentrations detected in the samples collected from the dairy lagoons, dairy manure piles, and dairy
application fields. Barium and alkalinity showed a similar pattern. These data indicate the Dairy Cluster
is a likely source of the nitrate contamination in the downgradient residential drinking water wells.
The Pharmaceuticals tetracycline and monensin were detected in all but one of the dairy sources samples,
which indicates they are used by the dairies at the Dairy Cluster. Tetracycline was detected in two of the
downgradient residential drinking water wells, two dairy supply wells, dairy lagoons, manure pile, and
application fields. The concentration of tetracycline in the upgradient well was similar to the
concentrations detected in the two downgradient residential wells. The dairies are a possible source of the
tetracycline in the downgradient residential water wells. However, given the concentration in the
upgradient well, another source of the tetracycline likely exists.
Monensin was detected in two of the downgradient residential water wells, two dairy supply wells, dairy
lagoons, manure piles, and application fields. The Dairy Cluster is a likely source of monensin because
this antibiotic is used in dairy cows but not people. Monensin was not detected in samples from the
WWTP influent samples that were collected as surrogates for residential septic systems, providing further
support that the dairies are a likely source.
The hormone testosterone was detected in downgradient residential drinking water wells and dairy
sources. The concentration of testosterone detected in the upgradient residential water well is similar to
the concentrations detected in the downgradient water wells. The dairies are s a possible source of the
testosterone in the downgradient wells; however, given the concentration in the upgradient well, another
source for the testosterone is likely.
The isotopic data provide strong evidence that animal waste (human or non-human) is the likely dominant
source of the nitrate in at least two of the residential water wells downgradient of the Dairy Cluster.
Because isotopic analysis cannot differentiate between human and non-human waste, both could be
sources of the nitrate in these downgradient wells. Isotopic data for the other residential drinking water
wells downgradient of the Dairy Cluster indicate that the source of the nitrate could be animal waste,
fertilizer, or derived from the atmosphere, or some combination of these sources.
86"
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Several other compounds that are generally less mobile in groundwater than nitrate and some of the major
ions, were detected in the Dairy Cluster sources (for example, the trace organics), but not in the
downgradient residential water wells. Fecal coliform was not detected in any of the residential water
wells.
Given the historic and current volumes of wastes generated and stored by dairies, and the application of
nitrogen-rich fertilizers including dairy waste in the Lower Yakima Valley, it is expected that dairies are a
likely source of high nitrate levels in downgradient drinking water wells. The total nitrogen, major ions,
alkalinity and barium data provide strong evidence that the dairies evaluated in this study are likely
sources of the high nitrate levels in the drinking water wells downgradient of the dairies. Additional
information that supports this conclusion includes: there are few potential sources of nitrogen located
upgradient of the dairies; the dairy lagoons are likely leaking large quantities of nitrogen-rich liquid into
the subsurface; and Washington State Department of Agriculture inspectors have reported elevated levels
of nitrogen in application fields of the dairies in the study.
Irrigated Cropland
Nitrogen-rich fertilizers, such as inorganic synthetic fertilizer and manure, are applied to irrigated crop
fields and are a possible source of nitrate in drinking water wells. In Phase 3, EPA sampled six irrigated
crop fields (two mint, two hops, and two corn) and six residential water wells downgradient of these
fields. The six water wells downgradient from the irrigated crop fields and sampled by EPA during Phase
3 all had nitrate levels greater than the MCL. Several organic compounds were detected in the crop soil
samples but only bentazon and monensin were detected in a water well and its associated crop field soil
sample. Bentazon was detected in two water wells and the associated mint field soil samples. These
results indicate that bentazon was applied to the crop field and is likely migrating to the groundwater and
water wells. Monensin was the only veterinary pharmaceutical detected in one well and also in an
associated soil sample collected from a hop field. Possible manure application to the hop field could
account for the monensin detected in the downgradient residential well.
The isotopic data provide strong evidence that synthetic fertilizer is a dominant source in one residential
drinking water well downgradient of a mint field and that animal waste (human and non-human) is a
dominant source of the nitrate in one well downgradient of a hops field. Isotopic analysis cannot
differentiate between human and non-human waste. Isotopic data for the other residential drinking water
wells downgradient of the crop fields indicate that the source of the nitrate could be animal waste or
fertilizer, with some contribution from the atmosphere.
Given the historic and current application of nitrogen-rich fertilizers in the Lower Yakima Valley, it is
expected that irrigated crop fields would be a likely source of high nitrate levels in downgradient drinking
water wells. The data collected in this study provide some corroboration that irrigated crop fields are a
likely a source of nitrate in groundwater. The data supporting this conclusion is not as strong for the crop
fields as it is for the dairies. The reasons for this include: lack of upgradient well data; the irrigated crop
fields sampled are situated amongst other agricultural uses, including upgradient dairy operations; fewer
analytes detected in both the crop field samples and the corresponding downgradient wells; more limited
information about crop field operations; and the crop fields' positions on the landscape relative to other
potential sources.
87
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Residential Septic Systems
Four residential water wells were identified for evaluation of impacts from septic systems. However, all
of the residential drinking water wells sampled as part of Phase 3 of this study were analyzed for the same
suite of chemicals. Although all the residential water wells were evaluated to determine if septic systems
could be a likely source of the nitrate in water wells, the four wells identified to evaluate the potential
contribution from septic systems were selected because they are in residential areas served by septic
systems, but are not located near dairies or crop fields. EPA also collected influent samples from three
WWTP located in Zillah, Mabton, and Toppenish.
The WWTP influent had no actual or potential hydrogeological connection with the residential wells.
These treatment plant influent samples were collected to serve as surrogates for septic systems by
providing a characterization and quantification of compounds that are found in rural septage, while
recognizing that these WWTPs also may receive commercial or and industrial waste streams. The
WWTP and residential drinking water well data were compared to determine whether the drinking water
wells contained the same compounds as the WWTP influent samples which could indicate that the septic
systems are a source of nitrate in the residential drinking water wells.
The majority of the trace organics (for example personal care products) and wastewater pharmaceuticals
were detected in the WWTP influent samples, but only two of these compounds were detected in the
residential drinking water wells sampled by EPA in Phase 3. Specifically, DEHP was detected in four
residential drinking water wells and DEBT was detected in one residential water well. This indicates the
trace organics are being used and can be found in wastewater, but with a few exceptions are not reaching
residential drinking water wells.
Four veterinary pharmaceutical compounds were detected in the WWTP influent samples, three of which
were also detected in one or more residential water wells. Specifically, sulfamethazine (used for cattle,
poultry, and swine) was detected in two residential water wells, sulfamethoxazole (used for people) in one
residential drinking water well, and tetracycline (used for people, cattle, and several other animals) in six
residential drinking water wells.
There were 10 additional veterinary pharmaceuticals detected in residential water wells, but not detected
in WWTP influent samples. Monensin (used for cattle and poultry) and virginiamycin (used in poultry
and swine) were the most frequently detected veterinary pharmaceuticals: monensin was detected in nine
residential water wells and virginiamycin in four. Monensin and virginiamycin were not detected in the
WWTP influent samples. Given the results, septic systems are a possible source of tetracycline and
sulfamethoxazole, both of which can be used by humans, in the residential drinking water wells.
Of the 20 hormones analyzed, 14 were detected in at least one WWTP influent sample. Of those 14
hormones, seven were detected in residential water wells. Testosterone and androsterone were the most
frequently detected hormones: testosterone was detected in nine wells and androsterone was detected in
four wells. Given both testosterone and androsterone are natural sex hormones it is possible they came
from septic systems in proximity to the residential water wells, but these compounds were also detected in
wells downgradient of the dairies.
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
While the septic systems could be a source of nitrate in drinking water wells, there is insufficient
information from this study to support this conclusion.
The high nitrate levels in residential drinking water wells in the Lower Yakima Valley are likely coming
from several sources. This study attempted to identify those sources. In some cases it was possible to
identify likely or possible sources of the nitrate contamination.
Evaluating actions to reduce nitrate concentrations in residential drinking water wells to safe levels is
beyond the scope of this report. Although actions to reduce nitrate are needed, it may take many years to
reduce the nitrate levels in residential drinking water wells to safe levels because of the extent of the
nitrate contamination in the Lower Yakima Valley and the persistence of nitrate in the environment.
XII. REFERENCES
Arnon, S., Dahan, O., Elhanany, S., Cohen,K., Pankratov, I., Gross, A., Ronen, Z., Baram, S., and Shore,
L.S. 2008. Transport of testosterone and estrogen from dairy-farm waste dairy lagoons to
groundwater. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42(5521-5526).
Barbash, J.E., Thelin, G.P., Kolpin, D.W., and Gilliom, R.J. 1999. Distribution of major herbicides in
groundwater of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report
98-4245, 57 p.
Barnes, K.K., Koplin, D.W., Furlong, E.T., Zaugg, S.D.,Meyer, M.T., and Barber, L.B. 2008. A national
reconnaissance of pharmaceuticals and other organic wastewater contaminants in the United
States - I) Groundwater. Science of the Total Environment. 402 (192-200).
Bartlet-Hunt, S., Snow, D.D., Damon-Powell, T., and Miesbach, D. 2011. Occurrence of steroid
hormones and antibiotics in shallow groundwater impacted by livestock waste control facilities.
Journal of Contaminant Hydrology. 123(94-103).
Bart, A.L., Snow, D.D., and Aga, D.S. 2006. Chemosphere. Occurrence of sulfonamide antimicrobials
in private wells in Washington County, Idaho, USA. 64(1963-1971).
Benotti. M.J., Trenholm, R.A., Vanderford, B.J., Holady, J.C., Stanford, B.D., and Snyder S.A. 2009.
Pharmaceuticals and endocrine disruption compounds in US drinking water. Environ. Sci. Tech,
2009,43,597-603.
Carson, J.D., Jenkins, R.L., Wilson, E.M., Howell, W.M. and Moore, R. 2008. Naturally occurring
progesterone in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.): A major steroid precursor of environmental
androgens. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 27:1273-1278.
Christina, T., Schneider, R.J., Barber, H.A., Skutlarek, D., Meyer, G.T., and Goldrach, H.E. 2003.
Determination of antibiotic residues in manure, soil, and surface waters. Acta Hydrochim
Hydrobiol. 31(36-44).
Czajka, C.P. and Londry, K.L. 2006. Anaerobic biotransformation of estrogens. Science of The Total
Environment 367:932-941.
89
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Erasmuson, A.F., Scahill, E.G. and West, D.M. 1994. Natural zeranol (a-zearalanol) in the urine of
pasture-fed animals. J. Agricul. Food Chem. 42:2721-2725.
Extension Toxicology Network (ETN), 1993. Bentazon - Pesticide Information Profile. Accessed April
26, 2012. http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/24d-captan/bentazon-ext.html
Fetter, C.W. 1980. Applied Hydrogeology. Charles E. Merrill Publishing, 488pp.
Frans, L.M. 2000. Estimating the probability of elevated nitrate concentrations in groundwater in the
Columbia Basin groundwater management area, Washington. USGS. Water Resources
Investigations Report 00-4110.
Freeze, R.A. and Cherry, J.A. 1979. Groundwater. Prentice Hill, 604pp.
Gooddy, B.C., Clay, J.W., Bottrell, Clay, S.H. 2002. Redox-driven changes in porewater chemistry in
the unsaturated zone of the chalk aquifer beneath unlined cattle slurry lagoons, Applied
Geochemistry, 17(2002), 903-921.
Ham, J.M. 2002. Seepage losses from animal waste lagoons: A summary of a four-year investigation in
Kansas. Trans. ASAE 45: 983-992. March 2002.
Hanselman, T.A., Graetz, D.A., and Wilkie, A.C. 2003. Manure-borne estrogens as potential
environmental contaminants: A review. Environ. Science and Teh. 37-5471-5478
Harner, J.P., Smith, J.F., and Brouck, M.V. 2007. Surviving the integration of management of a dairy
and manure. Western Dairy Management Conference, March 7-9, 2007.
http://www.wdmc.org2007/Harner.pdf
Hutchins, S.R., White, M.V., Hudson, P.M., and Fine, D.D. 2007. Analysis of dairy lagoon samples
from different concentrated animal feeding operations for estrogens and estrogen conjugates.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 41: 738-744.
Johnson, A.C., Williams, R.J. and Matthiessen, P. 2006. The potential steroid hormone contribution of
farm animals to freshwaters, the United Kingdom as a case study. Sci. Total Environ. 362:166-
178.
Kendall. C. 1998. Tracing nitrogen sources and cycling in catchments. In: Kendall, Carol, and
McDonnell, J.J (eds.), Isotope Tracers in Catchment Hydrology: Amsterdam, Elsevier Science
B.V., Chapter 16, p.519-576.
Kendall, C. and Aravena, R. 1999. Nitrate isotopes in groundwater systems. In: Cook, P.G., and
Herczeg, A.AL. (eds). Environmental Tracers in Subsurface Hydrology: Boston, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Chapter p, p-261-299.
Kendall, C., Elliott, E.M., and Wankel, S.D. 2007, Tracing anthropogenic inputs of nitrogen to
ecosystems. In: Michener, R.H., and Lajtha. K., eds., Stable Isotopes in Ecology and
Environmental Science, 2nd ed.: Blackwell Publishing, p. 375-499.
90
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Kolodziel, E.P., Harter, T., and Sedlak, D.L. 2004. Dairy wastewater, aquaculture, and spawning fish as
sources of steroid hormones in the aquatic environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 38(6377-6384).
Kolpin, D.W, Furlong, E.T., Meyer, M.T., Thurman, E.M., Zaugg, S.D., Barber, L.B., and Buxton, H.T.
2002. Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams,
1999-2000—A national reconnaissance. Environmental Science and Technology, v. 36, no. 6.
1202-1211.
Kummerer, K. 2009. Antibiotics in the aquatic environment. A review-Part 1. Chemosphere. 75(417-
434).
Lange, I.G, Daxenberger, A., Schiffer, B., Witters, D., Ibarreta, D., and Meyer, H.H.D. Sex hormones
originating from different livestock production systems: fate and potential disrupting activity in
the environment. Analytica Chemica ACTA:27-37.
Lubliner,B., Redding, M. and Ragsdale, D. 2010. Pharmaceuticals and personal care products in
municipal wastewater and their removal by nutrient treatment technologies. Washington State
Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. Publication No. 10-03-004.
McGovern, P. and McDonald, H.S. 2003. Endocrine disrupters: The next generation of regulatory
concern? Water Environmental Technology. 15(1): 35-39.
Mayo Clinic. 2011. Accessed website November 2011. Mayoclinic.com/health/drug-information.
Meyer, M.T. 2004. Use and environmental occurrence of veterinary pharmaceuticals in the United States.
In: Pharmaceuticals in the environment: Sources, fate, effects, and risks (Kummerer K, ed). New
York: Springer-Verlag. 155-163.
Michener, R.H. and Lajtha,K. 2007. Stable Isotopes in Ecology and Environmental Science. 2nd Edition.
Wiley-Blackwell. 592 pages.
Morris, R.A., Miller, T.M., Viggiano, A.A., Solomon, S., and Reid, G. 1995. Effects of electron and ion
reactions on atmospheric lifetimes of fully fluorinated compounds. J. Geophys. Res., 100, 1287-
1294.
Nakagaki, N. and Wolock, D.M. 2005. Estimation of agricultural pesticide use in drainage basins using
land cover maps and county pesticide data. U.S. Geological Survey. Open-file report 2005-1188.
http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pnsp/usage/maps/compound_listing.php?year=02
Nolan, B.T., and Hitt, K.J. 2003. Nutrients in shallow groundwaters beneath relatively undeveloped
areas in the conterminous United States. Water-Resources Investigations Report 2002-4289. US
Geological Survey.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Washington. 2004. Conservation Practice Standard,
Waste Storage Facility, Code 313.
NRCS. 2008. Agricultural waste management field handbook, Part 651, appendix 10D design and
construction guidelines for waste impoundments lined with clay or amendment-treated soil.
97
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
NRCS. 2012. Soil Survey Staff, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO)
Database for Yakima County. Available online at http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov. Accessed
January 2012.
Pesticide Action Network (PAN). 2011. PAN Pesticide Database. Pesticide Action Network. Accessed
November 11,2011.
Pidwirny, M. 2006. The Nitrogen Cycle. Fundamentals of Physical Geography, 2nd Edition. (Adapted
to represent specific sources).
Pike, D.R. 2004. Pest management strategic plan for lactating (dairy) cattle. USDA Office of Pesticide
Management Policy (January 2004).
Prospero, J.M. and Lamb, P.J. 2003. African droughts and dust transport to the Caribbean: climate
change implications. Science 302: 1024-1027.
Raman, D.R., Williams, E.L., Layton, A.C., Burns, R.T., Easter, J.P., Daugherty, A., Mullen, M.D., and
Sayler, G.S. 2002. Estrogen content of dairy and swine waste. Environ. Sci. Technol. 38(3567-
3573).
Rao, B., Anderson, T.A., Orris, G.J., Rainwater, K.A., Rajagopalan, S., Sandvig, R.M., Scanlon, B.R.,
Stonestrom, D.A., Walvoord, M.A., and Jackson, W.A. 2007, Widespread natural perchlorate in
unsaturated zones of the southwest United States: Environmental Science and Technology,
doi: 10.1021/es062853i. http://toxics.usgs.gov/highlights/perchlorate_sw_soils.html
Ravishankara, A.R., Solomon, S., Turnipseed, A.A., and Warren, R.F. 1993. The atmospheric lifetimes
of long-lived halogenated species. Science 259: 194-199.
Stumm, W., and Morgan, J.J. 1996. Aquatic Chemistry. John Wiley & Sons, 1022 p.
Ternes, T.A., Joss, A., and Siegrist, H. 2004. Scrutinizing pharmaceuticals and personal care products in
wastewater treatment. Environmental Science and Technology. 38(392A-399A).
U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Systems Support Division. Demographic Profiles.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2007. Census of Agriculture. National Agricultural Statistics
Service.
USDA. 2008. Info Sheet: Antibiotic use on U.S. dairy operations, 2002 and 2007. U.S. Department of
Agriculture. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. October 2008.
USDA. 2009. Increasing size of dairy farms driven by declining production costs. Robert Mosheim.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/December09/Findings/DairyFarms.htm
USDA. 2010. Overview of the United States dairy industry. Released September 22, 2010 by the
National Agricultural Statistics Service, Agricultural Statistics Board, United States Department
of Agriculture. http://usda01.library.cornell.edu/usda/current/USDairyIndus/USDairyIndus-09-
22-2010.pdf
92
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1998. Environmental impacts of animal feeding
operations. USEPA, Office of Water, Standards, and Applied Science Division. December 31,
1998. Page 6.
EPA. 2004. Risk assessment evaluation for concentrated animal feeding operations. Office of Research
and Development. May 2004.
EPA. 2009. Characterization of groundwater contamination by nitrate, bacteria, and other contaminants
in Yakima River Basin. USEPA Region 10 FY09 Regional Applied Research Efforts (RARE).
August 2009.
EPA. 2010a. Yakima Basin Nitrate Study Phase 2 - Initial Nitrate/Coliform Screening of Domestic
Water Wells February 2010 Sampling Event. Quality Assurance Project Plan. USEPA Region
10. January 27, 2010.
EPA. 2010b. Yakima Basin Nitrate Study Phase 3 - Comprehensive Analytical Source Tracer Sampling
April 201 Sampling Event. Quality Assurance Project Plan. EPA Region 10. April 8, 2010.
EPA. 2011. Phthalates action plan summary.
http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/existingchemicals/pubs/actionplans/phthalates.html
EPA. 2012a. Soil Reports for Haak Dairy, Dairy Cluster, and Irrigated Crop Fields. Compiled from
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Soil Survey staff, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Yakima County. Available online
at http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov. Accessed January 2012.
EPA. 2012b Yakima Valley: Screening analysis-Nitrogen Budget. EPA Region 10. Office of
Environmental Assessment. June 2012.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 201 la. FDA approved drug products. Drugs@FDA. U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Accessed November
1, 2011. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/drugsatfda/index.cfm
FDA. 201 Ib. FDA approved animal drug products. Animal Drugs@FDA. U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Accessed November 1,2011.
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/animaldrugsatfda/
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Vaccaro, J.J., Jones, M.A., Ely, D.M., Keys, M.E., Olsen, T.D., Welch,
W.B. and Cox, S.E. 2009. Hydrogeologic framework of the Yakima river basin aquifer system,
Washington. Scientific Investigations Report 2009-5152, 106 p.
Ward, M.H., deKok, T.M., Levallois, P., Brender, J., Gulis, G., Nolan, B.T., and Vanderslice J. 2005.
International Society of Environmental Epidemiology. Workgroup report: Drinking water -
nitrate and health- recent findings and research needs. Environmental Health Perspectives,
93
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA). 1996. Summary of information exempt from
public inspection in respect to the dairy nutrient management act.
WSDA. 2009. Washington State Department of Agriculture spreadsheet. "Yakima Dairy CAFOs 10-16-
09Chan"
WSDA. 2010. Washington State Department of Agriculture spreadsheet
" 1998_201 OBiennialRegAnimalNumbers_byDairy.xls"
WSDA. 2012. Inspection reports for Haak Dairy and Dairy Cluster from the Washington State
Department of Agriculture.
Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2010. Lower Yakima Valley groundwater quality:
Preliminary assessment and recommendations. Prepared by: the Washington State Departments
of Agriculture, Ecology and Health; Yakima County Public Works Department; and the US
Environmental Protection Agency. February 2010. Ecology Publication No. 10-10-009.
Watanabe, N., Hater, T., and Bergmaschi, B. 2008. Environmental occurrence and shallow
groundwater detection of the antibiotic monensin from dairy farms. J. Environ. Qual. 37
(S78-S85).
Watanabe, N., Bergamaschi, B.A., Loftin, K.A., Meyer, M.T., and Harter,T. 2010. Use and
environmental occurrence of antibiotics in free stall dairy farms with manured forage
fields. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44(6591-6600).
Williams, C. L. and G. M. Stancel. 1996. Estrogens and Progestins. Pages 1411-1439 in M. J.
Wonsiewicz and P. McCurdy, editors. The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics. McGraw Hill.
Wilson, J. D. 1996. Androgens. Pages 1441-1457 in M. J. Wonsiewicz and P. McCurdy, editors. The
Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics. McGraw-Hill.
Yakima County. 2011. Yakima County Website. Accessed November 15, 2011.
http://www.yakimacounty.us/.
Zaugg, S.D., Smith, S.G., Schroeder, M.P., Barber, L.B., and Burkhardt, M.R. 2006. Methods of
analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—
Determination of wastewater compounds by polystyrene-divinylbenzene solid-phase
extraction and capillary-column gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological
Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4186, 37 p.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wriO 14186/
Zheng, W., Yates, S.R., and Bradford, S.S. 2008. Analysis of steroid hormones in atypical dairy waste
disposal system. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42(2), 530-535.
94
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
FIGURES
-------
Septic
Leaching to
Groundwater x' ^ /
Irrigated Cropland
Leaching Fertilizer
Nutrient-Rich Lagoon
Effluent Applied to Fields
.
Irrigated Cropland
ilizer '<>,,,.
rients
Leaching Fertilizer
& Lagoon Nutrients
Drinking
Water
Well
Drinking
Water
Well
Contaminated |
Drinking Water!
Well
Contaminated
Drinking Water
Wells
}LJnsatu rated
Zone
Saturated
Zone
Deeper
Basalt
Aquifer
Figure 1: Conceptual Site Model for Lower Yakima Valley Project
-------
Gaseous
Losses
N2 & N20
lant
Consump i
Plant
Decay
Figure 2: Nitrogen Cycle
-------
•
YaJama
>n
Gan
^.'-- —~ r^-x.
n
^Hy
Yakama Reservati<
Toppenish Basin
Bent on Basin
Ra"**°»ake Hill
Wapato
Toppenish Basin
Harrah
Yakama Reservation
Toppenish
Miles
V
Benton Basin
Sunnyside
Grandvie
M^bton
/
Figure 3: Study Area for EPA Lower Yakima Valley Project
-------
muses
X tenre /at * changing toroiU
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
GLIHLAU 01 RLCLAMAI ION. WASHING™ SIAIL [JLI'AUIML.NI Ul LCULUGY, AND lilt YAKAMANANUN
n-
w
s
1X01
EXPLANATION
GEOLOGIC UNITS
| al | ALLUVIUM
| al I ALLUVIAL FAN
|0fri»| LOESS
| ii.ili | MISSOULA LAKE. IOUCHET
| met I i i:RRAi:!Di>[ POSITS
| UTa* | CONTINENTAL SEDIMENTARY UNKNOWN
| TseJ CONTINENTAI SEDIMENTARY FLIENSBURG FORMATION
r| SADDLE MOUNTAIN BASALT
WAHAPUMBASAII
GRANDE RONDEBASAtiJ
• — >;'
,41
BOUNDARY OF TOPPENISH BASIN
LINE (IFFIYUmiGEOLOGIC
FOLD
Anticline
Synclme
FAULI
————»— Otfset urictelDnninticI
_ J J — Bar arid hall CHI ilqsvnlhrown side
- -4, — - - Showing relative horizontal m
. A__ A_ Il«m fault Sm-.iccSi on upper tf
I V H
"•"'•'l!'"-'" '','.
tfaiiHtulOMUir. ffcnf AmeficBtiOi&n^it* 'ill WftD !71
WtSI
^5
rtrr a
5
' •: II lifti I I i I II IS llii |!
^- L' i' ^" ^ ^' ^' i" I* ^ T - * ^ ^ a S a» isa ss ^ •;• si t- -J -v -• •
^ i ii ^ i^| i l I i
1 11 N
T.9H
Figure 4: Hydrogeology of Toppenish Basin
-------
T Of Till IHTERIOR
SLJEAU Of HESiAMffl'.DK. W&5HING73N STATE
-C3L3GY. AMI' THE YAKW1A NATICA
SCItNTIFIC HNVf STIfiATIC-NS REPORT iW.-r,m;
EXPUUUnON
V j.-,: -mi '.
<
[ "* '
^>^5i
WASHINGTON
lUCJI.UIt jf
•n SmrlcnSMin
-
1
=^: " • ,.
™>- • .^.. "•**'
^.^^f^W^-i ?
X
fwV
J:^^-
«.._
Q - o i«i IN iuwMumani.
tSOH HI tlOtt AXimiL WOK'J
.-I-...
:, ._:.^-' --••/-
^r^ra
S\ ^, . .
( S I ^
;<*S -^--
ia™ N
Map Showing Surficial Geology and Locations ol Selected Wells in the Benton Basin, Yakima River Basin, Washington
Myrtle A Jones, John Vaccaro, suit Annt M Welkins
2C06
f n s 11 i i a i I i i i ) < i is i > 11) i n 11 i u i stn :i i Nik if tm ;
(0 se«^>f ^^K«l«t^4»ttF«t-«tti%r •. «*t* fBt •!*»* i«,
H II I I I I I 0 II II 1 I I 1 II 1 f.i il 1 II I I I II I Illl II III! II Ilil IIII1IM
Figure 5: Hydrogeology of Benton Basin
-------
3% 2%
Dairy *
Other Livestock *
Irrigated Cropland
Septic/Biosolids
Other
Does not account for
losses due to volatilization
and dentrification
Figure 6: Nitrogen Generated by Major Sources in Yakima County
-------
K^r •*" •
Dairy in Study
City :,.:,, ^
-—'—'
Yakama Reservation
Source: Washington State Department of Agriculture
,
•'
'
Wapato
.*,..
Yakama Reservation
Toppenish
Granger
,
Grandview
.
n h
•-'
1
\ ,«
Figure 7: Lower Yakima Valley Dairy Locations
-------
^jB^Ifc*- ; If, \ , '". Yakima
•^:.'..^%L Jfe ,
'^ViifcMafJ Union
j Yakama Reservation
I Berries
Corn
Alfalfa/Hay/Grass/Sorj
Hops
Mint
Pasture/Development
Orchards
Vegetables
S4.fr."'
.
I
rghum
\x~-
Pi: ?-'
J Wapato
. v.»,
I Grapes
Source: Washington State Department of Agriculture
f 1
••
•
• X-'
I
T ^
p
h
O(
o r
//
S
N
-^
2.25 ^ 4.5
18
i^
Miles
///'A
Figure 8: Lower Yakima Valley Crop Inventory
-------
rwf
.r**
r^ ~W
IWriion
• •
••
*Gap
.- •:
fr
<»
auxee%w|
.:e?tyvV.
3S^=k
aa
v w -]
• •1
Septic Systems
Yakama Reservation
Source: Yakima County GIS Department
« —^
•> -»
A
>••'*»*„. i
n a k e, // ;-
®
»i
U«d>e.«* i
• «
i
M»
7
/
,.
• %
• • •
O'X
i d g
.,
e
-
H
o
-^
N
•
r < N » A w A
4.5
:
H e a^f,i'H i I I S TJJL
'', /J
^
18
I Miles
^;'6^fc*3®^ ••tr^^
> t%fl?5aM$i
,,r 'J&tf&SgM$
M •• ^r .N^rifc.^r
,* »-tf—4¥n .
.
'
« ° «.,
• •
Figure 9: Lower Yakima Valley Septic System Distribution
-------
Phase 2 Results (331 water wells sampled)
44%
a
n
m
-----
Phase 2 Nitrate Results
< 5 mg/L
5<10mg/L
• 10<25mg/L
• 25< 50 mg/L
• >
1 o P
r" i
Yakama Reservation
'lr>E HOt i-
~\ 7" 1 • ' \
Yakima \st
I : ,
Union
c¥
Washout
A H T A N U M
i/ j / ; i- •— .-/'-"
v^SRMl
k
24
V
i'..n .iid
Ur-
'
a
\SS s».iuycr
•\
o
:
H iJlfljs*.
•
* :
^
t
lion
n
N
Yakama Reservation
r A
' ifoui^^l^yside
• o
-
- *4 J
M
MISSOURI FLATS
2.75
5.5
I Miles
Figure 10: Lower Yakima Valley Phase 2 Nitrate Sampling Locations and Results
-------
~^~
Yakima;
HOt LOW
\GapVCky
a
e s
n a k e Hi
I I
WW-19
...
Dairy Cluster
^*
WW-06
A
M
SO-07
I WW-07 SO-03
WW-09 LG-10V A ^
SO-09
LG-14
LG-13 ^
WW-10
A
A o (^LG-05
LG-12 O LG-11 LG-06 LG.04
SO-08
V-— -^^~~\
WW-15
A
SO-10 ^ ^
u SO-04
WW-14 OLG-15 ww.17ww.080
WW-11 A WW-16* £n<
WW-12
A
WW-13 >3^""0 ^
LG-09.J so_05 0
LG-08
LG-07
Sampling Locations
• Wastewater Treatment Plant
O Lagoon
A Water Well
<> Manure Pile
O Application Field
Crop Field
O corn
O hops
O mint
i j Yakama Reservation
Harrah
V\ WW-29
SP-01
\
Toppenish
A A SP-03
Yakama Reservation
SP-03
SP-04
109! m
...,
•\ --^
< Granger
ww-aor
WW-25
A WW-20
/
^
o r s
"J"?B
fJHbgton
ia ^
ZZ1
„
-------
WW-01 | 0.39 ppm
LG-02
WW-03 | 35.5 ppm
1401 ppm
WW-04 | 55 ppm
si
100000
10000
1000
100
Haak Dairy: Total Nitrogen (ppm)
Upgradient /
* Histogram Presented in Log Scale
—/Downgradient
Sample Type
•0- Upgradient Well
Supply Well
Dairy Lagoon
Manure Pile
Application Field
Downgradient Well
Haak Dairy
LG-01 | 1200 ppm
SO-02 | 2760 ppm
SO-01 | 29700 ppm
LG-03 | 1401 ppm
WW-05| 13.4 ppm
Figure 12: Haak Dairy: Total Nitrogen in Water Wells, Lagoons, Manure Piles, and Application Field Samples
-------
WW-01
Sample Type
•0- Upgradient Well
Supply Well
Dairy Lagoon
-(J)- Downgradient Well
[ j Haak Dairy
Haak Dairy: Calcium (mg/L)
WW-01 WW-02 LG-01 LG-02 LG-03 WW-03 WW-04 WW-05
Haak Dairy: Chloride (mg/L)
700
WW-01 WW-02 LG-01 LG-02 LG-03 WW-03 WW-04 WW-05
X
Haak Dairy: Magnesium (mg/L)
250
100
50
6.47
_••_
WW-01 WW-02 LG-01 LG-02 LG-03 WW-03 WW-04 WW-05
Haak Dairy: Potassium (mg/L)
2500
2000
1500
1000 • -
500
2100 2140
6.14 7.29 6.67
WW-01 WW-02 LG-01 LG-02 LG-03 WW-03 WW-04 WW-05
X
c
X
Haak Dairy: Sodium (mg/L)
600
WW-01 WW-02 LG-01 LG-02 LG-03 WW-03 WW-04 WW-05
Haak Dairy: Sulfate (mg/L)
3.51
_^^M
WW-01 WW-0 2 LG-01
LG-02 LG-03 WW-03 WW-04 WW-05
oC
Figure 13: Haak Dairy: Concentration of Major Ions in Water Wells and Lagoons
-------
DeRuyter Dairy
Cow Palace 1 and 2 Dairy
Liberty/Bosnia Dairy
D&A Dairy
1 ' Ti
IBBIfii.?^*!
