EPA 600/R-14/084 I May 2015 I www.epa.gov/hfstudy
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Retrospective Case Study in
Southwestern Pennsylvania
STUDY OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF
HYDRAULIC FRACTURING ON DRINKING
WATER RESOURCES
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
-------
(This page intentionally left blank.)
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
Study of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing
on Drinking Water Resources
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/084
in
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Disclaimer
This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
IV
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Table of Contents
Disclaimer iv
Table of Contents v
List of Tables vii
List of Figures viii
Acronyms and Abbreviations xi
Preface xiv
Authors xv
Acknowledgements xvi
Executive Summary 1
1. Introduction 5
2. Purpose and Scope 10
3. Study Area Background 11
3.1. Geology 11
3.2. Hydrology 14
3.3. Oil and Gas Production 15
3.4. Land Use 17
3.5. Potential Contaminant Sources 20
4. Study Methods 22
4.1. Sampling Locations 23
4.2. Water Collection 23
4.3. Purging and Sampling at Domestic Wells and Springs 24
4.4. Sampling at Surface Water Locations 24
4.5. Sample Shipping/Handling 24
4.6. Water Analysis 25
4.6.1. Field Parameters 25
4.6.2. Analytical Methods for Ground Water and Surface Water 25
4.7. QA/QC 27
4.8. Data Handling and Analysis 28
5. Historical Water Quality Data 31
6. Water Quality Data from This Study 36
6.1. Geochemical Parameters 36
6.2. Major Ions 41
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
6.3. Organic Compounds 59
6.3.1. Volatile Organic Compounds 62
6.3.2. Semivolatile Organic Compounds 63
6.3.3. Diesel- and Gasoline-Range Organics 64
6.4. Water Isotopes 64
6.5. Dissolved Gases 67
6.5.1. Methane Isotopes 68
6.5.2. Inorganic Carbon Isotopes 72
6.6. Strontium Isotopes 75
6.7. Halogen Ions 77
6.8. Radionuclides 81
7. Southern Area 83
8. Iron and Manganese 88
9. Summary of Case Study Results 93
References 98
Appendix A QA/QC Summary A-l
Appendix B Sample Results B-l
Appendix C Background Data C-l
Appendix D Analytical Data from Locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 D-l
VI
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
List of Tables
Table 1.
Land use in Washington County in 1992 and 2006 [[[ 17
Table 2. Area potentially affected by active well pads in Washington County .................................... 19
Table 3. Information on wells sampled in Washington County [[[ 22
Table 4. Summary statistics for countywide ground water and spring data ........................................ 39
Table 5. Summary statistics for northern area ground water and spring data .................................... 46
Table 6. Summary statistics for southern area ground water and spring data .................................... 48
Table 7. Summary statistics for countywide surface water data [[[ 50
Table 8. Summary statistics for countywide ground water and spring data, additional
parameters [[[ 51
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
List of Figures
Figure 1. Location map of Washington County in southwestern Pennsylvania 7
Figure 2. Map of the study areas for the southwestern Pennsylvania retrospective case study
within the Appalachian Basin 8
Figure 3. Map of the Yeager impoundment area and nearby sampling locations, southern area 9
Figure 4. Panel map showing geology, land use, locations of active oil and gas wells, and
Marcellus Shale wells in Washington County, Pennsylvania 12
Figure 5. Stratigraphic chart for the bedrock of Washington County, Pennsylvania 13
Figure 6. The number of approved well permits for the Marcellus Shale in Washington County
by year through 2013 16
Figure 7. Washington County, Pennsylvania - land use in 1992 and 2006 18
Figure 8. Northern and southern sampling areas and historical water quality locations 32
Figure 9. Northern sampling area with historical water quality locations 34
Figure 10. Southern sampling area with historical water quality locations 35
Figure 11. Frequency diagram showing distributions of specific conductance in ground water
from this study and historical data 37
Figure 12. Frequency diagram showing distributions of ground water pH from this study and
historical data 38
Figure 13. Frequency diagram of water types (ground water) identified in Washington County
from this study and from historical water quality data 42
Figure 14. Major ion chemistry of ground water from this study and from historical data 43
Figure 15. Relationship between specific conductance and pH and the concentrations of
chloride, bicarbonate, sulfate, calcium, and sodium for ground water in Washington
County; data are plotted with respect to water type 44
Figure 16. Countywide box-and-whisker plots, showing the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 95th
percentiles 52
Figure 17. Northern area box-and-whisker plots, showing the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 95th
percentiles 53
Figure 18. Southern area box-and-whisker plots, showing the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 95th
percentiles 54
Vlll
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Figure 19. Frequency diagram showing well depths for samples collected in this study and
samples included in historical water quality databases (countywide and northern
area) 57
Figure 20. Time trends for chloride, calcium, sodium, and specific conductance in ground water
samples from this study 58
Figure 21. DRO chromatograms (GC-FID) for selected samples: A) SWPAGW08, B) SWPAGW10,
C) SWPAGW11 (rounds 1 and 2), and D) SWPAGW17 (round 2) 65
Figure 22. A) Oxygen and hydrogen isotope compositions of ground water, Marcellus Shale
flowback water, and oil and gas brines in Pennsylvania, with potential mixing trends
indicated. B) Detail area showing fitted equation (dashed line) for the local meteoric
water line 66
Figure 23. Dissolved methane concentrations in shallow ground water; data from this study and
from Sharma et al. (2014) 69
Figure 24. Methane C and H isotope diagram with genetic zonation from Giustini et al. (2013) 71
Figure 25. 513C of dissolved inorganic carbon in shallow ground water and correlation with
dissolved inorganic carbon concentration and the calcite saturation index 73
Figure 26. Frequency diagrams of 513C of dissolved inorganic carbon 74
Figure 27. A) Strontium isotope values versus strontium concentrations and mixing model trends
with % contributions of Marcellus Shale produced water (see text). B) 87Sr/86Sr values
in ground water as a function of time and by well location 76
Figure 28. [CI/Br] weight ratio versus chloride concentration for shallow ground water and
surface water, as well as Marcellus Shale flowback water and oil and gas brines from
Pennsylvania 79
Figure 29. Chloride versus sodium, bromide, calcium, and lithium 80
Figure 30. [SO4/CI] weight ratio versus bromide concentration for shallow ground water and
surface water, as well as Marcellus Shale flowback water (Haluszcak et al., 2013), oil
and gas brines from Pennsylvania (Dresel and Rose, 2010), and other water types
identified in Wilson et al. (2014; yellow shaded regions) 82
Figure 31. Histogram and cumulative distribution curve of chloride concentrations from ground
water and springs in Washington County, including data from this study and historical
data 84
Figure 32. Schoeller diagram showing the major ion composition of shallow ground water,
springs, and surface water in the southern area 86
Figure 33. Iron and manganese concentrations in ground water from this study and historical
data 89
IX
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Figure 34. EH-pH diagram for Mn (25°C, Mn = 10~6, HCO3"= 10"3). Data points are measured pH
versus oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) values of ground water converted to EH
(voltage reading versus the standard hydrogen electrode) 90
Figure 35. Concentrations of manganese, iron and arsenic as a function of redox potential (EH) 91
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADQ
AMD
ATSDR
CERCLA
CH4
CLP
C02
CRDS
DIG
DOC
DOI
DRO
5180
H20
52HH20
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
o CD!C
EPA
EDR
GC/MS
GPS
GRO
GWERD
H2SO4
HPLC
IRMS
LC-MS-MS
LLNL
audit of data quality
acid mine drainage
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
methane
Contract Laboratory Program
carbon dioxide
cavity ring-down spectrometry
dissolved inorganic carbon
dissolved organic carbon
(U.S.) Department of the Interior
diesel-range organics
oxygen-18/oxygen-16 isotopic ratio in water
deuterium/hydrogen isotopic ratio in water
carbon-13/carbon-12 isotopic ratio in methane
deuterium/hydrogen isotopic ratio in methane
carbon-13/carbon-12 isotopic ratio in DIG
(U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Data Resources, Inc.
gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
global positioning system
gasoline-range organics
Ground Water and Ecosystems Restoration Division
sulfuric acid
high-performance liquid chromatography
isotope ratio mass spectrometry
liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
XI
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
LMWL local meteoric water line
MCL maximum contaminant level
MDL method detection limit
ml milliliters
mV millivolts
u.g/L micrograms per liter
u.S/cm microsiemens per centimeter
mg/L milligrams per liter
mmol/L millimoles per liter
mol/L moles per liter
NaCI sodium chloride
NaHCO3 sodium bicarbonate
NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
NLCD National Land Cover Database
NRMRL National Risk Management Research Laboratory
NIL) nephelometric turbidity unit
NURE National Uranium Resource Evaluation
NWIS National Water Information System
ORD Office of Research and Development
ORP oxidation-reduction potential
PA DCNR Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
PA DEP Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
pQ/L picocuries per liter
permil %o, parts per thousand
ppm parts per million
QA quality assurance
QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan
QC quality control
QL quantitation limit
xn
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RSKERL Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
SLAP Standard Light Antarctic Precipitation
SMCL secondary maximum contaminant level
SPC specific conductance
STORE! STOrage and RETrieval
SVOC semivolatile organic compound
IDS total dissolved solids
TIC tentatively identified compound
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
VOC volatile organic compound
VPDB Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite
VSMOW Vienna Standard Mean Ocean Water
Xlll
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Preface
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is conducting a study of the potential impacts of
hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas on drinking water resources. This study was initiated in Fiscal Year
2010 when Congress urged the EPA to examine the relationship between hydraulic fracturing and
drinking water resources in the United States. In response, EPA developed a research plan (Plan to
Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources) that was reviewed by
the Agency's Science Advisory Board (SAB) and issued in 2011. A progress report on the study (Study of
the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources: Progress Report), detailing
the EPA's research approaches and next steps, was released in late 2012 and was followed by a
consultation with individual experts convened under the auspices of the SAB.
The EPA's study includes the development of several research projects, extensive review of the
literature and technical input from state, industry, and non-governmental organizations as well as the
public and other stakeholders. A series of technical roundtables and in-depth technical workshops were
held to help address specific research questions and to inform the work of the study. The study is
designed to address research questions posed for each stage of the hydraulic fracturing water cycle:
• Water Acquisition: What are the possible impacts of large volume water withdrawals
from ground and surface waters on drinking water resources?
• Chemical Mixing: What are the possible impacts of surface spills of hydraulic fracturing fluid
on or near well pads on drinking water resources?
• Well Injection: What are the possible impacts of the injection and fracturing process on
drinking water resources?
• Flowback and Produced Water: What are the possible impacts of surface spills of flowback
and produced water on or near well pads on drinking water resources?
• Wastewater Treatment and Waste Disposal: What are the possible impacts of inadequate
treatment of hydraulic fracturing wastewaters on drinking water resources?
This report, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania, is the product of one of the
research projects conducted as part of the EPA's study. It has undergone independent, external peer
review in accordance with Agency policy, and all of the peer review comments received were considered
in the report's development.
The EPA's study will contribute to the understanding of the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing
activities for oil and gas on drinking water resources and the factors that may influence those impacts.
The study will help facilitate and inform dialogue among interested stakeholders, including Congress,
other Federal agencies, states, tribal government, the international community, industry, non-
governmental organizations, academia, and the general public.
xiv
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Authors
Richard T. Wilkin, US EPA/ORD/NRMRL
Tony R. Lee, US EPA/ORD/NRMRL
Christopher J. Ruybal, Student Services Contractor for the US EPA under contract EP-13-C-000135
David J. Rectenwald, US EPA/Region 3
xv
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Acknowledgements
EPA would like to acknowledge the homeowners who participated in this study. EPA would also like to
acknowledge the following organizations for their efforts in supporting this project: Ecology and
Environment, Inc., for providing assistance in the preparation of the report (contract EP-S7-13-07); the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry for their support in addressing health-based concerns
raised by homeowners; and EPA Region 3 for field assistance. EPA acknowledges student contractors
and postdocs Ms. Alexandra Kirkpatrick (contract EP-10-C-000239), Ms. Ashley McElmurry (contract EP-
12-C-000025), Ms. Ranjani Ravi (EP-13-C-000134), and Dr. Amy Wolfe for reviewing data and conducting
field work. For their efforts in providing analytical support, EPA acknowledges the following
organizations: Shaw Environmental (subsequently CB&I) for metals, VOC, dissolved gas, organic acid,
and water isotope analyses (contract EP-C-08-0134); EPA Region 3 for glycol analyses; EPA Region 7 for
coordinating the analytical contract for VOCs and metals for the third round of sampling conducted in
the study (contract EP-R7-1001); EPA Region 8 for SVOC, DRO, and GRO analyses; EPA Office of Research
and Development's general parameters laboratory for DIG, DOC, anion, and nutrient analyses; ALS
Environmental for radionuclide analyses (contract EP-12-W-000014); Isotech Laboratories for stable
isotope measurements; and USGS for conducting strontium isotope analyses (interagency agreement
DW-14-95801601). Finally, EPA acknowledges the five technical reviewers, who provided constructive
comments to improve the report; peer review was coordinated by Eastern Research Group, Inc.
(contract EP-C-12-021).
xvi
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Executive Summary
In December 2009, Congress urged the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to study the
relationship between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water resources. This report provides the results
of one of five retrospective case studies conducted as part of the resulting national study (US EPA,
2012). The retrospective case studies focused on investigating reported instances of drinking water
contamination in areas where hydraulic fracturing had already occurred. This report describes the
retrospective case study for southwestern Pennsylvania, which was conducted in Amwell, Cross Creek,
Hopewell, and Mount Pleasant Townships in Washington County, locations that have witnessed
unconventional gas production from the Devonian-age Marcellus Shale.