Cow Palace 1 and 2 Dairy
IF*
IJiberty/Bosma Dairy
I /
ii IJ
Figure 14: Dairy Cluster: Dairy Property Boundaries
-------
WW-06 | 0.73 ppm
SO-07 16100 ppm
WW-07 1.2 ppm
WW-09 ND
LG-10|380ppm
SO-03 | 9210 ppm
iLG-05|1600ppm
LG-12 290 ppm I LG-°4 1600 ppm
^ | LG-11 | 500 ppm|
LG-13 1703 ppm
LG-06 1803 ppm
SO-08 3040 ppm
LG-14 | 1400 ppm
WW-15 | 30.2 ppm
WW-10 ND
17 I 22.7 ppm
SO-04 2110 ppm
WW-14 43.4 ppm
Dairy Cluster: Total Nitrogen (ppm)
WW-11 | 23 ppm
WW-13 | 44.4 ppm
WW-16|23.4ppm
LG-07 1703 ppm
WW-08 | 12.9 ppm
SO-05 13600 ppm
WW-12 46.7 ppm LG-09 | 1100 ppm
A
LG-08 1200 ppm V /
SO-06 960 ppm
upgradient
* Data Represented in Log Scale
downgradient
Sample Type
V Upgradient Well
© Supply Well
3 Dairy Lagoon
<»» Manure Pile
M Application Field
M/ Downgradient Well
Dairies
Liberty/Bosma
^•DeRuyter
^^•Cow Palace
D & A Dairy
Figure 15: Dairy Cluster: Total Nitrogen Concentrations in Water Wells, Lagoons, Manure Piles, and Application Fields
-------
Sample Type
M' Upgradient Well
© Supply Well
Dairy Lagoon
M/ Downgradient Well
Dairies
Liberty/Bosnia
DeRuyter
Cow Palace
D & A Dairy
1000
800
600
400
200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Dairy Cluster: Calcium (mg/L)
y?
1484.3
•
109.6
•
217
193
1118 113
; i •
upgradient
Dairy Cluster: Chloride (mg/L)
• downgradient
2.38 8.04 •" 7.93
684.6
581
4.44
52 49 79.8 69.8 39 2 45 5 44 6
upgradieftt — -*-—*-— downgradient
Figure 16a: Dairy Cluster: Calcium and Chloride Concentrations in Water Wells and Lagoons
-------
Dairy Cluster: Magnesium (mg/L)
Sample Type
Upgradient Well
Supply Well
Dairy Lagoon
H7 Downgradient Well
Dairies
Liberty/Bosnia
DeRuyter
Cow Palace
D&ADairy
Dairy Cluster: Potassium (mg/L)
Figure 16b: Dairy Cluster: Magnesium and Potassium Concentrations in Water Wells and Lagoons,
-------
Sample Type
Upgradient Well
Supply Well
Dairy Lagoon
Downgradient Well
Dairies
Liberty/Bosnia
DeRuyter
Cow Palace
D&ADairy
Dairy Cluster: Sulfate (mg/L)
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
305
6.38
113 105.33111-3 I'7
• I I III iff
t
upgradient -
downgradient
Dairy Cluster: Sodium (mg/L)
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
80? 6
673.6
472.6
t
. , 101 97.3 103 108
7 CQ o ^/i o
Figure 16c: Dairy Cluster: Sulfate and Sodium Concentrations in Water Wells and Lagoons
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix A
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
APPENDIX A
WATER WELL INFORMATION
A-l
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix A
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
A-2
-------
Table Al: Phase 3 - Water Well Information
Location
ID
WW-01
WW-02
WW-03
WW-04
WW-05
WW-06
WW-07
WW-08
WW-09
WW-10
WW-11
WW-12
WW-13
WW-14
WW-15
WW-16
WW-17
WW-18
WW-19
WW-20
WW-21
WW-22
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-26
WW-27
WW-28
WW-30
Sample
ID
10154201
10154202
10154203
10154204
10154205
10154206
10154207
10154208
10164209
10164210
10154211
10154212
10154213
10154214
10154215
10154216
10154217
10154218
10154219
10154220
10154221
10164222
10154223
10154224
10154225
10154226
10154227
10154228
10164230
Sample Type
Upgradient well - Dairy
Supply well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Upgradient - Dairy
Supply well - Dairy
Supply well - Dairy
Supply well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Downgradient well - Dairy
Residential well
Downgradient well - Septic
Downgradient well - Septic
Downgradient well - Septic
Downgradient well - Septic
Downgradient well - Mint
Downgradient well - Mint
Downgradient well - Corn
Downgradient well - Hops
Downgradient well - Hops
Downgradient well - Corn
Residential well
Nitrate
Concentration"
(units: mg/L)
0.38
3.12
33.1
51.9
12.8
0.71
1.02
11.7
0.05
0.05
22.3
45
41.4
40.9
29.4
22.3
21.7
72.2
38.2
15.0
38
16.4
16
13.8
33.4
15.3
19.8
71.2
23.4
Well depth (ft)
from Phase 2
(reported by
owners)
330
220
158
120
230
96
50
90
Well depth (ft)
from Phase 3
(reported by
owners)
126
Well depth (ft)
from WSDA
(reported by the
dairy)
80
200
200
430
300
Well depth (ft) from
WDOE well report
(total depth/
static level)
210/70
95/25
88/20
470 / 220
220 / 73
482/201
345/185
158/50
105/64
192 / 67
120 /?
3Phase 3 nitrate concentrations reported by Cascade Analytical Laboratory.
A-3
-------
Figure Al: Phase 3 - Relationship Between Water Well Depth and Nitrate Concentrations
Rfl
7n
fin
=" en
bB
"7T An
+•*
E
^j
m
c
Phase 3 Wells
Well Depths and Nitrate Levels
\
\ *
A *
\
V .
\^_^^ R' = 0.7521
) 100 200 300 400 500 600
Well Depth (feet)
Figure Al Supporting Data
EPA Phase 3
Well Number
WW-04
WW-03
WW-17
WW-28
WW-12
WW-25
WW-02
WW-08
WW-10
WW-07
WW-09
Well Depth from
WADOE Well
Report
(Total Depth)
88
95
105
120
158
192
210
220
345
470
482
Nitrate
(mg/l)
51.9
33.1
21.7
71.2
45
33.4
3.12
11.7
0.05
1.02
0.05
Well Completed in
Alluvial Aquifer or
in Basalt
Alluvial
Alluvial
Alluvial
Unknown
Alluvial
Alluvial
Basalt
Alluvial
Alluvial
Basalt
Basalt
Well Type
Domestic
Domestic
Domestic
Domestic
Domestic
Domestic
Dairy/Domestic
Dairy
Domestic
Dairy
Dairy
Notes:
Well logs are probable matches based on available information.
WW-28 information based on well owner interview.
The WW-02 well log may be for one of two wells that feed into the Haak dairy water supply.
"Well Type" is based on EPA's understanding of the current use of the well.
WADOE = Washington State Department of the Ecology
A-4
-------
Figure A2: Phase 3 - Relationship Between Water Well Depth and Age Dating Data
600
500
•Z? 400
01
,S
.c
a. 300
01
Q
100
0 -
(
Age of Water and Well Depth
R2 = 0.4787^
/^
^^
^^ +
^^
) 10 20 30 40 50 60
Water Age (years)
Figure A2 Supporting Data
Well No.
WW-03
WW-04
WW-17
WW-02
WW-08
WW-10
WW-07
WW-09
Water
Age
25.3
22.6
33.6
16.1
38.1
44.6
34.6
54.8
Well
Depth
95
88
105
210
220
345
470
482
Notes:
Water in wells WW-09 and WW-10 may be older than indicated.
A-5
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix A
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
A-6
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix B
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
APPENDIX B
SURFACE SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AREA
B-l
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix B
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
B-2
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix B
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Appendix B: Surface Soil Characteristics of the Study Area
Surface soils in Yakima County have been characterized and mapped by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS 2012). A soil report was generated from the NRCS database for each dairy
and irrigated crop field in the study and EPA compiled the soil reports (EPA 2012). A summary of
surface soil characterization for each of the dairies and irrigated crop field is presented below.
HAAK DAIRY
Within the Haak Dairy property boundary, five soil units have been mapped by the NRCS. All five soil
units have a silt loam texture with a "well-drained" classification. Three of the soil units (Scooteney,
Sinloc, and Warden) represent 82 percent of the surface area. They have a saturated hydraulic
conductivity in the range of 1.1 to 4.0 feet per day, which is characterized as "moderately high to high" in
their capacity to transmit water. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is a measure of soil permeability and
describes how quickly water moves through soil under saturated conditions. Likewise the other two soil
units (Burke and Scoon) have a moderately high to high capacity to transmit water to a depth of 2 to 3
feet below ground surface; however, a cemented layer is present below this depth with a saturated
hydraulic conductivity in the "very low to moderately low" range of 0.0 to 0.10 feet per day. The Burke
and Scoon units are located in the northwest portion of the Haak Dairy property and account for 18
percent of the surface area.
DAIRY CLUSTER
Almost all the surface soils underlying the Dairy Cluster have a "well drained" classification, which
means water moves readily through the soil.
More than 80 percent of the surface soils underlying the Dairy Cluster are highly permeable. Highly
permeable is defined here to mean having a high hydraulic conductivity. The prevalence of highly
permeable surface soils is significant because it increases the risk of groundwater contamination due to
water carrying nitrogen into the ground more readily than if the soils were of lower permeability.
Within the approximate boundary of the Liberty Dairy and Bosnia Dairy, 10 soil units have been mapped
by NRCS. Most all of them are characterized by a silt loam texture and are classified as "well drained",
except for two (Outlook and Sinloc) which have a "somewhat poorly drained" classification. Six of the
soil units (Outlook, Scooteney, Shano, Sinloc, Warden, and Esquatzel) represent approximately 87
percent of the surface area. The soil units have a saturated hydraulic conductivity in the range of 1.1 to
4.0 feet per day, which is characterized as "moderately high to high". Three of the soil units (Burke,
Moxee, and Scoon) have a saturated hydraulic conductivity in the range of 0.0 to 0.10 feet per day, which
is characterized as "very low to moderately low." One of the soil units (Finlay) has a saturated hydraulic
conductivity of 1.98 to 5.95 feet per day, which is characterized as "high".
Within the approximate property boundary of the Cow Palace, six soil units have been mapped by the
NRCS. All six soil units have a silt loam texture with a "well-drained" classification. Three of the soil
units (Esquatzel, Shano, and Warden) represent approximately 81 percent of the surface area. These units
have a saturated hydraulic conductivity in the range of 1.1 to 4.0 feet per day, which is characterized as
"moderately high to high" in their capacity to transmit water. Two of the soil units (Burke and Scoon)
represent approximately 19 percent of the surface area and have a saturated hydraulic conductivity in the
B-3
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix B
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
range of 0.0 to 0.12 feet per day, which is characterized as "very low to moderately low." One of the soil
units (Finlay) represents less than 1 percent of the surface area and has a saturated hydraulic conductivity
of 4 to 11.9 feet per day, which is characterized as "high."
Within the approximate boundary of the DeRuyter Dairy and the D and A Dairy, five soil units have been
mapped by the NRCS. All five soil units have a silt loam texture with a "well drained" classification.
Three of the soil units (Scooteney, Esquatzel, and Warden) represent 92 percent of the surface area. They
have a saturated hydraulic conductivity in the range of 1.1 to 4.0 feet per day, which is characterized as
"moderately high to high" in their capacity to transmit water. One of the soil units (Scoon) represents
approximately 7 percent of the surface area, and has a saturated hydraulic conductivity of 0.0 to 0.12 feet
per day, which is described as "very low to moderately low." Another soil unit (Finley) represents just
over 1 percent of the land surface area and has a saturated hydraulic conductivity in the range of 4.0 to
11.9 feet per day, which is described as "high."
Irrigated Crop Fields
There were six crop fields sampled in this study: two mint fields (soil samples SO-11 and SO-12); two
corn fields (soil samples SO-13 and SO-14); and two hop fields (soil samples SO-15 and SO16). Soil
samples SO-11, SO-12, and SO-13 were collected from the same type of soil unit - Warden - which is
classified as being "well drained" with a saturated hydraulic conductivity in the range of 1.1 to 4.0 feet
per day, which is characterized as "moderately high to high".
Soil sample SO-14 is composed of three soil units - Cleman, Hezel, and Warden. The Cleman unit is
well drained and is characterized as having a saturated hydraulic conductivity of "moderately high to
high." The Hezel is classified as being "somewhat excessively drained" with a "moderately high"
saturated hydraulic conductivity. The Warden soil is also "somewhat excessively drained" with a
"moderately high to high" saturated hydraulic conductivity.
Soil sample SO-15 is composed of three soil units - Esquatzel, Hezel, and Warden. The Esquatzel and
Warden units are classified as well drained with a "moderately high to high" saturated hydraulic
conductivity. The Hezel soil unit is classified as being "somewhat excessively drained" with a
"moderately high" saturated hydraulic conductivity.
Soil sample SO-16 is composed of two soil units - Esquatzel and Warden. Both of these units are
classified as well drained with a "moderately high to high" saturated hydraulic conductivity.
References Appendix B
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2012. Soil survey staff, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Yakima County. Available online
at http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov. Accessed January 2012.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2012. Soil reports for dairies and irrigated crop fields
associated with Phase 3 sampling for EPA Lower Yakima Valley Study. February 2012.
B-4
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix C
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
APPENDIX C
DATA SUMMARY TABLES
C-l
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix C
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
C-2
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-11007
WW-11008
WW-11009
WW-11010
WW-11011
WW-11012
WW-11013
WW-11014
WW-11015
WW-11016
WW-11017
WW-11018
WW-11020
Sample ID
10086001f
10086001
10086002f
10086002
10086003f
10086004f
10086004
10086005f
10086006f
10086007f
10086007
10086008
10086009f
10086009
10086010f
10086011f
10086012f
10086013f
10086013
10086015
10086014f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10086007)
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10086013)
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate as N
Result
2
<1
<1
<1
20
<1
<1
1
49.7
5
21.1
2
5
<1
<1
<1
0.51
1
2
50
<1
<1
<1
112
50
53.5
<1
<1
<1
114
5
54.6
5
<1
<1
1
1
5
2
2
10
<1
<1
1
5.1
13.1
2
Qualifier
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
J
U
U
J
U
J
J
J
J
U
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
351.2
353.2
Page 1 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-11022
WW-11023
WW-11024
WW-11025
WW-11026
WW-11027
WW-11028
WW-11030
WW-11031
WW-11032
WW-11033
Sample ID
10086016f
10086016
10086017f
10086018f
10086018
10086020f
10086020
10086021f
10086021
10086022f
10086023f
10086024f
10086024
10086025f
10086025
10086026f
10086027f
10086027
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Result
5
<1
<1
<1
2
0
<1
<1
<1
0.5
5
<1
<1
<1
1
10
<1
<1
<1
9.47
1
6.84
5
5
10
<1
<1
<1
13.9
1
8.52
5
<1
<1
<1
0.51
2
2
<1
<1
<1
23.6
0.5
3.02
Qualifier
J
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
J
J
U
J
U
J
J
U
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
Page 2 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-11034
WW-11035
WW-11036
WW-11037
WW-11039
WW-11040
WW-11041
WW-11042
WW-11043
WW-11044
Sample ID
10086028f
10086028
10086029f
10086029
10086030f
10086030
10086031f
10086032f
10086032
10086033f
10086034f
10086034
10086035f
10086036f
10086036
10086037f
10086037
10086038
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10086037)
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
10
<1
<1
<1
11.9
1
8.71
10
<1
<1
<1
13.4
17.4
0
<1
<1
<1
0.51
5
5
<1
<1
<1
0.5
5
50
<1
<1
<1
32.7
20.8
2
10
<1
<1
<1
28.8
6.72
0
<1
<1
<1
0.51
<1
<1
<1
0.51
Qualifier
J
U
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
U
U
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
Page 3 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-11045
WW-11046
WW-11047
WW-11048
WW-11049
WW-11050
WW-11051
WW-11052
WW-11053
WW-11054
WW-11055
WW-11056
WW-11057
Sample ID
10086039f
10086039
10086040
10086041f
10086041
10086043f
10086043
10086042f
10086042
10086044f
10086044
10086045
10086046f
10086047f
10086047
10086048f
10086048
10086049f
10086050f
10086050
10086051f
10086051
10086052f
10086052
10086053f
10086053
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10086039)
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10086044)
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
20
<1
<1
<1
68.5
17.7
68.6
17.4
1
0.51
1
<1
<1
<1
0.51
2
0.5
20
<1
<1
<1
34.6
17.5
35
17.4
5
5
1
1
0.51
5
5
1
5
<1
<1
<1
0.5
10
<1
<1
<1
14.5
1
8.93
2
0.51
Qualifier
J
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
J
J
U
J
U
J
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
U
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
300.0
300.0
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
300.0
300.0
351.2
351.2
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
351.2
Page 4 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-11058
WW-11059
WW-11060
WW-11061
WW-11062
WW-11063
WW-11064
WW-11065
WW-12066
WW-12068
WW-12069
WW-12071
WW-12072
WW- 12074
WW-12075
Sample ID
10086054f
10086054
10086055f
10086055
10086056f
10086057f
10086057
10086058f
10086059f
10086059
10086060f
10086061f
10096301f
10096301
10096302f
10096303f
10096303
10096304f
10096305f
10096305
10096306f
10096306
10096307f
10096307
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
1
<1
<1
<1
0.5
1
<1
<1
<1
0.51
5
5
0.5
2
1
0.51
n/a
2
1
<1
<1
<1
0.5
5
5
<1
<1
<1
2
2
<1
<1
<1
2
0.51
1
<1
<1
<1
0.51
Qualifier
J
U
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
U
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
351.2
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
Page 5 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW- 12076
WW-12078
WW-12079
WW-12080
WW-12081
WW-12083
WW-12084
WW-12085
WW-12086
WW-12087
WW-12089
WW-12090
WW-12091
WW-12092
Sample ID
10096308f
10096308
10096309
10096310f
10096311f
10096311
10096312f
10096314f
10096315f
10096316f
10096317f
10096318f
10096319f
10096319
10096320f
10096320
10096323f
10096323
10096321f
10096321
10096322f
10096322
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10096308)
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
50
<1
<1
<1
60
5
52.6
<1
<1
<1
59.4
5
52.1
5
1
0.51
5
5
2
2
1
5
1
<1
<1
<1
10
<1
<1
<1
12.5
1
9.75
1
<1
<1
<1
10
<1
<1
<1
16.7
17.1
5
<1
<1
<1
1
Qualifier
J
U
U
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
U
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
Page 6 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-12094
WW-12095
WW-12096
WW-12097
WW-12099
WW-12100
WW-12101
WW-12102
WW-12109
WW-12111
WW-12114
WW-12115
Sample ID
10096324f
10096324
10096325
10096326f
10096326
10096328f
10096329f
10096329
10096330
10096331f
10096331
10096332f
10096332
10096333f
10096333
10096334f
10096334b
10096336f
10096336
10096337f
10096338f
10096339f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10096324)
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10096329)
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Result
10
<1
<1
<1
19.2
9.71
<1
<1
<1
19.1
9.66
5
<1
<1
<1
5
10
<1
<1
<1
13.2
11
<1
<1
<1
13.2
11
10
18.1
16.6
5
<1
<1
<1
5
<1
<1
<1
5
>120
>120
>200
10
<1
<1
5
9.81
11.1
2
2
2
Qualifier
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
Page 7 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-12116
WW-12117
WW-12118
WW-12119
WW-12120
WW-12121
WW-12122
WW-12127
WW-12130
WW-12131
WW-12132
WW-12133
WW-12134
WW-12135
WW-12136
WW-12137
WW-12138
Sample ID
10096340f
10096341f
10096341
10096342f
10096343f
10096344f
10096345f
10096345
10096346f
10096346
10096347f
10096348f
10096348
10096349f
10096349
10096350f
10096351f
10096352f
10096352
10096353f
10096353
10096354f
10096354
10096355f
10096356f
10096356
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
2
2
<1
<1
<1
1
1
2
2
<1
<1
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
2
n/a
<1
<1
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
2
1
n/a
<1
<1
<1
0.51
2
<1
<1
<1
0.51
1
<1
<1
<1
26.3
0.51
1.2
1
0
0.51
Qualifier
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
U
J
U
U
J
U
Units
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
351.2
Page 8 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-12139
WW-12140
WW-12141
WW-12142
WW-12143
WW-12144
WW-12145
WW-12146
WW-12147
WW-12148
WW-12149
WW-12150
WW-12151
Sample ID
10096357f
10096357
10096358f
10096358
10096359f
10096359
10096360f
10096360
10096361f
10096362f
10096362
10096363f
10096363
10096364f
10096364
10096366f
10096366
10096367f
10096368f
10096368
10096369f
10096370f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Result
0
<1
<1
<1
0.51
0
0.51
1
<1
<1
<1
0.51
2
12
12
12
2
2
<1
<1
<1
5.02
2.79
50
<1
<1
<1
14.8
19.9
10
<1
<1
<1
10.1
10.7
2
<1
<1
<1
5
10
<1
<1
<1
16.3
10.3
5
5
Qualifier
U
U
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
Page 9 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-12153
WW-12281
WW-12296
WW-12354
WW-21009
WW-21010
WW-21013
WW-21014
WW-21015
WW-21016
WW-21017
WW-21018
WW-21019
WW-21020
WW-21021
WW-21022
Sample ID
10096371f
10096371
10096313f
10096313
10096327f
10096327
10096372f
10086101f
10086101
10086102f
10086102
10086103f
10086103
10086104f
10086104
2101501f
10086106f
10086106
2101702f
2101803f
10086108f
10086108
2102004f
2102105f
2102206f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Result
2
<1
<1
<1
5
<1
<1
<1
5
<1
<1
<1
5
10
<1
<1
<1
7.82
1
11.4
5
<1
<1
<1
1
10
<1
<1
<1
1
2
<1
<1
<1
0.51
5
20
38.7
27.6
10
10
0
<1
<1
<1
0.51
2
10
2
Qualifier
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
300.0.0
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
Page 10 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-21023
WW-21024
WW-21025
WW-21026
WW-21027
WW-21028
WW-21029
WW-21030
WW-21035
WW-21036
Sample ID
100861 12f
10086107
10086109
10086112
10086113f
10086113
10086114f
10086114
10086115f
10086115
2102707f
10086117f
10086117
2102908f
2103009f
10086120f
10086119
10086120
10086122f
10086122
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Duplicate Sample
(10086112)
Duplicate Sample
(10086112)
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Duplicate Sample
(10086120)
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Result
5
<1
<1
<1
1
<1
<1
<1
1
10
<1
<1
<1
18.9
5
18.9
2
<1
<1
>60
2
<1
<1
<1
1
5
2
<1
<1
<1
0.51
2
5
20
35.2
11.9
<1
<1
10
36.1
12.1
20
<1
<1
<1
25.6
29.1
Qualifier
J
U
U
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
300.0.0
351.2
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
351.2
300.0.0
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
300.0.0
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
300.0.0
300.0.0
Page 11 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-21037
WW-21038
WW-21039
WW-21040
WW-21041
WW-21042
WW-21043
WW-21044
WW-21045
WW-21046
WW-21047
WW-21048
Sample ID
10086123f
10086123
2103810f
10086124f
10086124
2104011f
10086127f
10086127
10086129f
10086129
10086130f
10086130
10086131f
10086131
10086132f
10086132
2104612f
2104713f
2104814f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Result
5
<1
<1
<1
1
10
1
<1
<1
<1
0.51
5
20
<1
<1
<1
10.2
1
12.1
20
<1
<1
<1
26.4
12.1
5
<1
<1
<1
20
<1
<1
<1
21.6
5.1
16.6
20
<1
<1
<1
51.3
25.2
5
5
5
Qualifier
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
351.2
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
351.2
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
300.0.0
Page 12 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-21049
WW-21050
WW-21051
WW-21052
WW-21053
WW-21054
WW-21055
WW-21056
WW-21057
WW-21058
WW-21059
WW-21142
Sample ID
10086136f
10086136
10086138f
10086138
10086139f
10086139
10086140f
10086140
10086141f
10086141
2105415f
10086143f
10086143
2105616f
2105717f
2105818f
10086147f
10086147
10086128f
10086126
10086128
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Duplicate Sample
(10086128)
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
20
<1
<1
<1
40
18.1
20
<1
<1
<1
17.6
6.06
10
21.6
14
5
1
20
<1
<1
<1
57.3
27.6
5
20
<1
<1
<1
20.2
12.8
10
10
5
20
<1
<1
<1
13.3
1
10
5
1
1
Qualifier
J
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
U
U
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
300.0.0
300.0.0
300.0.0
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
351.2
300.0.0
351.2
351.2
Page 13 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-21150
WW-22060
WW-22061
WW-22062
WW-22063
WW-22064
WW-22065
WW-22066
WW-22067
WW-22068
Sample ID
10086137f
10086135
10086137
10096401f
10096401
2206 119f
2206220f
10096404f
10096404
10096405f
10090060
10096405
10096406f
10096406
10096407f
10090061
10096407
10096408f
10090062
10096408
2206821f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Duplicate Sample
(10086137)
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Duplicate Sample
(10096407)
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Result
20
<1
<1
<1
17
5
18.2
<1
<1
<1
16.8
5.1
18
1
0.5
1
0
20
<1
<1
<1
17.3
1
10.8
20
<1
<1
<1
45.8
21.1
20
<1
<1
<1
44.5
20.3
20
<1
<1
<1
79.9
5.1
41.1
50
<1
<1
<1
70
5
39.8
2
Qualifier
J
U
U
J
U
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
U
J
U
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
351.2
300.0.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0.0
351.2
300.0.0
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
Page 14 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-22069
WW-22070
WW-22071
WW-22072
WW-22073
WW-22074
WW-22075
WW-22076
WW-22078
WW-22079
WW-22080
WW-22082
WW-22083
WW-22084
WW-22085
WW-22086
WW-22087
WW-22088
WW-22089
WW-22090
Sample ID
2206922f
10096411f
10096411
2207123f
2207224f
2207325f
2207426f
2207527f
10096412f
10096412
2207828f
10096413f
10096413
2208029f
2208230f
10096423f
10096423
2208431f
2208532f
10096426f
10096426
10096427
100964281"
10096428
10096429
100964311"
10096431
22089331"
100964331"
10096433
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10096426)
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10096428)
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Result
5
20
<1
<1
<1
52.1
21.4
2
5
2
5
5
2
0.51
5
2
0.51
2
5
1
0.5
2
5
5
0.51
0.51
20
<1
<1
<1
45
14.3
<1
<1
<1
44.8
14.9
1
0.51
5
20
<1
<1
<1
72
11.3
Qualifier
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
U
U
J
J
U
J
J
Units
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
351.2
351.2
351.2
351.2
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
Page 15 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-22091
WW-22092
WW-22093
WW-22094
WW-22096
WW-22098
WW-22099
WW-22100
WW-22101
WW-22102
WW-22103
WW-22104
WW-22105
WW-22106
WW-22107
WW-22108
WW-22109
WW-22110
WW-22111
Sample ID
10096434f
10096434
10096435f
10096435
10096436f
10096436
2209434f
2209635f
10096439f
10096439
2209936f
2210037f
2210138f
2210239f
2210340f
10096445f
10096445
2210541f
10096446f
10096446
2210742f
2210843f
10096450f
10096450
10096451
2211044f
10096452f
10096452
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10096450)
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
20
<1
<1
<1
37.9
12.2
10
<1
<1
<1
7.89
8.57
1
<1
<1
<1
0.51
5
5
5
1
5
5
1
1
5
5
<1
<1
<1
0.51
5
0
0.51
1
2
50
<1
<1
<1
53.3
46.4
51.3
44.6
5
2
0.51
Qualifier
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
U
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
300.0
300.0
351.2
Page 16 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-22112
WW-22113
WW-22114
WW-22115
WW-22116
WW-22117
WW-22118
WW-22201
WW-22202
WW-22203
WW-22204
WW-22205
WW-22206
WW-22207
WW-22208
WW-31011
WW-31012
WW-31013
Sample ID
10096453f
10096453
2211345f
10096455f
10096455
10096456f
10096456
2211646f
10096459f
10096459
10096461f
10096461
2220 147f
2220248f
2220349f
2220450f
222055 If
2220652f
2220753f
10096465f
10096465
3101154f
10086201f
10086201
3101355f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Result
2
<1
<1
<1
2
50
<1
<1
<1
30.7
5.1
22.8
50
<1
<1
<1
34.8
5
23.8
5
50
<1
<1
<1
50.8
5.1
37
20
13.3
1
12.5
5
5
10
10
1
5
10
50
<1
<1
<1
21.9
5
20.1
1
1
<1
<1
<1
5
Qualifier
J
J
J
U
J
U
J
J
U
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
Page 17 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-31014
WW-31016
WW-31017
WW-31018
WW-31019
WW-31020
WW-31022
WW-31024
WW-31025
WW-31029
Sample ID
3101456f
3101657f
3101758f
3101859f
10086202f
10086202
3102060f
10086203f
10086203
10086204f
10086204
10086205
10097002
10107004
10117006
10127008
10137010
10157014
10167016
10177018
10086206f
10086206
10097001
10107003
10117005
10127007
10137009
10147011
10147012
10157013
10167015
10177017
3102961f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10086204)
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate as N
Result
5
5
5
5
1
<1
<1
<1
5
1
<1
<1
<1
0.51
50
<1
<1
<1
62.6
38.2
<1
<1
<1
63.4
38.1
40.6
40.6
40.3
39.3
41.1
41
41
41
20
<1
<1
<1
41.5
18.4
20.6
20.6
20.7
20.4
40.4
40.8
44
24
22
22
2
Qualifier
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
353.2
Page 18 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-31030
WW-31031
WW-31032
WW-31034
WW-31035
WW-31036
WW-31038
WW-31039
WW-31040
WW-31041
WW-31045
Sample ID
10086207f
10086207
10086208f
10086208
10086209f
10086209
3103462f
10086211f
10086211
3103663f
10086212f
10086212
10086213f
10086213
10086214f
10086214
10086215f
10086215
10086216
3104564f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10086215)
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Total Coliform
Fecal Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Result
1
<1
<1
<1
0.51
5
<1
<1
<1
0.51
5
<1
<1
<1
1
5
10
10.5
12.9
2
2
<1
<1
<1
0.51
20
<1
<1
<1
24.2
15
1
<1
<1
<1
0.51
0
<1
<1
<1
0.5
0.51
5
Qualifier
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
J
U
U
U
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
351.2
Page 19 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-31046
WW-31047
WW-31048
WW-31050
WW-31051
WW-31052
WW-31054
WW-31056
WW-31057
WW-31058
WW-31059
WW-31060
WW-31064
WW-31355
WW-31356
Sample ID
1 00862 17f
10086217
10086218f
10086218
3104865f
3105066f
10086219f
10086219
1008622 If
10086221
10086222f
10086222
10086223f
10086223
10086224f
10086224
10086225
3105867f
10086226f
10086226
10086227
3106068f
3106469f
10086220f
10086220
3135670f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10086224)
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10086226)
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate as N
Result
5
<1
<1
<1
18.2
14.8
20
<1
<1
<1
26.7
16.2
5
5
20
<1
<1
<1
8.03
1
12.1
2
0.5
20
<1
<1
<1
34.4
22
5
1
0
<1
<1
<1
0.51
<1
<1
<1
1
5
1
1
5
5
0
0.05
5
Qualifier
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
U
J
J
U
U
J
J
U
U
J
J
U
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222-B
351.2
351.2
353.2
Page 20 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-32068
WW-32069
WW-32070
WW-32071
WW-32072
WW-32073
WW-32074
WW-32075
WW-32076
WW-32079
WW-32080
Sample ID
10096501f
10096501
10096502f
10096502
10096503f
10096503
10096504f
10096504
10096505f
10096505
10096506f
10096506
10096507f
10096507
3207572f
3207673f
3207974f
10096508f
10096508
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Result
50
<1
<1
<1
40.2
27.1
0
0.51
50
<1
<1
<1
104
31.4
20
<1
<1
<1
37.2
5.1
12.7
20
<1
<1
<1
26.8
12.4
20
<1
<1
<1
28.5
16.1
20
<1
<1
<1
47.8
10.5
5
5
5
10
<1
<1
<1
15.8
1.15
8.65
Qualifier
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
Page 21 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-32081
WW-32082
WW-32083
WW-32084
WW-32085
WW-32086
WW-32087
WW-32091
WW-32092
WW-32093
WW-32094
WW-32095
WW-32096
WW-32097
WW-32098
WW-32100
WW-32101
WW-32102
WW-32103
Sample ID
10096509f
10096509
10096594f
10096594
10096595
10096596f
10096596
3208475f
3208576f
3208677f
3208778f
10096597f
10096597
3209279f
3209380f
3209481f
3209582f
3209683f
3209784f
3209885f
10096599f
10096599
10096598f
10096598
10096510f
10096510
3210386f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10096594)
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Result
2
0.51
10
<1
<1
<1
34.3
8.06
<1
<1
<1
34.6
8.05
10
<1
<1
<1
21.1
6.53
2
10
10
5
10
<1
<1
<1
35.6
3.76
5
10
5
2
5
5
5
20
<1
<1
<1
13
5.1
15.8
10
1
5
1
5
Qualifier
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
351.2
351.2
Page 22 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-32104
WW-32105
WW-32106
WW-32107
WW-32108
WW-32109
WW-32110
WW-32111
WW-32112
Sample ID
10096511f
10096511
10096512f
10096512
10096513f
10096513
10096514f
10096514
10096515f
10096515
10096516f
10096516
3211087f
10096517f
10096517
10096518
10096519f
10096519
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10096517)
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
10
<1
<1
<1
0.99
10
<1
<1
<1
20
<1
<1
<1
9.23
1
12
20
<1
<1
<1
26.2
11.6
20
<1
<1
<1
26.2
9.51
1
0.5
5
10
<1
<1
<1
9.9
1
9.29
<1
<1
<1
9.87
1
9.29
0
<1
<1
<1
0.51
Qualifier
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
J
U
J
J
U
U
U
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
Page 23 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-32113
WW-32114
WW-32115
WW-32116
WW-32117
WW-32118
WW-32119
WW-32120
WW-32122
WW-32123
WW-32124
WW-32125
WW-32126
WW-32127
Sample ID
10096520f
10096520
10096521f
10096521
10096522f
10096522
10096523f
10096523
10096524f
10096524
10096525f
10096525
3211988f
10096526f
10096526
10096527f
10096527
3212389f
3212490f
3212591f
10096528f
10096528
3212792f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Result
50
<1
<1
<1
45.9
21.3
2
<1
<1
<1
0.51
10
<1
<1
<1
17.2
9.61
10
<1
<1
<1
14.1
1
9.01
10
<1
<1
<1
9.08
14.2
2
0.51
5
5
1
10
<1
<1
<1
16.6
1
8.98
5
5
5
5
1
2
Qualifier
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
U
J
J
J
J
U
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
351.2
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
351.2
Page 24 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
WW-32128
WW-32129
WW-32130
WW-32131
WW-32132
WW-32133
WW-32135
Sample ID
10096529f
10096529
10096530
10096531f
10096531
10096532
10096533f
10096533
10096534f
10096534
3213293f
10096535f
10096535
3213571f
Sample Type3
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10096529)
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Duplicate Sample
(10096531)
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Field Measurement
Laboratory Sample
Field Measurement
Compound
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Escherichia coli
Fecal Coliform
Total Coliform
Chloride
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrate as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate as N
Result
20
<1
<1
<1
23.8
14.4
<1
<1
<1
23.8
14
20
<1
<1
<1
51.1
5.1
18.9
5
20
<1
<1
125
27.9
20.6
50
<1
<1
<1
71.5
5
20.6
5
5
1
10
Qualifier
J
J
U
U
J
J
U
J
J
U
J
Units
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Method
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
351.2
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
300.0
SM9221-F
SM9221-E
SM 9222 -B
300.0
351.2
300.0
351.2
Units
mg/L = milligrams per liter
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an estimate.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported value.
< = The level of the target organism present in the sample is less than the detection limit. The reported value is the detection limit.
> = The level of the target organism present in the sample exceeds the upper limit for microbial estimates. The reported value is the
Page 25 of 26
-------
Table Cl: Phase 2 Field Measurements and Laboratory Analytical Results
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type3
Compound
Result
Qualifier
Units
Analytical
Method |
Notes:
aSamples submitted to the laboratory were analyzed by the EPA Manchester Environmental Laboratory.
bSample No. 10096334 was submitted to the laboratory for microbial source tracking (MST) analysis. Results are presented below.
Biomarker Result
BAC-32 Present
CF-128 Absent
CF-193 Absent
MST- General Bacteriodes Present
HF-183 Absent
HF-134 Absent
BAC32: This is the screening Bacteroides biomarker. If it is present, further testing is done to determine the specific source. If
the test is negative, nothing more is done.
CF128 and CF193: These are two separate biomarkers that identify the presence of ruminant fecal source. Between the two of
them, they comprise most of the biomarkers that would be found in ruminants. There may be other biomarkers that could exist in
very isolated populations of ruminants, but these two will identify the majority. A "P" would identify detection of the biomarker in
the particular sample, an "A" indicates absence of that biomarker in the sample.
HF134 and HF183: These are two separate biomarkers that identify the presence of human fecal source. As above, between the
two of these biomarkers, the majority of human source will be detected. Again, a very isolated community might develop a
different biomarker. A "P" would identify detection of the biomarker in the particular sample, an "A" indicates absence of that
biomarker in the sample.
MST- Microbial Source Tracking. MST contaminants: This identifies by two letter code the kind of fecal source was identified in
the particular sample.GB indicates that although Bacteroides DNA was present, the source was neither human nor ruminant. An
"A" indicates that no Bacteroides DNA was present in the sample. H indicates human source; R indicates ruminant; H/R indicates
that both were found in that sample. To be noted, where there is a species identification, there may be fecal contamination from
other species present as well, but due to method limitations is not identified.
Page 26 of 26
-------
Table C2: Phase 3 Summary of Sampling Locations and Laboratory Analyses
Laboratory Analyses
//
Location ID
WW-01
WW-02
WW-03
WW-04
WW-05
WW-06
WW-07
WW-08
WW-09
WW-10
WW-11
WW-12
WW-13
WW-14
WW-15
WW-16
WW-17
WW-184
WW-19
WW-20
WW-21
WW-22
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-26
WW-27
WW-28
WW-29
WW-305
LG-01
LG-02
LG-03
LG-04
LG-05
LG-06
LG-07
LG-08
LG-09
LG-10
LG-11
LG-12
LG-13
LG-14
LG-15
Sample ID
10154201
10154202
10154203
10154204
10154205
10154206
10154207
10154208
10164209
10164210
10154211
10154212
10154213
10154214
10154215
10154216
10154217
10154218
10154219
10154220
10154221
10164222
10154223
10154224
10154225
10154226
10154227
10154228
10154229
10164230
10154251
10154252
10154253
10154254
10154255
10154256
10154257
10154258
10154259
10164260
10164261
10164262
10164263
10164264
10164265
Sample Type
Upgradient Well - Haak Dairy
Supply Well - Haak Dairy
Downgradient Well - Haak Dairy
Downgradient Well - Haak Dairy
Downgradient Well - Haak Dairy
Upgradient - Dairy Cluster
Supply Well - DeRuyter Dairy
Supply Well - D and A Dairy
Supply Well - Cow Palace
Downgradient Well - Dairy Cluster
Downgradient Well - Dairy Cluster
Downgradient Well - Dairy Cluster
Downgradient Well - Dairy Cluster
Downgradient Well - Dairy Cluster
Downgradient Well - Dairy Cluster
Downgradient Well - Dairy Cluster
Downgradient Well - Dairy Cluster
Residential Well
Downgradient Well - Septic
Downgradient Well - Septic
Downgradient Well - Septic
Downgradient Well - Septic
Downgradient Well - Mint
Downgradient Well - Mint
Downgradient Well - Corn
Downgradient Well - Hops
Downgradient Well - Hops
Downgradient Well - Corn
Field Blank
Residential well
Dairy Lagoon - Haak Dairy
Dairy Lagoon - Haak Dairy6
Dairy Lagoon - Haak Dairy6
Dairy Lagoon - DeRuyter Dairy
Dairy Lagoon - DeRuyter Dairy
Dairy Lagoon - DeRuyter Dairy
Dairy Lagoon - D and A Dairy
Dairy Lagoon - D and A Dairy6
Dairy Lagoon - D and A Dairy6
Dairy Lagoon - Cow Palace
Dairy Lagoon - Cow Palace6
Dairy Lagoon - Cow Palace6
Dairy Lagoon - Bosnia Dairy
Dairy Lagoon - Bosnia Dairy
Dairy Lagoon - Bosnia Dairy
Number of Analytes
Sample Media
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
//
1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
It*
4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
//*
9
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
//*
12
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
//
1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ ^
50
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ *
/ *
Varies
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ */
5
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ ^y
20
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ ^/
17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ **/
14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ ^
NA
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ ^
69
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ i$
NA
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Page 1 of2
-------
Table C2: Phase 3 Summary of Sampling Locations and Laboratory Analyses
Laboratory Analyses
//
Location ID
SO-01
SO-02
SO-03
SO-04
SO-05
SO-06
SO-07
SO-08
SO-09
SO- 10
SO- 11
SO- 12
SO- 13
SO- 14
SO- 15
SO- 16
SP-01
SP-02
SP-03
SP-04
Sample ID
10154231
10154232
10154233
10154234
10154235
10154236
10164237
10164238
10164239
10164240
10154241
10154242
10154243
10154244
10154245
10154246
10154271
10154272
10154273
10154274
Sample Type
Manure - Haak Dairy
Soil - Haak Dairy Application Field
Manure - DeRuyter Dairy
Soil - DeRuyter Dairy Application Field
Manure - D and A Dairy
Soil - D and A Dairy Application Field
Manure - Cow Palace
Soil - Cow Palace Application Field
Manure - Bosma Dairy
Soil - Bosma Dairy Application Field
Soil - Mint
Soil- Mint
Soil - Corn
Soil - Corn
Soil - Hops
Soil - Hops
Zillah Wastewater Treatment Plant Influent
Mabton Wastewater Treatment Plant Influent
Toppenish Wastewater Treatment Plant Influent
Toppenish Wastewater Treatment Plant Influent
Number of Analytes
Sample Media
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Water
Water
Water
Water
//
1
It*
4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
//*
9
X
X
X
X
//*
12
X
X
X
X
//
1
/ ^
50
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ *
/ *
Varies
X
X
X
X
/ */
5
X
X
X
/ ^y
20
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ ^/
17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ **/
14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
/ ^
NA
/ ^
69
X
X
X
/ i$
NA
Abbreviations
NA- Not applicable
Notes
The other nitrogen compounds evaluated included: total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN); extractable nitrate, extractable ammonia and total nitrogen by combustion.
Lagoon samples were evaluated but it was determined that because of matrix interferences it was not possible to reliably quantify the compounds..
3The specific analysis depended on which laboratory analyzed the sample. The analysis included either total coliform, fecal coliform, and/or E Coli. Microbial source tracking was performed for 9 lagoons and all Wastewater treatment plant influent samples.
4Sample WW-18 collected at the owner's request.
Sample WW-30 was collected because this residential well is located in an area not otherwise sampled and is high in nitrate. WW-30 was not evaluated for hormones, Pharmaceuticals, isotopic, or age dating as the location
was added later in the study.
to-located samples: LG-02 and LG-03; LG-08 and LG-09; and LG-11 and LG-12.
'Samples SP-03 and SP-04 were collected at the same Wastewater treatment plant at different times. Sample SP-04 was submitted to EPA's Manchester Laboratory only and was analyzed for a subset of compounds as
identified in the table.
Page 2 of1
-------
Table C3: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrogen Compounds in
Wells, Lagoons and Wastewater Treatment Influents
Location
ID
WW-01
WW-02
WW-03
WW-04
WW-05
WW-06
WW-07
WW-08
WW-09
WW-10
Sample
ID
10154201
10154202
10154203
10154204
10154205
10154206
10154207
10154208
10164209
10164210
Sample
Type
Upgradient
Well - Dairy
Supply Well -
Dairy
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Upgradient -
Dairy
Supply Well -
Dairy
Supply Well -
Dairy
Supply Well -
Dairy
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Sample
Media
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Compound
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
0.3 U
0.39
0.38
0.5 U
0.3 U
3.4
3.12
0.5 U
0.3 U
35.5
33.1
5.1 U
0.3 U
55
51.9
5.1 U
0.3 U
13.4
12.8
2.5 U
0.3 U
0.73
0.71
0.5 U
0.05 U
1.19
1.02
0.51 U
0.05 U
12.9
11.7
2.5 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.51 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.5 U
Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Laboratory
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
Analytical
Method
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
Page 1 of 5
-------
Table C3: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrogen Compounds in
Wells, Lagoons and Wastewater Treatment Influents
Location
ID
WW-11
WW-12
WW-13
WW-14
WW-15
WW-16
WW-17
WW-18
WW-19
WW-20
Sample
ID
10154211
10154212
10154213
10154214
10154215
10154216
10154217
10154218
10154219
10154220
Sample
Type
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Downgradient
Well - Dairy
Residential
Well
Downgradient
Well - Septic
Downgradient
Well - Septic
Sample
Media
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Compound
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
0.3 U
23
22.3
2.5 U
0.3 U
46.7
45
5.1 U
0.05 U
44
41.4
5.1 U
0.05 U
43.4
40.9
5.1 U
0.3 U
30.2
29.4
5.1 U
0.3 U
23.4
22.3
2.5 U
0.3 U
22.7
21.7
2.5 U
0.05 U
16.1
72.2
5.1 U
0.3 U
41.1
38.2
5.1 U
0.3 U
16
15
2.5 U
Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Laboratory
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
Analytical
Method
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
Page 2 of 5
-------
Table C3: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrogen Compounds in
Wells, Lagoons and Wastewater Treatment Influents
Location
ID
WW-21
WW-22
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-26
WW-27
WW-28
WW-29
WW-30
Sample
ID
10154221
10164222
10154223
10154224
10154225
10154226
10154227
10154228
10154229
10164230
Sample
Type
Downgradient
Well - Septic
Downgradient
Well - Septic
Downgradient
Well - Mint
Downgradient
Well - Mint
Downgradient
Well - Hops
Downgradient
Well - Hops
Downgradient
Well - Corn
Downgradient
Well - Corn
Field Blank
Residential
Well
Sample
Media
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Compound
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Nitrate-N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
0.05 U
40.5
38
5.1 U
0.05 U
17.3
16.4
2.5 U
0.3 U
17.2
16
2.5 U
0.3 U
14.9
13.8
2.5 U
0.3 U
35.5
33.4
5.1 U
0.05 U
16.7
15.3
2.5 U
0.3 U
21.8
19.8
2.5 U
0.3 U
76
71.2
5.1 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.51 U
0.05 U
24.5
23.4
2.5 U
Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Laboratory
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
MEL
MEL
Cascade
MEL
Analytical
Method
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
350.1
353.2
300.0
351.2
Page 3 of 5
-------
Table C3: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrogen Compounds in
Wells, Lagoons and Wastewater Treatment Influents
Location
ID
LG-01
LG-02
LG-03
LG-04
LG-05
LG-06
LG-07
LG-08
LG-09
LG-10
LG-11
LG-12
LG-13
LG-14
Sample
ID
10154251
10154252
10154253
10154254
10154255
10154256
10154257
10154258
10154259
10164260
10164261
10164262
10164263
10164264
Sample
Type
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Sample
Media
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Compound
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Result
1000 J
1200 J
1 UJ
870 J
1400 J
1.2 J
870 J
1400 J
1 UJ
920 J
1600 J
1 UJ
1200 J
1600 J
1 UJ
1200 J
1800 J
1 UJ
950 J
1700 J
3.1 J
730 J
1200 J
1 UJ
760 J
1100 J
1 UJ
190 J
380 J
1 UJ
240 J
500 J
1 UJ
240 J
290 J
1 UJ
970 J
1700 J
2.5 J
860 J
1400 J
1 UJ
Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Laboratory
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
Analytical
Method
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
351.2
353.2
Page 4 of 5
-------
Table C3: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrogen Compounds in
Wells, Lagoons and Wastewater Treatment Influents
Location
ID
LG-15
SP-01
SP-02
SP-031
SP-041
Sample
ID
10164265
10154271
10154272
10154273
10154274
Sample
Type
Dairy Lagoon
WWTP
WWTP
WWTP
WWTP
Sample
Media
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Compound
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia (NH3+NH4) as N
Nitrate+Nitrite as N
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Result
560 J
900 J
1 UJ
26.6
0.942
46.8
25.2
0.05 U
46.7
38.4
0.05 U
53.8
35.1
0.1
57
Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Analytical
Laboratory
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
MEL
Analytical
Method
350.1
351.2
353.2
350.1
353.2
351.2
350.1
353.2
351.2
350.1
353.2
351.2
350.1
353.2
351.2
Abbreviations
LG - lagoon
MEL - EPA Manchester Environmental Laboratory
SP - wastewater treatment plant influent
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
Units
mg/L = milligrams per liter
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an estimate.
R = The data are unusable for all purposes.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported value.
UJ = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported estimated result. The associated numerical value is an estimate
of the quantitation limit of the analyte in this sample.
Notes
1 Samples SP-03 and SP-04 were collected at the same wastewater treatment plant at different times. Sample SP-04 was
submitted to EPA's Manchester Laboratory only and was analyzed for a subset of compounds as identified in the table.
Page 5 of 5
-------
Table C4: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrogen Compounds in
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location
ID
SO-01
SO-02
SO-03
SO-04
SO-05
SO-06
SO-07
SO-08
SO-09
SO-10
SO-11
Sample
ID
10154231
10154232
10154233
10154234
10154235
10154236
10164237
10164238
10164239
10164240
10154241
Sample
Type
Manure
Soil
Manure
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Manure
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Manure
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Manure
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Soil - Mint
Field
Compound
Ammonia Solid
Kjedahl Nitrogen/Solid
NO3N/Total Solid
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonia Solid
NO3N/Total Solid
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonia Solid
NO3N/Total Solid
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonia Solid
NO3N/Total Solid
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonia Solid
NO3N/Total Solid
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Result
10100
29700
0.32 U
4.6
71.7
2760
1470
32.8
9210
7.3
247
2110
1060
43.1
13600
6.8
45.6
960
3600
18.9
16100
2.9
84.3
3040
1700
5.69
13700
7.1
139
3590
210
245
3330
Units
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
Analytical
Method
4500-NH3
4500N-ORG-C
4500
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
4500-NH3
4500-NO3 E
993.13
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
4500-NH3
4500-NO3 E
993.13
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
4500-NH3
4500-NO3 E
993.13
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
4500-NH3
4500-NO3 E
993.13
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
Page 1 of 2
-------
Table C4: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrogen Compounds in
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location
ID
SO-12
SO-13
SO-14
SO-15
SO-16
Sample
ID
10154242
10154243
10154244
10154245
10154246
Sample
Type
Soil - Mint
Field
Soil - Corn
Field
Soil - Corn
Field
Soil -Hops
Field
Soil -Hops
Field
Compound
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N/Nitrite
Total Nitrogen/Solid
Result
8.2
191
2350
7.5
24.3
1100
12
6.3
1180
21
83.5
2210
7.7
26.5
3000
Units
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
Analytical
Method
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
4500-NH4 H
4500-NO3 F
993.13
Samples were analyzed by Cascade Analytical Laboratory.
Abbreviations
SO - solid
Units
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an estimate.
R = The data are unusable for all purposes.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported value.
UJ = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported estimated result. The
associated numerical value is an estimate of the quantitation limit of the analyte in
Page 2 of 2
-------
Table C5: Comparison of Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrate Levels in Wells
Location
ID
WW-01
WW-02
WW-03
WW-04
WW-05
WW-06
WW-07
WW-08
WW-09
WW-10
WW-11
WW-12
WW-13
WW-14
WW-15
WW-16
WW-17
WW-18
WW-19
WW-20
WW-21
WW-22
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
Sample
ID
10154201
10154202
10154203
10154204
10154205
10154206
10154207
10154208
10164209
10164210
10154211
10154212
10154213
10154214
10154215
10154216
10154217
10154218
10154219
10154220
10154221
10164222
10154223
10154224
10154225
Sample Type
Upgradient Well
Dairy Supply Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Upgradient Well
Dairy Supply Well
Dairy Supply Well
Dairy Supply Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Residential Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Cascade
Analytical
Laboratory
Manchester
Environmental
Laboratory
Univeristy of
Nebraska Water
Sciences
Laboratory
Maximum Contaminant Level = 10 mg/L
Units: mg/L
0.38
3.12
33.1
51.9
12.8
0.71
1.02
11.7
<0.05U
<0.05U
22.3
45
41.4
40.9
29.4
22.3
21.7
72.2
38.2
15
38
16.4
16
13.8
33.4
0.391
3.4
35.5
55
13.4
0.73
1.19
12.9
0.05U
0.05U
23
46.7
44
43.4
30.2
23.4
22.7
16.1
41.1
16
40.5
17.3
17.2
14.9
35.5
0.2
3
34
49.9
12.8
0.6
1.1
11.7
NM
NM
21.6
43.6
42
40.7
27.4
23
23.3
72.3
36.4
15
36.5
16.6
17.3
14
32.9
Page 1 of 2
-------
Table C5: Comparison of Phase 3 Analytical Results for Nitrate Levels in Wells
Location
ID
WW-26
WW-27
WW-28
WW-29
WW-30
Sample
ID
10154226
10154227
10154228
10154229
10164230
Sample Type
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Field Blank
Residential Well
Cascade
Analytical
Laboratory
Manchester
Environmental
Laboratory
Univeristy of
Nebraska Water
Sciences
Laboratory
Maximum Contaminant Level = 10 mg/L
15.3
19.8
71.2
<0.05U
23.4
16.7
21.8
76
0.05U
24.5
15.1
19.9
69.6
NM
NA
Abbreviations
NM = Insufficient Nitrate to complete analysis.
NA = Not analyzed.
Notes
Cascade used Method 300.0 to analyze the samples.
Manchester conducted the nitrate analysis as part of the general water chemistry
using Method 353.2.
UNL conducted the nitrate analysis as a part of their isotopic analysis.
Page 2 of 2
-------
Table C6: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Major Ions and Trace Inorganic Elements in Wells,
Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Alkalinity as CaCO,
Arsenic
Barium
Bromide
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Phosphorus, total
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Sulfate
Zinc
Method No.
2320B
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
245.1
365.1
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
78.4
45 U
13.5
0.2 U
3 U
17200
2.96
10 U
5 U
0.113
20 U
25 U
6470
2 U
0.05 U
0.0292
1900
50 U
10 U
5130
3.51
5 U
WW-02
10154202
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
165
45 U
32.7
0.2 U
3 U
35400
9.11
10 U
5 U
0.528
20 U
25 U
15100
2U
0.05 U
0.0926
4190
SOU
10 U
22500
22.3
5.4
WW-03
10154203
Downgradient
Well
Water
181
45 U
135
0.873
3 U
165000
96.2
10 U
5 U
0.307
20 U
25 U
39900
2 U
0.05 U
0.0327
6140
50 U
10 U
41800
234
21
WW-04
10154204
Downgradient
Well
Water
394
45 U
178
0.39
3 U
186000
58
10 U
5 U
0.319
20 U
25 U
52600
2 U
0.05 U
0.0439
7290
50 U
10 U
57000
168
12
WW-05
10154205
Downgradient
Well
Water
454
45 U
164
0.2 U
3 U
125000
37.5
10 U
5 U
0.332
20 U
25 U
39000
2 U
0.077
0.0606
6670
50 U
10 U
48800
44.4
15
WW-06
10154206
Upgradient
Well
Water
119
45 U
11.2
0.2 U
3 U
20800
2.38
10 U
5 U
0.416
20 U
25 U
7410
2U
0.05 U
0.0664
3300
SOU
10 U
15400
6.38
471
WW-07
10154207
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
129
45 U
10
0.2 U
3 U
28300
8.04
10 U
5 U
0.298
20 U
25 U
12300
3.4
0.05 U
0.0299
6830
SOU
10 U
15100
27.8
5 U
WW-08
10154208
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
178
45 U
30.7
0.336
3 U
81800
35
10 U
5 U
0.257
20 U
25 U
25600
2 U
0.05 U
0.0271
4330
50 U
10 U
34200
113
12
WW-09
10164209
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
155
45 U
15.1
0.2 U
3 U
21100
7.93
10 U
5 U
0.405
20 U
25 U
9220
37.7
0.05 U
0.0304
8570
SOU
10 U
28400
0.841
5 U
See Table C6 notes on page 7 of 7.
Pagel of 7
-------
Table C6: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Major Ions and Trace Inorganic Elements in Wells,
Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Alkalinity as CaCO,
Arsenic
Barium
Bromide
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Phosphorus, total
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Sulfate
Zinc
Method No.
2320B
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
245.1
365.1
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
WW-10
10164210
Downgradient
Well
Water
141
45 U
63.8
0.2 U
3 U
27000
4.44
10 U
5 U
0.328
550
25 U
8410
89.9
0.05 U
0.0477
5250
50 U
10 U
25500
21.7
8.3
WW-11
10154211
Downgradient
Well
Water
178
45 U
34
0.333
3 U
93400
52
10 U
5 U
0.282
91
25 U
25800
2 U
0.05 U
0.0204
3870
50 U
10 U
62700
147
66.9
WW-12
10154212
Downgradient
Well
Water
350
45 U
14.7
0.237
3 U
109000
49
10 U
5 U
0.285
20 U
25 U
42000
2U
0.05 U
0.0201
4000
SOU
10 U
101000
117
5 U
WW-13
10154213
Downgradient
Well
Water
604
45 U
8.7
0.428
3 U
217000
79.8
10 U
5 U
0.132
20 U
25 U
66300
2U
0.106
0.02 U
5450
SOU
10 U
97300
229
9.7
WW-14
10154214
Downgradient
Well
Water
502
45 U
35.9
0.389
3 U
193000
69.8
10 U
5 U
0.106
20 U
25 U
65000
2U
0.05 U
0.02 U
6640
SOU
10 U
103000
305
17
WW-15
10154215
Downgradient
Well
Water
240
45 U
47.8
0.246
3 U
69200
39.2
10 U
5 U
0.363
194
25 U
32100
2 U
0.05 U
0.0272
7970
50 U
10 U
108000
138
53.8
WW-16
10154216
Downgradient
Well
Water
318
45 U
25.4
0.418
3 U
118000
45.5
10 U
5 U
0.205
27
25 U
47900
2U
0.05 U
0.0213
3630
SOU
10 U
52900
173
5 U
WW-17
10154217
Downgradient
Well
Water
316
45 U
39.2
0.406
3 U
113000
44.6
10 U
5 U
0.205
135
25 U
46000
2.1
0.05 U
0.023
3730
SOU
10 U
54900
171
8.5
WW-18
10154218
Residential
Well
Water
280
45 U
70.5
0.522
3 U
210000
39.7
10 U
5 U
0.439
33
25 U
67100
2 U
0.084
0.0443
5610
50 U
10 U
48800
361
5 U
See Table C6 notes on page 7 of 7.
Page 2 of 7
-------
Table C6: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Major Ions and Trace Inorganic Elements in Wells,
Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Alkalinity as CaCO,
Arsenic
Barium
Bromide
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Phosphorus, total
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Sulfate
Zinc
Method No.
2320B
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
245.1
365.1
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
WW-19
10154219
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
111
45 U
243
0.761
3 U
79200
60
10 U
5 U
0.216
35
25 U
29800
2U
0.05 U
0.041
5280
SOU
10 U
37400
63.4
51.2
WW-20
10154220
Downgradient well
Water
359
45 U
94.4
0.2 U
3 U
96500
24.9
10 U
5 U
0.352
259
25 U
29700
22.4
0.05 U
0.0745
5370
SOU
10 U
49700
63.6
10
WW-21
10154221
Downgradient Well
Water
178
45 U
107
0.737
3 U
111000
51.2
10 U
5 U
0.462
67
25 U
35700
3.1
0.05 U
0.101
4590
55
10 U
55800
164
5 U
WW-22
10164222
Downgradient Well
Water
136
45 U
184
0.415
3 U
79300
26.8
10 U
5 U
0.239
112
25 U
19600
4.8
0.05 U
0.0399
4180
SOU
10 U
18000
69.8
5 U
WW-23
10154223
Downgradient
Well
Water
251
45 U
121
0.2 U
3 U
92000
23.1
10 U
5 U
0.251
20 U
25 U
24600
2U
0.05 U
0.078
6160
50 U
10 U
23900
51.9
9
WW-24
10154224
Downgradient Well
Water
259
45 U
27.8
0.2 U
3 U
70600
10.5
10 U
5 U
0.385
89
25 U
22700
2U
0.05 U
0.0961
6510
50 U
10 U
44000
29.8
53.4
WW-25
10154225
Downgradient Well
Water
388
45 U
106
0.2 U
3 U
95100
23.6
10 U
32.8
0.364
44
25 U
27200
2U
0.05 U
0.0769
4680
SOU
10 U
112000
45.6
55.4
See Table C6 notes on page 7 of 7.
Page 3 of 7
-------
Table C6: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Major Ions and Trace Inorganic Elements in Wells,
Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Alkalinity as CaCO,
Arsenic
Barium
Bromide
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Phosphorus, total
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Sulfate
Zinc
Method No.
2320B
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
245.1
365.1
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
WW-26
10154226
Downgradient Well
Water
352
45 U
102
0.2 U
3 U
83200
12.7
10 U
5 U
0.378
115
25 U
32100
2U
0.05 U
0.0855
11700
SOU
10 U
58500
64.9
9.3
WW-27
10154227
Downgradient Well
Water
180
45
U
56.6
0.3
3
U
88600
22.4
10
5
U
U
0.721
20
25
U
U
28600
2
0.05
U
U
0.0406
3650
50
10
U
U
40400
124
47.6
WW-28
10154228
Downgradient
Well
Water
237
45 U
89.6
1.36
3 U
238000
130
10 U
5 U
0.574
20 U
25 U
85000
2U
0.05 U
0.0367
4790
72
10 U
53800
386
26.3
WW-29
10154229
Field Blank
Water
5
45
1
0.2
3
30
0.06
10
5
0.04
20
25
50
2
0.05
0.02
700
50
10
100
0.3
5
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
WW-30
10164230
Residential
Well
Water
255
45 U
57.5
0.248
3 U
99300
33.1
10 U
5 U
0.258
100
25 U
24700
2U
0.05 U
0.0204
2900
SOU
10 U
107000
176
22
LG-01
10154251
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
3820
180 U
297
10 U
12 U
148000
473
40 U
575
2 U
9000
100 U
116000
1370
0.25 UJ
39.6
1660000
200 U
40 U
437000
257
1790
LG-02
10154252
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
6340
170 U
931
10 U
11 U
409000
616
88
1850
2U
16700
95 U
236000
3970
0.25 UJ
118
2100000
190 U
38 U
501000
15 U
5410
LG-03
10154253
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
6320
160 U
907
10 U
11 U
390000
616
85
1810
2 U
15800
89 U
234000
3950
0.25 UJ
126
2140000
180 U
35 U
511000
15 U
5260
LG-04
10154254
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
6110
170
U
2480
10
12
U
U
1010000
684
203
3110
2
U
205000
97
U
514000
14800
0.387
J
354
2160000
190
39
U
U
517000
286
11000
LG-05
10154255
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
8920
180 U
722
10 U
12 U
351000
1140
44
1030
2 U
15500
99 U
281000
4420
0.25 UJ
103
2590000
200 U
40 U
751000
15 U
3720
See Table C6 notes on page 7 of 7.
Page 4 of 7
-------
Table C6: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Major Ions and Trace Inorganic Elements in Wells,
Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Alkalinity as CaCO,
Arsenic
Barium
Bromide
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Phosphorus, total
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Sulfate
Zinc
Method No.
2320B
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
245.1
365.1
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
LG-06
10154256
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
8700
160 U
683
10 U
10 U
323000
1140
46
989
2U
13900
86 U
274000
4070
0.25 UJ
111
3E+06
170 U
34 U
753000
15 U
3470
LG-07
10154257
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
6210
190 U
1080
10 U
13 U
578000
633
70
1850
2U
53000
100 U
358000
7780
0.25 UJ
221
2E+06
210 U
42 U
443000
304
6080
LG-08
10154258
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
5280
190 U
720
10 U
13 U
433000
699
42 U
1290
2U
23600
100 U
202000
3990
0.25 UJ
90.8
1820000
210 U
42 U
488000
15 U
4160
LG-09
10154259
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
5280
160 U
720
10 U
11 U
442000
722
37
1290
2U
23600
90 U
200000
4010
0.25 UJ
89.8
1810000
180 U
36 U
487000
15 U
4290
LG-10
10164260
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
1170
160 U
220
10 U
11 U
103000
62.4
37 U
193
2 U
5960
91 U
63100
660
0.065 J
57.1
327000
180 U
37 U
142000
181
926
LG-11
10164261
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
2060
170 U
259
10 U
11 U
124000
113
38 U
148
2U
1560 J
94 U
84500
793
0.05 UJ
82.9
394000
190 U
38 U
175000
15 U
496
LG-12
10164262
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
2060
160 U
240
10 U
11 U
102000
113
36 U
157
2 U
1470 J
90 U
85000
673
0.05 UJ
58.5
400000
180 U
36 U
177000
15 U
377
LG-13
10164263
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
11300
180 U
3160
10 U
22
1210000
661
180
2870
2U
208000
100 U
707000
11100
0.707 J
297
2650000
200 U
41 U
906000
96
8470
LG-14
10164264
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
9490
150 U
2350
10 U
10 U
1180000
558
130
2090
2U
152000
84 U
580000
9810
0.495 J
239
2290000
170 U
34 U
830000
59.6
8650
LG-15
10164265
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
5640
160 U
803
10 U
11 U
387000
524
36 U
743
2 U
20300
91 U
294000
2410
0.25 UJ
74
1830000
180 U
36 U
687000
15 U
2920
See Table C6 notes on page 7 of 7.