The Marcellus Shale is an unconventional shale-gas reservoir within the Appalachian Basin, a northeast-
to-southwest oriented basin that extends from New York in the northeast to northern Georgia and
Alabama in the southwest. In Washington County, the Marcellus Shale ranges in thickness from less
than 50 to about 150 feet, and varies in depth from about 5,000 to over 7,000 feet below land surface.
Gas production from the Marcellus Shale depends on recent advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic
fracturing technologies to enhance and create fracture porosity and permeability to facilitate gas flow.
Oil and gas exploration and production has a long history in Washington County, extending back to the
late 1800s. Much of the early resource extraction in Washington County occurred at much shallower
depths compared to present-day gas development from the Marcellus Shale. In this study, water quality
samples were collected from 16 domestic wells, three springs, and three surface water locations during
three events in July 2011, March 2012, and May 2013. The sampling locations were selected based
upon public recommendations and concerns of landowners about deteriorated water quality potentially
linked to nearby drilling, hydraulic fracturing, and the related use of pits and impoundments for storing
drilling wastes and flowback/produced water from the Marcellus Shale. The domestic wells sampled in
Washington County ranged in depth from 50 to 160 feet below land surface, with a median depth of 95
feet below land surface.
The geochemistry of water samples was investigated by analysis of major ions, trace metals, dissolved
methane/ethane gas concentrations, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), low-molecular-weight acids,
semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), glycol ethers, diesel-range organics (DRO), gasoline-range
organics (GRO), radiometric constituents, strontium isotope ratios, and selected stable isotopes
(618OH2o, 62HH2o, 613CD|C, 613CCH4, and 62HCH4) (see Appendices A and B of this report). Major ion data
collected for this study were compared to historical water quality data obtained from the literature and
national water quality databases, including the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water
Information System (NWIS) and National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) databases. These data
sources provide water quality data for samples collected before 2005, and therefore before Marcellus
Shale gas recovery. Statistical comparisons (ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis) were made between the data
collected for this study and historical data on a countywide basis and on a reduced-area (3-mile-radius)
basis in order to specifically focus on historical water quality samples collected near the sampling
locations of this study. To help determine whether hydraulic fracturing or processes related to hydraulic
fracturing had caused or contributed to alleged impacts on water quality, other potential contaminant
sources were identified through detailed environmental record searches (see Appendix C of this report).
Three ground water types were identified in this study based on major ion chemistry: the calcium-
bicarbonate, sodium-bicarbonate, and calcium-chloride types. These ground water types generally
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
coincide with major ion types identified in historical water quality data, with the exceptions that the
calcium-chloride water type was unique to this study and the sodium-sulfate and calcium-sulfate water
types prevalent in the NWIS database were not identified at the sampling locations of this study.
Elevated concentrations of chloride relative to historical water quality data and time-dependent
concentration behavior indicate that a recent ground water impact occurred at sampling locations of
this study near the Yeager impoundment in Amwell Township. Based on background assessment and
evaluation of existing data, candidate causes for the issues concerning ground water chemistry at these
sampling locations include historical land use, current drilling processes and practices, historical drilling
practices, naturally occurring sources, and road salt. These potential causes are examined using
available geochemical data, land use information, and data obtained from environmental record
searches. The water quality trends with time suggest that the chloride anomaly is linked to sources
associated with the impoundment site; site-specific data are unavailable to provide more definitive
assessments of the primary causes(s) and longevity of the ground water impact.
Methane occurs naturally in ground water in southwestern Pennsylvania and is present within
subsurface glacial deposits, Permian- and Pennsylvania-age coal seams/sedimentary deposits, as well as
underlying Devonian-age strata, including the Marcellus Shale. Methane dissolved in water is odorless
and tasteless; at high concentrations, dissolved methane can outgas and produce flammable or
explosive environments. In this study, dissolved methane was detected in 24% of the ground water and
spring water samples collected; detected concentrations ranged from about 0.002 to 15.5 milligrams per
liter (mg/L), with a median value of 0.045 mg/L One domestic well sampled in this study had a methane
concentration above the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) action level of
7 mg/L. Concentrations of methane were sufficient at this and one other location for measurement of
the C and H isotope signatures, which ranged from -76.0 to -52.5 permil (%o) and -239 to -161 permil,
respectively. The most negative values, characteristic of biogenic sources, were also associated with the
highest methane concentration observed in this study. The combined C and H isotope signatures in
domestic well waters were distinct from the reported thermogenic composition of Marcellus Shale gas
(613CCH4 = -38.1 to -28.7 permil; 62HCH4 = -167 to -157 permil). Evaluations of 87Sr/86Sr, 613CDIC, 618OH20,
62HH20, [CI/Br], and [SO4/CI] ratio data from the sampling locations selected for this study provide no
clear evidence of contamination of shallow ground water by flowback or produced water from Marcellus
Shale gas wells, Upper Devonian sands, and/or other deep brines.
Water samples were analyzed for organic chemicals, including VOCs, SVOCs, glycol ethers, low-
molecular-weight acids, DRO, and GRO; these analyses evaluated up to 133 organic compounds in total.
The purpose of these analyses was to evaluate ground water and surface water for the potential
occurrence of chemicals documented as components of hydraulic fracturing fluids, and specifically the
chemicals in fracturing fluids that have been applied in Pennsylvania. There were no detections of glycol
ethers, GRO compounds, or acetate in ground water and surface water samples. VOCs (toluene,
benzene, chloroform, and acetone), SVOCs (2-butoxyethanol, phenol, and phthalates), and DRO
compounds were detected at some locations during some of the sampling rounds. Detected
concentrations of VOCs were 1.9 to 4.0 orders of magnitude below EPA's drinking water standards
(maximum contaminant levels [MCLs], where available) and included: (i) toluene at two locations during
the first and last sampling rounds; (ii) benzene at one location during the last sampling round; (iii)
acetone at three locations during the last sampling round; and (iv) chloroform at two locations during
the last sampling round. Detected concentrations of SVOCs were below EPA MCLs, where available, and
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
included: (i) phthalates at eight locations mainly during the first round of sampling; (ii) 2-butoxyethanol
at eight locations during the first round of sampling; and (iii) phenol at two locations during the first
round of sampling. Detection of individual SVOCs were not repeated at any location during the multiple
sampling rounds of this case study. Lack of correlation with other potential chemical indicators in
ground water samples with low-level concentrations of VOCs and/or SVOCs, such as elevated chloride
and other organic compounds such as glycol ethers, indicates that the infrequent detections of organic
compounds likely did not originate from hydraulic fracturing activities.
A total of 24 ground water and four surface water samples were collected for radionuclide
measurements during the latter two sampling events. Previous studies have shown high levels of
radium (73 to 6,540 picocuries per liter, pC/L) in produced water from the Marcellus Shale. The
isotopes of radium (226Ra and 228Ra) were not detected in any of the surface water or shallow ground
water samples collected in this study above 1 pC/L The EPA MCL for gross a activity is 15 pC/L In this
study, gross a and gross (3 were detected above method reporting limits in one sample collected from a
domestic well in May 2013 at activities of 6.3 and 10.3 pQ/L, respectively. The gross a activity
determined in the ground water from this well was below the EPA MCL. The radionuclide results are
consistent with the isotope data for water, dissolved inorganic carbon, and strontium and suggest that
shallow ground water and surface water from the selected sampling locations of this study were not
impacted by flowback or produced water from Marcellus Shale gas wells or other deep brines enriched
in radioactive substances.
Primary MCL exceedances were observed in this study at one location for nitrate and at two locations
for total lead. Sources of nitrate to ground water include septic systems, animal manure, and fertilizers
applied to lawns and crops; nitrate is not typically considered to be associated with hydraulic fracturing
operations. The mobility of lead in ground water is limited due to the low solubility of lead carbonates
and hydroxy carbonates, and because of the tendency for lead to sorb to mineral surfaces. Lead is not
typically considered to be associated with hydraulic fracturing operations but can be derived from
weathering of natural lead-containing minerals and drinking water can potentially be contaminated by
lead pipes or copper pipes with lead solder.
Water quality data collected for this study are consistent with historical observations showing the
common occurrence and wide-ranging concentrations of iron and manganese in ground water in
Washington County, Pennsylvania. Many of the accounts conveyed by local residents about the quality
of water from their wells related to episodic turbidity and discolored water; in many cases these
descriptions were suggestive of the presence of particulate iron and/or manganese. Concentrations of
iron and manganese in ground water systems are predominantly controlled by oxidation-reduction
(redox) reactions. In this study, these elements showed negative correlations with redox potential (EH),
that is, higher concentrations of iron and manganese were associated with lower EH, or more reducing
conditions. While the occurrences of iron and manganese in ground water of Washington County likely
stem from geology and geochemical processes that result in the natural enrichment of these elements in
regional aquifers, this water quality issue may be amplified in areas of active drilling. Previous studies in
Pennsylvania showed that some water wells sampled before and after drilling activities had increased
levels of iron and manganese. Such impacts may be related to vibrations and energy pulses put into the
ground during drilling and/or other operations. These energy inputs may cause naturally formed
particles containing iron and manganese to mobilize and possibly increase turbidity and may explain
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
temporally isolated instances of reduced water quality. Such transient water quality events were not
captured at any location during the sampling conducted for this case study.
Key observations/findings from this study are summarized below.
• Elevated concentrations of chloride relative to historical water quality data and time-dependent
concentration behavior indicate that a recent ground water impact occurred at sampling
locations near the Yeager impoundment in Amwell Township. The impact resulted in chloride
concentrations in a drinking water supply that exceeded the secondary MCL and a shift in
ground water chemistry toward a calcium-chloride composition. The impoundment site was
used to store drilling wastes and wastewater associated with the hydraulic fracturing water
cycle.
• Dissolved methane was detected in 24% of the ground water and spring water samples collected
in this study at concentrations that ranged from about 0.002 to 15.5 mg/L Carbon and
hydrogen isotope signatures of methane in domestic well waters were distinct from the
reported thermogenic composition of Marcellus Shale gas. Methane occurs naturally in ground
water in southwestern Pennsylvania and is present within subsurface glacial deposits, Permian-
and Pennsylvania-age coal seams/sedimentary deposits, as well as underlying Devonian-age
strata, including the Marcellus Shale.
• There were no detections in this study of glycol ethers, GRO compounds, or acetate in ground
water and surface samples collected in Washington County. Detections of VOCs and SVOCs
were infrequent, below EPA's drinking water MCLs, and did not correlate with other potential
indicators of hydraulic fracturing fluids, such as elevated chloride and/or the presence of glycol
ethers.
• Primary MCL exceedances were observed in this study at one location for nitrate and at two
locations for total lead; the occurrences of nitrate and lead in ground water are not considered
to be associated with hydraulic fracturing operations.
• Secondary MCL exceedances for manganese and iron were common in homeowner wells;
increased concentrations of these elements correlate with moderately reducing ground water
conditions and are consistent with historical observations that demonstrate the natural
enrichment of these elements in regional aquifers. Transient episodes of decreased water
quality from increased concentrations of iron and/or manganese and increased turbidity may be
amplified in areas of active drilling.
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
1. Introduction
Recent advances in drilling technologies (horizontal drilling) and well stimulation (hydraulic fracturing)
have resulted in large-scale development of vast, unconventional reserves of oil and gas across a wide
range of geographic regions and geologic formations in the United States. These reserves are
considered unconventional, because they are bound up in low-permeability reservoirs such as shale,
tight sands, limestone, and coal beds, and recovery of these reserves was previously uneconomical.
While some of this new development is occurring in areas with mature oil and gas fields, areas with very
little or no previous oil and gas development also are now being developed. As a result, there are rising
concerns over potential impacts on human health and the environment, including potential effects on
drinking water resources. Environmental concerns include the potential for contamination of shallow
ground water by stray gases (methane), fracturing chemicals associated with unconventional gas
development, and formation waters (brines).
In December 2009, Congress urged the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to study the
relationship between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water. The study was to be conducted using an
approach that relied on the best available science as well as independent sources of information, and
through a transparent, peer-reviewed process that would ensure the validity and accuracy of the data.
EPA consulted with other federal agencies and appropriate state and interstate regulatory agencies in
carrying out the study (US EPA, 2010a). In February 2011, EPA issued the Draft Plan to Study the
Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources (US EPA, 2011a). The final Plan
to Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources was released in
November 2011 (US EPA, 2011b).
In 2011, EPA began to research the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water
resources, if any, and to identify the driving factors that could affect the severity and frequency of any
such impacts. EPA scientists focused primarily on hydraulic fracturing of shale formations, with some
study of other oil- and gas-producing formations, including coal beds. EPA designed the scope of the
research around five stages of the hydraulic fracturing water cycle (US EPA, 2012).
Each stage of the cycle is associated with a primary research question:
• Water acquisition: What are the potential impacts of large-volume water withdrawals from
ground water and surface waters on drinking water resources?
• Chemical mixing: What are the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing fluid surface spills on or
near well pads on drinking water resources?
• Well injection: What are the potential impacts of the injection and fracturing process on
drinking water resources?
• Flowback and produced water: What are the potential impacts of flowback and produced water
(collectively referred to as "hydraulic fracturing wastewater") surface spills on or near well pads
on drinking water resources?
• Wastewater treatment and waste disposal: What are the potential impacts of inadequate
treatment of hydraulic fracturing wastewater on drinking water resources?
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Prior to the release of the study plan, EPA invited the public to nominate specific regions of the United
States for inclusion as potential sites for retrospective case studies. The plan identified 41 potential
sites. The studies were to focus on investigating reported instances of drinking water resource
contamination in areas where hydraulic fracturing had already occurred and were intended to inform
several of the primary research questions related to chemical mixing, well injection, and flowback and
produced water. Of the 41 sites nominated during the stakeholder process, EPA selected five sites
across the United States at which to conduct the retrospective case studies. The sites were deemed
illustrative of the types of problems that were reported to EPA during stakeholder meetings held in 2010
and 2011. Additional information on site selection can be found in US EPA (2011b). EPA's plan for the
retrospective case studies was to make a determination of the presence and extent of drinking water
resource contamination, if any, as well as whether hydraulic fracturing or related processes contributed
to the contamination. Thus, the retrospective sites were expected to provide EPA with information
regarding key factors that may be associated with drinking water contamination from hydraulic
fracturing activities (US EPA, 2011b).