Page 5 of 7
-------
Table C6: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Major Ions and Trace Inorganic Elements in Wells,
Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Alkalinity as CaCO,
Arsenic
Barium
Bromide
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Phosphorus, total
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Sulfate
Zinc
Method No.
2320B
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
245.1
365.1
200.7
200.7
200.7
200.7
300.0
200.7
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
ug/L
SP-01
10154271
WWTP
Liquid
444
45 U
107
0.213
3 U
71000
67.6
10 U
34.1
0.184
268
25 U
24600
29.6
0.05 UJ
6.87
21800
SOU
10 U
114000
88.2
130
SP-02
10154272
WWTP
Liquid
307
45 U
65.3
0.2 U
3 U
36500
42.8
10 U
51.5
0.784
1300
25 U
11200
75.6
1.21 J
6.14
20800
50 U
10 U
72300
13.5
193
SP-031
10154273
WWTP
Liquid
257
45 U
64.1
0.2 U
3 U
58900
489
10 U
63.1
0.534
674
25 U
19400
36.2
0.152 J
8.4
19100
50 U
10 U
230000
15.9
172
SP-041
10154274
WWTP
Liquid
255
45 U
30.7
0.2 U
3 U
24500
40.1
10 U
81
0.614
555
25 U
10700
26.4
0.072 J
8.37
15700
50 U
10 U
50300
21
121
See Table C6 notes on page 7 of 7.
Page 6 of 7
-------
Table C6: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Major Ions and Trace Inorganic Elements in Wells,
Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Samples were analyzed by the EPA Manchester Environmental Laboratory
Abbreviations
LG - Dairy waste lagoon
SP - wastewater treatment plant influent
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
mg/L = milligrams per liter
Data Qualifiers
< = less than
R = The data are unusable for all purposes.
UJ = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported estimated result. The associated numerical value is an estimate of the quantitation
limit of the analyte in this sample.
Notes
Samples SP-03 and SP-04 were collected at the same wastewater treatment plant at different times. Sample SP-04 was submitted to EPA's
Manchester Laboratory only and was analyzed for a subset of compounds as identified in the table.
Page 7 of 7
-------
Table C7: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Perchlorate in Wells
Location ID
WW-01
WW-02
WW-03
WW-04
WW-05
WW-06
WW-07
WW-08
WW-09
WW-10
WW-11
WW-12
WW-13
WW-14
WW-15
WW-16
WW-17
WW-18
WW-19
WW-20
WW-21
WW-22
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-26
WW-27
WW-28
WW-29
WW-30
Sample ID
10154201
10154202
10154203
10154204
10154205
10154206
10154207
10154208
10164209
10164210
10154211
10154212
10154213
10154214
10154215
10154216
10154217
10154218
10154219
10154220
10154221
10164222
10154223
10154224
10154225
10154226
10154227
10154228
10154229
10164230
Sample Type
Upgradient Well
Dairy Supply Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Upgradient Well
Dairy Supply Well
Dairy Supply Well
Dairy Supply Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Residential Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Downgradient Well
Field Blank
Residential Well
Result
0.135
0.493
1.96
1.38
0.547
0.06
0.231
1.4
0.003 U
0.003 U
0.915
1.68
1.17
1.84
1.76
3.08
2.9
2.3
3.25
1.31
0.978
1.74
1.36
3.42
1.98
1.44
0.556
4.69
0.003 U
1.07
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Center.
Abbreviations
WW - water well
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
Data Qualifiers
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported value.
Analytical Method
SW846 Method 6850, "Perchlorate in Soils, Water and Wastes Using High
performance Liquid Chromatography/Electrospray/Ionization (ESI) Mass
Spectroscopy (MS) or Tandem Mass Spectroscopy (MS/MS) .
Page 1 of 1
-------
Table C8: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Total Coliform, E. Coli, Fecal Coliform, and Microbial Source Tracking
in Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
WW-01
WW-02
WW-03
WW-04
WW-05
WW-06
WW-07
WW-08
WW-09
WW-10
WW-11
WW-12
WW-13
WW-14
WW-15
WW-16
WW-17
WW-18
WW-19
WW-20
WW-21
WW-22
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-26
WW-27
WW-28
WW-29
WW-30
LG-01
LG-02
LG-03
LG-04
LG-05
LG-06
LG-07
Sample ID
10154201
10154202
10154203
10154204
10154205
10154206
10154207
10154208
10164209
10164210
10154211
10154212
10154213
10154214
10154215
10154216
10154217
10154218
10154219
10154220
10154221
10164222
10154223
10154224
10154225
10154226
10154227
10154228
10154229
10164230
10154251
10154252
10154253
10154254
10154255
10154256
10154257
Sample Type
Upgradient Well - Dairy
Supply Well - Dairy
Downgradient Well - Dairy
Downgradient Well — Dairy
Downgradient Well - Dairy
Upgradient — Dairy
Supply Well - Dairy
Supply Well - Dairy
Supply Well - Dairy
Downgradient Well — Dairy
Downgradient Well - Dairy
Downgradient Well — Dairy
Downgradient Well - Dairy
Downgradient Well — Dairy
Downgradient Well - Dairy
Downgradient Well — Dairy
Downgradient Well - Dairy
Residential Well
Downgradient Well - Septic
Downgradient Well — Septic
Downgradient Well - Septic
Downgradient Well — Septic
Downgradient Well - Mint
Downgradient Well — Mint
Downgradient Well - Corn
Downgradient Well — Hops
Downgradient Well - Hops
Downgradient Well — Corn
Field Blank
Residential Well
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Sample Media
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Total
Coliform
<1
<1
<1
23.8
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Laboratory
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Cascade
Cascade
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Cascade
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Cascade
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Units
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Fecal Coliform
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<1
<1
<1
0
0
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
0
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
NA
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
> 16 million
2000
1800
5. 4 million
Laboratory
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Cascade
Cascade
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Cascade
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
NA
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Units
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
CFU/lOOml
CFU/lOOml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
CFU/lOOml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
NA
CFU/lOOml
CFU/lOOml
CFU/lOOml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
E.Coli
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
NA
NA
NA
>16 million (J)
2000 (J)
1800(J)
5. 4 million (J)
Laboratory
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Cascade
Cascade
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Cascade
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Cascade
NA
NA
NA
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Units
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
NA
NA
NA
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
BAC-32
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
CF-128
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
CF-193
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MST-
Contaminants
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
R
H/R
H/R
R
R
R
R
HF-183
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
P
ND
P
A
A
A
A
HF-134
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
A
P
A
A
A
A
A
Page 1 of 2
-------
Table C8: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Total Coliform, E. Coli, Fecal Coliform, and Microbial Source Tracking
in Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
LG-08
LG-09
LG-10
LG-11
LG-12
LG-13
LG-14
LG-15
SP-01
SP-02
SP-031
SP-041
Sample ID
10154258
10154259
10164260
10164261
10164262
10164263
10164264
10164265
10154271
10154272
10154273
10154274
Sample Type
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
Dairy Lagoon
WWTP Influent
WWTP Influent
WWTP Influent
WWTP Influent
Sample Media
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Total
Coliform
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Laboratory
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Units
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Fecal Coliform
130,000
79,000
1.1 billion
5.4 million
4.5 million
3.3 billion (J)
2.4 billion (J)
5.4 million
TNTC
9.2 million
>1.6 million
13 million
Laboratory
Manchester
Manchester
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Cascade
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Units
#/100ml
#/100ml
CFU/lOOml
CFU/lOOml
CFU/lOOml
CFU/lOOml
CFU/lOOml
CFU/lOOml
CFU/lOOml
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
E.Coli
130,000 (J)
79,000 (J)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5. 4 million (J)
>1.6 million (J)
13million(J)
Laboratory
Manchester
Manchester
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Manchester
Manchester
Manchester
Units
#/100ml
#/100ml
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
#/100ml
#/100ml
#/100ml
BAC-32
P
P
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
P
P
P
P
CF-128
P
P
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
A
A
A
P
CF-193
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
A
A
A
ND
MST-
Contaminants
R
H/R
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
H
H
H
H/R
HF-183
A
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
A
P
HF-134
A
P
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
P
P
P
A
Samples were analyzed by the EPA Manchester Environmental Laboratory.
Abbreviations
A = Absent
H = Human
MST - Microbial Source Tracking
NA = Not analyzed
ND = Not detected
P = Present
R = Ruminant
TNTC = Too numerous to count
WWTP - Wastewater Treatment Plant
BAC32: This is the screening Bacteroides biomarker. If it is present, further testing is done to determine the specific source. If the test is negative, nothing more is done.
CF128 and CF193: These are two separate biomarkers that identify the presence of ruminant fecal source. Between the two of them, they comprise most of the biomarkers that would be found in ruminants. There may be other biomarkers that could exist in very isolated populations of ruminants, but these two will identify the
majority. A "P" would identify detection of the biomarker in the particular sample, an "A" indicates absence of that biomarker in the sample.
HF134 and HF183: These are two separate biomarkers that identify the presence of human fecal source. As above, between the two of these biomarkers, the majority of human source will be detected. Again, a very isolated community might develop a different biomarker. A "P" would identify detection of the biomarker in the
particular sample, an "A" indicates absence of that biomarker in the sample.
MST- Microbial Source Tracking. MST contaminants: This identifies by two letter code the kind of fecal source was identified in the particular sample.GB indicates that although Bacteroides DNA was present, the source was neither human nor ruminant. An "A" indicates that no Bacteroides DNA was present in the sample. H
indicates human source; R indicates ruminant; H/R indicates that both were found in that sample. To be noted, where there is a species identification, there may be fecal contamination from other species present as well, but due to method limitations is not identified.
Units
#/100ml - number per 100 millilters
<1 - less than one organism
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an estimate.
Notes
'Samples SP-03 and SP-04 were collected at the same Wastewater treatment plant at different times. Sample SP-04 was submitted to EPA's Manchester Laboratory only and was analyzed for a subset of compounds as identified in the table.
Page 2 of 2
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
2,3,4,5-Tetrachlorophenol
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4-D
2,4-DB
3,5-Dichlorobenzoic acid
4-Nitrophenol
Acifluorfen
Alachlor
Atrazine
Azinphos-methyl
Bentazon
Benzonitrile, 2,6-dichloro-
Bromoxynil
Chloramben
Chlorpyrifos, Ethyl
Clopyralid
DACTHAL-DCPA
Diazinon
Dicamba
Dichlorprop
Diclofop, Methyl
Dinoseb
Diuron
Endosulfan I
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.5 U
0.2 U
0.5 UJ
0.5 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.5 UJ
0.5 U
0.1 UJ
0.015 J
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.2 UJ
0.1 UJ
1 UJ
0.5 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.5 U
0.1 U
0.5 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-02
10154202
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.49 U
0.2 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.041 J
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.2 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.99 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 U
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-03
10154203
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.49 U
0.2 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.098 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.2 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.98 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 U
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-04
10154204
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.1 U
0.49 U
0.19 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.015 J
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 U
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-05
10154205
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.1 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.11 J
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.95 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-06
10154206
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.5 U
0.2 U
0.5 UJ
0.5 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.5 UJ
0.5 U
0.1 UJ
0.026 J
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.2 UJ
0.1 UJ
1 UJ
0.5 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.5 U
0.1 U
0.5 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-07
10154207
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.1 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.012 NJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
Page 1 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan Sulfate
Fenhexamid
Fenpropathrin
Imidan
loxynil
Kresoxim-methyl
MCPA
MCPP
Metribuzin
Myclobutanil
Oxyfluorfen
Pendimethalin
Pentachlorophenol
Picloram
Propargite
Silvex
Simazine
SURFLAN
Terbacil
Trichlorpyr
Triflumizole
Trifluralin
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
0.1 U
0.4 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-02
10154202
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.99 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.99 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 UJ
1.97 UJ
2UJ
0.1 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-03
10154203
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.098 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.98 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.98 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
0.1 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-04
10154204
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
0.1 U
0.39 UJ
0.098 UJ
WW-05
10154205
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.95 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.95 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.1 U
0.38 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-06
10154206
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
0.1 U
0.4 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-07
10154207
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.096 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.1 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
See Table C9 notes on
page 15 of 15.
Page 2 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
2,3,4,5-Tetrachlorophenol
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4-D
2,4-DB
3,5-Dichlorobenzoic acid
4-Nitrophenol
Acifluorfen
Alachlor
Atrazine
Azinphos-methyl
Bentazon
Benzonitrile, 2,6-dichloro-
Bromoxynil
Chloramben
Chlorpyrifos, Ethyl
Clopyralid
DACTHAL-DCPA
Diazinon
Dicamba
Dichlorprop
Diclofop, Methyl
Dinoseb
Diuron
Endosulfan I
WW-08
10154208
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.1 U
0.47 U
0.19 U
0.47 UJ
0.47 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.47 UJ
0.47 U
0.095 UJ
0.095 UJ
0.095 UJ
0.036 J
0.095 UJ
0.1 U
0.19 UJ
0.095 UJ
0.95 UJ
0.47 UJ
0.095 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.47 U
0.1 U
0.47 U
0.095 UJ
0.095 UJ
WW-09
10164209
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.096 U
0.096 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 UJ
0.48 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-10
10164210
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.096 U
0.096 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.19UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 UJ
0.48 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-11
10154211
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.5 U
0.2 U
0.5 UJ
0.5 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.5 UJ
0.5 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.2 UJ
0.1 UJ
1 UJ
0.5 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.5 U
0.1 U
0.5 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-12
10154212
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.49 U
0.19 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.097 U
0.097 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.016 J
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 UJ
0.49 U
0.097 U
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-13
10154213
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.096 U
0.096 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.048 J
0.048 J
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 UJ
0.48 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-14
10154214
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.49 U
0.19 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.097 U
0.097 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.06 J
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.19UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 UJ
0.49 U
0.097 U
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
Page 3 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan Sulfate
Fenhexamid
Fenpropathrin
Imidan
loxynil
Kresoxim-methyl
MCPA
MCPP
Metribuzin
Myclobutanil
Oxyfluorfen
Pendimethalin
Pentachlorophenol
Picloram
Propargite
Silvex
Simazine
SURFLAN
Terbacil
Trichlorpyr
Triflumizole
Trifluralin
WW-08
10154208
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.095 UJ
0.095 UJ
0.95 UJ
0.095 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.1 U
0.095 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 U
0.095 UJ
0.095 UJ
0.095 UJ
0.095 UJ
0.1 U
0.95 UJ
0.095 UJ
0.19 U
0.09 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.1 U
0.38 UJ
0.095 UJ
WW-09
10164209
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.096 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-10
10164210
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9UJ
1.9UJ
0.096 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-11
10154211
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
0.1 U
0.4 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-12
10154212
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9UJ
1.9UJ
0.097 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-13
10154213
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.0063 J
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.096 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-14
10154214
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9UJ
1.9UJ
0.097 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
See Table C9 notes on
page 15 of 15.
Page 4 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
2,3,4,5-Tetrachlorophenol
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4-D
2,4-DB
3,5-Dichlorobenzoic acid
4-Nitrophenol
Acifluorfen
Alachlor
Atrazine
Azinphos-methyl
Bentazon
Benzonitrile, 2,6-dichloro-
Bromoxynil
Chloramben
Chlorpyrifos, Ethyl
Clopyralid
DACTHAL-DCPA
Diazinon
Dicamba
Dichlorprop
Diclofop, Methyl
Dinoseb
Diuron
Endosulfan I
WW-15
10154215
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.096 U
0.096 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.011 J
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 UJ
0.48 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-16
10154216
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.096 U
0.096 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 J
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 UJ
0.48 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-17
10154217
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.49 U
0.19 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.097 U
0.097 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 U
0.057 J
0.18 J
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 UJ
0.49 U
0.097 U
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-18
10154218
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.096 U
0.096 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.048 J
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 UJ
0.48 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-19
10154219
Downgradient
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.097 U
0.097 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 UJ
0.48 U
0.097 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-20
10154220
Downgradient
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.096 U
0.096 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.03 J
0.1 UJ
0.091 J
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 UJ
0.48 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-21
10154221
Downgradient
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.094 U
0.47 U
0.19 U
0.47 UJ
0.47 UJ
0.094 U
0.094 U
0.47 UJ
0.47 U
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 U
0.094 UJ
0.094 U
0.19UJ
0.094 UJ
0.94 UJ
0.47 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.47 U
0.094 U
0.47 U
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
Page 5 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan Sulfate
Fenhexamid
Fenpropathrin
Imidan
loxynil
Kresoxim-methyl
MCPA
MCPP
Metribuzin
Myclobutanil
Oxyfluorfen
Pendimethalin
Pentachlorophenol
Picloram
Propargite
Silvex
Simazine
SURFLAN
Terbacil
Trichlorpyr
Triflumizole
Trifluralin
WW-15
10154215
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9UJ
1.9UJ
0.096 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-16
10154216
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.096 U
0.38 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-17
10154217
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.097 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-18
10154218
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.096 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-19
10154219
Downgradient
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.097 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-20
10154220
Downgradient
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.096 U
0.38 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-21
10154221
Downgradient
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.94 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.19UJ
0.094 U
0.094 UJ
0.19 U
0.094 U
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 U
0.94 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.19 U
0.09 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.094 U
0.38 UJ
0.094 UJ
See Table C9 notes on
page 15 of 15.
Page 6 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
2,3,4,5-Tetrachlorophenol
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4-D
2,4-DB
3,5-Dichlorobenzoic acid
4-Nitrophenol
Acifluorfen
Alachlor
Atrazine
Azinphos-methyl
Bentazon
Benzonitrile, 2,6-dichloro-
Bromoxynil
Chloramben
Chlorpyrifos, Ethyl
Clopyralid
DACTHAL-DCPA
Diazinon
Dicamba
Dichlorprop
Diclofop, Methyl
Dinoseb
Diuron
Endosulfan I
WW-22
10164222
Downgradient
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.094 U
0.47 U
0.19 U
0.47 UJ
0.47 UJ
0.094 U
0.094 U
0.47 UJ
0.47 U
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 U
0.094 UJ
0.094 U
0.19 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.94 UJ
0.47 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.47 U
0.094 U
0.47 U
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
WW-23
10154223
Downgradient
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.096 U
0.096 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.028 J
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 UJ
0.48 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-24
10154224
Downgradient Mint
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.49 U
0.2 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.017 J
0.1 UJ
0.033 J
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.2 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.98 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 U
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-25
10154225
Downgradient
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.49 U
0.19 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.097 U
0.097 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.03 NJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 UJ
0.49 U
0.097 U
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-26
10154226
Downgradient
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.097 U
0.097 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.025 J
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 UJ
0.48 U
0.097 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-27
10154227
Downgradient
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.097 U
0.097 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 UJ
0.48 U
0.097 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-28
10154228
Downgradient
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.097 U
0.097 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 UJ
0.48 U
0.097 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
Page 7 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan Sulfate
Fenhexamid
Fenpropathrin
Imidan
loxynil
Kresoxim-methyl
MCPA
MCPP
Metribuzin
Myclobutanil
Oxyfluorfen
Pendimethalin
Pentachlorophenol
Picloram
Propargite
Silvex
Simazine
SURFLAN
Terbacil
Trichlorpyr
Triflumizole
Trifluralin
WW-22
10164222
Downgradient
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.94 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.094 U
0.094 UJ
0.19 U
0.094 U
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.094 U
0.94 UJ
0.094 UJ
0.19 U
0.09 UJ
1.9UJ
1.88 UJ
0.094 U
0.38 UJ
0.094 UJ
WW-23
10154223
Downgradient
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9UJ
1.9UJ
0.096 U
0.38 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-24
10154224
Downgradient Mint
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.98 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 U
0.98 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 U
0.1 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
0.1 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-25
10154225
Downgradient
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
0.097 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-26
10154226
Downgradient
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9UJ
1.9UJ
0.097 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-27
10154227
Downgradient
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9UJ
1.9UJ
0.097 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-28
10154228
Downgradient
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.097 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
See Table C9 notes on
page 15 of 15.
Page 8 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
2,3,4,5-Tetrachlorophenol
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4-D
2,4-DB
3,5-Dichlorobenzoic acid
4-Nitrophenol
Acifluorfen
Alachlor
Atrazine
Azinphos-methyl
Bentazon
Benzonitrile, 2,6-dichloro-
Bromoxynil
Chloramben
Chlorpyrifos, Ethyl
Clopyralid
DACTHAL-DCPA
Diazinon
Dicamba
Dichlorprop
Diclofop, Methyl
Dinoseb
Diuron
Endosulfan I
WW-29
10154229
Field Blank
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.49 U
0.19 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.097 U
0.097 U
0.49 UJ
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.097 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.49 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.097 UJ
0.49 U
0.097 U
0.49 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-30
10164230
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.19 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.096 U
0.096 U
0.48 UJ
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.02 J
0.1 UJ
0.015 J
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.48 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 UJ
0.48 U
0.096 U
0.48 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
SO-01
10154231
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
96 U
96 U
96 U
96 U
96 UJ
37 J
96 U
96 U
97 U
96 UJ
720 U
720 U
720 UJ
96 U
720 U
96 U
96 UJ
720 U
96 U
7 J
720 U
4.9 J
96 U
96 U
96 UJ
720 UJ
720 U
SO-02
10154232
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
24 U
24 U
24 U
24 U
24 UJ
24 U
24 U
24 U
1400 J
24 UJ
20 U
1.1 J
20 UJ
24 U
20 U
24 U
24 UJ
1.3 J
24 U
24 U
20 U
24 U
24 U
24 U
24 UJ
3.2 J
20 U
SO-03
10154233
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
45 U
45 U
45 U
45 U
45 UJ
45 U
45 U
45 U
31 J
45 U
71 U
71 U
71 UJ
45 U
71 U
45 U
45 UJ
11 J
45 U
9 J
71 U
4.1 J
45 U
45 UJ
45 UJ
71 UJ
71 U
SO-04
10154234
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
22 U
22 U
22 U
22 U
22 UJ
22 U
22 U
22 U
1800 J
22 UJ
19 U
19 U
19 UJ
22 U
19 U
22 U
22 UJ
1.7 J
22 U
22 U
19 U
22 U
22 U
22 U
22 UJ
2.1 J
19 U
SO-05
10154235
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
37 U
37 U
37 U
37 U
37 UJ
37 U
37 U
37 U
37 UJ
37 UJ
62 U
62 U
62 UJ
37 U
62 U
37 U
37 UJ
8.6 J
36 J
28 J
62 U
3.8 J
37 U
37 U
37 UJ
8.3 J
62 U
SO-06
10154236
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 UJ
13 U
13 U
13 U
1700 J
13 UJ
23 U
23 U
23 UJ
13 U
23 U
13 U
13 UJ
5.9 J
13 U
13 U
23 U
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 UJ
23 UJ
23 U
Page 9 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan Sulfate
Fenhexamid
Fenpropathrin
Imidan
loxynil
Kresoxim-methyl
MCPA
MCPP
Metribuzin
Myclobutanil
Oxyfluorfen
Pendimethalin
Pentachlorophenol
Picloram
Propargite
Silvex
Simazine
SURFLAN
Terbacil
Trichlorpyr
Triflumizole
Trifluralin
WW-29
10154229
Field Blank
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.097 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.017 J
0.97 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
0.097 U
0.39 UJ
0.1 UJ
WW-30
10164230
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 UJ
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.096 U
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.096 U
0.96 UJ
0.1 UJ
0.19 U
0.1 UJ
1.9 UJ
1.9 UJ
0.096 U
0.19 UJ
0.1 UJ
SO-01
10154231
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
720 U
720 U
720 UJ
720 U
720 UJ
96 U
720 U
96 U
96 U
720 UJ
720 U
720 U
720 U
96 U
96 U
720 U
96 U
720 U
1400 UJ
720 U
96 U
720 U
720 U
SO-02
10154232
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
20 U
1.3 J
20 UJ
20 U
20 UJ
24 U
20 U
24 U
24 U
20 UJ
20 U
20 U
20 U
1 J
24 U
20 U
24 U
20 U
39 UJ
20 U
24 U
20 U
20 U
SO-03
10154233
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
71 U
71 U
71 UJ
71 U
71 UJ
45 U
71 U
45 U
45 U
71 UJ
71 U
71 U
71 U
0.9 J
45 U
71 U
45 U
71 U
140 UJ
71 U
45 U
71 U
71 U
SO-04
10154234
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
19 U
1.1 J
19 UJ
19 U
19 UJ
22 U
19 U
22 U
22 U
19 UJ
19 U
19 U
5.7 J
4.2 J
22 U
19 U
22 U
19 U
37 UJ
19 U
22 U
19 U
19 U
SO-05
10154235
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
62 U
62 U
62 UJ
62 U
62 UJ
37 U
62 U
37 U
37 U
62 UJ
62 U
62 U
62 U
1.9 J
37 U
62 U
37 U
62 U
120 UJ
62 U
37 U
62 U
62 U
SO-06
10154236
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
23 U
23 U
23 UJ
23 U
23 UJ
13 U
23 U
13 U
13 U
23 UJ
23 U
23 U
23 U
13 U
13 U
23 U
13 U
23 U
47 UJ
23 U
13 U
23 U
23 U
See Table C9 notes on
page 15 of 15.
Page 10 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
2,3,4,5-Tetrachlorophenol
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4-D
2,4-DB
3,5-Dichlorobenzoic acid
4-Nitrophenol
Acifluorfen
Alachlor
Atrazine
Azinphos-methyl
Bentazon
Benzonitrile, 2,6-dichloro-
Bromoxynil
Chloramben
Chlorpyrifos, Ethyl
Clopyralid
DACTHAL-DCPA
Diazinon
Dicamba
Dichlorprop
Diclofop, Methyl
Dinoseb
Diuron
Endosulfan I
SO-07
10164237
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
62 U
62 U
62 U
62 U
62 UJ
62 U
62 U
62 U
44 J
62 UJ
87 U
87 U
87 UJ
62 U
87 U
62 U
62 UJ
13 J
62 U
10 J
87 U
4.4 J
62 U
62 U
62 UJ
22 J
87 U
SO-08
10164238
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
11 U
11 U
11 U
11 U
11 UJ
11 U
11 U
11 U
300 J
11 UJ
23 U
23 U
23 UJ
11 U
23 U
11 U
11 UJ
1.5 J
11 U
11 U
23 U
11 U
11 U
11 U
11 UJ
2.6 J
23 U
SO-09
10164239
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
49 U
49 U
49 U
49 U
49 UJ
49 U
49 U
49 U
49 UJ
49 UJ
79 U
79 U
79 UJ
49 U
79 U
49 U
49 UJ
79 U
49 U
11 J
79 U
4 J
49 U
49 U
49 UJ
79 UJ
79 U
SO-10
10164240
Soil - Dairy
Application
T7io1H
Solid
ug/Kg
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 UJ
13 U
13 U
13 U
670 J
13 UJ
19 U
19 U
19 UJ
13 U
19 U
13 U
13 UJ
2.3 J
13 U
1 J
19 U
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 UJ
19 UJ
19 U
SO- 11
10154241
Soil - Mint
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 UJ
13 U
13 U
13 U
1100 J
13 UJ
26 U
26 U
26 UJ
38
0.5 J
13 U
13 UJ
26 U
13 U
13 U
26 U
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 UJ
7.9 J
26 U
SO-12
10154242
Soil - Mint
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
14 U
14 U
14 U
14 U
14 UJ
14 U
14 U
14 U
410 J
14 UJ
26 U
26 U
26 UJ
2 J
26 U
4.1 J
14 UJ
0.5 J
14 U
14 U
26 U
14 U
14 U
14 U
14 UJ
26 UJ
26 U
SO-13
10154243
Soil - Corn
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 UJ
69
12 U
12 U
590 J
12 UJ
22 U
1.6 J
22 UJ
12 U
22 U
12 U
12 UJ
22 U
12 U
12 U
22 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 UJ
22 UJ
22 U
SO-14
10154244
Soil - Corn
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 UJ
6.1 J
12 U
12 U
190 J
12 UJ
25 U
0.7 J
25 UJ
12 U
25 U
12 U
12 UJ
25 U
12 U
12 U
25 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 UJ
25 UJ
25 U
Page 11 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan Sulfate
Fenhexamid
Fenpropathrin
Imidan
loxynil
Kresoxim-methyl
MCPA
MCPP
Metribuzin
Myclobutanil
Oxyfluorfen
Pendimethalin
Pentachlorophenol
Picloram
Propargite
Silvex
Simazine
SURFLAN
Terbacil
Trichlorpyr
Triflumizole
Trifluralin
SO-07
10164237
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
87 U
87 U
87 UJ
87 U
87 UJ
62 U
87 U
62 U
62 U
87 UJ
87 U
87 U
87 U
3.2 J
62 U
87 U
62 U
87 U
170 UJ
87 U
62 U
87 U
87 U
SO-08
10164238
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
23 U
23 U
23 UJ
23 U
23 UJ
11 U
23 U
11 U
11 U
23 UJ
23 U
23 U
23 U
11 U
11 U
23 U
11 U
23 U
46 UJ
23 U
11 U
23 U
23 U
SO-09
10164239
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
79 U
79 U
79 UJ
79 U
79 UJ
49 U
79 U
49 U
49 U
79 UJ
79 U
79 U
79 U
49 U
49 U
79 U
49 U
79 U
160 UJ
79 U
49 U
79 U
79 U
SO-10
10164240
Soil - Dairy
Application
T7io1H
Solid
ug/Kg
19 U
19 U
19 UJ
19 U
19 UJ
13 U
19 U
13 U
13 U
19 UJ
19 U
19 U
19 U
1.7 J
13 U
19 U
13 U
19 U
39 UJ
19 U
13 U
19 U
19 U
SO- 11
10154241
Soil - Mint
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
26 U
26 U
26 UJ
26 U
26 UJ
13 U
26 U
13 U
13 U
26 UJ
2.7 J
470
2100
0.7 J
13 U
26 U
13 U
1.6 J
51 UJ
1700
13 U
26 U
3.1 J
SO-12
10154242
Soil - Mint
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
26 U
26 U
26 UJ
26 U
26 UJ
14 U
26 U
14 U
14 U
26 UJ
26 U
26 U
1100
13 J
14 U
26 U
14 U
26 U
52 UJ
7.8 J
14 U
26 U
26 U
SO-13
10154243
Soil - Corn
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
22 U
22 U
22 UJ
22 U
22 UJ
12 U
22 U
12 U
12 U
22 UJ
22 U
22 U
22 U
12 U
12 U
22 U
12 U
22 U
44 UJ
22 U
12 U
22 U
22 U
SO-14
10154244
Soil - Corn
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
25 U
25 U
25 UJ
25 U
25 UJ
12 U
25 U
12 U
12 U
25 UJ
25 U
25 U
25 U
0.5 J
12 U
25 U
12 U
25 U
50 UJ
25 U
12 U
25 U
25 U
See Table C9 notes on
page 15 of 15.
Page 12 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
2,3,4,5-Tetrachlorophenol
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
2,4,5-T
2,4, 5 -Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4-D
2,4-DB
3,5-Dichlorobenzoic acid
4-Nitrophenol
Acifluorfen
Alachlor
Atrazine
Azinphos-methyl
Bentazon
Benzonitrile, 2,6-dichloro-
Bromoxynil
Chloramben
Chlorpyrifos, Ethyl
Clopyralid
DACTHAL-DCPA
Diazinon
Dicamba
Dichlorprop
Diclofop, Methyl
Dinoseb
Diuron
Endosulfan I
SO-15
10154245
Soil - Hops
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 UJ
14
13 U
13 U
510 J
13 UJ
21 U
21 U
21 UJ
13 U
21 U
13 U
13 UJ
21 U
13 U
13 U
21 U
13 U
13 U
13 U
13 UJ
21 UJ
21 U
SO-16
10154246
Soil - Hops
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
10 U
10 U
10 U
10 U
10 UJ
7 J
10 U
10 U
410 J
10 UJ
18 U
18 U
18 UJ
10 U
18 U
10 U
10 UJ
18 U
10 U
10 U
18 U
10 U
10 U
10 U
10 UJ
3 J
18 U
Page 13 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan Sulfate
Fenhexamid
Fenpropathrin
Imidan
loxynil
Kresoxim-methyl
MCPA
MCPP
Metribuzin
Myclobutanil
Oxyfluorfen
Pendimethalin
Pentachlorophenol
Picloram
Propargite
Silvex
Simazine
SURFLAN
Terbacil
Trichlorpyr
Triflumizole
Trifluralin
SO-15
10154245
Soil - Hops
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
21 U
21 U
21 UJ
21 U
21 UJ
13 U
21 U
13 U
13 U
21 UJ
21 U
21 U
21 U
1.6 J
13 U
21 U
13 U
21 U
42 UJ
21 U
13 U
21 U
21 U
SO-16
10154246
Soil - Hops
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
18 U
18 U
18 UJ
18 U
18 UJ
10 U
18 U
10 U
10 U
18 UJ
26
13 J
18 U
8.3 J
10 U
18 U
10 U
18 U
36 UJ
18 U
10 U
18 U
18 U
See Table C9 notes on
page 15 of 15.
Page 14 of 15
-------
Table C9: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Pesticides in Wells,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, and Crop Soils
Samples analyzed by the EPA Manchester Environmental Laboratory
Abbreviations
SO - soil
WW - water well
NA - Not analyzed
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
mg/L = milligrams per liter
Analytical Method
US EPA Method 8270D
Data Qualifiers
< = less than
J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an estimate.
NJ = The analyte was detected at the reported level, the mass spectrum did not meet criteria. The reported value is an estimate.
R = The data are unusable for all purposes.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported value.
UJ = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported estimated result. The associated numerical value is an estimate of the quantitation limit
of the analyte in this sample.
Page 15 of 15
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
1,4-dichlorobenzene
1 -methylnaphthalene
2,2',4,4'-tetrabromodiphenyl ether
2,6-dimethylnaphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
3,4-dichlorophenyl isocyanate
3-beta-coprostanol
3-methyl- Ih-indole (skatol)
3-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyanisole (bha)
4-cumylphenol
4-n-octylphenol
4-nonylphenol monoethoxylate - total (npleo)
4-octylphenol diethoxylate (op2eo)
4-octylphenol monoethoxylate (opleo)
4-tert-octylphenol
5-methyl- Ih-benzotriazole
acetophenone
acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene ( ahtn)
anthracene
anthraquinone
atrazine
benz[a]pyrene
benzophenone
beta-sitosterol
beta-stigmastanol
bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (dehp)
bisphenol a
bromacil
bromoform
caffeine
camphor
carbaryl
carbazole
chlorpyrifos
cholesterol
cotinine
diazinon
dichlorvos
diethoxynonylphenols- total (np2eo)
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2.66
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-02
10154202
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-03
10154203
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
5.26
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-04
10154204
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-05
10154205
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-06
10154206
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
1.74 J
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-07
10154207
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
0.2 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-08
10154208
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.5 UJ
1 UJ
0.4 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.4 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 UJ
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-09
10164209
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.3 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.5 UJ
1 UJ
0.4 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.4 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 UJ
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
Pagel ofll
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
diethyl phthalate
d-limonene
fluoranthene
liexahydrohexamethyl cyclopentabenzopyran (hhcb)
indole
isoborneol
isophorone
isopropylbenzene (cumene)
isoquinoline
menthol
metalaxyl
methyl salicylate
metolachlor
n,n-diethyl-meta-toluamide (deet)
naphthalene
para-nonylphenol total
p-cresol
pentachlorophenol
phenanthrene
phenol
prometon
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
tri(2-butoxy ethyl) phosphate
tri(2-chloroethyl) phosphate
tri(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate
tributyl phosphate
triclosan
triethyl citrate (ethyl citrate)
triphenyl phosphate
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-02
10154202
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-03
10154203
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-04
10154204
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-05
10154205
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-06
10154206
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.585 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-07
10154207
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.242
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.175 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-08
10154208
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-09
10164209
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
See Table CIO notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 2 of 11
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
1,4-dichlorobenzene
1 -methylnaphthalene
2,2',4,4'-tetrabromodiphenyl ether
2,6-dimethylnaphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
3,4-dichlorophenyl isocyanate
3-beta-coprostanol
3-methyl- Ih-indole (skatol)
3-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyanisole (bha)
4-cumylphenol
4-n-octylphenol
4-nonylphenol monoethoxylate - total (npleo)
4-octylphenol diethoxylate (op2eo)
4-octylphenol monoethoxylate (opleo)
4-tert-octylphenol
5-methyl- Ih-benzotriazole
acetophenone
acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene ( ahtn)
anthracene
anthraquinone
atrazine
benz[a]pyrene
benzophenone
beta-sitosterol
beta-stigmastanol
bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (dehp)
bisphenol a
bromacil
bromoform
caffeine
camphor
carbaryl
carbazole
chlorpyrifos
cholesterol
cotinine
diazinon
dichlorvos
diethoxynonylphenols- total (np2eo)
WW-10
10164210
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-11
10154211
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.5 UJ
1 UJ
0.4 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.4 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2.77 J
0.4 UJ
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-12
10154212
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.5 UJ
1 UJ
0.4 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.4 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 UJ
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-13
10154213
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-14
10154214
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.5 UJ
1 UJ
0.4 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.4 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 UJ
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-15
10154215
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-16
10154216
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-17
10154217
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
1.03
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-18
10154218
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.5 UJ
1 UJ
0.4 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.4 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 UJ
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
Page 3 of 11
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
diethyl phthalate
d-limonene
fluoranthene
liexahydrohexamethyl cyclopentabenzopyran (hhcb)
indole
isoborneol
isophorone
isopropylbenzene (cumene)
isoquinoline
menthol
metalaxyl
methyl salicylate
metolachlor
n,n-diethyl-meta-toluamide (deet)
naphthalene
para-nonylphenol total
p-cresol
pentachlorophenol
phenanthrene
phenol
prometon
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
tri(2-butoxy ethyl) phosphate
tri(2-chloroethyl) phosphate
tri(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate
tributyl phosphate
triclosan
triethyl citrate (ethyl citrate)
triphenyl phosphate
WW-10
10164210
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-11
10154211
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-12
10154212
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-13
10154213
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-14
10154214
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-15
10154215
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-16
10154216
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-17
10154217
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-18
10154218
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
See Table CIO notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 4 of 11
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
1,4-dichlorobenzene
1 -methylnaphthalene
2,2',4,4'-tetrabromodiphenyl ether
2,6-dimethylnaphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
3,4-dichlorophenyl isocyanate
3-beta-coprostanol
3-methyl- Ih-indole (skatol)
3-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyanisole (bha)
4-cumylphenol
4-n-octylphenol
4-nonylphenol monoethoxylate - total (npleo)
4-octylphenol diethoxylate (op2eo)
4-octylphenol monoethoxylate (opleo)
4-tert-octylphenol
5-methyl- Ih-benzotriazole
acetophenone
acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene ( ahtn)
anthracene
anthraquinone
atrazine
benz[a]pyrene
benzophenone
beta-sitosterol
beta-stigmastanol
bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (dehp)
bisphenol a
bromacil
bromoform
caffeine
camphor
carbaryl
carbazole
chlorpyrifos
cholesterol
cotinine
diazinon
dichlorvos
diethoxynonylphenols- total (np2eo)
WW-19
10154219
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-20
10154220
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-21
10154221
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.3 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 R
1.6 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 R
1.6 R
0.5 R
1 R
0.4 R
1.6 UJ
0.4 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 R
1.6UJ
1.7UJ
2UJ
0.4 R
0.8 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.8 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
3.2 R
WW-22
10164222
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.5 UJ
1 UJ
0.4 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.4 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 UJ
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-23
10154223
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
1.6 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-24
10154224
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-25
10154225
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-26
10154226
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
Page 5 of 11
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
diethyl phthalate
d-limonene
fluoranthene
liexahydrohexamethyl cyclopentabenzopyran (hhcb)
indole
isoborneol
isophorone
isopropylbenzene (cumene)
isoquinoline
menthol
metalaxyl
methyl salicylate
metolachlor
n,n-diethyl-meta-toluamide (deet)
naphthalene
para-nonylphenol total
p-cresol
pentachlorophenol
phenanthrene
phenol
prometon
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
tri(2-butoxy ethyl) phosphate
tri(2-chloroethyl) phosphate
tri(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate
tributyl phosphate
triclosan
triethyl citrate (ethyl citrate)
triphenyl phosphate
WW-19
10154219
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-20
10154220
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-21
10154221
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
1.6 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.8 R
0.2 R
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.4 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
WW-22
10164222
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-23
10154223
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-24
10154224
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-25
10154225
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.713 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-26
10154226
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
See Table CIO notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 6 of 11
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
1,4-dichlorobenzene
1 -methylnaphthalene
2,2',4,4'-tetrabromodiphenyl ether
2,6-dimethylnaphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
3,4-dichlorophenyl isocyanate
3-beta-coprostanol
3-methyl- Ih-indole (skatol)
3-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyanisole (bha)
4-cumylphenol
4-n-octylphenol
4-nonylphenol monoethoxylate - total (npleo)
4-octylphenol diethoxylate (op2eo)
4-octylphenol monoethoxylate (opleo)
4-tert-octylphenol
5-methyl- Ih-benzotriazole
acetophenone
acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene ( ahtn)
anthracene
anthraquinone
atrazine
benz[a]pyrene
benzophenone
beta-sitosterol
beta-stigmastanol
bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (dehp)
bisphenol a
bromacil
bromoform
caffeine
camphor
carbaryl
carbazole
chlorpyrifos
cholesterol
cotinine
diazinon
dichlorvos
diethoxynonylphenols- total (np2eo)
WW-27
10154227
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
1.25 J
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-28
10154228
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.5 UJ
1 UJ
0.4 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.4 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 UJ
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-29
10154229
Field Blank
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.349 J
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
WW-30
10164230
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.3 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.5 UJ
1 U
0.4 U
1.6 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
1.7 U
2U
0.4 U
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.2 U
LG-01
10154251
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2U
2UJ
2U
2UJ
2UJ
2U
95.6 J
22.2 J
0.2 UJ
2U
2U
48 J
2U
2U
2U
1.6 UJ
2U
2U
2UJ
2U
2U
2UJ
2UJ
104 J
135 J
2U
2U
2U
2U
2UJ
2U
2U
2U
2U
243 J
0.8 UJ
2U
2U
66 J
LG-02
10154252
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
48.2 J
40.9 J
2UJ
2 R
2 R
39.5 J
2 R
2 R
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
77.6 J
77.5 J
2U
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2U
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
81.4 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
41.6 J
LG-03
10154253
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
62.9 J
146 J
2UJ
2 R
2 R
54.6 J
2 R
2 R
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
82 J
91.3 J
2U
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
121 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
41.8 J
LG-04
10154254
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2 R
2UJ
23.1 J
24.2 J
2UJ
2 R
2 R
2.32 J
2 R
0.7 J
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2 R
43.5 J
34.1 J
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
59.6 J
0.8 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2.16 J
LG-05
10154255
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2 R
1.6 UJ
4.22 J
3.56 J
2UJ
2 R
2 R
1.48 J
2 R
2 R
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2 R
7.07 J
4.38 J
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
1.02 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
12.3 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
LG-06
10154256
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2 R
2UJ
16.7 J
22.5 J
2UJ
2 R
2 R
10.1 J
2 R
2 R
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2 R
15.2 J
15.6 J
2UJ
2 R
0.8 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
25.9 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
LG-07
10154257
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2 R
2UJ
14.9 J
34.9 J
2UJ
2 R
2 R
8.09 J
2 R
2 J
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2 R
23.7 J
19.3 J
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
37.3 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
4.87 J
Page 7 of 11
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
diethyl phthalate
d-limonene
fluoranthene
liexahydrohexamethyl cyclopentabenzopyran (hhcb)
indole
isoborneol
isophorone
isopropylbenzene (cumene)
isoquinoline
menthol
metalaxyl
methyl salicylate
metolachlor
n,n-diethyl-meta-toluamide (deet)
naphthalene
para-nonylphenol total
p-cresol
pentachlorophenol
phenanthrene
phenol
prometon
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
tri(2-butoxy ethyl) phosphate
tri(2-chloroethyl) phosphate
tri(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate
tributyl phosphate
triclosan
triethyl citrate (ethyl citrate)
triphenyl phosphate
WW-27
10154227
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-28
10154228
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
1.6 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
WW-29
10154229
Field Blank
Water
ug/L
1.69
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.29
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.216
1.6 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.178 J
0.179 J
0.323
0.202 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.285
WW-30
10164230
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.6 U
0.2 U
1.42
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
LG-01
10154251
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2U
2U
2UJ
2U
2U
2U
2U
2U
2U
2U
2U
2.24 J
2U
2U
2UJ
2U
25600 J
32 U
2UJ
1970 J
2U
2UJ
2U
2U
2U
2U
2U
2U
2U
2 U
LG-02
10154252
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
0.22 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
35.5 J
5480 J
2 R
2 R
1100 J
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 J
2UJ
2 UJ
LG-03
10154253
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
1.01 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
49.8 J
9010 J
2 R
2 R
1360 J
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 UJ
LG-04
10154254
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
25.6 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
1110 J
2 R
2 R
147 J
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 UJ
LG-05
10154255
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2U
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
3.17 J
14.7 J
2 R
2 R
3.85 J
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2U
2UJ
2 UJ
LG-06
10154256
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
1.17 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
17.9 J
112 J
2 R
2 R
31.3 J
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 UJ
LG-07
10154257
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
20.1 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
1880 J
2 R
2 R
245 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 UJ
See Table CIO notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 8 of 11
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
1,4-dichlorobenzene
1 -methylnaphthalene
2,2',4,4'-tetrabromodiphenyl ether
2,6-dimethylnaphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
3,4-dichlorophenyl isocyanate
3-beta-coprostanol
3-methyl- Ih-indole (skatol)
3-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyanisole (bha)
4-cumylphenol
4-n-octylphenol
4-nonylphenol monoethoxylate - total (npleo)
4-octylphenol diethoxylate (op2eo)
4-octylphenol monoethoxylate (opleo)
4-tert-octylphenol
5-methyl- Ih-benzotriazole
acetophenone
acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene ( ahtn)
anthracene
anthraquinone
atrazine
benz[a]pyrene
benzophenone
beta-sitosterol
beta-stigmastanol
bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (dehp)
bisphenol a
bromacil
bromoform
caffeine
camphor
carbaryl
carbazole
chlorpyrifos
cholesterol
cotinine
diazinon
dichlorvos
diethoxynonylphenols- total (np2eo)
LG-08
10154258
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
30 UJ
30 UJ
30 U
30 UJ
30 UJ
30 U
200 J
373 J
2UJ
30 U
30 U
165 J
48.4
30 U
30 U
2UJ
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
30 UJ
219 J
292 J
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
377 J
2UJ
30 U
30 U
46.5 J
LG-09
10154259
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2 R
2UJ
37.6 J
170 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
45.9 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2 R
56.6 J
52 J
2UJ
0.4 UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
78.3 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
3.2 UJ
LG-10
10164260
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.3 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 R
1.6 UJ
12 J
6.93 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
23.8 J
0.5 UJ
1 UJ
0.4 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.4 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 R
14.6 J
12.5 J
4.58 J
0.4 UJ
0.8 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.28 J
34 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
76.4 J
0.8 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
36.4 J
LG-11
10164261
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.3 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 R
1.6 UJ
2.82 J
45.4 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
3.14 J
0.5 UJ
1 UJ
0.4 UJ
1.6 UJ
0.4 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 R
2.41 J
2.73 J
2U
0.4 UJ
0.8 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
3.83 J
0.8 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
2.24 J
LG-12
10164262
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.3 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 R
1.6 UJ
2.6 J
48.3 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 R
3.06 J
0.5 R
1 R
0.4 R
1.6 UJ
0.4 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 R
2.22 J
2.64 J
2UJ
0.4 R
0.8 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
3.71 J
0.8 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
2.02 J
LG-13
10164263
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
30 U
30 UJ
30 U
3.41 J
30 UJ
30 U
591 J
1360 J
2UJ
30 U
30 U
745 J
30 U
30 U
30 U
1.6 UJ
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
30 UJ
613 J
535 J
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
808 J
0.8 UJ
30 U
30 U
293 J
LG-14
10164264
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
30 UJ
30 UJ
30 U
2.01 J
30 UJ
30 U
356 J
1170 J
2UJ
30 U
30 U
559 J
30 U
30 U
30 U
2UJ
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
30 UJ
312 J
260 J
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
406 J
2UJ
30 U
30 U
247 J
LG-15
10164265
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2 R
2 R
2UJ
46.8 J
330 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
166 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
2 R
77.6 J
45.3 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
114 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
55.3 J
SP-01
10154271
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
2.42 J
2UJ
2U
2UJ
2UJ
2U
227 J
3.89 J
3.75 J
2U
2U
2.66 J
2UJ
1.77 J
1.02 J
2UJ
0.74 J
0.41 J
2UJ
2U
2U
2UJ
1.03 J
19.3 J
7.94 J
4.35 J
2 J
2U
2U
81.3
1.79 J
2U
2U
2U
77.5 J
0.8 UJ
2U
2U
8.84 J
SP-02
10154272
WTTP
Liquid
ug/L
2.18 J
0.2 UJ
0.3 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 U
75.9 J
2.97 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.49 R
2.86 R
7.9 U
1 R
0.34 J
1.6UJ
0.24 J
5.25 U
0.2 UJ
9.98 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.41 J
19 J
19.9 J
3.95 J
0.4 R
2.34 U
0.2 U
8.59
0.4 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
118 J
0.8 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
11.2 J
SP-03
10154273
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
1.42 J
0.2 UJ
0.3 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.6 U
166 J
4.06 J
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 R
1.6 R
4.45
0.73 J
0.4 R
1.6 UJ
0.4 R
0.28 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.49 J
24.3 U
8.04 J
2.42 J
0.4 R
0.8 U
0.2 U
18.1
1.07 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
182 J
0.8 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
15.6 J
SP-04
10154274
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Page 9 of 11
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
diethyl phthalate
d-limonene
fluoranthene
liexahydrohexamethyl cyclopentabenzopyran (hhcb)
indole
isoborneol
isophorone
isopropylbenzene (cumene)
isoquinoline
menthol
metalaxyl
methyl salicylate
metolachlor
n,n-diethyl-meta-toluamide (deet)
naphthalene
para-nonylphenol total
p-cresol
pentachlorophenol
phenanthrene
phenol
prometon
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
tri(2-butoxy ethyl) phosphate
tri(2-chloroethyl) phosphate
tri(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate
tributyl phosphate
triclosan
triethyl citrate (ethyl citrate)
triphenyl phosphate
LG-08
10154258
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
30 U
30 U
30 U
1.06 J
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
81.2 J
9600 J
60 U
30 UJ
2930 J
30 U
30 UJ
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
LG-09
10154259
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2 UJ
2 UJ
2 R
2UJ
13 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
18.1 J
4690 J
2UJ
2 R
1120 J
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 UJ
LG-10
10164260
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
15.1 J
12.2 J
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
6.46
37.2 J
5.33 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
7.16 J
787 J
0.8 UJ
0.2 R
56.6 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.4 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
1.47 J
LG-11
10164261
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 U
4.04 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
37.4 J
889 J
0.8 UJ
0.2 R
66.6 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.4 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
LG-12
10164262
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
4.57 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
32.1 J
1350 J
0.8 R
0.2 R
125 J
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
0.4 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
LG-13
10164263
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
30 U
30 U
30 U
2.36 J
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
328 J
10800 J
1.6 U
30 UJ
4600 J
30 U
30 UJ
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
LG-14
10164264
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
30 U
0.89 J
30 UJ
30 U
30 U
30 U
2.12 J
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 UJ
233 J
8970 J
30 U
30 UJ
2760 J
30 U
30 UJ
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
30 U
LG-15
10164265
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
2 UJ
2 UJ
2 R
2UJ
6.68 J
2UJ
1.26 J
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 R
129 J
935 J
2UJ
2 R
1780 J
2UJ
2 R
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2UJ
2 UJ
SP-01
10154271
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
8.03 J
4.92
2 UJ
3.5
3.4 J
2 J
2U
2U
2U
24.5 J
2U
1.06
2U
0.99 J
2UJ
3.9 J
69.4 J
2U
2UJ
16.4 J
2U
2UJ
2U
1.86
0.41 J
39.5 J
0.2 U
6.19
1.56 J
2 U
SP-02
10154272
WTTP
Liquid
ug/L
4.03 J
2.3 J
0.2 UJ
5.95 J
18.1 J
0.4 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.9 U
8.6 J
0.2 U
0.31 J
0.37 U
0.48 U
0.2 UJ
2.79 U
11.4 J
1.6 R
0.2 UJ
6.84 R
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.4 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.62 J
0.35 J
0.2 U
SP-03
10154273
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
1.83 J
7.74 J
0.39 J
3.2 J
1.81 J
1.02 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
15.3 J
0.2 U
1.28 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
1.74 J
27.8 J
0.8 R
0.2 UJ
12.8 J
0.2 U
0.24 J
0.4 U
2.06 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
3.53 J
0.72 J
0.2 U
SP-04
10154274
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
See Table CIO notes on page 11 of 11.
PagelOofll
-------
Table CIO: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Trace Organics in
Wells, Lagoons, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Samples were analyzed by the United States Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory.
Abbreviations
WWTP - Wastewater Treatment Plant Influent
NA - Not Analyzed
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
Analytical Method
United States Geological Survey (USGS) Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the "Analysis of Waste Water Samples by Gas Chromatography/Mass
Spectroscopy" - USGS SOPs 1433 and 4433.
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an estimate.
R = The data are unusable for all purposes.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported value.
UJ = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported estimated result. The associated numerical value is an estimate of the quantitation limit of the analyte
in this sample.
Page 11 of 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound and Description Units
Acetaminophen - pain reliever
Amphetamine - psychostimulant
Azithromycin - antibiotics
Caffeine - stimulant
Carbamazepine - anticonvulsant
Cotinine - metabolite of nicotine
DEBT - insect repellent
Diphenhydramine - antihistimine
Ibuprofen - pain reliever
Methamphetamine - psychostimulant
Naproxen - anti-inflamatoryh
Paraxanthine - stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Thiabendazole - parasiticide (mintezol)
Triclosan - antibacterial
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-02
10154202
Dairy
Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-03
10154203
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-04
10154204
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-05
10154205
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-06
10154206
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-07
10154207
Dairy
Supply Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
See Table Cll notes on page 11 of 11.
Page lof 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound and Description Units
Acetaminophen - pain reliever
Amphetamine - psychostimulant
Azithromycin - antibiotics
Caffeine - stimulant
Carbamazepine - anticonvulsant
Cotinine - metabolite of nicotine
DEBT - insect repellent
Diphenhydramine - antihistimine
Ibuprofen - pain reliever
Methamphetamine - psychostimulant
Naproxen - anti-inflamatoryh
Paraxanthine - stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Thiabendazole - parasiticide (mintezol)
Triclosan - antibacterial
WW-08
10154208
Dairy
Supply Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-09
10164209
Dairy
Supply Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-10
10164210
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.67
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-11
10154211
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-12
10154212
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-13
10154213
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-14
10154214
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
See Table Cll notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 2 of 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound and Description Units
Acetaminophen - pain reliever
Amphetamine - psychostimulant
Azithromycin - antibiotics
Caffeine - stimulant
Carbamazepine - anticonvulsant
Cotinine - metabolite of nicotine
DEBT - insect repellent
Diphenhydramine - antihistimine
Ibuprofen - pain reliever
Methamphetamine - psychostimulant
Naproxen - anti-inflamatoryh
Paraxanthine - stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Thiabendazole - parasiticide (mintezol)
Triclosan - antibacterial
WW-15
10154215
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-16
10154216
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-17
10154217
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-18
10154218
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-19
10154219
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-20
10154220
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
See Table Cll notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 3 of 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound and Description Units
Acetaminophen - pain reliever
Amphetamine - psychostimulant
Azithromycin - antibiotics
Caffeine - stimulant
Carbamazepine - anticonvulsant
Cotinine - metabolite of nicotine
DEBT - insect repellent
Diphenhydramine - antihistimine
Ibuprofen - pain reliever
Methamphetamine - psychostimulant
Naproxen - anti-inflamatoryh
Paraxanthine - stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Thiabendazole - parasiticide (mintezol)
Triclosan - antibacterial
WW-21
10154221
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-22
10164222
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-23
10154223
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-24
10154224
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-25
10154225
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
See Table Cl 1 notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 4 of 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound and Description Units
Acetaminophen - pain reliever
Amphetamine - psychostimulant
Azithromycin - antibiotics
Caffeine - stimulant
Carbamazepine - anticonvulsant
Cotinine - metabolite of nicotine
DEBT - insect repellent
Diphenhydramine - antihistimine
Ibuprofen - pain reliever
Methamphetamine - psychostimulant
Naproxen - anti-inflamatoryh
Paraxanthine - stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Thiabendazole - parasiticide (mintezol)
Triclosan - antibacterial
WW-26
10154226
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-27
10154227
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-28
10154228
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-29
10154229
Field Blank
Water
ug/L
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 UJ
0.2 UJ
0.2 R
WW-30
10164230
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LG-01
10154251
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
4.7 J
0.2 U
See Table Cll notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 5 of 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound and Description Units
Acetaminophen - pain reliever
Amphetamine - psychostimulant
Azithromycin - antibiotics
Caffeine - stimulant
Carbamazepine - anticonvulsant
Cotinine - metabolite of nicotine
DEBT - insect repellent
Diphenhydramine - antihistimine
Ibuprofen - pain reliever
Methamphetamine - psychostimulant
Naproxen - anti-inflamatoryh
Paraxanthine - stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Thiabendazole - parasiticide (mintezol)
Triclosan - antibacterial
LG-02
10154252
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
LG-03
10154253
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.42 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
LG-04
10154254
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.36 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
LG-05
10154255
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
LG-06
10154256
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
LG-07
10154257
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.3
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
LG-08
10154258
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.2 U
2.3
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.9 J
0.2 U
LG-09
10154259
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.4 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
See Table Cll notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 6 of 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound and Description Units
Acetaminophen - pain reliever
Amphetamine - psychostimulant
Azithromycin - antibiotics
Caffeine - stimulant
Carbamazepine - anticonvulsant
Cotinine - metabolite of nicotine
DEBT - insect repellent
Diphenhydramine - antihistimine
Ibuprofen - pain reliever
Methamphetamine - psychostimulant
Naproxen - anti-inflamatoryh
Paraxanthine - stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Thiabendazole - parasiticide (mintezol)
Triclosan - antibacterial
LG-10
10164260
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.48 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
LG-11
10164261
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.61 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.3 J
0.2 U
LG-12
10164262
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.58 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
LG-13
10164263
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.67 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
LG-14
10164264
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.78 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.8 J
0.2 U
LG-15
10164265
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
0.45 J
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 R
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
0.2 U
SP-01
10154271
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
32
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
1.5
1.6
0.5
22 J
0.2 U
11
0.2 U
0.57 J
1 J
SP-02
10154272
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
17
0.2 U
0.2 U
42 J
0.2 U
0.59
1.6
0.2 U
110 J
0.2 U
13
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
1.5 J
See Table Cll notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 7 of 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound and Description Units
Acetaminophen - pain reliever
Amphetamine - psychostimulant
Azithromycin - antibiotics
Caffeine - stimulant
Carbamazepine - anticonvulsant
Cotinine - metabolite of nicotine
DEBT - insect repellent
Diphenhydramine - antihistimine
Ibuprofen - pain reliever
Methamphetamine - psychostimulant
Naproxen - anti-inflamatoryh
Paraxanthine - stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Thiabendazole - parasiticide (mintezol)
Triclosan - antibacterial
SP-03
10154273
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
83
0.2 U
0.2 U
46 J
0.2 U
2.2
0.88
0.9
91 J
0.2 U
59
0.2 U
0.2 UJ
2.5 J
SP-04
10154274
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
SO-01
10154231
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
SOU
50 U
50 U
SO-02
10154232
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
SOU
50 U
50 U
SO-03
10154233
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
SOU
50 U
50 U
SO-04
10154234
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
SOU
50 U
50 U
SO-05
10154235
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
SOU
50 U
50 U
See Table Cll notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 8 of 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound and Description Units
Acetaminophen - pain reliever
Amphetamine - psychostimulant
Azithromycin - antibiotics
Caffeine - stimulant
Carbamazepine - anticonvulsant
Cotinine - metabolite of nicotine
DEBT - insect repellent
Diphenhydramine - antihistimine
Ibuprofen - pain reliever
Methamphetamine - psychostimulant
Naproxen - anti-inflamatoryh
Paraxanthine - stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Thiabendazole - parasiticide (mintezol)
Triclosan - antibacterial
SO-06
10154236
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
100
50
NA
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
SO-07
10164237
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
SO-08
10164238
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
SOU
50 U
50 U
SO-09
10164239
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
SO-10
10164240
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
SOU
50 U
50 U
SO-11
10154241
Application
Field-Mint
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
SO-12
10154242
Application
Field-Mint
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
See Table Cll notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 9 of 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound and Description Units
Acetaminophen - pain reliever
Amphetamine - psychostimulant
Azithromycin - antibiotics
Caffeine - stimulant
Carbamazepine - anticonvulsant
Cotinine - metabolite of nicotine
DEBT - insect repellent
Diphenhydramine - antihistimine
Ibuprofen - pain reliever
Methamphetamine - psychostimulant
Naproxen - anti-inflamatoryh
Paraxanthine - stimulant (metabolite of caffeine)
Thiabendazole - parasiticide (mintezol)
Triclosan - antibacterial
SO-13
10154243
Application
Field-Corn
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
SO-14
10154244
Application
Field-Corn
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
SO- 15
10154245
Application
Field-Hops
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
SOU
sou
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
50 U
SOU
SOU
50 U
SO-16
10154246
Application
Field-Hops
Solid
ug/Kg
100 U
50 U
NA
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
See Table Cll notes on page 11 of 11.
Page 10 of 11
-------
Table Cll: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Wastewater Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Wastewater pharmaceutical analyses were conducted by the University of Nebraska Water Sciences Laboratory in Lincoln, Nebraska.
Abbreviations
LG - Dairy waste lagoon
NA - Not analyzed
SOP- Standard Operating Procedure
SP - wastewater treatment plant influent
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
ug/Kg = micrograms per kilogram
Analytical Methods
Liquids: UNL LC/MS SOP- LCQ-Wastewater-OOl'Ttefenw/'wartow of antibiotics in water and wastewater using off- line solid phase
extraction liquid chromatography (LC) - atmospheric pressure electro spray ionization ion trap mass spectrometry (MS) ".
Solids: UNL SOP-LCQ-Wastesolid-001 "Determination of antibiotics in solid samples by microwave-assisted solvent extraction (MASK),
solid-phase extraction (SPE) and isotope dilution liquid chromatography (LC)- atmospheric pressure electro spray ionization ion trap
mass spectrometry (MS) ".
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an estimate.
R = The data are unusable for all purposes.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported value.
UJ = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported estimated result. The associated numerical value is an estimate of the
quantitation limit of the analyte in this sample.
Page 11 of 11
-------
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Chlortetracycline (total)
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Oxytetracycline
Ractopamine
Sulfachloropyridazine
Sulfadimethoxine
Sulfamerazine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethazole
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracyline
Tiamulin
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.027
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-02
10154202
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-03
10154203
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.028
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.041 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-04
10154204
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.049
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.023
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.075 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-05
10154205
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.022
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-06
10154206
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.051 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-07
10154207
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.04 U
0.109
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.041 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.023 J
See Table C12 notes on
page 10 of 10.
Page 1 of 10
-------
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Chlortetracycline (total)
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Oxytetracycline
Ractopamine
Sulfachloropyridazine
Sulfadimethoxine
Sulfamerazine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethazole
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracyline
Tiamulin
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
WW-08
10154208
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
5.17
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-09
10164209
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.023
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-10
10164210
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.499
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-11
10154211
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.038
0.02 U
0.029
0.02 U
WW-12
10154212
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-13
10154213
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.085 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.041
WW-14
10154214
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.073 U
0.033
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.024
See Table C12 notes on
page 10 of 10.
Page 2 of 10
-------
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Chlortetracycline(total)
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Oxytetracycline
Ractopamine
Sulfachloropyridazine
Sulfadimethoxine
Sulfamerazine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethazole
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracyline
Tiamulin
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
WW-15
10154215
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.119
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.393 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-16
10154216
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-17
10154217
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.049
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-18
10154218
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.03 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-19
10154219
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
1.62
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-20
10154220
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.04 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-21
10154221
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.11
0.371
0.194
0.02 U
0.079
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.053
0.02 U
0.04
0.051
0.02 U
0.05
0.02 U
0.162
See Table C12 notes on
page 10 of 10.
Page 3 of 10
-------
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Chlortetracycline(total)
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Oxytetracycline
Ractopamine
Sulfachloropyridazine
Sulfadimethoxine
Sulfamerazine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethazole
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracyline
Tiamulin
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
WW-22
10164222
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.038 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-23
10154223
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-24
10154224
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-25
10154225
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.023 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-26
10154226
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.185
0.376
0.319
0.2
0.061
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.055
0.02 U
0.041 U
0.037
0.02 U
0.029
0.02 U
0.084
WW-27
10154227
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
See Table C12 notes on
page 10 of 10.
Page 4 of 10
-------
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Chlortetracycline(total)
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Oxytetracycline
Ractopamine
Sulfachloropyridazine
Sulfadimethoxine
Sulfamerazine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethazole
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracyline
Tiamulin
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
WW-28
10154228
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-29
10154229
Field Blank
Water
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.059
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
WW-30
10164230
Residential
Well
ug/L
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LG-01
10154251
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
44.97 J
0.02 R
0.081 J
0.02 UJ
0.38 J
0.02 UJ
0.071 J
0.06 J
0.02 UJ
0.305 J
1.96 J
0.02 UJ
0.381 J
0.02 UJ
LG-02
10154252
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.067 J
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
1086 J
0.02 R
0.085 J
0.02 UJ
4.68 J
0.117 J
0.109 J
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.312 J
5.83 J
0.02 UJ
1.85 J
0.02 UJ
LG-03
10154253
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
420 J
0.02 R
0.078 J
0.02 UJ
2.18 J
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.216 J
2.88 J
0.02 UJ
1.12 J
0.02 UJ
LG-04
10154254
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
LG-05
10154255
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.075 J
0.916 J
3.55 J
430.2 J
1.24 J
0.04 J
1.21 J
0.322 J
0.068 J
1.5 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.137 J
4.48 J
0.02 R
1.7 J
0.334 J
See Table C12 notes on
page 10 of 10.