In 2011, EPA began conducting investigations at the five selected sites in Washington County,
Pennsylvania (southwestern Pennsylvania); Bradford County, Pennsylvania (northeastern Pennsylvania);
Wise County, Texas; Las Animas and Huerfano Counties, Colorado (Raton Basin); and Dunn County,
North Dakota (Killdeer). This report presents the results of the retrospective case study in southwestern
Pennsylvania that was conducted in Amwell, Cross Creek, Hopewell, and Mount Pleasant Townships in
Washington County, locations where hydraulic fracturing has already occurred and may continue to
occur (see Figure 1). Hydraulic fracturing activities in these areas mainly focus on recovering natural gas
from the Marcellus Shale, a large reservoir of natural gas in the Appalachian Basin.
The sampling locations selected for this study were based primarily on homeowner concerns regarding
potential adverse impacts on their well water and possible association with the drilling or processes
related to hydraulic fracturing in the vicinity of their homes. The study specifically focused on two areas
in Washington County: the northern area and southern area (see Figure 2). In the northern area,
homeowner reports included recent changes in water quality (e.g., turbidity, staining properties, taste,
and odors) of the drinking water in their homes and concerns regarding the use of impoundments
(specifically the Carter impoundment). In the southern area, homeowner concerns focused on changes
in water quality and the possibility that water quality issues were related to the collection and storage of
flowback and other water in an impoundment (the Yeager impoundment) and drill cuttings in a reserve
pit on the Yeager Unit 7H well pad (see Figure 3). The 7H well (horizontal Marcellus well) was
completed in December 2009. Well records indicate that in 2011 the well was activated and began
producing natural gas, and it continued to produce through the first quarter of 2013 (PA DEP, 2013). A
plan for closure and reclamation of the Yeager impoundment site was submitted to the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) in February 2014.
The following sections of this report provide the purpose and scope of this case study, an overview of
the case study site background, study methods, historical water quality data, analysis of the study
sample data, a discussion of site-specific topics, and a summary of the case study findings.
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
((
ARREKK J MCKEAN _
=3 I
FOREST \ -
COUNT I N I
-I r T \
\
,Jys^4-\. BRADFORD
Yf \ COUNTY
1
COUNT<
I ft I
I
r ~ r \
&£ 1
I -^WASHINGTON
^" ^*/%IIMT\/
» r
—~--ur"-^'
L~x
i Philadelphia
Southwest Pennsylvania
Sampling Area Locations
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
.'. EPA HF Sample Locations
25 50
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Source: Basemap. t£M; Sample Locations, hPA OKU
Figure 1. Location map of Washington County in southwestern Pennsylvania.
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Wteburoh ,,„..,
K»HaP**r"**""-'
MOhONGAHELA
x
cities Appalachian Basin and Marcellus Shale Regions
Townships
Boioughs
Wata Bodies
Study Areas (See Append IxO
Washington County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
: = -: •;•-': £.-- :c: -:•.•;;.• ••-£;.-- ^-: Tr'= j:.
Figure 2. Map of the study areas for the southwestern Pennsylvania retrospective case study within
Appalachian Basin. The blue circles show the northern and southern study areas.
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
o
\~~
WASHINGTON COUNTY
m
2&i
Sample Location Type 100 ft contour
* spring 10 ft Contour
© surfacewater
Source: Aerial Image (3-27-2011), ESRI; Wells and Sample Locations, EPA ORD: Contours: PASDA
Figure 3. Map of the Yeager impoundment area and nearby sampling locations, southern area.
Vicinity of Yeager Impoundment
Retrospective Case Study Site
Washington County, Pennsylvania
LrA
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
2. Purpose and Scope
As a component of EPA's National Study of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking
Water Resources (US EPA, 2012), five retrospective case studies were conducted to investigate reported
instances of drinking water resource contamination in areas of natural gas development and use of
hydraulic fracturing technology. These studies were intended to inform primary research questions
related to the hydraulic fracturing water cycle (US EPA, 2012).
This report provides the results of the retrospective case study conducted in southwestern Pennsylvania
and describes the general water quality and geochemistry of shallow ground water and surface water in
Washington County, Pennsylvania. This area has been the focus of natural gas extraction from the
Devonian-age Marcellus Shale. Water quality results are used to evaluate the potential impacts on
drinking water resources, if any, from various land use activities not restricted to shale-gas drilling and
production. The evaluation of potential impacts includes consideration of the chemicals commonly used
in hydraulic fracturing, analyses of dissolved gases and their isotopic compositions, deep brine
geochemistry in relation to shallow ground water geochemistry, historical ground water quality in
Washington County, and time-dependent geochemical trends. Potential causes of water quality
impairment that were evaluated include: industrial/commercial land use, historical land use (e.g.,
farming and mining), current drilling processes/practices, historical drilling practices, and naturally
occurring sources of contamination.
This report presents analytical data for water samples from 22 locations representing domestic wells,
springs, and surface water bodies that were sampled at least once during three rounds spanning 22
months (July 2011, March 2012, and May 2013) in Amwell, Cross Creek, Hopewell, and Mount Pleasant
Townships. The water samples were analyzed for over 235 constituents, including organic compounds,
nutrients, major ions, metals and trace elements, gross radioactivity and radioisotopes, dissolved gases,
and selected stable isotopes. Ground water quality data and summary statistics are presented for
sampled constituents. In addition to chemical data collected specifically for this study, the report
includes analysis of literature data, historical data from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National
Water Information System (NWIS) database, and other sources of water quality data for Washington
County.
Each of the retrospective case study sites differs in geologic and hydrologic characteristics; however,
generally similar research approaches were followed at the case study locations to assess potential
drinking water impacts. As described in US EPA (2012), a tiered approach was followed to guide the
progress of the retrospective case studies. The tiered scheme uses the results of successive steps or
tiers to refine research activities. This report documents progress through the Tier 2 stage and includes
the results of water sampling activities and evaluation of water quality impacts. The approach for Tier 2
efforts included a literature review of background geology and hydrology; the choice of sampling
locations and the development of a site-specific Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP); sampling and
analysis of water wells, springs, and surface water; analysis of historical background data and evaluation
of new results against background data; statistical and geochemical evaluation of water quality data;
evaluation of potential drinking water contamination; and identification of potential sources of
identified contamination, if applicable. Further evaluation of identified contaminant sources and
contaminant transport and fate, including the collection of site-specific hydrogeologic information, is
not part of the scope of this report.
10
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
3. Study Area Background
Washington County is in the southwest corner of Pennsylvania, about 28 miles southwest of downtown
Pittsburgh (Figure 1). The county covers about 857 square miles. According to the census results of
2010, the population density in Washington County was about 240 people per square mile. Mean
temperatures range from about 27 to 70 degrees Fahrenheit in winter and summer months,
respectively. Average annual precipitation is about 40 inches, with the highest precipitation levels
typically occurring in May. The study area is in the Appalachian Plateau physiographic province, which is
characterized by rolling hills, valleys, and sharp terrain in some areas. Stream erosion has created an
incised landscape with up to 750 feet of relief between stream valleys and hilltops (Newport, 1973).
3.1. Geology
The geology of Washington County consists of thick sequences of Paleozoic-era (542 to 251 million years
ago) sedimentary strata, which have accumulated in the Appalachian Basin, a northeast-to-southwest-
oriented basin that extends from New York in the northeast to northern Georgia and Alabama in the
southwest (Shultz, 1999). In this basin, sedimentary rocks generally dip and thicken to the southeast,
toward the basin axis. The rocks of the Appalachian Basin represent both clastic and biochemical
sedimentary deposits from a variety of paleoenvironments including terrestrial swamps, near-shore
environments, and deep marine basins. The basement rocks of Washington County are Precambrian in
age and they are not known to have been penetrated by drilling activities. Based on data from a few
deep wells in the northwestern part of Pennsylvania, basement rocks consist of granitic gneiss and
amphibolite (Shultz, 1999).
Bedrock geology in Washington County consists of rocks of Pennsylvanian and Permian age. The
Pennsylvanian rocks are represented by the Conemaugh and Monongahela Group formations (see
Figures 4 and 5). The geologic units of this time period mainly consist of limestones, sandstones, shales,
mudstones, and coal (Lentz and Neubaum, 2005; Ryder et al., 2012). Well records show these
formations to be approximately 1,515 feet below land surface to 180 feet below land surface, with a
thickness of approximately 1,335 feet (Wagner, 1969). Within the Monongahela Group are the non-
marine Pittsburgh coal beds, which are regionally continuous in Pennsylvania (Markowski, 1998).
Underground mining techniques were heavily used to recover the coal from these beds, and evidence of
mining activity still exists throughout the county (Lentz and Neubaum, 2005). The Permian period is
represented by the Dunkard Group formations, including the Washington and Greene formations.
These units are described as sandstones, siltstones, mudstones, and claystones, with thin coal beds
(Shultz, 1999; Ryder et al., 2012). The base of the Permian lies about 180 feet below land surface
(Wagner, 1969). An unconformity at the top of the Permian rocks represents a period of non-deposition
of material. Lying on top of the Permian rocks are the regional soils of the area (Shultz, 1999).
Soils in Washington County consist of Quaternary alluvial deposits, predominantly in stream valleys of
the county. Alluvial deposits are generally less than 60 feet thick and consist of clay, silt, sand, and
gravel derived from local bedrock. The uppermost soils can be described as well drained to poorly
drained, very shallow to deep, nearly level to steeply sloping, clays, silts, and loams with some stones
(USDA, 1983).
11
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
2006 Land Use • Forest
Open Water Shrubland
Developed Gross/Herbaceous
Barren Agricultural
•4 Wetland:
Search Areas
EPA Sampling Locations
Greene Formation
Monongohela Group
Washington Formation
Waynesburg Formation
Search Areas
O EPA Sampling Locations
Geologic Formations
Casselman Formation
Glenshaw Formation
May 2014 Active Marcellus Locations (1239 Tota
up to 2008
2009
2010
May 2014 Active Oil and Gas Locations
Well Status Active (3412 Tota
C J Search Areas
urces: Landuse: USGS, Geology: PASDA, Well Locations:
Penrta DEPIOH and Gas Locations - Conventional/Unconventional Laver]
rr
IIA\
, Rochester
XL
Id
FFNNSY1.VANIA "
0
Pittsburgh ^
^\ Hairiiborg
-^ M^vi^r
AntiapolispEl A'1
Map Panels
A: Geologic Formations
B: Land Use/Land Cover
(2006)
C: Oil and Gas Wells
with Active Well Status
(May 2014)
D: Marcellus Shale Wei Is
(UnconventialWell
with Active Status
May 2014)
Washington County
Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure 4. Panel map showing geology, land use, locations of active oil and gas wells, and Marcellus Shale wells in Washington County, Pennsylvania. The
indicated search areas (blue circles) were used for the analysis of land use and environmental record searches (see Appendix C).
12
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
SYSTEM/
GROUP
GEOLOGIC UNIT
LITHOLOGY
Quaternary
Permian
Pennsylvanian
Dunkard
Group
Monongahela
Group
Conemaugh
Group
Allegheny
Group
Pottsville
Group
alluvium
Greene Formation
Washington Formation
Uniontown Formation
Pittsburgh Formation
Casselman Formation
Glenshaw Formation
Allegheny Formation
^ » ^ ^**^ ^n^
•—— ^^^^^^^f^^^^
Pottsville Formation
Poorly sorted clay, silt, sand, and gravel
Sandstone with thin shaly limestone
and thin coal beds
Alternating shale and sandstone, with
some coal beds
Massive to thin-bedded limestone, shale,
and sandstone; base is at the bottom of
the Pittsburgh coal
Sandstone and shale; some limestone and thin
coal beds
Shale, sandstone, thin limestone and coal beds
Sandstone, conglomeratic sandstone, with
minor shale
Figure 5. Stratigraphic chart for the bedrock of Washington County, Pennsylvania.
Of particular interest are Devonian-age strata which are present below the sedimentary formations
shown in Figure 5 (Roen, 1984). The Devonian strata occur in the subsurface of Washington County and
are represented in the geologic record of Pennsylvania as a group of 14 rock formations. These
formations, from oldest to youngest, are the Corriganville, Mandata Shale, Licking Creek Limestone,
Oriskany Sandstone, Bois Blanc, Onondaga Limestone, Hamilton Group formations (including the
Marcellus Shale), Tully Limestone, Genesee, Sonyea, West Falls, Brallier, Chadakoin, and the Venango
Group formations. These formations consist mainly of shales, limestones, and sandstones (Shultz, 1999;
see also Carter, 2007). Devonian sedimentary units lie between about 7,990 and 2,215 feet below land
surface and have an overall thickness of about 5,775 feet in Washington County (Wagner, 1969). The
Murrysville Sandstone (a member of the Venango Group) of the Upper Devonian is a historical shallow
natural gas reservoir in the county (Shultz, 1999). Recent gas exploration and production focuses on the
black carbonaceous shales of the Marcellus Shale. The maximum depth of the Marcellus Shale is about
7,432 feet below land surface, and it has an average thickness of approximately 102 feet (Wagner,
1969).
The Marcellus Shale, also referred to as the Marcellus Formation, is a Middle Devonian-age (about 390
million years), black, low-density, organic-carbon-rich shale that occurs in the subsurface beneath much
of Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and New York (Roen, 1984; see Figure 2). Smaller areas of
Maryland, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia are also underlain by the Marcellus Shale. The Marcellus
Shale is part of a transgressive sedimentary package that was deposited in a deepening basin. It is
underlain by limestone (Onondago Formation) and overlain by siltstones and shales (Mahantango
13
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Formation). These sediments were deposited under a sea that covered the Appalachian Basin. It is
believed that very little oxygen was present at the bottom of the ocean during deposition of the
Devonian black shales (e.g., Rimmer, 2004). Thus, organic detritus was preserved in the deposited
sediments. Subsequent burial of the carbon-rich sediments ultimately led to the formation of gas that
became trapped in the rock. Natural gas occurs within the Marcellus Shale in three ways: (1) within the
pore spaces of the shale; (2) within vertical fractures (joints) that break through the shale; and, (3)
adsorbed on mineral grains and organic material. The most productive zones for natural gas extraction
are located in areas where fracturing and brecciation produce space for gas accumulation (Engelder et
al., 2009). An assessment conducted by the USGS suggested that the Marcellus Shale contained an
estimated 1.9 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered recoverable natural gas (USGS, 2003). Estimated
volumes have increased significantly in more recent assessments of the gas reserves (Milici and Swezey,
2006). In Washington County, the Marcellus Shale ranges from approximately <50 to about 150 feet in
thickness (Lash and Engelder, 2011), and its depth ranges from about 5,000 feet below land surface in
the northwest corner of Washington County to over 7,000 feet below land surface in the southeastern
portion of the county (MCOR, 2013).
3.2. Hydrology
Background information on the geology and hydrology of Washington County is summarized from
reports published by Newport (1973) and Williams et al. (1993). Washington County is in the Ohio River
Basin. In the northern portion of the county, streams drain into the Ohio River; in the southern part of
the county, flow is into the Monongahela River, which subsequently flows into the Ohio River near
Pittsburgh. A majority of the public drinking water supply in this county is derived from the
Monongahela River in Allegheny County; however, rural residents often rely on private supply wells for
potable water. Potable ground water is typically located within aquifers less than 300 feet below land
surface (Carter et al., 2011). Ground water below these depths is sometimes found as brine as a result
of elevated salt content. Natural brine in Pennsylvania generally increases in concentration with
increasing age of the geologic formations; for example, Poth (1962) showed solute concentrations as
total dissolved solids (TDS) that ranged from about 6,000 mg/L in Pennsylvanian-age sandstones to
299,000 mg/L in Cambrian-age carbonate aquifers. The depth to ground water in Washington County is
generally less than 100 feet and commonly less than 40 feet, depending on topographic setting
(Newport, 1973; Battelle, 2013). As noted above, the geologic units in Washington County include
sedimentary rocks of Pennsylvanian (Monongahela and Conemaugh Groups) and Permian (Dunkard
Group) age, including sandstone, siltstone, limestone, shale, and coal, and unconsolidated Quaternary
deposits. The Quaternary deposits consist of alluvium, which overlies bedrock in some of the major
stream valleys of the county. The alluvium is generally less than 60 feet thick and is made up of clay, silt,
sand, gravel, and cobbles derived primarily from local bedrock. The unconsolidated alluvial deposits in
Washington County are often the source of high-yield wells, especially near rivers and streams.
Ground water in Washington County occurs in both artesian and water-table aquifers. Well yields range
from a fraction of a gallon per minute to over 350 gallons per minute (Newport, 1973). Ground water
flow in the shallow aquifer system generally follows topography, moving from recharge areas near
hilltops to discharge areas in valleys. Ground water is also derived from bedrock aquifers (see Figure 5),
including the Dunkard Group, Monongahela Group, and Conemaugh Group formations. The
Conemaugh Group generally provides the greatest yield, although the median yield for wells in this
14
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
aquifer is 5 gallons per minute (Williams et al., 1993). Carter et al. (2011) estimated that 10% to 30% of
the population in Washington County relies on private wells for drinking water.
The quality of ground water in Washington County is variable and depends on factors such as formation
lithology and residence time. For example, recharge ground water sampled from hilltops and hillsides is
typically calcium-bicarbonate type and usually low in IDS (~500 mg/L; Newport, 1973). Ground water
from valley settings in areas of discharge is typically sodium-bicarbonate type with higher values of IDS
(up to 2,000 mg/L). Williams et al. (1993) reported that concentrations of iron and manganese in the
ground water from Washington County are frequently above EPA's secondary maximum contaminant
levels (SMCLs). In their study, over 33% of water samples had iron concentrations greater than the
SMCL (300 u.g/L), and 30% of water samples had manganese concentrations above the SMCL (50 u.g/L).
Hard water was also reported as being a common problem in the county. IDS concentrations in more
than one third of the wells sampled by Williams et al. (1993) exceeded 500 mg/L. The concentrations of
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, selenium, silver, and zinc were below the drinking
water standards established by EPA (Williams et al., 1993). In some areas, ground water quality in
Washington County has been degraded, in part, because of drainage from coal mining operations
(Williams et al., 1993). Additionally, freshwater aquifers in some locations have been contaminated by
brine from deeper, non-potable aquifers through historical oil and gas wells that were improperly
abandoned or have corroded casings (Newport, 1973).
3.3. Oil and Gas Production
Washington County is currently experiencing extensive natural gas exploration and production targeting
the Marcellus Shale. Resource development uses horizontal and vertical drilling and hydraulic fracturing
technologies to stimulate gas production. The first test well into the Marcellus play was drilled in Mount
Pleasant Township in Washington County in 2003 by Range Resources (Renz #1 well); the well was
hydraulically fractured in 2004 (Carter et al., 2011). Since that time drilling has proceeded at a rapid rate
in Washington County. Data provided by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA
DEP) indicate that the numbers of permitted wells per year in the Marcellus Shale increased rapidly from
2005 to 2009 (from 10 to 205 wells per year; see Figure 6). Since 2009, the rate of increase in the
number of well permits approved for unconventional wells decreased, although the number of well
permits issued continued to increase year by year. The highest number of wells (310) was approved in
2013. From 2005 to 2008, more permits were issued in Washington County than were issued anywhere
else in the state (Carter et al., 2011).
Oil and gas exploration and production has a long history in southwestern Pennsylvania. In Washington
County, most of the early drilling activity occurred in the late 1800s and early 1900s. According to
Ashley and Robinson (1922), the first oil well in Washington County (the Gantz well) was completed in
1885 in the shallowest sand of the Upper Devonian Venango Group. In 1917, the deepest well in the
United States at that time was completed to a depth of 7,248 feet near McDonald, Pennsylvania in
Washington County (Ashley and Robinson, 1922). Note that many of the wells drilled in the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries produced both oil and gas at depths much shallower than
present-day gas development from the Marcellus Shale. The primary oil fields in Washington County are
the McDonald Field in the northern part of the county (oil struck in 1890), and the Washington-
Taylorstown Field (oil struck in 1885), near the city of Washington in the center of the county. Following
the early oil boom, oil and gas production in Washington County expanded to exploit the Allegheny
15
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
sandstone (Middle Pennsylvanian), Pottsville sandstone (Lower and Middle Pennsylvanian), Big Injun
sandstone (Lower Mississippian), and Berea sandstone (Upper Devonian). More recently, coalbed
methane resource potential in Washington County has been examined in coal seams within the
Conemaugh Group formations (e.g., Markowski, 1998).
^00
2^0
«2
t onn
i_ zuu —
s.
"CD
> 1^0
Q 100
CL IUU
a.
<
*in -
n
iii
! I r^-i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 '
,
•
•
•
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Figure 6. The number of approved well permits for the Marcellus Shale in Washington County by
year through 2013 (data from Marcellus.org, accessed 3/7/2014).
Battelle (2013) mapped the locations of over 11,600 conventional oil and gas wells drilled in Washington
County (active and inactive). Well numbers and locations are necessarily uncertain because of
incomplete historical records. With passage of the Oil and Gas Act in 1984, Pennsylvania modernized
environmental controls and resource management for development of crude oil and natural gas. This
Act, following previous laws, required that all new wells be permitted by the state prior to drilling.
Similar to other regions of the United States with long histories of oil and gas production, little is known
about well construction and abandonment practices for historical oil and gas wells. Early wells are
known to provide potential conduits for gas and brine migration into shallow aquifers (e.g., Newport,
1973; Vidic et al., 2013). Vidic et al. (2013) stated that methane detection in domestic wells in
northeastern Pennsylvania is common (80% to 85%) and contrasts with the lower number of methane
detections in southwestern Pennsylvania (24%). Vidic et al. (2013) also suggested that the
hydrogeological regime in the northeastern part of Pennsylvania is more prone to gas migration.
Brantley et al. (2014) proposed that geomorphic and hydrogeologic processes in fractured rocks of the
upper Devonian Lock Haven and Catskill formations of northeastern Pennsylvania could have facilitated
fast migration of ground water and methane over long distances, possibly in the presence of natural or
gas-well-induced pressure gradients. In any case, the southwestern and northeastern regions of
16
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Pennsylvania have very different histories with respect to oil and gas production. For several decades
before any significant water quality testing programs were in place, a much higher density of potential
subsurface conduits has been present in southwestern Pennsylvania than in the northeastern part of the
state due to historical oil and gas activities (see PA DCNR, 2007).
3.4. Land Use
Although much of Washington County has historically been devoted to agriculture and forestry, the
county's economic development in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries was derived in great part
from coal mining and industries that relied on that coal. At their peak, the steel mills in the county
employed tens of thousands of workers. The county also experienced a brief oil boom in the early part
of the twentieth century, and natural gas has been extracted in the county for many decades. The
industrial portion of the county's economy fell into decline in the 1970s and 1980s, and many industrial
plants closed (Washington County, 2005).
Figure 7 shows land use maps for Washington County in 1992 and 2006 based on the National Land
Cover Database (NLCD); land use data are presented in Table 1. The NLCD uses 30-meter-resolution
data from the Landsat satellite (USGS, 2012a). The 2006 dataset was the most recent land-use
information available at the time of this study.
Table 1. Land use in Washington County in 1992 and 2006.
Land Use
Forest
Planted/cultivated
Developed
Barren
Water
Others
Total
1992
Square Miles
479
332
42
9
3
0
865
%of
Total
55.4%
38.4%
4.9%
1.0%
0.3%
0.0%
100%
2006
Square Miles
484
234
124
4
5
13
864
%of
Total
56.0%
27.1%
14.4%
0.5%
0.6%
1.5%
100%
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding. Source: USGS (2012a).
The NLCD data indicate that, in 1992 and 2006, forest cover was the largest land use in the county,
followed by planted/cultivated land, and that these two categories accounted for a majority of the land
use in the county. Because of methodological differences, quantitative comparisons between the 1992
and 2006 datasets are not recommended. Qualitative comparisons suggest very little change in the
predominant land use patterns (Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, 2013). This lack of
change in land use is consistent with the relative stability of the county's population (i.e., an indicator of
the intensity of land use) over decades as indicated by US census data (Appendix C). Additional land-use
analysis, with particular focus in the areas adjacent to the sampling locations of this study, is presented
in Appendix C.
17
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Land Use Types
Water
Developed
Barren
Forest
Shrubland
Herbaceous
Planted/Cultivated
Wetlands
Municipal Boundaries
Search Areas
EPA HF Sampling Locations
Land Use/Land Cover
1992 and 2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Landuse, USGS National Land Cover Database (1992,2006! ftl.in ,;i,M,'^ °A5pz .s. niyilmg Locations. EPA ORD
Figure?. Washington County, Pennsylvania - land use in 1992 and 2006. The indicated search areas were used for the analysis of land use and environmental
record searches (see Appendix C; data source USGS, 2012a).
18
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 2 provides an estimate of the land area potentially affected by active well pads in Washington
County. The PA DEP website provided the number of permitted unconventional well pads as of May 19,
2014 (PA DEP, 2014a, 2014b). The "unconventional" classification indicates that a well is completed in
the Marcellus Shale and has been stimulated using hydraulic fracturing. The number of permitted
conventional well pads was based on the total number of active conventional oil and gas wells in
Washington County as reported on the Pennsylvania Spatial Data Access site by the PA DEP. Each
conventional well was assumed to have one well pad. As shown in Figure 4C, there were a total of 3,412
active oil and gas wells in Washington County in May 2014. Approximately 36% of these wells were
unconventional shale-gas wells (Figure 4D). The estimates of the areas affected per type of well pad
were taken from a USGS study of the landscape impacts of natural gas extraction in Pennsylvania (USGS,
2012b). Using these estimates for the land area per type of well pad and the number of conventional
and unconventional well pads described above, approximately 23 square miles (2.6% of the land area in
the county) are estimated to be affected by pad development; 25% of this estimated area is associated
with unconventional gas development (see Table 2).
Table 2. Area potentially affected by active well pads in Washington County.
Item
Number of wells (1)
Conventional
Unconventional
Number of pads
Conventional3
Unconventional15
Affected acres per well pad0 (2)
Conventional
Unconventional
Affected area in square milesd
Conventional
Unconventional
Total
Total area of county in square miles (3)
% of County Area Affected by Well Pads
2,173
1,239
2,173
351
4.9
10.6
16.8
5.8
22.6
857
2.6%
Sources:
(1) PA DEP (2014a; Oil and Gas Locations - Conventional/Unconventional Layer).
(2) USGS (2012b).
(3) U.S. Census Bureau (2012).
Notes:
a Includes all active conventional oil and gas wells as of May 2014.
b Includes all active unconventional well pads as of May 2014.
c Original source in hectares converted to acres (2.471 acres per hectare).
640 acres per square mile.
19
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
3.5. Potential Contaminant Sources
To help determine whether hydraulic fracturing or processes related to hydraulic fracturing had caused
or contributed to alleged impacts on water quality, a consistent approach was adopted for evaluating
potential contaminant sources using causal assessment. Causal assessment is defined as the
organization and analysis of available evidence to evaluate links between apparent environmental
impacts and potential causes, and the assessment of the level of confidence in these causal links.