Page 5 of 10
-------
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Chlortetracycline (total)
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Oxytetracycline
Ractopamine
Sulfachloropyridazine
Sulfadimethoxine
Sulfamerazine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethazole
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracyline
Tiamulin
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
LG-06
10154256
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
8.5 J
463.8 J
4.49 J
0.02 R
0.157 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.17 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.829 J
5.41 J
0.02 R
10.22 J
0.02 R
LG-07
10154257
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.095 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.442 J
0.02 R
0.184 J
0.02 R
LG-08
10154258
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
449.6 J
0.929 J
0.02 R
0.254 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.39 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.872 J
6.07 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
LG-09
10154259
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
1.87 J
0.02 R
337.7 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
2.07 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
3.6 J
0.02 R
1.07 J
0.02 R
LG-10
10164260
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.079 J
0.02 R
1.7 J
2.24 J
0.02 R
0.048 J
0.043 J
0.065 J
0.02 R
0.077 J
0.114 J
0.133 J
0.038 J
6.55 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.816 J
LG-11
10164261
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
2 J
2.64 J
85 J
0.02 R
0.066 J
0.156 J
0.841 J
0.02 R
0.064 J
0.02 R
0.269 J
0.089 J
1.76 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.413 J
LG-12
10164262
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
1.11 J
1.54 J
135 J
0.02 R
0.046 J
0.172 J
0.875 J
0.02 R
0.07 J
0.02 R
0.264 J
0.065 J
1.91 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.314 J
LG-13
10164263
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
1.3 J
3.37 J
662 J
0.02 R
0.081 J
0.32 J
4.13 J
0.02 R
0.108 J
0.148 J
0.02 R
0.24 J
10.3 J
0.079 J
0.139 J
0.184 J
LG-14
10164264
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
0.02 R
2.04 J
498 J
0.02 R
0.056 J
0.16 J
3.65 J
0.02 R
0.139 J
0.02 R
0.031 J
0.061 J
8.6 J
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
See Table C12 notes on
page 10 of 10.
Page 6 of 10
-------
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Chlortetracycline (total)
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Oxytetracycline
Ractopamine
Sulfachloropyridazine
Sulfadimethoxine
Sulfamerazine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethazole
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracyline
Tiamulin
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
LG-15
10164265
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
4.35 J
1.71 J
426 J
0.02 R
0.06 J
0.658 J
2.98 J
0.028 J
0.601 J
1.27 J
0.037 J
0.135 J
7.55 J
0.132 J
0.02 R
1 J
SP-01
10154271
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 R
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 R
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.021 J
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.55 J
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
0.02 UJ
SP-02
10154272
WTTP
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 UJ
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 UJ
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.106 J
0.02 R
0.02 UJ
0.02 R
0.02 R
0.02 R
SP-03
1E+07
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.086
0.02 U
0.662
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
SP-04
10154274
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
SO-01
10154231
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
0.5 U
0.5 U
17.1
441
4.5
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
178
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-02
10154232
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
45.6
0.5 U
0.5 U
2.9
2.4
0.5 U
0.5 U
1
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
26.9
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-03
10154233
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
0.7
2.1
1.5
109
251
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
954
0.5 U
14.8
0.5 U
See Table C12 notes on
page 10 of 10.
Page 7 of 10
-------
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Chlortetracycline(total)
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Oxytetracycline
Ractopamine
Sulfachloropyridazine
Sulfadimethoxine
Sulfamerazine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethazole
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracyline
Tiamulin
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
SO-04
10154234
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
0.6
0.5 U
0.5 U
5.1
3.2
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.9
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
27.4
0.5 U
2.1
0.5 U
SO-05
10154235
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
17.7
3.1
0.5 U
1329
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
7.7
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
17.9
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-06
10154236
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
3
0.5 U
0.5 U
5.1
3.3
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
16.5
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-07
10164237
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
2303
0.5 U
0.5 U
283
134
0.5 U
0.5 U
6.8
0.5 U
2
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
2484
0.5 U
21.1
0.5
SO-08
10164238
Soil - Dairy
Application Field
Solid
ug/Kg
13.5
0.5 U
0.5 U
7.9
2.4
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
104
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-09
10164239
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
0.5 U
0.5 U
6.9
437
2.1
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
309
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-10
10164240
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
7
2.4
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.6
0.7
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
53
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
See Table C12 notes on
page 10 of 10.
Page 8 of 10
-------
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
Chlortetracycline (total)
Erythromycin
Lincomycin
Monensin
Oxytetracycline
Ractopamine
Sulfachloropyridazine
Sulfadimethoxine
Sulfamerazine
Sulfamethazine
Sulfamethazole
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfathiazole
Tetracyline
Tiamulin
Tylosin
Virginiamycin
SO-11
10154241
Application
Field-Mint
Solid
ug/Kg
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
1.3
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-12
10154242
Application
Field-Mint
Solid
ug/Kg
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
4.3
1.4
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-13
10154243
Application
Field-Corn
Solid
ug/Kg
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-14
10154244
Application
Field-Corn
Solid
ug/Kg
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
1.3
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-15
10154245
Application
Field-Hops
Solid
ug/Kg
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
4.5
10.5
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
20.7
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
SO-16
10154246
Application
Field-Hops
Solid
ug/Kg
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.7
5.3
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
10.5
0.5 U
0.5
0.5 U
See Table C12 notes on
page 10 of 10.
Page 9 of 10
-------
Table C12: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Veterinary pharmaceutical analyses were conducted by the University of Nebraska Water Sciences Laboratory in Lincoln, Nebraska
(UNL).
Abbreviations
LG - dairy waste lagoon
NA - not analyzed
SO - solid
SOP- Standard Operating Procedure
SP - wastewater treatment plant influent
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
ug/Kg = micrograms per kilogram
Analytical Method
Liquids: UNL SOP "Analysis of veterinary pharmaceuticals in water samples using a Spark Holland symbiosis on-line CIS cartridge
solid phase extraction (SPE) and high pressure liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC/MS/MS) "; Document File
number: LCMS_VET_PHARM_WATER_001".
Solids: UNL SOP "Analysis of Steroids in solid samples (i.e. soils, manure, etc) by microwave-assisted solvent extraction (MASE) and
liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) " (SOP# Analyte-Steroids_Solids-001) " .
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an estimate.
R = The data are unusable for all purposes.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported value.
UJ = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported estimated result. The associated numerical value is an estimate of the
quantitation limit of the analyte in this sample.
Page 10 of 10
-------
Table C13: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Well, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Field, Wastewater Treatment Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
17-a-estradiol
1 7-a-ethynyl-estradiol
17-p-estradiol
Estriol
Estrone
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-02
10154202
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-03
10154203
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-04
10154204
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-05
10154205
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-06
10154206
Upgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-07
10154207
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-08
10154208
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-09
10164209
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-10
10164210
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-11
10154211
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-12
10154212
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
Samples were analyzed by the EPA Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Center.
Abbreviations
LG - Dairy waste Dairy Lagoon
SOP- Standard Operating Procedure
SP - wastewater treatment plant influent
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
Analytical Method
EPA SOP "Quantitation of Estrogens in
Groundwater and Animal Waste Lagoon Water
Using Solid Phase Extraction, Pentafluorobenzyl
and Trimethylsilyl Derivatization and Gas
Chromatography Negative Ion Chemical
lonization/Mass Spectrometry/Mass Spectrometry,
RSKSOP-253, Revision 2, October 2010".
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The
associated numerical value is an estimate.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the
reported value.
Pagel of 5
-------
Table C13: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Well, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Field, Wastewater Treatment Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
17-a-estradiol
1 7-a-ethynyl-estradiol
17-p-estradiol
Estriol
Estrone
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-13
10154213
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-14
10154214
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-15
10154215
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-16
10154216
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-17
10154217
Downgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-18
10154218
Residential
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-19
10154219
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-20
10154220
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-21
10154221
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-22
10164222
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14U
0.22 U
0.21 U
Samples were analyzed by the EPA Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Center.
Abbreviations
LG - Dairy waste Dairy Lagoon
SOP- Standard Operating Procedure
SP - wastewater treatment plant influent
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
Analytical Method
EPA SOP "Quantitation of Estrogens in
Groundwater and Animal Waste Lagoon Water
Using Solid Phase Extraction, Pentafluorobenzyl
and Trimethylsilyl Derivatization and Gas
Chromatography Negative Ion Chemical
lonization/Mass Spectrometry/Mass Spectrometry,
RSKSOP-253, Revision 2, October 2010".
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The
associated numerical value is an estimate.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the
reported value.
Page 2 of 5
-------
Table C13: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Well, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Field, Wastewater Treatment Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
1 7-a-estradiol
1 7-a-ethynyl-estradiol
17-p-estradiol
Estriol
Estrone
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-23
10154223
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-24
10154224
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-25
10154225
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-26
10154226
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-27
10154227
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-28
10154228
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-29
10154229
Field Blank
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
WW-30
10164230
Residential
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
LG-01
10154251
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
10320
38.3 U
86.8
8.8 U
2660
LG-02
10154252
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
1610
20 U
18 J
8.8 U
1920
Samples were analyzed by the EPA Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Center.
Abbreviations
LG - Dairy waste Dairy Lagoon
SOP- Standard Operating Procedure
SP - wastewater treatment plant influent
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
Analytical Method
EPA SOP "Quantitation of Estrogens in
Groundwater and Animal Waste Lagoon Water
Using Solid Phase Extraction, Pentafluorobenzyl
and Trimethylsilyl Derivatization and Gas
Chromatography Negative Ion Chemical
lonization/Mass Spectrometry/Mass Spectrometry,
RSKSOP-253, Revision 2, October 2010".
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The
associated numerical value is an estimate.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the
reported value.
Page 3 of 5
-------
Table C13: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Well, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Field, Wastewater Treatment Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
17-a-estradiol
1 7-a-ethynyl-estradiol
17-p-estradiol
Estriol
Estrone
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
LG-03
10154253
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
1590
20 U
21.3
8.8 U
1950
LG-04
10154254
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
3430
20 U
555
8.8 U
1100
LG-05
10154255
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
1100
20 U
44
8.8 U
3180
LG-06
10154256
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
1190
20 U
38.5
8.8 U
3300
LG-07
10154257
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
1730
20 U
38.2
8.8 U
592
LG-08
10154258
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
1200
20 U
25.4
8.8 U
1020
LG-09
10154259
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
1270
20 U
22.3
8.8 U
1050
LG-10
10164260
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
292
20 U
16 J
8.8 U
73
LG-11
10164261
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
570
20 U
12 J
8.8 U
453
LG-12
10164262
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
559
20 U
11 J
8.8 U
451
LG-13
10164263
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
1220
20 U
179
8.8 U
390
LG-14
10164264
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
1050
20 U
41
8.8 U
419
LG-15
10164265
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ng/L
792
20 U
25.3
8.8 U
830
Samples were analyzed by the EPA Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Center.
Abbreviations
LG - Dairy waste Dairy Lagoon
SOP- Standard Operating Procedure
SP - wastewater treatment plant influent
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
Analytical Method
EPA SOP "Quantitation of Estrogens in
Groundwater and Animal Waste Lagoon Water
Using SolidPhase Extraction, Pentafluorobenzyl
and Trimethylsilyl Derivatization and Gas
Chromatography Negative Ion Chemical
lonization/Mass Spectrometry/Mass Spectrometry,
RSKSOP-253, Revision 2, October 2010".
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The
associated numerical value is an estimate.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the
reported value.
Page 4 of 5
-------
Table C13: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Well, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Field, Wastewater Treatment Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
1 7-a-estradiol
1 7-a-ethynyl-estradiol
17-p-estradiol
Estriol
Estrone
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ng/L
0.21 U
0.16 U
0.14 U
0.22 U
0.21 U
SP-01
10154271
WWTP
Liquid
ng/L
7.6 U
6.4 U
21.1
1030
77.1
SP-02
10154272
WTTP
Liquid
ng/L
7.6 U
6.4 U
35.4
863
96.4
SP-03
10154273
WWTP
Liquid
ng/L
7.6 U
6.4 U
34.1
640
72.7
SP-04
10154274
WWTP
Liquid
ng/L
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Samples were analyzed by the EPA Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Center.
Abbreviations
LG - Dairy waste Dairy Lagoon
SOP- Standard Operating Procedure
SP - wastewater treatment plant influent
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
Analytical Method
EPA SOP "Quantitation of Estrogens in
Groundwater and Animal Waste Lagoon Water
Using Solid Phase Extraction, Pentafluorobenzyl
and Trimethylsilyl Derivatization and Gas
Chromatography Negative Ion Chemical
lonization/Mass Spectrometry/Mass Spectrometry,
RSKSOP-253, Revision2, October2010".
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The
associated numerical value is an estimate.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the
reported value.
Page5 of 5
-------
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
11-Keto Testosterone
17-a-Hydroxyprogesterone
17-a-trenbolone
17-p-estradiol
17-p-trenbolone
4-Androstenedione
17-a-estradiol
Androstadienedione
Androsterone
a-Zearalanol
a-Zearalenol
3-Zearalanol
3-Zearalenol
Epitestosterone
Estriol
Estrone
17-a-ethynyl-estradiol
Melengesterol Acetate
Progesterone
Testosterone
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.003 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.006 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.021
WW-02
10154202
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.016
WW-03
10154203
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.009
WW-04
10154204
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.003 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.003
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.012
WW-05
10154205
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.007
WW-06
10154206
Upgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.003 U
0.003
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.004 U
0.005
WW-07
10154207
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.005 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.004 U
0.002 U
WW-08
10154208
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.005 U
0.004 U
0.002 U
0.003
0.004 U
0.003
0.002 J
0.002 UJ
0.009 J
0.002 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.003
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.004 U
0.007 U
0.003
See Table C14 notes on page
10 of 10.
Page 1 of 10
-------
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
11-Keto Testosterone
17-a-Hydroxyprogesterone
17-a-trenbolone
17-p-estradiol
17-p-trenbolone
4-Androstenedione
17-a-estradiol
Androstadienedione
Androsterone
a-Zearalanol
a-Zearalenol
p-Zearalanol
p-Zearalenol
Epitestosterone
Estriol
Estrone
17-a-ethynyl-estradiol
Melengesterol Acetate
Progesterone
Testosterone
WW-09
10164209
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
ug/L
0.003
0.003 U
0.003 U
0.006
0.004
0.003 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.005 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 J
0.003
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 J
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.005 U
0.008
WW-10
10164210
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
WW-11
10154211
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.004
WW-12
10154212
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.004 J
0.018 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
WW-13
10154213
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
WW-14
10154214
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
WW-15
10154215
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.019 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
WW-16
10154216
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.004 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
See Table C14 notes on page
10 of 10.
Page 2 of 10
-------
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
11-Keto Testosterone
17-a-Hydroxyprogesterone
17-a-trenbolone
17-p-estradiol
17-p-trenbolone
4-Androstenedione
17-a-estradiol
Androstadienedione
Androsterone
a-Zearalanol
a-Zearalenol
p-Zearalanol
p-Zearalenol
Epitestosterone
Estriol
Estrone
17-a-ethynyl-estradiol
Melengesterol Acetate
Progesterone
Testosterone
WW-17
10154217
Downgradient
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.008 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
WW-18
10154218
Residential
Well
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.003 U
0.003
WW-19
10154219
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
WW-20
10154220
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.004 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
WW-21
10154221
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
WW-22
10164222
Downgradient -
Septic
Water
ug/L
0.005
0.006 U
0.007 U
0.006
0.002 U
0.006 U
0.005
0.003
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.003
0.002 U
0.004
0.002 U
0.004
0.002 U
0.005 U
0.008 U
0.01
WW-23
10154223
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
See Table C14 notes on page
10 of 10.
Page 3 of 10
-------
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
11-Keto Testosterone
17-a-Hydroxyprogesterone
17-a-trenbolone
17-p-estradiol
17-p-trenbolone
4-Androstenedione
17-a-estradiol
Androstadienedione
Androsterone
a-Zearalanol
a-Zearalenol
3-Zearalanol
3-Zearalenol
Epitestosterone
Estriol
Estrone
17-a-ethynyl-estradiol
Melengesterol Acetate
Progesterone
Testosterone
WW-24
10154224
Downgradient -
Mint
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
WW-25
10154225
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
WW-26
10154226
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.003 U
0.002 U
WW-27
10154227
Downgradient -
Hops
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.005
0.002 U
0.002
0.003 J
0.022 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.005
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.004
WW-28
10154228
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
WW-29
10154229
Field Blank
Water
ug/L
0.002
0.003
0.002
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.003
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.004 J
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.003
0.005
0.002 U
WW-30
10164230
Residential
Well
ug/L
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
See Table C14 notes on page
10 of 10.
Page 4 of 10
-------
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
11-Keto Testosterone
17-a-Hydroxyprogesterone
17-a-trenbolone
17-p-estradiol
17-p-trenbolone
4-Androstenedione
17-a-estradiol
Androstadienedione
Androsterone
a-Zearalanol
a-Zearalenol
p-Zearalanol
p-Zearalenol
Epitestosterone
Estriol
Estrone
17-a-ethynyl-estradiol
Melengesterol Acetate
Progesterone
Testosterone
LG-01
10154251
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.196
7.401
0.002 UJ
1.48 J
1.643 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.994 J
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.806 J
0.032
LG-02
10154252
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.35
0.374
0.074 J
0.002 UJ
1.181 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.532 J
0.002 U
LG-03
10154253
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.171
1.043
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
2.889 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.333 J
0.002 U
LG-04
10154254
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
13.9
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.181
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
LG-05
10154255
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.131
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.5
0.002 U
3.504
0.002 U
11.9
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
1.945
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.912
0.193
LG-06
10154256
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.857
0.038
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.101
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
12.6
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
1.666
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.185
0.195
LG-07
10154257
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.765
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.107
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
11.3
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.757
0.016
LG-08
10154258
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.549
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.16
0.383
0.002 U
0.002 U
4.819
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.184
0.09
LG-09
10154259
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.444
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.204
0.844
0.002 U
0.002 U
6.969
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.328
0.007
See Table C14 notes on page
10 of 10.
Page 5 of 10
-------
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
11-Keto Testosterone
17-a-Hydroxyprogesterone
17-a-trenbolone
17-p-estradiol
17-p-trenbolone
4-Androstenedione
17-a-estradiol
Androstadienedione
Androsterone
a-Zearalanol
a-Zearalenol
3-Zearalanol
3-Zearalenol
Epitestosterone
Estriol
Estrone
17-a-ethynyl-estradiol
Melengesterol Acetate
Progesterone
Testosterone
LG-10
10164260
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.033
0.459
0.002 U
0.002 U
1.434
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.028
LG-11
10164261
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.085
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.411
2.92
0.166
0.002 U
1.664
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.043
0.251
0.002 U
LG-12
10164262
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.107
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.23
3.268
0.2
0.002 U
2.576
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.248
0.024
LG-13
10164263
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.758
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.314
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
9.851
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.926
0.262
LG-14
10164264
Dairy Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.31
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
8.83
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.039
0.682
0.17
LG-15
10164265
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
4.977
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 U
SP-01
10154271
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
0.1
0.002 U
1.562
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.28
0.263
0.255 J
5.049 J
0.176 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.632
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.053
SP-02
10154272
WTTP
Liquid
ug/L
0.043
0.002 U
1.014
0.002 U
1.059
0.269
0.002 U
0.614 J
2.137 J
0.22 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.06
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.059
See Table C14 notes on page
10 of 10.
Page 6 of 10
-------
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
11-Keto Testosterone
17-a-Hydroxyprogesterone
17-a-trenbolone
17-p-estradiol
17-p-trenbolone
4-Androstenedione
17-a-estradiol
Androstadienedione
Androsterone
a-Zearalanol
a-Zearalenol
3-Zearalanol
3-Zearalenol
Epitestosterone
Estriol
Estrone
17-a-ethynyl-estradiol
Melengesterol Acetate
Progesterone
Testosterone
SP-03
10154273
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
0.002 U
0.002 U
1.521
0.002 U
0.439
1.352
0.002 U
14.1 J
3.187 J
0.011 J
0.002 UJ
0.002 UJ
8.015
0.002 U
0.55
0.002 UJ
0.002 U
0.002 U
0.002 UJ
0.045
SP-04
10154274
WWTP
Liquid
ug/L
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
SO-01
10154231
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
2.08
2.39
0.1 U
0.1 U
17.4
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
6.3
0.44
2.83
0.1 U
SO-02
10154232
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0.16
0.24
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
SO-03
10154233
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
0.1 U
1.94
0.1 U
12.4
0.1 U
33.2
34.7
29.4
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
8.47
0.1 U
0.1 U
4.22
0.1 U
70.4
2.95
SO-04
10154234
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.25
0.1 U
SO-05
10154235
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
1.48
0.1 U
5.63
0.1 U
15.4
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
10.5
0.1 U
33.1
0.1 U
SO-06
10154236
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0.12
0.11
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0.17
0.1 U
See Table C14 notes on page
10 of 10.
Page 7 of 10
-------
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
11-Keto Testosterone
17-a-Hydroxyprogesterone
17-a-trenbolone
17-p-estradiol
17-p-trenbolone
4-Androstenedione
17-a-estradiol
Androstadienedione
Androsterone
a-Zearalanol
a-Zearalenol
p-Zearalanol
p-Zearalenol
Epitestosterone
Estriol
Estrone
17-a-ethynyl-estradiol
Melengesterol Acetate
Progesterone
Testosterone
SO-07
10164237
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
8.8
3.64
0.1 U
8.35
0.1 U
10.2
18.7
13.5
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
2.78
0.1 U
0.1 U
8.52
0.1 U
39
0.1 U
SO-08
10164238
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.29
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.48
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
SO-09
10164239
Manure
Solid
ug/Kg
0.1 U
3.42
0.1 U
4.37
0.1 U
12.4
16.9
19.3
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
4.43
0.1 U
0.1 U
4.06
0.1 U
48
0.1 U
SO-10
10164240
Soil - Dairy
Application
Field
Solid
ug/Kg
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.12
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.23
0.1 U
SO- 11
10154241
Application
Field-Mint
Solid
ug/Kg
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.18
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.14
0.1 U
SO-12
10154242
Application
Field-Mint
Solid
ug/Kg
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0.12
0.11
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0.17
0.1 U
SO- 13
10154243
Application
Field-Corn
Solid
ug/Kg
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.13
0.1 U
0.1 U
SO-14
10154244
Application
Field-Corn
Solid
ug/Kg
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
0. U
See Table C14 notes on page
10 of 10.
Page 8 of 10
-------
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample
Type
Sample Matrix
Compound Units
11-Keto Testosterone
17-a-Hydroxyprogesterone
17-a-trenbolone
17-p-estradiol
17-p-trenbolone
4-Androstenedione
17-a-estradiol
Androstadienedione
Androsterone
a-Zearalanol
a-Zearalenol
p-Zearalanol
p-Zearalenol
Epitestosterone
Estriol
Estrone
17-a-ethynyl-estradiol
Melengesterol Acetate
Progesterone
Testosterone
SO- 15
10154245
Application
Field-Hops
Solid
ug/Kg
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.16
0.1 U
0.15
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.13
0.1 U
SO-16
10154246
Application
Field-Hops
Solid
ug/Kg
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.13
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1
0.1 U
See Table C14 notes on page
10 of 10.
Page 9 of 10
-------
Table C14: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Hormones in Wells, Lagoons,
Manure Piles, Application Fields, Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents, and Crop Soils
Samples were analyzed by the U. of Nebraska Water Sciences Laboratory
Abbreviations
LG - dairy waste lagoon
NA - not analyzed
SO - solid
SOP - Standard Operating Procedure
SP - wastewater treatment plant influent
WW - water well
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant
Units
ug/L = micrograms per liter
ug/Kg = micrograms per kilogram
Analytical Methods
Liquids: UNL SOP LCMS-APPI-STEROIDS- WATER-001 "Analysis of steroids in water samples using a Spark Holland symbiosis on-line CIS
cartridge solid phase extraction (SPE) and high pressure liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC/MS/MS) " .
Solids: UNL SOP Analyte-Steroids_Solids-001 "Analysis of Steroids in solid samples (i.e. soils, manure, etc) by microwave-assisted solvent
extraction (MASK) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) " .
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an estimate.
R = The data are unusable for all purposes.
U = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported value.
UJ = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported estimated result. The associated numerical value is an estimate of the quantitation limit
of the analyte in this sample.
Page 10 of 10
-------
Table CIS: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Isotopic Analyses in Wells, Lagoons,
and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Nitrate
515N-NO3
Ammonia
515N-NH4
518O-NO3
Units
mg/L
%0
mg/L
%0
%o SMOW
WW-01
10154201
Upgradient
Well
Water
WW-02
10154202
Dairy
Supply Well
Water
WW-03
10154203
Downgradient
Well
Water
WW-04
10154204
Downgradient
Well
Water
WW-05
10154205
Downgradient
Well
Water
WW-06
10154206
Upgradient
Well
Water
WW-07
10154207
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
WW-08
10154208
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
0.2
NM
<0.1
NM
NM
3
2.73
<0.1
NM
15.1
34
2.3
0.3
NM
29
49.9
3.53
0.8
NM
-4.5
12.8
9.66
0.3
NM
7.1
0.6
NM
0.1
NM
NM
1.1
-0.09
<0.1
NM
NM
11.7
5.3
0.2
NM
22.6
See Table C15 notes on
page 7 of 7.
Page 1 of 7
-------
Table CIS: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Isotopic Analyses in Wells, Lagoons,
and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Nitrate
515N-NO3
Ammonia
515N-NH4
518O-NO3
Units
mg/L
%0
mg/L
%0
%o SMOW
WW-09
10164209
Dairy Supply
Well
Water
WW-10
10164210
Downgradient
Well
Water
WW-11
10154211
Downgradient
Well
Water
WW-12
10154212
Downgradient
Well
Water
WW-13
10154213
Downgradient
Well
Water
WW-14
10154214
Downgradient
Well
Water
WW-15
10154215
Downgradient
Well
Water
WW-16
10154216
Downgradient
Well
Water
NM
NM
0.1
NM
NM
NM
NM
<0.1
NM
NM
21.6
3.03
<0.1
NM
18.22
43.6
6.21
<0.1
NM
-1.4
42
11.17
0.1
NM
15.9
40.7
10.39
0.1
NM
8.5
27.4
5.23
1.1
NM
30.27
23
5.87
<0.1
NM
5.83
See Table C15 notes on
page 7 of 7.
Page 2 of 7
-------
Table CIS: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Isotopic Analyses in Wells, Lagoons,
and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Nitrate
515N-NO3
Ammonia
515N-NH4
518O-NO3
Units
mg/L
%0
mg/L
%0
%o SMOW
WW-17
10154217
Downgradient
Well
Water
WW-18
10154218
Residential
Well
Water
WW-19
10154219
Downgradient
Septic
Water
WW-20
10154220
Downgradient
- Septic
Water
WW-21
10154221
Downgradient •
Septic
Water
WW-22
10164222
Downgradient
Septic
Water
WW-23
10154223
Downgradient
Mint
Water
23.3
6.85
0.1
NM
2.45
72.3
6.88
0.2
NM
8.8
36.4
8.74
0.5
NM
15.43
15
6.28
0.1
NM
52.86
36.5
7.65
<0.1
NM
12.2
16.6
10.22
0.1
NM
11
17.3
2.17
0.5
NM
18.04
See Table C15 notes on
page 7 of 7.
Page 3 of 7
-------
Table CIS: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Isotopic Analyses in Wells, Lagoons,
and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Nitrate
515N-NO3
Ammonia
515N-NH4
518O-NO3
Units
mg/L
%0
mg/L
%0
%o SMOW
WW-24
10154224
Downgradient •
Mint
Water
WW-25
10154225
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
WW-26
10154226
Downgradient
Hops
Water
WW-27
10154227
Downgradient •
Hops
Water
WW-28
10154228
Downgradient -
Corn
Water
WW-29
10154229
Field Blank
Water
WW-30
10164230
Residential
Well
Water
14
-0.3
<0.1
NM
12.11
32.9
2.43
1.1
NM
15.04
15.1
7.54
<0.1
NM
6.3
19.9
8.83
0.2
NM
16.82
69.6
5.36
0.4
NM
44.41
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
See Table C15 notes on
page 7 of 7.
Page 4 of 7
-------
Table CIS: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Isotopic Analyses in Wells, Lagoons,
and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Nitrate
515N-NO3
Ammonia
515N-NH4
518O-NO3
Units
mg/L
%0
mg/L
%0
%o SMOW
LG-01
10154251
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-02
10154252
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-03
10154253
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-04
10154254
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-05
10154255
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-06
10154256
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-07
10154257
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-08
10154258
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-09
10154259
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-10
10164260
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
<0.1
NM
907
3.37
NM
<0.1
NM
923
10.07
NM
<0.1
NM
896
9.88
NM
NM
NM
899
6.69
NM
NM
NM
1151
10.63
NM
NM
NM
1293
10.25
NM
NM
NM
869
5.36
NM
NM
NM
696
10.27
NM
NM
NM
658
10.13
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
See Table C15 notes on
page 7 of 7.
Page 5 of 7
-------
Table CIS: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Isotopic Analyses in Wells, Lagoons,
and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Location ID
Sample ID
Sample Type
Sample Matrix
Compound
Nitrate
515N-NO3
Ammonia
515N-NH4
518O-NO3
Units
mg/L
%0
mg/L
%0
%o SMOW
LG-11
10164261
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-12
10164262
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-13
10164263
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-14
10164264
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
LG-15
10164265
Dairy
Lagoon
Liquid
SP-01
10154271
WWTP
Liquid
SP-02
10154272
WTTP
Liquid
SP-03
10154273
WWTP
Liquid
SP-04
10154274
WWTP
Liquid
NM
NM
274
3.13
NM
NM
NM
222
2.01
NM
NM
NM
469
4.4
NM
NM
NM
600
3.26
NM
NM
NM
658
13.85
NM
<0.1
NM
30.1
3.72
NM
<0.1
NM
31.5
7.43
NM
<0.1
NM
49.3
2.7
NM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
See Table C15 notes on
page 7 of 7.
Page 6 of 7
-------
Table CIS: Phase 3 Analytical Results for Isotopic Analyses in Wells, Lagoons,
and Wastewater Treatment Plant Influents
Samples were analyzed by the University of Nebraska Water Sciences Laboratory.
Abbreviations
NM = Insufficient Nitrate to complete analysis
NA = Not analyzed
%o = parts per thousand difference from the atmospheric standard
SMOW = standard mean of ocean water
WWTP - wastewater treatment plant influent
515N-NO3 = Nitrogen isotopes of nitrate. Ratio of the nitrogen isotopes 15N and 14N in a specific sample using
nitrate compared to a standard of known composition of 15N and 14N. This expressed as the parts per thousand (%o).
515N-HN4 = Nitrogen isotopes of ammonia. Ratio of the nitrogen isotopes 15N and 14N in a specific sample using
ammonia compared to a standard of known composition of 15N and 14N. This expressed as the parts per thousand
5180-NO3 = Oxygen isotopes of nitrate. Ratio of the oxygen isotopes 180 and 160 in a specific sample using nitrate
compared to a standard of known composition of 1 80 and 160. This expressed as the parts per thousand (%o) standard
mean of ocean water.
Units
mg/L - milligrams per liter
515N (%o.) = (15N/14N)..mri. . (15N/14N)cta^^ * 1000
(15N/14N)standard
Analytical Methods
UNL SOP: N15 Analysis Dual Inlet IRMS
UNL SOP: Inst-Isoprime EA-18O-001
Page 7 of 7
-------
Table C16: Phase 3 Analytical Results for
Sulfur Hexafluoride Age Dating in Wells
Sample
Location
WW-01
WW-02
WW-03
WW-04
WW-05
WW-06
WW-07
WW-08
WW-09
WW-10
WW-11
WW-12
WW-13
WW-14
WW-15
WW-16
WW-17
WW-18
WW-19
WW-20
WW-21
Sample Type
Upgradient Well - Dairy
.
.
.
.
.
Downgradient Well - Dairy
Downgradient Well - Dairy
Residential Well
Sample Media
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Sample ID
10154201
10154202
10154203
10154204
10154205
10154206
10154207
10154208
10154209
10154210
10154211
10154212
10154213
10154214
10154215
10154216
10154217
10154218
10154219
10154220
10154221
SF6Age Range
(Years)
Over Value
15.8
16.3
24.8
25.8
21.8
23.3
18.3
20.8
16.3
15.8
36.3
32.8
35.3
40.8
58.3
51.3
44.3
44.8
Over Value
Over Value
24.3
23.8
30.8
29.3
27.8
28.3
29.8
28.8
33.3
33.8
27.8
28.3
44.3
34.3
14.3
14.3
31.3
28.8
Qualifier
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Page 1 of 2
-------
Table C16: Phase 3 Analytical Results for
Sulfur Hexafluoride Age Dating in Wells
Sample
Location
WW-22
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-26
WW-27
WW-28
WW-29
WW-30
Sample Type
Downgradient Well - Mint
Downgradient Well - Corn
Field Blank
Residential Well
Sample Media
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Sample ID
10154222
10154223
10154224
10154225
10154226
10154227
10154228
10154229
10164230
SF6Age Range
(Years)
29.3
29.3
Over Value
14.8
15.8
10.3
9.8
12.8
11.8
Over Value
14.3
Over Value
NA
NA
Qualifier
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Samples were analyzed by the United States Geological Survey Chlorofluorocarbon Laboratory.
Analavtical Method
(http://water.usgs.gov/lab/) as well as the research publication Dating Young Ground Water with Sulfur
Hexafluoride: Natural and Anthropogenic Sources of Sulfur Hexafluoride (E. Busenberg & L. Plummer,
2000).
Data Qualifiers
J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an estimate.
Notes
Over Value: These samples contained more SF6 than can be explained by equilibrium with modern air.
Aquifer materials in volcanic areas such as the basalts under the Yakima Valley are known to host
naturally-occurring SF6. No anthropogenic source of SF6 is known in the area of the Dairy Cluster.
SF6 - Sulfur hexaflouride.
The SF6 recharge dating limit is around 1970. Any sample that has a model recharge date before about
1970 is older than the dating range of SF6 The SF6 method is useful in dating very young waters.
Page 2 of 2
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix D
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
APPENDIX D
DETAILS ON THE ISOTOPIC ANALYTICAL RESULTS
D-l
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix D
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
D-2
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix D
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Appendix D: Details on the Isotopic Analytical Results for the Study
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") submitted all the water well, dairy lagoon, and
wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) influent samples to the University of Nebraska - Lincoln Water
Sciences Laboratory ("UNL Laboratory") for isotopic analysis. The results of the isotopic analyses are
presented in Table C15 in Appendix C. Summary results for the dairy lagoons are presented below in
Table Dl. In addition, summary results for water wells are presented in Table D2 below and in Tables
14, 23, 30, and 35 within the main report. Summary results for the WWTP influent are included below as
Table D3.
The dual isotopic composition of nitrate (515N-NO3 and 518O-NO3) measured in any given water sample is
determined by a combination of mixing between different nitrate sources, and in-situ biogeochemical
processes. In groundwater, the main biogeochemical process which will significantly alter the isotopic
composition of nitrate is denitrification, which requires anoxic conditions. Denitrification will result in a
coupled linear increase of both 515N-NO3 and 518O-NO3 values as the nitrate concentrations exponentially
decrease. This combined isotope and concentration pattern was not observed in the water wells, which
indicates that the nitrate isotope compositions measured in the water wells are primarily controlled by
mixing of one or more nitrate sources. These potential sources are referred to as "end-members" when
doing either quantitative or qualitative mixing estimates.
Different end-members tend to have distinct nitrate isotope ranges, either in 515N-NO3 or 518O-NO3. For
example, nitrate derived from fertilizer tends to have much lower 515N-NO3 values than nitrate derived
from animal waste, but the 518O-NO3 values of these two end-members overlap. Nitrate derived from
atmospheric sources has much higher 518O-NO3 values than all other major nitrate sources due to
complex reactions in the atmosphere, but overlapping 515N-NO3 values. By measuring both the 515N-NO3
and 518O-NO3 for all water samples, more information about the possible end-member contributions to
any given well can be obtained. If the 515N-NO3 and 518O-NO3 values of a given water sample fall within
the ranges where the isotope values of the potential end-members overlap, then nitrate isotope
composition cannot be used to identify the dominant end-member(s).
The isotopic ranges for major nitrate sources are well-established in the literature, however, local end-
members specific to a particular study region often have a smaller isotopic range in comparison to world-
wide reported values, and therefore measuring the isotopic compositions of local end-members can
sometimes help better constrain and interpret nitrate isotope values within a specific data set. In this
study, the EPA was able to measure samples representing local animal and human waste end-members.
EPA followed a two-step process to associate a specific source of nitrogen to each water well, dairy
lagoon, and WWTP influent sample. First, the concentration of nitrate in each well was compared with
nitrate values reported in the literature for unimpacted groundwater. Nitrate concentrations in unimpacted
groundwater can be up to 1.1 milligrams per liter (mg/L) (Nolan and Hitt 2003). The second step was to
evaluate which of the potential sources or combination of sources (animal waste, synthetic fertilizer, or
atmospheric) were likely sources of the nitrate in the water wells. To evaluate whether animal waste was
a potential source of the nitrates in the water wells, EPA used the dairy lagoon data presented in Table
Dl.
D-3
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix D
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Based on the isotopic values observed in this study for nitrogen and oxygen in nitrate and for nitrogen in
ammonia, the sources identified include: (1) nitrate formed locally in soil derived from the breakdown of
plant material; (2) animal waste; (3) synthetic fertilizers; and (4) accumulation from atmospheric
deposition from precipitation and dry deposition. It is important to note that the animal waste category
does not differentiate between human and non-human wastes.
Concentrations of nitrate in the two upgradient wells (WW-01 and WW-06), two dairy supply wells
(WW-07 and WW-09) and one downgradient well (WW-10) were below 1.1 mg/L (see Table C5 in
Appendix C). The concentration of nitrate in the majority of downgradient wells was higher. This
indicates that animal waste, synthetic fertilizer, atmospheric contributions, or a combination of these
sources, are the likely source of the nitrate in the water wells.
Three dairy lagoon samples were collected from each dairy in order to better characterize the local animal
waste (includes both human and non-human) end-member. One sample was collected at the influent to
each dairy lagoon system (LG-01, LG-04, LG-07, LG-10 and LG-13), and the other lagoon samples were
collected at the "discharge" end of the system just before the manure wastes were pumped onto the dairy
application fields. Lagoon samples LG-02 and LG-03 were collected from the same lagoon, as were
lagoon samples, LG-08 and LG-09, and LG-11 and LG-12. Lagoon samples LG-05 and LG-06 and LG-
14 and LG-15 were collected from different lagoons.
The concentration of ammonium was measured in each dairy lagoon sample. The 515N-NH4 values were
then quantified for each sample. The 515N-NH4 value is the nitrogen isotopic composition reported for
ammonium. It is the ratio of the nitrogen isotopes 15N and 14N in a specific sample compared to a
standard of known composition of 15N and 14N. This is expressed as the parts per thousand or parts per
mil (%o).
It is expected that the 515N-NH4 values would increase as the waste goes from the lagoon influent to the
discharge point. In this process, the lighter 14N isotope volatilizes resulting in a higher proportion of the
heavier 15N isotope in the remaining pool of NH^. These data are summarized in Table Dl. The samples
collected from the lagoon influent generally have a lower 515N-NH4 ratio than the discharge samples, with
the exception of samples LG-10, LG-1 land LG-12.
The co-located samples (LG-02 and LG-03; LG-08 and LG-09; and LG-11 and LG-12) all show similar
515N-NH4 values. The average 515N-NH4 value for the five lagoon influent samples (LG-01, LG-04, LG-
07, LG-10, and LG-13) is 5.0%o. The average 815N-NH4 value for the 10 dairy lagoons that are located
immediately prior to land application (LG-02, LG-03, LG-05, LG-06, LG-08, LG-09, LG-11, LG-12, LG-
14, and LG-15) is 8.4%0.
The 515N-NH4 ratios from the dairy lagoon samples provide a better understanding of the local animal
waste end-member that could potentially contribute to groundwater nitrate. When NlrU is converted to
NO3 in oxic groundwater (called "nitrification"), typically there is almost complete conversion of NH/tto
NO3, and therefore the 515N-NO3 of the newly formed nitrate pool is very similar or equal to the 15N of
the NH4. Therefore, the 515N-NH4 measurements in the lagoons represent minimum 15N end-member
values for animal waste derived nitrate, because it is quite likely that there is some additional increase in
the 515N-NH4 from the waste ponds (due to continuing NH3 loss) before it enters the groundwater.
D-4
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
Appendix D
September 2012
Table Dl: Phase 3 - Concentrations of Ammonium, and Isotopic Signatures in Dairy Lagoons
Location
LG-01:Haak
LG-02:Haak
LG-03: Haak
LG-04: DeRuyter
LG-05:DeRuyter
LG-06: DeRuyter
LG-07:D and A
LG-08:DandA
LG-09: D and A
LG-10: Cow Palace
LG- 1 1 : Cow Palace
LG-12: Cow Palace
LG- 1 3 : Liberty/Bosnia
LG- 1 4 : Liberty/Bosnia
LG- 1 5 : Liberty/Bosnia
Position in System
Influent
Discharge
Discharge
Influent
Discharge
Discharge
Influent
Discharge
Discharge
Influent
Discharge
Discharge
Influent
Discharge
Discharge
Ammonium
(mg/L)
907
923
896
899
1151
1293
869
696
658
NM
274
222
469
600
658
515N-NH4 (%o)
3.4
10.1
9.9
6.7
10.6
10.3
5.4
10.3
10.1
NM
3.1
2.0
4.4
3.3
13.9
515N-NO3 ratios measured in water wells that have elevated 515N-NO3 values similar to the 515N-NH4
measured in the waste lagoons would indicate that animal waste is a dominant source of the nitrate in
water wells. 515N-NO3 is the nitrogen isotopic composition reported for nitrogen. It is the ratio of the
nitrogen isotopes 15N and 14N in a specific sample compared to a standard of known composition of 15N
and 14N. This is expressed as the parts per thousand or parts per mil (%o).
Literature values for animal waste indicate a range of 515N-NO3 ratios between 10%o and 20%o (Kreitler
1975; Komor and Anderson 1993; and Kendall and Aravena 1999), but with some values lower or higher
than this range (Becker and others 2001 and Kendall 1998). For this study, a 515N-NO3 ratio above 8.4%0
was used to indicate that the likely dominant source of the nitrate in the water wells was animal waste
(see Table D2 for a summary of the findings for water wells). As discussed above, the average 515N-NH4
ratio at the discharge end of the lagoons was 8.4%o and this ratio forms the lower end of the expected
range for the weights of nitrogen that, after microbial conversion to nitrate, would be transported in
groundwater to drinking water wells. The process of isotopic fractionation could be expected to continue
after the lagoon liquids escape or are applied as fertilizer. The tendency for the 515N-NH4 value to
continue to increase is why 8.4%o is considered a lower bound for identifying animal waste as a source of
nitrate in the water wells. Values of 515N-NO3 below 8.4%o do not rule out animal waste as a source.
D-5
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix D
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Synthetic fertilizers are another potential source of nitrate in water wells. This study did not directly
evaluate the isotopic values for fertilizer used in the study area, but 515N-NO3 ratios for synthetic
fertilizers are often within a range of-4.0 to +4.0%o (Komor and Anderson 1993; Kendall, C.1998; and
Kendall and Aravena 1999). In addition, the lowest 515N-NH4 value from the dairy lagoons was 2.0%o.
This result suggests synthetic fertilizers are the likely dominant source of nitrate in water wells when the
515N-NO3 values are below 2.0%o. As with the animal waste, this value does not mean synthetic fertilizer
cannot be a likely source of the nitrate in water wells if 515N-NO3 values are above 2.0%o.
For 515N-NO3 values between 2.0%o and 8.4%o, the source of nitrate in the water wells cannot be
confidently attributed to a single source. The source could be animal waste or synthetic fertilizer, or a
mixture of the two. In addition, for water wells that suggest an atmospheric contribution, other sources
could be solely animal waste, solely synthetic fertilizer, or a mixture of all three with an atmospheric
contribution.
Another possible source of nitrate in water wells is atmospheric deposition, although nitrogen
contribution from this source is estimated to be less than 2% of the total amount of nitrogen in the Valley
(EPA 2012). Because of the very low rainfall in the Lower Yakima Valley, atmospherically deposited
nitrate may accumulate in shallow soils in the caliche layer. A caliche layer is a characteristic of desert
regions that forms when carbonate minerals accumulate in the shallow subsurface because insufficient
rainfall occurs to wash them into the deeper groundwater. Other minerals may accumulate along with the
carbonates in areas of very low rainfall. These minerals include gypsum and, if the area is sufficiently
dry, nitrates and perchlorate.
As mentioned above, nitrate derived from atmospheric sources has significantly higher 518O-NO3 values
in comparison to other major nitrate sources. 518O-NO3 values for pure atmospheric deposition (the
atmospheric end-member) typically range from 60%oto 95%o (Kendall and others 2007). If the nitrate in
any given water sample has a significant component of atmospheric nitrate, then the 518O-NO3 value will
be higher than the 518O-NO3 values reported for other sources such as fertilizers and animal waste. Since
the major nitrate sources have ranges of 518O-NO3 values, the exact contribution of each end-member
cannot be determined, but a qualitative evaluation can be made.
The 518O-NO3 results were used to evaluate the degree to which an atmospheric signature or contribution
was dominant in the sample. Ratios above 20.0%o for 518O-NO3 were considered to have some
contribution from atmospherically derived nitrate. This ratio was selected because the literature based on
multiple studies of various nitrate sources suggests that 518O-NO3 ratios from synthetic fertilizer, soil
cycling, and animal wastes are typically below 15.0%o (Kendall and others 2007) and the desire to use a
value higher than 15.0%o for 518O-NO3 to ensure that the atmospheric contribution is dominate in the
sample. Values of 518O-NO3 below 20.0%o could have an atmospheric contribution, but it becomes
indistinguishable from other sources.
D-6
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
Appendix D
September 2012
Table D2: Phase 3 - Nitrate Concentrations, Isotopic Signatures, and Interpreted Dominant
Source(s) of Nitrate in Wells
Location
WW-01
WW-02
WW-03
WW-04
WW-05
WW-06
WW-07
WW-08
WW-09
WW-10
WW-11
WW-12
WW-13
WW-14
WW-15
WW-16
WW-17
WW-18
WW-19
WW-20
WW-21
WW-22
WW-23
WW-24
WW-25
WW-26
WW-27
WW-28
Nitrate-N
(mg/L)a
0.2
3.0
34
49.9
12.8
0.6
1.1
11.7
NM
NM
21.6
43.6
42
40.7
27.4
23
23.3
69.6
36.4
15
36.5
16.6
17.3
14
32.9
15.1
19.9
69.6
515N-NO3
(%»)
NM
2.7
2.3
3.5
9.7
NM
-0.1
5.3
NM
NM
3.0
6.2
11
10
5.2
5.9
6.9
5.4
8.7
6.3
7.7
10
2.2
-0.3
2.4
7.5
8.8
5.5
18O-NO3
(%»)
NM
15
29
-4.5
7.1
NM
NM
23
NM
NM
18
-1.4
16
8.5
30
5.8
2.5
44.4
15.4
52.9
12.2
11.0
18
12
15
6.3
17
44
Interpreted Dominant Source
NM
Indeterminate
Fertilizer and/or animal waste with some
atmospheric contribution
Fertilizer and/or animal waste
Animal waste
NM
Fertilizer
Fertilizer and/or animal waste with some
atmospheric contribution
NM
NM
Fertilizer and/or animal waste
Fertilizer and/or animal waste
Animal waste
Animal waste
Fertilizer and/or animal waste with some
atmospheric contribution
Fertilizer and/or animal waste
Fertilizer and/or animal waste
Fertilizer and/or animal waste with Some
Atmospheric Contribution
Animal waste
Fertilizer and/or animal waste with some
atmospheric contribution
Fertilizer and/or animal waste
Animal waste
Fertilizer and/or animal waste
Fertilizer
Fertilizer and/or animal waste
Fertilizer and/or animal waste
Animal waste
Fertilizer and/or animal waste with some
atmospheric contribution
"The nitrate concentrations are from the UNL isotopic analysis.
D-7
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
Appendix D
September 2012
Isotopic results were obtained from the ammonium sampled from the inlet to three sewer treatment plants
in the Lower Yakima Valley. The plants were located in Zillah, Mabton and Toppenish, and correspond
to SP-01 through SP-03. The results for the analysis of 515N-NH4 from the ammonium in the influent are
presented below.
Table D3: Phase 3 - Isotopic Signatures, and Nitrogen Enrichment in Wastewater Treatment
Plants
Location
SP-01: Zillah
SP-02: Mabton
SP-03: Toppenish
515N-NH4 (%o)
3.72
7.43
2.70
Nitrogen Enrichment
Slightly Enriched
Ammonia Volatilization has occurred
Slightly Enriched
References Appendix D
Becker, M.F., Peter, K.D., and Masoner, J. 2001. Possible sources of nitrate in groundwater at swine-
licensed-managed feeding operations in Oklahoma. U.S. Geological Survey. Water-Resources
Investigations Report 02-4257. Prepared in Cooperation with the Oklahoma Department of
Agriculture, Food, and Forestry.
Kendall, C. 1998. Tracing nitrogen sources and cycling in catchments, in Kendall, Carol, and
McDonnell, J.J (eds.), Isotope Tracers in Catchment Hydrology: Amsterdam, Elsevier Science
B.V., Chapter 16, p.519-576.
Kendall, C. and Aravena, R. 1999. Nitrate isotopes in groundwater systems. In Cook, P.G., and
Herczeg, A.AL. (eds). Environmental Tracers in Subsurface Hydrology: Boston, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Chapter p, p-261-299.
Kendall, C., Elliott, E.M., and Wankel, S.D. 2007, Tracing anthropogenic inputs of nitrogen to
ecosystems, in Michener, R.H., and Lajtha. K., eds., Stable Isotopes in Ecology and
Environmental Science, 2nd ed.: Blackwell Publishing, p. 375-499.
Komor, S.C., and Anderson, H.W. 1993. Nitrogen isotopes as indicators of nitrate sources in Minnesota
sand plan aquifers. Groundwater, 31, 260-270.
Kreitler, C.W. 1975. Determining the source of nitrate in groundwater by nitrogen isotope studies:
Austin, Texas, University of Texas, Austin, Bureau of Economic Geology, Reports of
Investigations, no.83, 57p.
Nolan, B.T. and Hitt, K.J. 2003. Nutrients in shallow groundwaters beneath relatively undeveloped areas
in the conterminous United States. Water-Resources Investigations Report 2002-4289. US
Geological Survey.
EPA. 2012. Yakima Valley: Screening analysis-Nitrogen Budget. EPA Region 10. Office of
Environmental Assessment. April 2012.
D-8
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix E
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
APPENDIX E
QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL
E-l
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix E
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
E-2
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix E
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Appendix E: Quality Assurance and Quality Control
This project was implemented in three phases. In Phase 1, a geographic information system (GIS)
screening application was developed and used to identify potential sample locations and sites in the
Lower Yakima Valley for Phase 2 sampling and screening. Phase 1 also developed estimates of the
relative nitrogen available for application to the land from different sources. Phase 2 and Phase 3
involved extensive sampling and analysis. A discussion of the quality assurance and quality control
(QA/QC) procedures followed in Phase 2 and Phase 3 is presented below.
Phase 2 was implemented following the specifications of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)- approved "QA Project Plan for Yakima Nitrate Study, Phase 2 - Initial Nitrate/Coliform
Screening of Domestic Wells, February 2010" (EPA 2010a). Deviations from the quality assurance
project plan (QAPP) included changes in sample locations and modifications to the analytical method
used, sampling method techniques, and additional number of samples collected. The rationale for these
deviations was documented in the project team-approved Sample Alteration Form or Corrective Action
Form.
In Phase 2 a multi-parameter water quality instrument was used in the field for measuring dissolved
oxygen, oxidation/reduction (redox) potential, pH, specific conductance, and temperature. All field
instruments were calibrated before use. For quality control, duplicate sample readings and calibration
checks were performed. All field testing QC samples met the frequency of analysis, precision, and
accuracy checks. The data generated are acceptable and can be used for screening purposes.
In Phase 2, EPA's Manchester Environmental Laboratory ("EPA Manchester Laboratory") received 189
samples for analysis. Of these 189 samples, 102 were analyzed for nitrate and chloride, two were
analyzed for nitrate and nitrite, and 123 were analyzed for total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN). Two percent of
the total nitrate data points were qualified as follows: one sample (10086211) did not meet the holding
time requirement and the result was qualified estimated; the nitrate concentration reported for this sample
may be biased low. One sample (10086101) exceeded the highest level of the calibration curve and was
qualified estimated. Data users are advised to consider the nitrate reported for this sample as biased low.
All nitrate data, as reported and qualified, are acceptable for use for all purposes. All of the chloride and
TKN analyses met the method required QC criteria. The data as reported are usable for all purposes.
A separate QAPP was developed for Phase 3 sampling (EPA 201 Ob). Phase 3 samples were collected and
shipped to the following laboratories for chemical analysis: EPA's Manchester Laboratory, Cascade
Analytical Laboratory, University of Nebraska - Lincoln, Water Sciences Laboratory ("UNL
Laboratory"), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory ("USGS NWQ Laboratory"),
USGS Laboratory in Reston ("USGS Reston Laboratory") and EPA's Robert S. Kerr Environmental
Research Center in Ada, Oklahoma ("EPA's Ada Laboratory"). The field sampling team and analytical
laboratories followed the protocols described in the QAPP with the exception of the deviations identified
in Table El. The quality assurance review summaries for each lab are included below.
E-3
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
Appendix E
September 2012
Table El: Deviations from the Phase 3 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)
Location in
QAPP
Page 11, Table 2,
First Column.
Surface Soil
Page 13, Table 5
Page 15, Section
3.1, second full
paragraph
Page 21, Section
4.0, third
paragraph
Page 21, Section
4.0, third
paragraph
Page 28, Section
4.2, Shipping
Location and
Requirements
Page 33, Section
4.13, second
bullet
Page 35, Section
5.0, first
paragraph
QAPP Description
"Surficial soil from waste application fields (large
area multi -increment sample of at least 30
subsamples...)"
Schedule of Tasks
"The laboratories performing the sample analysis
of drinking water analytes . . . are SDWA certified
and/or accredited."
"Water Wells . . . .Locations are identified as
WW01toWW29"
"Locations are identified as LG01 to LG15 and
SP01toSP03"
Samples to be shipped to the UNL Laboratory
were to be frozen at -20C.
"Coolers or boxes containing cleaned bottles will
be sealed with a custody tape seal during transport
to the field or while in storage before use."
"The required precision and accuracy for this
project is 20% relative percent difference
(RPD) ..."
Deviation or Action or Modification
The surface soil sampling method in the QAPP was misidentified as
multi-increment sampling. It should have been identified as composite
sampling. EPA collected composite surface soil samples comprised of at
least 30 subsamples from a depth of 1 inch below the surface.
The actual schedule for laboratory analysis, data validation, and report
preparation deviated from the schedule in the QAPP.
EPA's Manchester Laboratory and Cascade Analytical Laboratory are
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) certified for nitrate analysis in
drinking water. EPA's Manchester Laboratory used other standard
methods for the analysis of metals and pesticides. The UNL Laboratory,
USGS Laboratories and Ada Laboratory are not SDWA certified. A
complete list of analytical methods used in Phase 3 is included in
Appendix C, Table C-2.
Water well locations were identified as WW-01 through WW-30 because
one additional sample, a field blank (WW-29), was collected.
An additional wastewater treatment plan influent sample was collected at
the Toppenish wastewater treatment plant (SP04) because the laboratory
requested additional sample volume.
The on-site freezer trailer could not continuously maintain a temperature
of -20C. Samples were transferred to a freezer at WSU. Samples were
reported to have arrived frozen at the UNL Laboratory.
After custody seals had been removed from coolers or boxes containing
cleaned sample bottles, custody seals were not reapplied if coolers or
boxes remained in the custody of EPA at all times.
For herbicide, pesticide and age dating analyses, the laboratory
established duplicate analysis control limits were used instead of the
customary 20% RPD.
E-4
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
Appendix E
September 2012
Location in
QAPP
Page 35, Section
5.0, first full
paragraph
Page 39, Section
7.2, fourth
sentence
Page 40, Table 7
Page 40, Table 7
General
Chemistry and
Inorganics
Page 40, Table 7
Page 41, Table 8
Page 41, Table 8
Page 41, Table 8
Page 41, Table 8
Page 41, Table 8
Page 48, Table
12
QAPP Description
"Transfer blanks will be incorporated into the
sample schedule at a rate of approximately 5% or
once per sample location type."
"Data validation will be performed by the
laboratory for all the analyses prior to the release
of data in accordance with each laboratory's
quality assurance plan."
Bias of 80-120% was specified for Alkalinity,
ammonia, mercury, metals, nitrate+nitrite, TKN
and total phosphorus
Plus 1 duplicate sample for QA out of each 10
drinking water wells.
Plus 1 triple sample for QA out of each 20 lagoon
samples.
Chloride and bromide analysis of lagoon samples.
Varian Plexa SPE cartridge was specified in the
sample prep methods column.
Dichlobenil
Phosmet
Oryzalin
N/A
N/A
Deviation or Action or Modification
Transfer blanks were collected for bacterial analysis only.
The QAPP should have stated "Data verification will be performed by
the laboratory for all the analyses prior to the release of data in
accordance with each laboratory's quality assurance plan." EPA chemists
conducted an independent validation of all Phase 3 data.
The laboratory established control limits of 75%-125% were used.
Due to an oversight, no field duplicate or triplicate samples were
collected from the water wells or the lagoons.
After analysis at EPA's Manchester Environmental Laboratory, excess volumes
of thirteen of the fifteen lagoon samples were shipped to EPA's Laboratory in
Ada, OK for analysis of bromide to see if lower detection limits could be
achieved. Chloride also was reanalyzed by the Ada Laboratory to determine the
Cl:Br ratio for the lagoon samples. The bromide results from the Ada Laboratory
also were non-detects, therefore no Cl:Br ratios were determined.
The Varian Plexa adsorbent cartridge did not meet the laboratory
recovery control limits of 70% to 130% specified in the QAPP. Water
samples were extracted using Method 551.1.
Reported as IUPAC 2,6-dichlor-benzonitrile
Reported as Imidan
Reported as Surflan
Acid Herbicides were added.
Laboratory also analyzed for 18O. No blanks were analyzed for 18O.
E-5
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
Appendix E
September 2012
Location in
QAPP
Page 50, Table
14
Page 58, Table
18
Page 58, Table
18
QAPP Description
N/A
N/A
Matrix spike (bias) limits 85-115%.
Deviation or Action or Modification
The USGS laboratory's standard list of trace organic compounds included
analytes in addition to those listed in the QAPP. These compounds were
analyzed and the data are presented in the report.
Table 18 in the QAPP is incomplete. Cascade Analytical Laboratory also
analyzed for ammonia solid by Standard Method 4500-NH3, Nitrate-
N/Total Solid by Standard Method 4500-NO3 E, Ammonium-N by
Standard Method 4500-NH4 H, Nitrate -N/Nitrite by Standard Method
4500-NO3 F and TKN by 4500N-ORG-C.
Matrix spike (bias) limits were 80-120%.
E-6
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
Appendix E
September 2012
1. EPA's Manchester Environmental Laboratory, Port Orchard, Washington
A Stage 4 data validation was performed by the EPA Region 10 Quality Assurance (QA) team for all the
data generated by EPA's Manchester Laboratory (Appendix Table E2).
Table E2: Phase 3 - Chemical Analyses Conducted and Analytical Methods Used by the EPA's
Manchester Laboratory
Sample
Type
Water
Wells,
Dairy
Lagoons,
and WWTP
Influent
Soils and
Manure
Number of
Samples
49
49
49
49
49
49
32
13
49
49
30
30
16
16
Parameter or
Compound
TKN
NH3
Nitrate -Nitrites
Total Metals
Mercury
Alkalinity
Coliforms
Microbial Source
Tracking
Bromide, Chloride,
Fluoride, and Sulfate
Total Phosphorous
Pesticides (only water
wells)
Herbicides (only water
wells)
Pesticides
Herbicides
Analytical Method
(Prep)
Analytical Method
(Analysis)
EPA Method 3 5 1.2
EPA Method 3 5 0.1
EPA Method 3 5 3. 2
EPA Method 200.2
(water)
SW846 Method
30 10A (lagoons)
EPA Method 200.7
EPA Method 245.1
Standard Method 2320B
Standard Methods 9221F/9221E/9222B
DNA PCR Techniques
EPA Method 300.0
EPA Method 3 65.1
EPA Method 5 5 1.1
EPA Method 5 5 1.1
SW846- Method
3570
SW846-Method
8151A
SW846 - Method 8270D-
SIM
SW846-Method 8270D-SIM
SW846 - Method 8270D-
SIM
SW846-Method 8270D-SIM
All of the chemical and microbial analyses conducted at EPA's Manchester Laboratory met the project
data quality goals and criteria for accuracy, precision, comparability, completion, representativeness, and
sensitivity, and are useable for all purposes with the following exceptions:
E-7
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix E
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Nitrate and Nitrogen Compounds
Nitrogen compounds included ammonia, TKN, and nitrate-nitrites. Samples 10154251, 10154252,
10154253,10154254, 10154255, 10154256, 10154257, 10154258, 10154259, 10164260, 10164261,
10164262, 10164263, 10164264 and 10164265 did not meet the required preservation when they were
received at the laboratory. Nitrate/nitrites, TKN, and ammonia results for these samples were qualified
estimated with a possible low bias. Thirty-one (31 percent) of the data points (147) were qualified
estimated.
Mercury and Alkalinity
Thirty-nine percent (39 percent) of the total mercury data points were qualified estimated based on out of
control sample spike and blank spike recoveries. Alkalinity results met all the QC criteria. The mercury
and alkalinity data, as reported and qualified, are acceptable for use for all purposes.
Metals
Two dairy lagoon samples, 10164261 and 10164262 (4 percent of the total metals data points), were
qualified estimated based on blank contamination. The metals data, as reported and qualified, are
acceptable for use for all purposes.
Pesticides and Herbicides
The project data quality goals for precision and accuracy for numerous target analytes were not met for
dairy lagoons and WWTPs. As stated above, all of the pesticides and herbicide results for the dairy
lagoons and WWTPs could not be quantified and are considered unusable because of (1) the complexity
of the sample matrices, (2) holding times that were exceeded, (3) recurring QC failures, and (4) the
limitations of modified Method 8270D for detecting pesticides and herbicides at the project reporting
levels. However, the pesticides for water and soil, as qualified, are usable for all purposes.
Anions
Anions included chloride, fluoride, bromide, and sulfates. As a result of matrix interferences, the dairy
lagoon and WWTP biosolids samples collected were analyzed at 5 Ox dilutions for bromide, fluoride, and
sulfate. The reporting limits for these bromide, fluoride, and sulfate were elevated and did not meet the
project goals. As qualified and reported, the analytical results for water and soil are acceptable for use for
all purposes.
2. Cascade Analytical Laboratory, Wenatchee, Washington
Nitrate and Other Forms of Nitrogen
Cascade Analytical Laboratory is a certified by the State of Washington to conducted drinking water
analysis including analysis for nitrate. It is located in Union Gap and Wenatchee Washington, and
analyzed nitrate for this study. Because of the short holding times for certain nitrate analytical methods,
Cascade Analytical Laboratory was sub-contracted by Region 10 to analyze the water well, soil, and
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix E
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
manure samples for nitrate and nitrogen compounds for Phase 3. A total of 30 water wells, 11 soil, and
five manure samples were submitted.
The analytical method used for the determination of nitrate in water samples was Method 300.0. Five
samples were analyzed for Total Nitrogen/Solid by AOAC Method 993.13, Ammonia Solid by SM 4500-
NH3, and Nitrate-N/Total Solid by SM 4500-NO3 E. Ten samples were analyzed for Total
Nitrogen/Solid by AOAC Method 993.13, Ammonium-N by SM 4500-NH4 H, and Nitrate-N/Nitrite by
SM 4500-NO3 F. In addition, several samples were analyzed for TKN by 4500-Norg C. A Stage 4 data
validation was performed by EPA Region 10 QA team for all data generated by Cascade Analytical
Laboratory.
All of the QC samples and sample analysis met the technical acceptance criteria set forth by the
methods. The data, as reported, are acceptable for use for all purposes.
Thirty split water samples were collected, shipped to Cascade Analytical Laboratory and EPA's
Manchester Laboratory, and analyzed for nitrate using the EPA Method 300.0 (Cascade Analytical
Laboratory) and EPA Method 353.2 (EPA's Manchester Laboratory). Both sets of data met all the
method-specified QC criteria and are acceptable for use for all purposes. The nitrate concentrations
reported by both laboratories are comparable within 10 percent. The following is a list of water samples
that were collected, split, and sent to these two labs:
10154201 10154202 10154203 10154204 10154205
10154206 10154207 10154208 10154211 10154212
10154213 10154214 10154215 10154216 10154217
10154218 10154219 10154220 10154221 10154223
10154224 10154225 10154226 10154227 10154228
10154229 10164209 10164210 10164222 10164230
Bacteria
Cascade Analytical Laboratory analyzed nine well water samples for Escherichia Coli and Total Coliform
using a Quanti-Tray method (Standard Method 9223 B). Three of the well water samples along with nine
dairy lagoon samples and one wastewater treatment plant influent sample were analyzed for fecal
coliform in accordance with Standard Method 9222 D.
For bacterial analyses, a holding time of 30 hours must be met for drinking water samples and a holding
time of 6 hours must be met for wastewater samples. All samples met these requirements, except for the
following dairy lagoon and wastewater treatment plant samples: 10154251, 10154252, 10154253,
10154271, 10164263 and 10164264. The fecal coliform results for these samples were qualified
estimated based on holding time exceeded. In addition, all sample results that exceeded the upper limit
for microbial estimates were reported as "TNTC" or "too numerous to count." The data, as reported and
qualified, are acceptable for use for all purposes.