A list of candidate causes—that is, hypothesized causes of an environmental impairment that are
sufficiently credible to be analyzed (US EPA, 2000a)—was developed for the northern and southern
areas of this retrospective case study. Each environmental stressor was evaluated through an
examination of potential causes and effects. Candidate causes included potential sources that could
impact the environment and contribute to any detected levels of surface and/or ground water
contamination. Candidate causes were categorized as follows: industrial/commercial land use, historical
land use (e.g., farming and mining), current drilling processes/practices, historical drilling practices, and
naturally occurring sources.
In order to identify potential sources of contamination, in addition to drilling and hydraulic fracturing
processes, a background assessment was performed using the following databases:
• Environmental records search: Environmental record searches were performed by obtaining
environmental record reports from Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). EDR provides a
service for searching publically available databases and provides data from its own proprietary
databases.
• Well inventory: Existing oil and gas well inventories were prepared on the same search areas
used for the EDR reports using PA DEP's oil and gas well database.
• State record summary: The PA DEP Web site containing Pennsylvania's Environment Facility
Application Compliance Tracking System (eFACTS at hftJlL//!/!/!^^
criteria sjte.aspx) was used to find up-to-date well records for the study areas. This database
provides information on inspection and pollution prevention visits, including a listing of all
inspections that have occurred at each well on record, whether violations were noted, and any
enforcement that may have resulted. The system provides multiple options to search for
records.
Appendix C provides the results of these background assessments. The issues concerning ground water
and surface water as reported by landowners in the northern area included concerns about changes in
water quality (e.g., turbidity, staining properties, and odor) believed to be associated with recent gas
drilling and the use of impoundments (Carter impoundment). Although many gas wells have been
recently drilled and continue to be drilled in this area, no specific gas well was considered as a potential
candidate cause at the initiation of the study. Other candidate causes for observed changes in water
quality included land use, historical drilling practices, and naturally occurring sources (see Appendix C).
Landowners reported similar issues concerning ground water and surface water in the southern area,
possibly related to practices and procedures near an impoundment area. For example, water quality
impacts could be related to potential leaks in the reserve pit and/or Yeager impoundment, discharge
from former coal mines, migration of landfill fluids, migration of brine from underlying formations along
20
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
well bores due to poor casing cement integrity, migration of brine from underlying formations along
natural fractures, and road salt infiltration (see Appendix C).
Battelle (2013) concluded that potential impacts to water resources in Washington County include
contaminant sources from agriculture, mining, steel production, manufacturing, and conventional oil
and gas extraction. They suggested that the major causes of water quality impairment in southwestern
Pennsylvania are acid mine drainage (AMD), agricultural, urban and storm water runoff, and waste
handling. For example, a total of 1,759 miles of streams are impacted by one or more of these activities.
Deep coal mining has occurred under approximately 53% of the county (Battelle, 2013). More than
11,600 oil and gas wells have been completed in the county over approximately 130 years of resource
development, a majority of them within 2,500 feet of land surface (whereas unconventional wells target
depths greater than 5,000 feet). The analysis in Appendix C identifies potential contaminant sources
within the areas surrounding the sampling locations of this study; this analysis of potential contaminant
sources is integrated into the evaluation of the water quality data, where appropriate, in the following
sections of this report.
21
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
4. Study Methods
Water quality sampling locations within the northern and southern areas included 16 domestic wells,
three springs, and three surface water locations. Sampling events occurred in July 2011, March 2012,
and May 2013 (see Table 3). Domestic wells ranged in depth from 50 to 160 feet below land surface,
with a median depth of 95 feet below land surface. Wherever possible, ancillary data for each well were
collected during or near the time of sample collection and included latitude and longitude (recorded
with a handheld GPS device), topographic setting, depth, diameter, screened interval, casing material,
and static water level (depth to water). Samples were analyzed for over 235 constituents, including field
parameters, major ions, nutrients, trace metals, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic
compounds (SVOCs), diesel-range organics (DRO), gasoline-range organics (GRO), glycol ethers
(diethylene, triethylene, and tetraethylene glycol), low-molecular-weight acids (lactate, formate,
acetate, propionate, isobutyrate, and butyrate), dissolved gases (methane, ethane, propane, and
butane), radioactivity (gross alpha/beta, 226Ra, 228Ra), strontium isotope ratios (87Sr/86Sr), and selected
stable isotopes (513CCH4, 52HCH4, 513CD,C, 518OH2o, S2HH2o)- Descriptions of the sampling methods,
analytical methods, and QA/QC are provided in the QAPP for this study (Wilkin, 2013). The results of
QA/QC samples and assessments of data usability are provided in Appendix A and analytical results for
the sample measurements are tabulated in Appendix B.
Table 3. Information on wells sampled in Washington County.
Sample
Identification
SWPAGW01
SWPAGW02
SWPAGW03
SWPAGW04
SWPAGW05
SWPAGW06
SWPAGW07
SWPAGW08
SWPAGW09
SWPAGW10
SWPAGW11
SWPAGW12
SWPAGW13
SWPAGW14
SWPAGW15
SWPAGW16
SWPAGW17
SWPAGW18
Type of
Location
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Spring
Spring
Spring
Well
Well
Well
Area
Northern
Northern
Northern
Northern
Northern
Northern
Northern
Northern
Northern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Latitude
N40 16.430
N40 16.579
N40 17.409
N40 19.463
N40 16.666
N40 16.654
N40 16.653
N40 13.992
N40 16.573
N40 05.278
N40 05.109
N40 05.282
N40 05.562
N40 05.565
N40 05.323
N40 05.230
N40 04.993
N40 05.496
Longitude
W80 18.161
W80 18.285
W80 20.636
W80 17.778
W80 21.464
W80 23.824
W80 23.853
W80 20.456
W80 23.949
W80 13.825
W80 13.844
W80 13.769
W80 13.803
W80 13.834
W80 13.793
W80 13.812
W80 14.109
W80 13.840
Rounds
Sampled
1,3
1,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,3
1,2,3
1,3
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2,3
2,3
2
2
2
3
Depth (feet
BLS)
50
98
100
80
95
88
91
130
160
130
unknown
80
-
-
-
70
102
unknown
22
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 3. Information on wells sampled in Washington County.
Sample
Identification
SWPAGW19
SWPASW01
SWPASW02
SWPASW03
Type of
Location
Well
Surface water
Surface water
Surface water
Area
Southern
Northern
Northern
Southern
Latitude
N40 05.424
N40 16.608
N40 19.453
N40 05.308
Longitude
W80 13.850
W80 18.233
W80 17.792
W80 13.835
Rounds
Sampled
3
1,3
1,2,3
1,2
Depth (feet
BLS)
unknown
-
-
-
4.1. Sampling Locations
Water samples from ground water and surface water resources were collected within the northern and
southern areas that are designated in Figure 2. A general summary of sampling activities is as follows:
• Round 1 (July 2011 sampling event): Water samples were collected from 13 domestic
wells/springs and three surface water locations.
• Round 2 (March 2012 sampling event): Water samples were collected from 13 domestic
wells/springs and two surface water locations.
• Round 3 (May 2013 sampling event): Water samples were collected from 13 domestic
wells/springs and two surface water locations.
The samples collected provide analytical data for a broad range of compounds and chemical indicators
that are potentially linked to hydraulic fracturing activities and/or that aid in providing a conceptual
framework for evaluating potential impacts. Some locations in the study were sampled once, some
twice, and some during all three rounds (see Table 3). Reasons for retaining or excluding a location
during a sampling round included access issues and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
constraints (such as well functionality issues). The completion depths of domestic wells sampled in this
study were, in some cases, uncertain and based on homeowner knowledge of their wells.
4.2. Water Collection
Sample bottles for each location were uniquely labeled prior to each sampling round, and all labels were
color-coded by analytical parameter. See Table Al (Appendix A) for pre-cleaned bottle types and
number of sample bottles needed for each laboratory analysis.
Water samples were collected as close to the ground water pump as possible and processed using
methods designed to yield samples that were representative of environmental conditions and
unaffected by contamination during sample collection. Teflon-lined polyethylene tubing was connected
to the pump output at each sample location; clean tubing was used prior to sampling and filtration and
discarded after use.
Unfiltered samples were collected first and included the following parameters: dissolved gases, VOCs,
SVOCs, DRO, GRO, glycol ethers, low-molecular-weight acids, total metals, gross alpha, gross beta, 226Ra,
228Ra, 513CCH4, and 52HCH4. Samples for dissolved metals, anions, nutrients, dissolved inorganic carbon
(DIG), 513CD|C, dissolved organic carbon (DOC), 518OH20, 52HH20, and Sr isotope analyses were filtered
23
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
onsite using 0.45-micron pore-size, disposable-capsule filters (Millipore). Approximately 100 milliliters
(ml) of ground water were passed through the filter, to waste, before sample bottles were filled. The
date, time, and initials of the sampler were recorded at each location. Sample preservation and holding
time requirements for each sample type are described in Table Al (Appendix A).
4.3. Purging and Sampling at Domestic Wells and Springs
A well volume approach, combined with the monitoring of stabilization parameters, was used for
purging domestic wells (Yeskis and Zavala, 2002). Domestic wells were sampled using downhole pumps
via homeowner taps, or by accessing the wells directly using a submersible pump (Proactive Monsoon)
fitted with Teflon-lined polyethylene tubing. When possible, the ground water level was measured
using a Solinist® water level indicator and tracked every 10 to 15 minutes during well purging. In
general, wells were purged for about an hour prior to sample collection. Water samples were collected
upstream of pressure tanks before any water treatment. Initial flow rates were obtained at each
location; wells were then purged at flow rates of about 0.4 to 10 gallons per minute, depending on the
well volume and recharge rate. The rate of purging was determined by measuring the volume of water
collected after a unit of time into a large metered pail or graduated cylinder. Spring samples were
collected by placing inlet tubing to a peristaltic pump (Pegasus Pump Company Alexis®) at the point of
ground water discharge. Water quality parameters were continuously monitored and recorded using a
YSI 556 multi-parameter probe system to track the stabilization of pH (<0.02 standard units per minute),
oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) (<2 millivolts per minute), specific conductance (<1% per minute),
dissolved oxygen (DO), and temperature. Water flow through the cell containing the multi-parameter
probe was maintained at about 0.25 to 0.50 gallons per minute, with the excess flow valved to waste.
Sample collection began after parameter stabilization occurred. All samples were stored on ice before
being processed for shipping.
4.4. Sampling at Surface Water Locations
Surface water samples were collected from flowing water bodies (<0.5 meters deep), in some cases
down gradient from spring discharges. Geochemical parameters and samples were collected
simultaneously; parameters were recorded every 2 minutes for up to 40 minutes at each surface water
site, or until parameter stabilization was attained. Sample bottles were submerged into the surface
water just below the surface and filled as grab samples for unfiltered samples. Sampling of surface
waters was performed to minimize capture of sediment. Filtered samples were obtained by pumping
surface water through Teflon-lined polyethylene tubing and a 0.45-micron, high-capacity filter using a
peristaltic pump. Approximately 100 ml of water was passed through the filter, to waste, before sample
bottles were filled. Samples were stored on ice before being processed for shipping.
4.5. Sample Shipping/Handling
At the conclusion of each day, samples were organized by analytical parameter, placed together into
sealed Ziploc plastic bags, and transferred to coolers filled with ice. Glass bottles were packed with
bubble wrap to prevent breakage. A temperature blank and a chain-of-custody form were placed in
each cooler. Coolers were sealed, affixed with a custody seal, and sent to the appropriate lab via
express delivery, generally within 24 hours of collection, depending on sample holding time
requirements. Sample bottles for 513CCH4 and 52HCH4 analyses were placed in an inverted position in
coolers and maintained in the inverted position throughout shipment to the analytical laboratory.
24
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
4.6. Water Analysis
4.6.1. Field Parameters
Temperature, specific conductance, pH, ORP, and dissolved oxygen were continuously monitored during
well purging using a YSI 556 multi-parameter probe and flow-cell assembly. Electrode measurements of
specific conductance were correlated to the concentration of total dissolved solids (IDS). YSI electrodes
were calibrated every morning before sampling according to the manufacturer's instructions.
Performance checks were conducted at midday and at the end of each day, and the electrodes were re-
calibrated if necessary. A National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)-traceable 1,413 u.S/cm
specific conductance standard was used for calibration and performance checks. NIST-traceable buffer
solutions (4.00, 7.00 and 10.01) were used for pH calibration and performance checks. An Orion ORP
standard was used for calibration and performance checks of redox potential measurements. Note that
field determinations of the ORP provide an approximate measure of redox conditions, but ORP values
do not necessarily correspond to equilibrium EH values (US EPA, 2002). Dissolved oxygen sensors were
calibrated with air, and low-oxygen measurement performance was tested with a zero-oxygen solution
(sodium sulfite). Zero-oxygen solutions consistently read below 0.25 mg/L. The probe assembly was
stored in pH 4.00 buffer solution when not in use.
After geochemical parameters stabilized in each well, a 500-mL sample was collected for field
determinations of alkalinity, turbidity, ferrous iron, and dissolved sulfide. Alkalinity measurements were
determined by titrating water samples with 1.6N sulfuric acid (H2SO4) to the bromcresol green-methyl
red endpoint using a Hach titrator (EPA Method 310.1). Turbidity measurements (EPA Method 180.1)
made use of a Hach 2100Q portable meter. Ferrous iron concentrations were determined using the
1,10-phenanthroline colorimetric method (Hach DR/890 colorimeter, Standard Method 3500-FeBfor
Wastewater). Dissolved sulfide measurements were made using the methylene blue colorimetric
method (Hach DR/2700 spectrophotometer, Standard Method 4500-S2"D for Wastewater).
Hach spectrophotometers (for ferrous iron and sulfide) and turbidimeters (for turbidity) were inspected
before going into the field, and their functions were verified using performance calibration check
solutions. The ferrous iron accuracy was checked through triplicate measurements of a 1 mg Fe/L
standard solution (Hach Iron Standard solution, using Ferrover reagent); the results were between 0.90
and 1.10 mg Fe/L. The accuracy of dissolved sulfide measurements was checked by measuring standard
solutions prepared in the laboratory by purging dilute sodium hydroxide solution (0.0001 M) with 1.0%
H2S gas (balance N2); the results of spectrophotometric measurements were within 20% of expected
concentrations. Turbidity was checked against formazin turbidity standards supplied by Hach. Titrant
cartridges used for alkalinity measurements were checked using a 100 mg/L standard prepared from
sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3). Blank solutions (deionized water) were measured at the beginning of the
day, at midday, and at the end of the day for each parameter (see Appendix A).
4.6.2. Analytical Methods for Ground Water and Surface Water
Water samples were collected and analyzed using the methods identified in Table Al of Appendix A.
The laboratories that performed the analyses, per sampling round, are also identified in Table Al. A
total of 1,304 samples (not including duplicates of glass containers) were collected and delivered to up
to 10 laboratories for analysis.
25
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Anions, nutrients, DIG, and DOC samples were analyzed for all sampling events (rounds 1, 2, and 3).
Quantitative analysis of the major anions bromide (Br~), chloride (Cl~), fluoride (F~) and sulfate (SO42~) was
performed by capillary ion electrophoresis (EPA Method 6500) with a Waters Quanta 4000 Capillary Ion
Analyzer. During the first two rounds of sampling, bromide concentrations up to about 2.5 mg/L were
detected in samples containing low to moderate levels of chloride (2-228 mg/L) using EPA Method
6500. During the third round of sampling, bromide analysis was also conducted using flow injection
analysis on a Lachat QuickChem 8000 Series flow injection analyzer and bromide levels were consistent
with the first two rounds of sampling. Nutrients (NO3 + NO2, NH3, total Kjeldahl Nitrogen) were
measured by flow injection analysis (EPA Method 350.1, 353.1, and 351.2). The concentration of carbon
in DIG and DOC in aqueous samples was determined via acidification and combustion followed by
infrared detection (EPA Method 9060A) on a Shimadzu TOC-VCPH Analyzer.
Samples for dissolved gases, low-molecular-weight acids, and stable isotopes of water (52HH2o and
518OH2o) were analyzed by Shaw Environmental for rounds 1 and 2 and by CB&I for round 3. Dissolved
gases were measured by gas chromatography (Agilent Micro 3000 gas chromatograph) using a
modification of the method described by Kampbell and Vandegrift (1998). Two methods were used to
collect dissolved gas samples in round 3. Only the results for the first method (filled bucket submersion
method) are presented in this report, as this method was used consistently in all rounds of sampling.
The concentrations of low-molecular-weight acids were determined using high-performance liquid
chromatography (Dionex lcs-3000). Hydrogen and oxygen isotope ratios for aqueous samples collected
during round 1 were determined by isotope ratio mass spectrometry (Finnigan TC/EA, Finnigan Delta
Plus XP IRMS); cavity ring-down spectrometry (CRDS) was used to measure isotope ratios in samples
collected during rounds 2 and 3 (Picarro L2120J CRDS). The oxygen and hydrogen isotope ratio values
are reported in terms of permil (%o) notation with respect to the Vienna Standard Mean Ocean Water
(VSMOW) standard. For consistency of methodology and analytical results, data collected using CRDS
from rounds 2 and 3 are used in the data analysis.
The analysis of DRO, GRO, and SVOCs in water samples collected during rounds 1, 2, and 3 was
completed by the EPA Region 8 Laboratory. DRO and GRO concentrations were determined by gas
chromatography using a gas chromatograph equipped with a flame ionization detector (EPA Method
8015B; Agilent 6890N GC). The concentrations of SVOCs were determined by gas chromatography
(GC)/mass spectrometry (MS) (EPA Method 8270D; HP 6890 GC and HP 5975 MS).
VOCs were analyzed by Shaw Environmental for samples collected during rounds 1 and 2; samples were
analyzed using automated headspace GC/MS (EPA Methods 5021A and 8260C; Agilent 6890/5973
Quadrupole GC/MS). Following round 3, samples were analyzed for VOCs by the Southwest Research
Institute using purge-and-trap GC/MS (EPA Method 8260B; Agilent 6890N GC/MS).
Glycols (2-butoxyethanol, diethylene, triethylene, and tetraethylene glycol) were measured by the EPA
Region 3 Laboratory for samples collected during rounds 1, 2, and 3. The samples were analyzed by
high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) coupled with positive electrospray ionization tandem
mass spectrometry (MS/MS; Waters HPLC/MS/MS with a Waters Atlantis dC18 3um, 2.1 x 150mm
column). Over the course of this case study, the glycol method was in development. A verification
study of the method was completed using volunteer federal, state, municipal, and commercial analytical
laboratories. The study indicated that the HPLC/MS/MS method was robust, had good accuracy and
26
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
precision, and exhibited no matrix effects for several water types that were tested (Schumacher and
Zintek, 2014).
For samples collected in July 2011 and March 2012 (rounds 1 and 2), major cations and trace metals
were determined on filtered (dissolved metals) and unfiltered (total metals) samples by Shaw
Environmental. Major cations were analyzed using inductively coupled plasma-optical emission
spectroscopy (ICP-OES; EPA Method 200.7; Optima 3300 DV ICP-OES); trace metals were determined by
inductively coupled plasma-mass spectroscopy (ICP-MS; EPA Method 6020A; Thermo X Series II ICP-
MS). Unfiltered samples were prepared before analysis by microwave digestion (EPA Method 3015A).
Total and dissolved trace metals were also analyzed through EPA's Contract Laboratory Program (CLP)
for samples collected in round 2. The samples were prepared and analyzed following CLP methodology
(Method ISM01.3). Total and dissolved metal analyses for samples collected in May 2013 (round 3)
were conducted by the Southwest Research Institute in accordance with EPA Methods 6020A (ICP-MS)
and 200.7 (ICP-OES). Unfiltered samples were digested prior to analysis (EPA Method 200.7). Mercury
concentrations were determined by cold-vapor atomic absorption (EPA Method 7470A; Perkin Elmer
FIMS400A).
Following all sampling rounds, samples were submitted to Isotech Laboratories, Inc., for analysis of
stable isotope ratios of DIG and methane (513CD|C, 513CCH4, 62HCH4). The 513CD|C was determined using gas
stripping and isotope ratio mass spectrometry (IRMS). Elemental analyses, coupled to an isotope ratio
mass spectrometer, were used to obtain methane (513CCH4, 62HCH4) isotope ratios. The carbon isotope
ratio value is reported in terms of permil (%o) notation with respect to the Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite
(VPDB) standard. The hydrogen isotope ratio value is reported in terms of permil notation with respect
to the VSMOW standard.
Strontium isotopes (87Sr/86Sr) and rubidium (Rb) and strontium (Sr) concentrations were measured by
USGS for samples collected during all sampling events. High precision (2o = ±0.00002) strontium isotope
ratio results were obtained using thermal ionization mass spectrometry (TIMS; Finngan MAT 262) using
methods described in Peterman et al. (2012). The activity concentrations of gross alpha and gross beta
were measured simultaneously using a gas proportional counter following EPA Method 900.0 at ALS
Environmental. Isotopes of radium were determined by ALS Environmental using EPA Methods 903.1
and 904.0.
4.7. QA/QC
Field QC samples for ground water and surface water sampling are summarized in Table A2 (Appendix A;
see Wilkin, 2013). These QC samples included several types of blanks and duplicate samples. In
addition, adequate volumes were collected to allow for laboratory matrix spike samples to be prepared,
where applicable. All of the QC sample types were collected, preserved, and analyzed using
methodologies identical to those used for water samples collected in the field. Appendix A presents
detailed QA practices and the results of QC samples, including discussions of chain of custody, holding
times, blank results, field duplicate results, laboratory QA/QC results, data usability, Quality Assurance
Project Plan (QAPP) additions and deviations, field QA/QC, application of data qualifiers, tentatively
identified compounds (TICs), audits of data quality (ADQ), and the laboratory and field Technical System
Audits (TSA). All reported data met project requirements unless otherwise indicated by application of
data qualifiers. In rare cases, data not meeting project requirements were rejected as unusable and not
27
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
reported (see Appendix A). Detection and reporting limits for all analytes, per sample type, are provided
in Tables B1-B7 in Appendix B.
4.8. Data Handling and Analysis
For each sampling location from this study, geochemical parameters and the water quality data for
major ions and other selected inorganic ions collected over the multiple sampling events were averaged.
This approach ensures that more frequently sampled locations are given equivalent weight in the data
analysis (Battelle, 2013); however, a shortcoming of this method is that potential temporal variability in
concentration data at a single location is not captured. Intra-site variability of the data collected in this
study was examined through evaluation of time-dependent concentration trends at specific locations.
Summary statistics were calculated for selected parameters after averaging across sampling events for
each location (e.g., mean, median, standard deviation, minimum and maximum values). Parameters
with non-detect values were set at half the method detection limit; summary statistics determined for
parameters that showed mixed results, both above and below the quantitation limit (QL), were
generally determined only when over 50% of the concentration data were above the QL (US EPA,
2000b). In rare cases, concentration values set at half the MDL were used for calculating summary
statistics (e.g., for iron and manganese), and these cases are noted in the tabulated data. The three
springs sampled as part of this study in the southern area were grouped together with ground water
samples collected from the domestic wells. In all cases, springs were sampled at their discharge points
and showed geochemical parameters consistent with ground water—e.g., dissolved oxygen
concentrations were below the saturation level, indicating that the springs are representative of surficial
aquifers. Surface water samples were treated as a separate group.
Concentration data for organic compounds were not averaged across the multiple sampling events
because relatively few detections above the QL were found and because detections were generally not
consistent through time at specific sampling locations. Stable isotope and strontium isotope data, used
to identify fluid sources and biogeochemical processes, were not averaged so that the full range of data
variability could be evaluated. Furthermore, historical sources of isotope data for the study were not
available so that weighting was not a significant data analysis issue.
Historical water quality data from Washington County were collected from Newport (1973) and online
from the USGS NWIS (USGS, 2013a) and the USGS National Uranium Resource Evaluation, or NURE
(USGS, 2013b) databases. Secondary data from these sources were considered based upon various
evaluation criteria, such as: (i) did the organization that collected the data have a quality system in
place; (ii) were the secondary data collected under an approved QAPP or other similar planning
document; (iii) were the analytical methods used comparable to those used for the primary data; (iv) did
the analytical laboratories have demonstrated competency (such as through accreditation) for the
analysis they performed; (v) were the data accuracy and precision control limits similar to those for the
primary data; (vi) were the secondary data source MDLs (method detection limits) and QLs comparable
to those associated with the primary data or at least adequate to allow for comparisons; and (vii) were
sampling methods comparable to those used for the primary water quality data collected for this study.
In general, the secondary water quality data sources are missing the accompanying metadata necessary
to fully assess these evaluation criteria; thus, the secondary data are used with the understanding that
they are of an indeterminable quality relative to the requirements specified for this study (see QAPP;
Wilkin, 2013). The EPA STORET (Storage and Retrieval) data warehouse was not used because these
28
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
data may be indicative of environmental impact monitoring that could skew background
characterization.
The software package AqQA (version 1.1.1; Standard Methods, 2012) was used to evaluate internal
consistency of water compositions by calculating cation/anion balances and by comparing measured
and calculated electrical conductivity values (see Appendix A, Table A26). Major ion charge balance was
calculated by comparing the summed milliequivalents of major cations (calcium, magnesium, sodium,
and potassium) with major anions (chloride, sulfate, and bicarbonate) in filtered samples using the
equation:
Charge balance error (%) = | (Zcat-Zan)/(Zcat+Zan)*1001 (1)
where Zcat and Zan are the summed milliequivalents of positively and negatively charged ions,
respectively. The calculated charge balance error over the three sampling rounds ranged between 0.1
and 9.0%; 71% of the samples collected for this study had a charge balance error less than 5% (see
Appendix A). For data collected in this study, the calcite saturation index was determined using the
Geochemist's Workbench package (version 8; Bethke, 1996). Speciation and mineral equilibria
calculations were made by using temperature and concentrations of base species: major cations (Na+,
K+, Ca2+, Mg2+), anions (Cl~, SO42", HCO3"), and pH. Activity corrections were made using the extended
Debye-Htickel equation (Stumm and Morgan, 1996). The LLNL (EQ3/6) thermodynamic database was
selected for use in the calculations (Delany and Lundeen, 1990). For these calculations, charge
imbalance was handled by compensating with chloride for samples with an anion deficit or by
compensating with sodium for samples with a cation deficit. Only samples with a charge balance error
<5% were used for determining saturation indices.
For the historical datasets, samples with a charge balance error <15% were used for water-type analysis
and for constructing geochemical plots such as Piper and Schoeller diagrams. In most cases, charge
balance errors exceeding the 15% criterion were due to missing concentrations of major cations or
anions in the historical datasets. Again, the historical data from locations with multiple sampling events
were averaged and summary statistics were determined, in order to avoid undue weighting of locations
sampled on multiple occasions. Charge balance criteria were not used to screen data for use in
summary statistic calculations and for plotting box and whisker diagrams. Ground water and spring data
were combined, and surface water was treated as a separate group. Summary statistics for historical
data were determined on a countywide basis for comparison with the data collected in this study and
also on a reduced-area basis (3-mile radius) in order to more directly evaluate data from samples
collected in nearby locations. The reduced areas used for evaluating water quality data were chosen to
approximately coincide with the areas considered in the background assessment of potential
contaminant sources (see Appendix C). Various issues relating to data quality and applicability of
historical water quality data have been discussed previously (Battelle, 2013; US EPA, 2013; Wilkin, 2013),
such as comparability of analytical methods, comparability of analytes, unknown sample collection
methods, and unavailable laboratory QC data and data quality-related qualifiers. While recognizing
these limitations, historical data are used as the best points of reference available to compare with the
water quality data collected in this study.