E-9
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix E
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
3. EPA National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Robert S. Kerr Environmental
Research Center, Ada,
Hormone and Perchlorate Analyses
Fifteen dairy lagoon, three WWTP, and 30 water samples were analyzed for estrogens (17-a-estradiol;
17-(3-estradiol;17-a-ethynyl estradiol; estriol; and estrone) by EPA's Ada Laboratory following the in-
house standard operating procedure (SOP) "Quantitation of Estrogens in Groundwater and Animal waste
Dairy lagoon Water Using Solid Phase Extraction, Pentafluorobenzyl and Trimethylsilyl Derivatization
and Gas Chromatography Negative Ion Chemical lonization/Mass Spectrometry/Mass Spectrometry,
RSKSOP-253, Revision 2, October 2010. "
The same 30 water samples were also analyzed for perchlorate following the modified USEPA SW846
Method 6850, "Perchlorate in Soils, Water and Wastes Using High performance Liquid
Chromatography/Electrospray/Ionization (ESI) Mass Spectroscopy (MS) or Tandem Mass Spectroscopy
(MS/MS). All sample analyses were evaluated following the EPA's Stage 2B Manual Data Validation
Process. The summaries of sample and QC analyses were evaluated and laboratory qualifiers were
mapped to Region 10 EPA validation qualifiers following the technical acceptance criteria and method
quality control specifications. All of the technical acceptance criteria for QC were met by both analyses.
Target compounds detected above the method detection limit (MDL) but below reporting limits were
qualified estimated, "J." Data detected below the MDL were qualified non-detects, "U," and reported at
the MDL level. The data, as qualified, are usable for all purposes.
4. USGS National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colorado
Trace Organics
USGS NWQ Laboratory analyzed fifteen dairy lagoons, three WWTP plant influent, and 30 water
samples for trace organic chemicals following the SOP for the "Analysis of Waste Water Samples by Gas
Chromatography/Mass Spectroscopy" - USGS SOPs 1433 and 4433. All sample analyses were
evaluated following EPA's Stage 2B Manual Data Validation Process (S2VM). The summaries of
sample and QC analyses were evaluated and laboratory qualifiers were mapped to Region 10 EPA
validation qualifiers following the technical acceptance criteria and method quality control specifications.
Data users are advised to consider the values reported as a screen. For full usability, data need further
confirmation for the following reasons: (1) data were not thoroughly verified by the validator because of
the absence of the instrument raw data output at the time of review, and (2) the laboratory followed their
in-house SOP and the recurrence of results out of SOP QC control limits indicates that the data may not
be reproducible by a third party. The data reported can only be used for information purposes and a good
starting point in determining sample locations for confirmatory analyses.
Samples were analyzed following the technical specifications of the analytical method. Approximately 6
percent of the total data points were qualified unusable based on extremely low surrogate recoveries.
Approximately 32 percent of the total data points were qualified estimated due to chromatographic
interference and QC results that did not meet the specified criteria.
E-10
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
Appendix E
September 2012
Trace levels of 4-tert-octylphenol, diethyl phthalate, menthol, p-cresol, tri(2-butoxyethyl)phosphate, tri(2-
chloroethyl) phosphate, tri (dichloroisopropyl) phosphate, tributyl phosphate, and triphenyl phosphate
were detected in the field blank (WW29). Only the diethyl phthalate in associated sample WW06
detected at a concentration less than 5x the value in the blank was qualified as non-detect, "U," based on
blank contamination.
5. University of Nebraska - Lincoln Water Science Laboratory (UNL)
The University of Nebraska - Lincoln Water Science Laboratory (UNL Laboratory) analyzed several
different types of compounds. Table E3 provides a summary of the compounds evaluated, number of
samples, matrix, and analytical method.
Table E3: Phase 3 - Chemical Analyses Conducted and Analytical Methods Used by the
University of Nebraska - Lincoln Water Science Laboratory
Sample Type
Water Wells,
Dairy
Lagoons, and
WWTP
Influent
Soil and
Manure
Compound Class
Hormones
Wastewater
Pharmaceuticals
Veterinary
Pharmaceuticals
Isotopic Nitrogen
Isotopic Oxygen
Ammonia
Nitrate
Hormones
Wastewater
Pharmaceuticals
Veterinary
Pharmaceuticals
No. of
Samples
47
47
47
47
47
47
47
16
16
16
Analytical Method
(Prep)
On-line SPE with CIS
clean-up
Off-line SPE-Modified
Method 3535
On-line SPE extraction
with citrate buffer
Analyte Prep 15-002
SOP#Analyte-O18in
Nitrate/AgNO3
Analyte-DISTN15-004
Analyte Prep 15-002
Microwave-Assisted
solvent extraction
(MASE) and SPE
Microwave-Assisted
solvent extraction
(MASE) and SPE
On-line SPE extraction
with citrate buffer
Analytical Method
(Analysis)
SOP#LCMS APPI
Steroids_Water-001
LC/MS SOP-LCQ-
Wastewater-001
SOP#LC/MS_Vet_P
harm water-002
N15 Analysis Dual
Inlet IRMS
SOP# Inst-Isoprime
EA-18O-001
Titrimetric
Titrimetric
SOP# Analyte-
Steroids_Solids-001
SOP#-Analyte-
LCQ-Wastesolid-
001
SOP#-Analyte-
VetPharmSED-001
A Stage 2A data validation review was conducted by the EPA QA team on all the data. The validation
included the limited evaluation of calibration, QA, and sample analytical summary results. All samples
were analyzed following the technical specifications of UNL's in-house SOPs.
E-ll
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix E
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
General QA Observations for UNL Analyses
UNL data sets may not meet the third-party reproducibility criterion set forth by EPA's Information
Quality Guidelines (EPA /260R-02-008 October 2002) for the following reasons: (1) there is no
established or standard analytical method for the analysis of the target compounds, and the analytical
methods used are for research purposes only, (2) the recurrence of out-of-control QC results;
(S)variability in duplicate runs; and (4) compound identification and calculations were not verified at the
time of review because the instruments' raw data output was not available.
Twenty-nine water, 15 dairy lagoons, three WWTP, and 16 soil or manure samples were collected and
analyzed for wastewater pharmaceuticals, veterinary pharmaceuticals, hormones and steroids, and
isotopic nitrogen and isotopic oxygen. The following is a summary of the data validations for UNL:
Wastewater Pharmaceuticals: Samples were analyzed following the technical specifications of UNL's in-
house SOP. Data users are advised to consider the values reported as a screen. For full usability, data
needs further confirmation for the following reasons: (1) data were not thoroughly verified by the
validator because of the absence of the instrument raw data output at the time of review, and (2) there is
no established standard analytical method for the analysis of the target compounds and the recurrence of
out of control QC results and big variability in the duplicate runs indicated that the data may not be
reproducible by a third party. The data reported can only be used for informational purposes only and a
good starting point in determining sample locations for confirmatory analyses.
Approximately 10 percent of the wastewater pharmaceutical data points were qualified unusable because
of extremely low spike and surrogate recoveries (less than 10 percent). An additional 55% of the total
data points were qualified estimated due to out of control recoveries in the associated QC runs. The rest of
the data as qualified are usable for all purposes.
Veterinary Pharmaceuticals: No significant problems were encountered with the analysis of soil/solid
samples for veterinary pharmaceuticals. Most of the liquid samples (dairy lagoons, well water, and
WWTP) underwent multiple analyses because of concentrations of some of the target compounds in the
field blank and also because of matrix interferences. Approximately 9 percent of the total data points
were qualified unusable and an additional 18 percent were qualified estimated concentrations with a high
bias because of out of control internal standards or calibration. Five lincomycin and three monensin
results in the water samples were detected above the reporting limits but were flagged non-detects based
on contamination in the associated field blank, WW29. The concentrations reported were calculated
using internal standard techniques. Most of the internal standards did not meet minimum area
requirements when compared with the daily calibration standards. Therefore, the associated results may
be biased high.
Steroids/Hormone s: Because of the calibration results, the detected results or reporting limits for
androstadienedione, androsterone, progesterone, estrone, a-zearalanol, a-zearalenol, (3-zearalanol for
samples associated with the calibration run on January 18, 2011, were qualified estimated, "J/UJ."
Approximately 15 percent of the total data points were flagged estimated because of calibrations. In
addition, some target compounds were qualified non-detects based on contamination in the associated
blank.
E-12
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix E
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Isotopic Nitrogen/Isotopic Oxygen Analyses/Ammonium and Nitrate Nitrogen Analyses: Isotopic
nitrogen and oxygen were determined using the amounts of ammonium and nitrate-nitrogen in water. No
problems were encountered with the isotopic nitrogen, isotopic oxygen, and intermediate ammonia and
nitrate nitrogen results. For QC, laboratory reagent blanks, duplicates, and laboratory-fortified blanks
were analyzed at the required frequency. All of the results were comparable to each other. Data were not
qualified and are usable for all purposes.
6. USGS Laboratory, Reston Virginia
Recharge Age Dating
The USGS Laboratory located in Reston, Virginia (USGS Reston Laboratory) analyzed the recharge age
of the water well samples following the SF6 procedure.
Limitations of the Method: The recharge dating procedure is a statistical calculation derived from the SF6
gas evolved in the sample and other existing data. It is applicable to young groundwater systems aged
1970 to present. This procedure is not applicable to areas with high anthropogenic and natural SF6
background values such as indicated by samples WW-01, WW-11, WW-12, WW-13, WW-23, and WW-
28. As a result, age could not be measured in those samples because of the high values of SF6 as
dissolved gases. These samples may indicate areas where localized anthropogenic sources of SF6 exist.
Alternatively, volcanic rocks can contain more SF6 than the average atmospheric concentrations of SF6
and the volcanic terrain and mineralogy of the sediments in the local aquifer may be the source of the SF6.
The USGS Reston Laboratory flagged these six water wells samples with a "C" qualifier, meaning
contaminated. For clarity, the validator changed the "C" qualifier with "NM," not measured. In addition,
there were also some samples with recharge calculated dates before 1970. The dating technique used
provides only a range, and data users should be warned that the reported recharge ages are estimates.
References Appendix E
EPA. 2010a. Yakima Basin Nitrate Study Phase 2 - Initial Nitrate/Coliform Screening of Domestic
Water Wells February 2010 Sampling Event. Quality Assurance Project Plan. USEPA Region
10. January 27, 2010.
EPA. 2010b. Yakima Basin Nitrate Study Phase 3 - Comprehensive Analytical Source Tracer Sampling
April 201 Sampling Event. Quality Assurance Project Plan. EPA Region 10. April 8, 2010.
E-13
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix E
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
E-14
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix F
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
APPENDIX F
DAIRIES AND NITROGEN
F-l
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix F
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
F-2
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix F
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Appendix F - Dairies and Nitrogen
Animal feeding operations (AFOs) such as dairies generate large volumes of waste of the following types:
animal manure and urine, hair and corpses, bedding and spilled feed, wash-flush water, and other
processing wastes. If properly stored and used, manure from animal feeding operations can be an
environmentally sound approach to fertilizing fields. However, if not managed correctly, the waste
produced by AFOs can pollute the environment, including groundwater (NRCS 2008 and EPA 2004).
Animal wastes applied to the land can contaminate groundwater and surface water. This problem has
received increasing attention as livestock operations have become more concentrated, with a trend toward
more animals on fewer farms and less land (EPA 2001). In 1998, there were 71 dairies in Yakima County
that generated 20,162,500 pounds of waste nitrogen. In 2010, the number of dairies contracted to 67 but
the amount of nitrogen they generated increased by more than 50 percent to 33,278,300 pounds (WSDA
2010). Over this time period the amount of waste generated by the average Yakima Valley dairy
increased substantially.
Concentrated animal feeding operations produce large amounts of waste in small areas (EPA 2004).
Rapid growth in the amount of nitrogen per dairy poses waste disposal challenges. It can become
increasingly difficult to effectively store and manage the waste onsite, and to find enough land on which it
can be safely applied without causing pollution of groundwater and surface water.
A dairy cow produces considerable amounts of nitrogenous organic waste, typically in the range of 110 to
120 pounds of manure per day (EPA 2009). A lactating dairy cow excretes about 328 to 405 pounds of
nitrogen over the same time period (USDA 2009). In a typical dairy, liquid waste from the cow pens is
flushed with water into a ditch and then may go to a solids separator, which removes most of the solids.
Then the liquid waste may drain into a lagoon, or into a sequence of lagoons. This allows time for
additional solids to settle out to the bottom of the lagoon(s). Periodically, dairy lagoons fill with solids
and must be dredged. After the liquid has passed through the lagoon system it is typically applied with
irrigation water to wastewater application fields. Solids, either from the cow pens, aprons, the solids
separator, or from the dredged lagoons, are also usually distributed onto the application fields as fertilizer
for crops.
Agricultural ditches or creeks can receive nitrogen from overland runoff, discharges from agricultural
return flows, or discharges from application fields. These surface waters can infiltrate into the underlying
soils and carry nitrogen down to the aquifer. Contaminated surface water in creeks and ditches can carry
nitrogen away from the dairy footprint and transport it into the soil column and groundwater at off-site
locations.
As they age, underground pipes transporting dairy waste can deteriorate and develop cracks and holes
resulting in leakage of liquid over time. Pipes can crack when the soils around them settle or shift, and
they can be damaged by heavy equipment. Typically, it is difficult to determine if underground pipes are
leaking once they have been installed unless a leak detection system was incorporated into the design or
other integrity testing, such as pressure testing, is performed.
F-3
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix F
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Intact concrete slabs are relatively impermeable, but liquid can move through cracks that occur from
ground settlement, through unsealed joints between slabs, or from animal waste spillage off the slab onto
the ground.
The rate of leakage, or seepage, from manure lagoons can be significantly reduced by the presence of an
engineered liner. However, several studies have concluded that clay liners do not completely prevent
leakage. A study in southwest Kansas reported seepage rates from swine and cattle waste lagoons lined
with compacted soil liners ranging from 0.2 to 2.4 millimeters per day based on measurements of
evaporation and changes in water depth in response to the addition or removal of waste (Ham 2002).
Harter and others (2002) inferred manure lagoon leaching rates on the order of 2 millimeters per day at a
site in California's Central Valley. Leakage from manure lagoons with clay liners has also been reported
by Ritter and Chirnside (1987) and by McCurdy and McSweeney (1993).
Studies have shown that manure solids do not completely "self-seal" unlined lagoons. For example, when
researchers analyzed samples from the vadose zone (the unsaturated zone above the water table)
downgradient of unlined waste lagoons at five Texas dairies, they found that three of the five sites
exhibited nitrate levels in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) (Frarey and others 1994).31
The term "sealing," as it is sometimes used with regard to dairy lagoon solids, is misleading because it
suggests complete containment of the wastewater. The term refers to only a reduction in the seepage rate.
Ham and DeSutter found that in new lagoons constructed without clay liners, permeability decreased on
average by a factor of five after addition of waste to the lagoons, indicating some permeability reduction
overtime from organic sludge buildup.
Irrigation with manure lagoon water is a common animal waste disposal practice as it can be used as
fertilizer while reducing the volume of liquid waste stored in the lagoons. Nitrogen is an essential
nutrient for plant growth. However, if too much nitrogen or water is applied to a field, nitrogen can
migrate downward and contaminate groundwater. The potential for nitrogen migration is increased if
surface soils are highly permeable.
Nutrient Management in Washington
Because dairies generate large quantities of animal waste that can pollute surface water and groundwater,
the State of Washington requires all newly licensed Grade A milk32 producers to have an approved
Nutrient Management Plan (NMP) on site within 6 months of licensing, and a certified NMP on site
within two years of licensing. "Approved" means the local conservation district has determined that the
facility's plan to manage nutrients meets all the elements identified on a checklist established by the
Washington Conservation Commission. Certified means the local conservation district has determined all
plan elements are in place and implemented as described in the plan. To be certified, both the dairy
operator and an authorized representative of the local conservation district must sign the plan.
31 Environmental Impacts of Animal Feeding Operations, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Standards and
Applied Sciences Division, December 31, 1998. Page 14.
32 In the United States, Grade A milk refers to milk that is produced under sufficiently sanitary conditions to qualify for fluid
(beverage) consumption.
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix F
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
The checklist contains 20 elements that the dairy must meet in order to receive a license. Most dairies
keep their NMPs and associated sampling data on location and they are not available for public review.
At the end of the growing season, operators are required to collect soil samples from their fields to which
they apply manure or dairy waste water and test for nitrogen. Soil nitrogen concentrations are not to
exceed 45 parts per million (ppm) at the end of the growing season. Adherence to this guideline reduces,
but does not eliminate the potential for nitrogen to move below the plant root zone and potentially
contaminate groundwater.
Consequences of Waste Mismanagement
Improperly stored or used, animal waste can pollute rivers and groundwater, including underground
drinking water supplies. Inadequately sized, unlined, or poorly lined lagoons or other storage structures
allow manure to escape into the surrounding environment. Poorly maintained and unlined corrals can
allow contaminated wastewater to seep into groundwater. Many AFOs also lack necessary stormwater
runoff controls that divert rainwater and snowmelt from the animal confinement area. Stored manure can
be washed into nearby streams or infiltrate into the soil column. Applying too much AFO wastewater to
fields too quickly or by inadequate methods can also cause the pollutants in animal waste to pollute
streams or groundwater before they can be completely absorbed by the land and crops. In some cases, an
AFO's location - for example, on hillsides, along streams, and atop sensitive groundwater areas -
complicates sound animal waste management practices. Animal waste has the potential to contribute
contaminants such as nutrients (nitrogen or phosphorus), organic matter, sediments, pathogens (E. coll,
giardia, or cryptosporidium), heavy metals, hormones, and antibiotics to groundwater and surface water
(EPA 2011 and EPA 1999).
Nitrate Transport
Water wells can facilitate the downward migration of nitrogen. Water can flow downward outside a well
casing. If a casing is cracked or deteriorated, water can migrate down the well shaft. Negative pressure
created by the well pump can pull water from more shallow, contaminated parts of the aquifer downward
more quickly that it would otherwise migrate. Improperly abandoned wells (that were not sealed to
prevent the downward migration of shallow groundwater) can serve as conduits for downward water
migration. A comparison of historical aerial photographs shows that a number of houses that used to
exist on Dairy Cluster property have been demolished or removed. Some of these houses were situated
where dairy animal waste application fields now exist. EPA has asked the dairies for documentation that
any wells abandoned on their property were properly sealed on closure to prevent contaminant migration,
but they have declined to provide this information.
Relatively high-production dairy supply wells are often located on the facility they serve, in areas where
the shallow aquifer could become contaminated with nitrate from dairy operations. Dairy supply wells
may be screened in the upper basalt layers below the shallow, alluvial aquifer. If the well casings are
placed down to the top of the first basalt layer but not sealed to it, contaminated water from the shallow
aquifer may migrate down the outside of the well casing into the water-bearing zones between the upper
basalt layers. During the cooling process following a volcanic eruption, basaltic flows, like those in the
Yakima Valley, develop significant fracture permeability. These fractures can serve as preferential
F-5
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix F
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
pathways for the migration of contaminated groundwater. Dairy production wells and irrigation wells are
generally high production wells with large pumps.
References Appendix F
Ham, J.M., Reddi, L.N., Rice, C.W. 1999. Animal waste lagoon water quality study. A research report
by Kansas State University.
Ham, J.M. 2002 Seepage Losses from Animal Waste Lagoons: A Summary of a four-year investigation in
Kansas. Trans. ASAE 45:983-992.
Ham, J.M., and DeSutter, T.M., 1999. Seepage losses and nitrogen export from swine-waste lagoons: A
water balance study. J. Environ. Qual. 28:1090-1099.
Ham, J.M., and DeSutter, T.M., 2000. Toward site-specific design standards for animal waste lagoons:
protecting groundwater quality. J. Environ. Qual. 29:1721-1732.
Harter, T., Davis, H., Mathews, M.C., and Meyer, R.D. 2002. Shallow groundwater quality on dairy
farms with irrigated forage crops. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology. 55(287-315).
McCurdy, M. and McSweeney, K. 1993. The origin and identification of macropores in an earthen-lined
dairy manure storage basin. J. Environ. Qual. 22:148-154.
McNab, W.W., Singleton, M.J., Moran, J.E., and Esser, B.K. 2007. Assessing the impact of animal
waste lagoon seepage on the geochemistry of an underlying shallow aquifer. Environ. Sci.
technol. Feb.l; 41(3) 753-758.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2008. Agricultural Waste Management Field
Handbook, Part 651, Appendix 10D Design and Construction Guidelines for Waste
Impoundments Lined with Clay or Amendment-Treated Soil.
Ritter. W.F., and Chirnside, A.E.M. 1987. Influence of agricultural practices on nitrate in the water table
aquifer. Biological Wastes. 19(3)165-178.
Toor, G.S., Lusk, M., and Obreza, T. 2011. Onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems: Nitrogen.
Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Science, University of
Florida, June 2011. Publication Number SL348.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2009. Part 651. Agricultural Waste Management Field
Handbook. Page 4-13, Table 4-5.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1999. Preliminary data summary, feedlots point source
category study. January 1999. EPA-821-R-99-022.
EPA. 2001. Environmental assessment of proposed revisions to the national pollutant discharge
elimination system regulation and the effluent guidelines for concentrated animal feeding
operation, January 2001, EPA 821-B-01-001, page 2-1.
F-6
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix F
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
EPA. 2004. Risk assessment evaluation for concentrated animal feeding operations. Office of Research
and Development. May 2004.
EPA. 2009. Livestock Manure Management, June 27, 2009, Page 5-2,
http://www.epa.gov/outreach/reports/05-manure.pdf
EPA. 2011. U.S. EPA Region 9, Animal waste - What's the Problem? Page 1.
http://www.epa.gov/region9/animalwaste/problem.html. Accessed January 2011.
Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA). 2010. Spreadsheet "Summary 1998
2010BiennialRegAnimaNumbers001. Obtained from WSDA.
F-7
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix F
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
F-8
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix G
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
APPENDIX G
IRRIGATED CROPS IN THE YAKIMA COUNTY
G-l
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix G
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
(This page intentionally left blank.)
G-2
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix G
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Appendix G: Irrigated Crops in the Yakima County
The Yakima County is one of the world's most fertile growing regions with more than 240,000 acres of
cropland in the county (USDA 2007a). Agriculture is the largest economic sector in Yakima County and
it accounts for approximately 70% to 80% of land use. The top seven crops account for about 90% of the
agricultural acreage in Yakima County (USDA 2007b):
• Orchards (about 95,000 acres)
• Corn for silage and grain (about 42,000 acres)
• Alfalfa hay (about 37,000 acres)
• Hops (about 19,000 acres)
• Mint (about 12,000 acres)
• Winter wheat (about 9,000 acres)
• Haylage (about 8,000 acres)
Nitrogen is essential to crop growth and development. This nutrient can be supplied in the form of
fertilizer as synthetic compounds or through organic-based amendments including manure, plant residues,
and for legume plants like alfalfa, by atmospheric nitrogen-fixing Rhizobium bacteria. Nitrate is the
principal form of nitrogen used by plants, and numerous biological and chemical processes result in the
conversion of nitrogen-containing compounds to nitrate.
The amount, timing, frequency, and form of nitrogen fertilizer affect the amount of nitrogen (in the form
of nitrate) available for uptake. Many synthetic nitrogen fertilizers are readily available for assimilation
into the plant. Organic forms of nitrogen fertilizer, such as manure or crop residue, require degradation
and transformation over time and release nitrate at a slower rate than synthetic fertilizers. Other factors
such as denitrification in the soil by microorganisms, soil type, and volatilization to the atmosphere, also
affect the amount of nitrogen available for plant uptake. Regardless of the form of nitrogen, application
of nutrients or water at rates greater than plant demand can result in excess nitrate infiltrating through the
soil below the root zone into the groundwater.
Nitrogen Application to Irrigated Crops
It is likely that both historic and current use of nitrogen-based fertilizers and irrigation methods in Yakima
County contribute to groundwater nitrate levels (Ecology 2010). Crop management has advanced
substantially over the past 20 years with more precise nutrient and water management for many crops
grown in the Yakima County including hops, grapes, and tree fruit. Based on recommended rates, EPA
estimated the amount of nitrogen that is being applied to irrigated crop fields (EPA 2012) by determining
the amount of irrigated crop acreage for individual crops (USDA 2007a) and multiplying that by the WSU
fertilizer application guidelines (WSU 2009). When the 2007 census did not provide adequate
information, crop data from the 2002 Census of Agriculture was used (USDA 2002).
Nitrogen application rates may be based on yield goals, soil type, and existing residual nitrate levels as
determined by soil or plant tissue tests. The development of recommended agronomic nitrogen
application rates does not take into account protection of groundwater. Since published application rates
G-3
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix G
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
specific to Yakima County could not be found, the recommended average nitrogen application rates for
each crop was obtained from the Washington State University fertilizer guidelines (WSU 2009). For each
type of crop, WSU recommends a range of nitrogen application bounded by a high and low application
rate. The annual nitrogen application rate for each crop was estimated by averaging the high and low
rates. These are estimated rates and actual application rates by farmers vary.
Below is a list of the crops that EPA estimates have potentially the highest nitrogen demand for fertilizers,
either synthetic, organic, or both based on the WSDA crop data (WSDA 2008) and WSU fertilizer
guidelines (WSU 2009):
• Corn for silage and grain - 32%
• Orchard Land-21%
• Hops - 9%
• Mint for oil, both peppermint & spearmint - 8%
• Alfalfa Hay - 7%
• Winter wheat for grain - 6%
These six crops account for nearly 83% of the total potential nitrogen loading from crop fertilization in
Yakima County. Corn, when either grown for silage or grain, accounts for the greatest potential nitrogen
loading due to its high nitrogen demand and high biomass yield potential. Silage corn is now a common
crop associated with dairy operations in Yakima County. Washington State University Fertilizer Guides
estimate total nitrogen requirements for a 30 ton yield of corn silage to be approximately 220 pounds per
acre per year.
Orchard land has a relatively low recommended nitrogen application rate of approximately 50 pounds per
acre per year, but because the total acreage of orchard land is large it accounts for high nitrogen loading in
Yakima County for irrigated crops. The crop management practices for orchard land are generally
closely monitored because of the need to ensure a high quality product for consumers (Peck and others
2006).
The form of fertilizer applied may also be constrained by crop physiology. Application of manure solids
on mint and alfalfa is limited as these perennial crops cannot withstand tillage or incorporation of manure
but could accept a liquid form of dairy waste (Mitchell and others, 1992). Application of manure to hop
fields may be limited to amendment of soil prior to planting because hop production trellises limit manure
incorporation between rows. Food safety concerns for directly consumed crops, such as apples, limit the
application window for manure. The National Organic Program, Washington State Organic Standard, and
USDA Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) prohibit the application of raw manure on any directly
consumed crop 90 days prior to harvest and require incorporation of the waste into the soil (WSDA
2009).
Irrigation Practices
In addition to fertilizer, irrigation is a significant component of the Yakima County crop production.
Water quality violations of total suspended sediment in the Yakima River led to enactment of Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) limits in the late 1990s. Since then, significant progress has been made in
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix G
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
reducing soil erosion from agricultural fields through cost share incentive programs for growers to
convert from highly erodible irrigation systems (rill and flood) to less erosive sprinkler-based or drip
irrigation systems (NACD 2008). However, nitrate leaching may occur under any irrigation system,
including sprinkler based, if irrigation water is applied beyond crop plant water demand.
Estimates of predominant irrigation methods for the top seven crops in Yakima County, based on acreage,
are shown in Figure Gl (WSDA 2008). The irrigation method was estimated by quarter section and
resulted in combinations of irrigation system types as shown by the example center pivot/rill. Rill
irrigation is the practice of applying water to row crops via small ditches or channels between the rows
made by tillage implements. Apples on sprinkler had the greatest acreage at 27,388 acres, followed
closely by corn on rill irrigation at 22,145 acres.
Detailed irrigation water management studies conducted by universities, industry and agencies in the past
have documented that rill (surface) irrigation results in significantly more deep percolation of irrigation
water than sprinkler irrigation (USDA 1997). Drip irrigation has the lowest deep percolation rate.
Figure Gl shows that there are approximately 22,145 acres of rill or surface irrigated cropland in Yakima
County and of that, corn and wheat which are both annually seeded crops make up 38% of the total
irrigated acres.
No published data are available for irrigation scheduling or management for Yakima County crops.
USDA National Agriculture Statistics Service (NASS) conducted a survey in 2007 on the methods used
by crop producers on when to irrigate (USDA 2007b). For Washington State, nearly 70% of irrigated
farms surveyed use qualitative factors to determine water demand such as calendar scheduling, delivery
by the irrigation provider, or crop appearance. It was estimated that less than 30% of Washington
irrigated farms use quantitative methods such as crop evapotranspiration (ET), crop models, or soil or
plant sensors to determine irrigation water quantity and application timing.
G-5
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
Appendix G
September 2012
Figure Gl: Irrigation System for the Seven Crops with the Highest Total Acreage in the Yakima County1
Table Gl: Yakima County Irrigation Type for Crops with over 15,000 Acres
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
ru.-,
Alfalfa, Hay
Apple
Corn, Field
Grape, Concord
Hops
Mint
Wheat
Central
Pivot
3932
125
4936
181
3025
Central
Pivot Rill
496
1826
142
293
32
181
CRSP
1502
59
207
Central
Pivot
Sprinkler
173
401
^^^Tltra^^^
Pivot
Wheel
Line
838
232
222
159
Drip
497
620
15388
20
None
21
267
70
33
6
5424
No
Sprinkler
Wheel
Rill
1641
313
22145
6133
3044
5436
6640
Rill
Sprinkler
19
211
20
2830
Rill
Wheel
Line
82
354
142
Sprinkler
1588
27338
220
6647
228
368
Sprinkler
Wheel
Line
368
62
46
Undefined
57
129
74
41
37
47
118
Wheel
Line
11975
37
449
73
3653
6031
1 Irrigation system survey was conducted on a quarter section basis which results in combinations of irrigation system types (USDA 2007b).
G-6
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley
Appendix G
September 2012
Figure G2: USDA Survey of Methods Used to Determine When to Irrigate Crop Fields (USDA 2007b)
mnnn
IUUUU
snnn
ouuu
E
i«
" cnnn
u_ bUUU
«f—
o
i«
o
_ /nnn
•Q 4UUU
E
3
onnn
^UUU
C
c
CJ
V
<
C
.0
•^
£3
•»«.
)
c
0
o
t—
D
V
<
--»
CD
.^
O
CD
:>
**^,
.CO
Q
9»
*
Q
A-
Uj
^
0?
Q
(r.
•»—
O
Q.
CD
—
C
C
&
£
,(/3
0
J
o
o
*~
Q
CO
cr
CD
0
b
_c
cz
^
^
CD
Z
0
-Q
cr
5>
r
n n
II
c7 CD c 45
f « c? ^
^ ° ® o
C? CO ^r
O O> v.
^ ^ ^
•*- C3
•5? 5
0 £•
^ r°
^ 0
-£?
a
G-l
-------
Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells and Appendix G
Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley September 2012
Appendix G References
National Association of Conservation Districts (NACD). 2008. TMDL Case Study: Washington.
Accessed at: http://www.nacdnet.org/policy/environment/water/tmdl/casestudies/washington.phtml
Mitchell, Alan, K. Stevenson, N. A. Farris, M. English, and J. S. Selker. 1992. Irrigation and Nitrogen
Fertility of Peppermint in Central Oregon. Accessed at: http://oregonstate.edu/dept/coarc/sites/
default/files/publication/92 jeppermint_irrigation_nitrogen.pdf
Peck, Gregory, P. K. Andrews, J. P. Reganold, and J. K. Fellman. 2006. Apple Orchard Productivity and
Fruit Quality Under Organic, Conventional, and Integrated Management. HortScience 41:99-107
Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) Organic Program. 2009.
http://agr.wa.gov/FoodAnimal/Organic/docs/2805_manure_compost_guide.pdf
WSDA Natural Resources Assessment Division. 2008. Crop and Irrigation Survey Data.
Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2010. Lower Yakima Valley groundwater quality:
preliminary assessment and recommendations. Prepared by: the Washington State Departments of
Agriculture, Ecology and Health; Yakima County Public Works Department; and the US
Environmental Protection Agency. February 2010. Ecology Publication No. 10-10-009.
Washington State University (WSU). Washington State University Fertilizer Guides & Summary.
Acquired August 2009 from http://grant-adams.wsu.edu/agriculture/General/fertilizerguides/
Washington%20State%20Fertilizer%20Guides/Indexfertguide.html
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2007 a. The Census of Agriculture for Washington
State. 2007. Vol. 1, Ch. 2: County Level Data.
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2007b. Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey, Washington
State Responses. Accessed at: http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Online_Highlights/
Farm_and_Ranch_Irrigation_Survey/fris08 .pdf pp 159.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The Census of Agriculture for Washington State.
2002. Vol. 1, Ch. 2: County Level Data.
USDA Economic Research Service. 1997. Agricultural Resources and Environmental Indicators.
Agricultural Handbook No. 712. Accessed at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ah712/
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2012. Yakima Valley: Screening Analysis-
Nitrogen Budget. EPA Region 10. Office of Environmental Assessment. June 2012.
G-8
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
------- |