Statistical evaluations were carried out using the ProUCL (US EPA, 2010b) and Statistica (version 12)
software packages. Hypothesis testing for the water quality data was performed using parametric
29
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
(ANOVA) and nonparametric (Kruskal-Wallis) methods. An assumption underlying parametric statistical
procedures is that datasets are normally distributed or can be transformed to a normally distributed
form; data transformations in some cases included logarithmic functions. For the analysis of the major-
ion trends, average values were used in the statistical tests and were combined with single observations.
As noted previously, this approach was used to avoid the undue weighting of locations sampled multiple
times, either in the new data collected for this study or in the historical water quality data. Post hoc
tests were performed to identify significant differences among water quality datasets for particular
analytes, including the Scheffe and Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparison tests. A p-value of less than 0.05
was interpreted as a significant difference between compared datasets. Because a large number of
comparisons were made between the data from this study and the historical water quality data, which
encompass many sampling investigations, multiple locations, and extended periods of time, the problem
of multiple comparisons is suggested: that is, the increased likelihood of rejecting the null hypothesis
and flagging significant differences among datasets. Given the exploratory nature of this study, p-value
adjustments (e.g., Bonferroni or Sidak correction factors) were not incorporated and the traditional
significance threshold of 0.05 was applied for the data comparisons.
30
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
5. Historical Water Quality Data
Historical ground water quality data for Washington County were obtained from Newport (1973), and
the USGS NWIS (USGS, 2013a) and USGS NURE databases (USGS, 2013b). These data sources represent
sampling events conducted before 2005 that pre-date unconventional gas development in the county.
Comparisons of data from historical sources and collected during this study were conducted at the
county scale (approximate area 860 square miles). No attempt was made to expand the analysis to
include adjacent counties in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio; however, more refined analysis was
conducted in areas proximal to the sampling locations of this study (reduced-area comparisons;
approximately 150 square miles in the northern area and 30 square miles in the southern area). The
regions included in the reduced-area comparisons were controlled by the spatial distribution of
sampling locations from this study; for example, a smaller region was considered in the southern area
because sampling locations there were relatively close to one another (e.g., within 1 mile; see Figure 8).
The historical data are constrained temporally by the availability of information in the databases, as
noted below. It is important to point out that the historical water quality data are not taken a priori as
being representative of the background condition in the county, where background is taken to represent
the water quality regime in the absence of all human activities, including unconventional oil and gas
development. It is anticipated that the historical databases, in fact, contain examples in which the water
quality information reflects anthropogenic impact. Thus, for the purposes of this report, the historical
data are used as points of reference for screening-level comparisons in order to illustrate regional
concentration ranges typical in ground water and for constraining major water composition types that
have previously been encountered throughout the county. The applicability of these data is limited by
the parameters for which data have been historically collected; organic compounds, radiogenic
parameters, stable isotopes, and dissolved gases are not generally represented in the historical data, yet
these data types are critical for this study (Bowen et al., 2015). Subsequent analysis of the historical
water quality information, in relation to the new data collected for this study, provides appropriate
context regarding the geologic settings and geochemical environments, the influence of anthropogenic
impacts based on environmental record searches (see Appendix C), and the recognition of data quality
issues (see US EPA, 2013). The following paragraphs briefly describe the historical datasets used for
comparison purposes in this study.
The Newport (1973) report provides water quality data for 14 sampling locations noted to be
representative of water from wells drilled in Washington County, although an unspecified number of
samples were considered to represent extreme conditions atypical of background conditions.
Concentration data for major cations (sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium), major anions
(bicarbonate, sulfate, chloride), and other constituents (silicon, nitrate, and total iron) were provided in
tabular form (see Table 4 in Newport, 1973). Water samples were collected from wells ranging in depth
from 28 to 200 feet below land surface (median = 90 feet) and represent a range of topographic
locations, including stream channels, valleys, and hilltops. Sampling locations are approximated in
Figure 8 (coordinates provided for the southeast corner of the 1-minute quadrangle containing the well).
For the Newport (1973) dataset, the calculated charge balance error ranges from 0.2% to 13.1% (median
= 1.4%); thus, all data were used for evaluation of water types and constructing Piper diagrams.
31
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
CARROLL
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
The USGS NWIS database for Washington County contains entries for 95 ground water locations (1926-
1997), six spring locations (1983-1985), and 46 surface water locations (1964-2012); sampling locations
are identified in Figure 8. Ground water samples were collected from wells ranging in depth from 21 to
301 feet below land surface (median = 100 feet). Water quality data from the ground water and spring
entries were combined. Analytical data mainly include major cations, anions, general parameters (e.g.,
pH, specific conductance, and alkalinity), some trace elements, and very limited entries for organic
compounds and radiogenic constituents. Of the 101 combined ground water and spring samples, 50
samples have a charge balance error of 15% or lower and were used for evaluating water types and for
constructing Piper diagrams. Of the 46 surface water locations, 40 samples have a charge balance error
of 15% or lower.
The USGS NURE database for Washington County contains entries for 107 ground water locations, 46
spring locations, and 107 stream water locations; sampling locations are identified in Figure 8. Ground
water samples were collected from wells ranging in depth from about 6 to 250 feet below land surface
(median = 60 feet). All of the samples were collected during the summer of 1978. Water quality data
from the ground water and spring entries were combined. These data include a more limited selection
of parameters, including pH, specific conductance, sodium, magnesium, chloride, fluoride, bromine,
manganese, uranium, vanadium, and aluminum. Consequently, no charge balance evaluation is possible
with the NURE dataset.
Summary statistics for water quality parameters were computed separately for the Newport (1973),
NWIS, and NURE datasets, including minimum and maximum values, median, mean, and standard
deviation. Analysis is provided for the countywide distribution of data as well as for the reduced-area
distributions (see Figures 9 and 10).
33
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Water Sampling Location Map
Legend
Newport Ground Water Samples MURE Surface Water Samples
NWIS Spring Samples NURE Spring Samples
NWIS Ground Water Samples NUREGround Water Samples Washington COUHty,
Northern Study Area
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
NWIS Surface Water Samples Study Area
O EPA HF Sampling Locations
Figure 9. Northern sampling area with historical water quality locations.
34
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Pittsburgh*
Mimlinll *
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Legend
Newport Ground Water Samples
NWIS Spring Samples
NWIS Ground Water Samples
NWIS Surface Water Samples
NURE Surface Water Samples Wate|. Samp|jng LOCatJOn Map
NURE Spring Samples
NURE Ground water samples Washi ngton County, Pennsylvania
Southern Study Area
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Basemap. ESRI: Sample Locations, EPA ORD and USGS
Figure 10. Southern sampling area with historical water quality locations.
35
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
6. Water Quality Data from This Study
The following sections describe the results and present interpretations of the water quality testing
conducted in this case study, including geochemical parameters, major cations and anions, trace metals,
organic compounds, dissolved gases, stable isotopes, and radiometric constituents. Also presented are
comparisons of data from this study with historical data. Analytical data obtained during the three
sampling events are provided in tabular form in Appendix B.
6.1. Geochemical Parameters
Water temperature, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, pH, ORP, and concentrations of
dissolved sulfide were measured in the field during the collection of water samples. The mean
temperature of well water and springs from the three sampling events ranged from 10.3 to 17.5 degrees
Celsius (°C), with a median temperature of 13.3°C. Turbidity ranged from <1 to 18 nephelometric
turbidity units (NTU), with a median of 5.4 NTU, representative of water with very little suspended
particulate or colloidal material. Dissolved oxygen concentrations ranged from 0.05 to 7.7 mg/L, with a
median of 4.6 mg/L. Although most of the well waters and springs were oxygenated, dissolved oxygen
concentrations indicative of more reducing (anoxic) conditions—i.e., generally less than 1 mg/L—were
measured at some of the locations. Concentrations of dissolved sulfide were below the level of
detection (<0.01 mg/L) at all locations except SWPAGW06 during the second and third rounds of
sampling (0.05 to 0.26 mg/L, J; see Appendix A for data qualifiers). Redox conditions and impacts on
water quality characteristics are discussed in the "Iron and Manganese" section below.
Frequency distributions for values of specific conductance (a surrogate measure of TDS) from historical
water quality data and this study are shown in Figure 11. Specific conductance values for ground water
and springs measured in this study ranged from 440 to 1,801 u.S/cm (median=659 u.S/cm; n = 19) and fall
within ranges of the NURE and NWIS datasets (see Figure 11 and Table 4). Statistical analysis of the
specific conductance values from the different datasets on a countywide basis reveals a significant
difference between data from this study and historical data using the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test
(p-value <0.05); post hoc multiple comparison tests show that specific conductance values from this
study and the NURE dataset are not significantly different (p-value = 0.14), indicating that the NWIS
distribution of specific conductance values is distinct. NWIS data include samples with high specific
conductance (>2,000 u.S/cm), suggesting that the NWIS dataset may include impacted waters not
representative of typical background conditions. This issue is further evaluated below in the discussion
of water types.
The mean pH value of the NURE dataset (7.2; n = 153) is equivalent to the mean value from this study
(7.2; n = 19). Post hoc statistical analysis reveals that pH data from this study and the NURE dataset are
not significantly different (p-value = 0.82; Kruskal-Wallis). The distribution of pH values from the NWIS
dataset differs from the distribution in this study and the NURE data (p-value <0.05; see Figure 12), with
a positive shift of the mean pH value to 8.0 (n = 88; see Table 4).
36
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
81
-
>» 6 -
0 °
c
0
3 4-
il:
^ ™"
0
This study
i n n=19
i • i • i • i
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
60-
o
§ 40-
LL 20-
-
0-
r~
PI
NURE
n=153
— i , — i
1 i • i ' i
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
20-
o
c
0
0" 10-
-
n .
—
NWIS
Ifh n=98
^n-TI r-r-i n n HI
0
2000 4000 6000
Specific Conductance, ^S/cm
8000
Figure 11. Frequency diagram showing distributions of specific conductance in ground water from
this study and historical data.
37
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
10-i
8-
o
This study
^ 0
0 -
I
60-
o
V 40-
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 4. Summary statistics for countywide ground water and spring data.
Data Sou rce
NURE
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Parameter
PH
pH
PH
SPC
SPC
SPC
Alkalinity
Alkalinity
Sodium
Sodium
Sodium
Sodium
Potassium
Potassium
Potassium
Calcium
Calcium
Calcium
Magnesium
Magnesium
Magnesium
Magnesium
Chloride
Chloride
Chloride
Chloride
Sulfate
Sulfate
Sulfate
Dissolved/
Total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
Units
u.S/cm
u.S/cm
u.S/cm
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
Mean
7.2
8.0
7.2
604
1238
742
164
273
87
19
198
51
4.7
3.5
1.3
94
74
98
26
10
20
14
45
23
90
74
176
349
40
Median
7.3
8.1
7.1
550
675
659
156
250
33
7
42
20
3.6
3.4
1.3
69
66
93
18
7
14
12
17
9
29
35
54
175
38
SD
0.32
0.50
0.53
298
1412
341
71
93
122
40
362
70
3.0
1.7
0.3
124
30
68
35
10
15
7
72
51
159
116
416
521
20
Min
6.1
6.5
6.5
80
71
440
9
105
8.2
1.4
4.0
3.3
1.7
0.2
0.9
2.8
19
6.2
2.1
1.0
3.6
4.4
1.4
1.9
3.0
2.2
3.7
10
4.5
Max
8.7
9.1
8.9
2050
7000
1801
460
540
440
309
1700
265
12
7.2
1.8
506
160
311
141
73
67
29
220
404
910
494
1600
2600
95
Locations
153
101
19
153
101
19
101
19
14
153
101
19
14
101
19
14
101
19
14
153
101
19
14
153
101
19
14
101
19
N
153
88
19
153
97
19
91
19
14
130
48
19
14
48
19
14
69
19
14
123
69
19
14
128
73
19
14
91
19
Z1
--
--
--
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 4. Summary statistics for countywide ground water and spring data.
Data Sou rce
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NURE
This study
NURE
This study
Parameter
Fluoride
Fluoride
Fluoride
Bicarbonate
Bicarbonate
Bicarbonate
Nitrate
Nitrate2
Nitrate
Silicon
Silicon
Silicon
Barium
Barium
Strontium
Strontium
Iron
Iron
Iron
Iron
Iron
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese2
Manganese
Uranium
Uranium
Vanadium
Vanadium
Dissolved/
Total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
total
total
total
dissolved
dissolved
total
total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
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
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mean
0.12
0.27
0.29
340
209
349
9.3
0.5
2.0
15
6.6
6.1
51
143
1485
493
771
693
561
675
158
107
201
131
69
115
0.30
0.54
1.2
0.05
Median
0.07
0.20
0.10
316
190
335
0.95
0.5
0.6
16
5.7
5.8
13
125
810
453
700
330
63
320
29
60
15
62
40
10
0.22
0.53
0.6
0.04
SD
0.17
0.16
0.50
181
89
99
21.6
0.4
4.6
5.4
3.3
1.4
70
105
1800
308
639
1278
1366
1383
326
126
384
176
74
241
0.27
0.39
1.1
0.07
Min
0.01
<0.1
<0.05
45
13
146
<0.1
<0.04
<0.01
7.3
2.9
4.3
9
34
445
86
70
<50
<22
130
<20
<10
<4
7
10
<4
0.004
<0.05
0.2
<0.02
Max
1.24
0.8
2.03
867
560
605
75
1.4
20.4
26
21
10
183
437
6400
1267
2300
9200
5175
9000
1280
710
1265
903
340
913
1.7
1.6
3.1
0.28
Locations
153
101
19
14
101
17
14
101
19
14
101
19
101
19
101
19
14
101
19
101
19
101
19
153
101
19
153
19
153
13
N
102
48
19
14
54
19
14
16
19
14
48
19
6
19
11
19
14
79
19
42
19
67
19
71
58
19
153
19
7
13
Z1
0
2
3
0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
10
0
12
2
11
0
0
12
0
2
0
4
40
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 4. Summary statistics for countywide ground water and spring data.
Data Sou rce
NURE
This study
Parameter
Br3
Br
Dissolved/
Total
dissolved
dissolved
Units
mg/L
mg/L
Mean
0.15
0.93
Median
0.04
0.83
SD
0.36
0.71
Min
0.10
<0.17
Max
1.9
2.5
Locations
153
19
N
45
19
Z1
0
8
Z is the number of locations with left-censored data; concentration values were set at K of the MDL or Reporting Level.
Data base entries of "0" were not included in the statistical analysis.
The NURE dataset provides results for bromine. It is likely that total bromine is present as bromide; however, because of uncertainty
about the analytical procedures used for Br analysis, comparisons between the NURE bromine results and bromide data from this study
should be made with caution. NURE Br results are not provided in subsequent data tables.
6.2. Major Ions
Water types, based on the predominant cation-anion pair (molar basis), were determined for the
Newport (1973) and NWIS historical water quality datasets for Washington County and compared to the
results of this study. Results of the dissolved metals (filtered) analyses were used for water-type
evaluations, charge balance calculations, and for constructing Piper diagrams. As noted previously,
turbidity was generally low for the ground water and surface water samples, and in most cases, the
results of total and dissolved metals analyses were similar, typically with the exceptions of calcium,
aluminum, iron, and manganese in some samples. The calcium-bicarbonate water type was the most
frequently observed across all of the datasets in Washington County (see Figure 13), followed by the
sodium-bicarbonate and calcium-sulfate water types. NWIS data include a high proportion of the
sodium-sulfate water type (31%), which was not observed in this study or in the Newport (1973) data.
This study included the calcium-chloride water type from several locations (SWPAGW05, SWPAGW13,
and SWPAGW14); these sampling locations are discussed more fully in following sections.
The major cation and anion compositions of ground water and springs are shown on a trilinear diagram
(Piper diagram; see Figure 14) for each water sample for which a charge balance error of 15% or lower
was determined, encompassing all of the locations from this study, the Newport (1973) data, and 50
locations in Washington County from the NWIS database (ground water and springs). The Piper diagram
includes two ternary plots, one for anions and one for cations, and a central quadrilateral plot,
containing data projected from the ternary diagrams. In each of the datasets evaluated, major cations
trend from compositions dominated by calcium and magnesium to compositions dominated by sodium
plus potassium. The anion compositions of waters from this study are mainly bicarbonate-dominated,
with a trend toward chloride-dominated compositions (represented mainly by locations SWPAGW13
and SWPAGW14); the chloride trend is not present in the historical water quality data (see Figure 14).
The anionic composition of some waters from the NWIS data and the Newport (1973) data show a
separate distinctive trend toward sulfate-dominated compositions. As discussed below, the sodium-
sulfate type compositions present in the NWIS data, but not in this study, tend to be elevated in TDS and
may be representative of more evolved water-rock interactions, perhaps involving weathering of sulfide
minerals such as pyrite contained in coal and other sedimentary rocks.
The origin of major ions in ground water in part reflects long-term reactions of recharge water with the
minerals contained in subsurface aquifers, including silicate-rich and carbonate-rich rocks and
unconsolidated materials. The primary chemical reactions expected in ground water systems include
abiotic dissolution-precipitation processes and several important biotic processes (e.g., Hem, 1985).
Various trends are revealed by plotting specific water quality parameters against the measure of TDS (or
41
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
its surrogate specific conductance) and retaining context to the primary water types (see Figure 15). For
example, water samples with pH below 7 (acidic) tend to be unbuffered and low in specific conductance.
The sodium-sulfate water type (NWIS data) tends to be elevated in pH and enriched in IDS resulting
from water-rock interactions. The calcium-chloride water type from this study shows increasing calcium
and chloride concentrations with increasing specific conductance, but no change in pH or the
concentrations of bicarbonate, sulfate, and sodium, suggesting decoupled behavior and a specific source
of calcium and chloride enrichment (see Figure 15).
Newport
NWIS
This Study
Ca-HCO, Na-HCO, Ca-SO, Na-SO Ca-CI Na-CI
334 4
Water Type
Figure 13. Frequency diagram of water types (ground water) identified in Washington County from this study and
from historical water quality data.
42
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Ca-CI
Ca-SCX
Ca-HCO
Na-S(X
Na-HCO,
Sulfate trend
80%
60%
40%
\
20%
20%
Cl trend
Cl
This study
Newport (1973)
NWIS
Figure 14. Major ion chemistry of ground water from this study and from historical data.
43
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Q _
8-
X
a
-} _
6-
I
800-
0)
^ 600-
s
a
o 4D°-
2
a
« 200-
CQ
Q
500-
_J 400-
E
300-
E
3
"y 200 -
"100-
0-
C
• Ca-HCO3
• Na-HC03 This Study
* 4 „ A Ca-CI
• » ^ ! !
•f . • Ca-HCO3
l£ Ca-SO4
i,^P A Na-CI
^*A ^ **" " Na-S04 Historical Data
• Ca-HCO3
B Na-HCO3
Ca-S04
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
1 1 1 1 ! 1 1
•
•
f *
*F*
* A
"4 »
) 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
•
1
-
-
-
mf
^^
**•
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
^ 750-
ro
E
•§ 500-
o
£
O 2SQ-
0-
c
3000 -i
_l
"o> 20°°-
E
— 1000-
•3
0-
c
1500
_1
"5)
£ 1000
E"
3
"§ 500
(A
0
4
-
.
4/
-/
/
A^
»'
JAB-
•*t*^
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
1111111
4
* .
•
4 4
" « "4 .*"
r_*»* *o *t — ^~
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
4
4
*4" *
•
. jTr^^ ^A »
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Specific Conductance, nS/cm Specific Conductance, nS/cm
Figure 15. Relationship between specific conductance and pH and the concentrations of chloride, bicarbonate, sulfate, calcium, and sodium for ground water
in Washington County; data are plotted with respect to water type. Arrows indicate trends in Ca-CI type waters from this study.
44
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Water quality data collected for this study are compared to historical data from Washington County in
Tables 4 through 7. Descriptive statistics for selected water quality parameters were determined, and
data from this study were compared to values determined from the historical data on a countywide
basis (see Table 4) and on a reduced-area basis (see Tables 5 and 6). Data for surface water are
presented in Table 7. Descriptive statistics include the mean, median, standard deviation, minimum and
maximum values, number of total locations, and number of data entries for the particular parameter.
The last two metrics indicate that the datasets are not always complete for all of the parameters of
interest, for example, not all locations have concentration data for sodium, etc. Summary statistics are
also provided in Table 8 for selected parameters measured in this study but not generally included in
historical water quality datasets (i.e., ORP, dissolved oxygen, DOC, dissolved and total arsenic, and
dissolved lithium).
The reduced search areas (see Figures 9 and 10) were drawn to represent a 3-mile radius of influence
from the central point in the southern area (equivalent to the site-7H area; see Appendix C) and to
consider the area encompassed by overlapping 3-mile radii around sampling locations in the northern
area (resulting in a 7-mile radius; see Appendix C). Box and whisker plots were constructed from the
historical datasets and from data collected for this study (see Figures 16, 17, and 18).
On a countywide basis, the concentrations of sodium and chloride from this study, the NURE dataset,
and the Newport (1973) dataset are generally lower than those from the NWIS dataset. Statistical
analysis of sodium concentrations using the post hoc Scheffe test revealed no significant differences
between the Newport (1973) data, NURE data, and data from this study (p-value >0.62). Values for
magnesium from this study are within the ranges of the Newport (1973), NURE, and NWIS data. Calcium
and bicarbonate values from this study and from Newport (1973) are generally similar to the NWIS data
but lower for sulfate (see Table 4 and Figure 16). With the exception of calcium, ANOVA (log-
transformed) and Kruskal-Wallis tests showed significant differences among all of the datasets for the
major ions: sodium, chloride, sulfate, magnesium, and bicarbonate (p-value <0.05). In particular, the
presence of high sulfate concentrations in the NWIS dataset compared to the data collected for this
study indicates that comparisons with lumped historical water quality data may not be appropriate;
however, no attempt was made to filter the datasets in order to avoid unintended bias in the evaluation
of historical data.
Northern area reduced-area analysis: The northern sampling area retains good coverage of water
quality data from the Newport (1973), NURE, and NWIS datasets, with up to 4, 16, and 32 locations
within the reduced area, respectively (see Figure 17). With the exception of calcium, the range of major
ion concentrations observed in this study fell within historical data ranges. Concentrations of sodium,
magnesium, chloride, sulfate, and bicarbonate were generally lower in the data from this study
compared to NWIS data. Significant differences among the datasets were found for all parameters in
Figure 17 using the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric ANOVA by ranks test (p-value <0.05).
45
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 5. Summary statistics for northern area ground water and spring data.
Data Source
NURE
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Parameter
PH
pH
PH
SPC
SPC
SPC
Alkalinity
Alkalinity
Sodium
Sodium
Sodium
Sodium
Potassium
Potassium
Potassium
Calcium
Calcium
Calcium
Magnesium
Magnesium
Magnesium
Magnesium
Chloride
Chloride
Chloride
Chloride
Sulfate
Sulfate
Sulfate
Dissolved/
Total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
Units
u.S/cm
u.S/cm
u.S/cm
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
Mean
7.2
8.0
7.1
603
1110
640
160
251
44
18
229
39
4.4
3.5
1.3
70
63
87
26
9
17
15
19
13
102
57
116
299
39
Median
7.3
8.1
7.1
575
505
530
150
250
33
11
46
20
4.9
3.2
1.2
69
58
77
29
6
12
12
18
8
21
52
123
92
39
SD
0.23
0.43
0.29
299
1615
240
90
70
37
29
448
42
1.8
1.4
0.3
9
22
37
6
10
15
7
14
11
192
55
105
618
9
Min
6.6
7.0
6.5
300
305
440
9
105
12
4.2
7.4
5.1
1.8
0.7
0.9
62
24
27
17
3
7
8
4
2
7
5
6
26
25
Max
7.6
8.8
7.6
2000
7000
1230
460
342
97
124
1700
124
5.9
6.9
1.8
82
130
155
30
44
67
29
38
35
910
178
210
2600
50
Locations
29
35
9
29
35
9
35
9
4
29
35
9
4
35
9
4
35
9
4
29
35
9
4
29
35
9
4
35
9
N
29
31
9
29
33
9
32
9
4
16
22
9
4
22
9
4
29
9
4
16
29
9
4
15
30
9
4
32
9
Z1
--
--
--
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
46
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 5. Summary statistics for northern area ground water and spring data.
Data Source
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NURE
This study
Parameter
Fluoride
Fluoride
Fluoride
Bicarbonate
Bicarbonate
Bicarbonate
Nitrate
Nitrate
Nitrate
Silicon
Silicon
Silicon
Iron
Iron
Iron
Iron
Iron
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Uranium
Uranium
Dissolved/
Total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
total
total
total
dissolved
dissolved
total
total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
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
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
Mean
0.21
0.30
0.20
248
233
333
20
0.49
0.81
14
6.0
6.0
520
676
1058
624
310
125
182
118
76
170
0.21
0.33
Median
0.11
0.20
0.11
282
200
342
1.4
0.51
0.56
14
5.9
5.7
610
360
54
510
90
60
17
99
50
30
0.16
0.32
SD
0.26
0.20
0.26
145
104
94
37
0.25
0.73
3
1.9
1.7
250
918
1910
530
440
136
333
92
79
300
0.2
0.21
Min
0.01
<0.1
0.06
45
140
146
0.2
0.2
<0.01
10
3.1
4.3
170
70
15
150
10
<10
<4
30
10
<4
0.004
0.07
Max
0.98
0.70
0.87
383
560
506
75
0.87
1.88
17
10
10
700
4800
5175
1900
1280
590
1002
321
340
910
0.77
0.63
Locations
29
35
9
4
35
9
4
35
9
4
35
9
4
35
9
35
9
35
9
29
35
9
29
9
N
16
22
9
4
18
9
4
5
9
4
22
9
4
32
9
9
9
27
9
11
23
9
29
9
Z1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
6
1
6
0
0
6
0
0
Z is the number of locations with left-censored data; concentration values were set at 1/2 of the MDL or Reporting Level.
47
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 6. Summary statistics for southern area ground water and spring data.
Data Sou rce
NURE
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Parameter
PH
pH
PH
SPC
SPC
SPC
Alkalinity
Alkalinity
Sodium
Sodium
Sodium
Sodium
Potassium
Potassium
Potassium
Calcium
Calcium
Calcium
Magnesium
Magnesium
Magnesium
Magnesium
Chloride
Chloride
Chloride
Chloride
Sulfate
Sulfate
Sulfate
Dissolved/
Total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
Units
u.S/cm
u.S/cm
u.S/cm
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
Mean
7.4
--
7.3
500
--
838
--
293
--
21
--
62
--
--
1.3
--
--
108
--
6
--
13
--
8
--
89
--
--
40
Median
7.4
--
7.0
520
--
750
--
259
--
9
--
18
--
--
1.3
--
--
96
--
7
--
12
--
7
--
34
--
--
30
SD
0.18
--
0.68
122
--
397
--
110
--
26
--
90
--
--
0.3
--
--
88
--
4
--
7
--
5
--
154
--
--
27
Min
7.2
--
6.6
360
--
491
--
200
--
2
--
3.3
--
--
0.9
--
--
6.2
--
1.6
--
4.4
--
2.8
--
2.2
--
--
4.5
Max
7.7
--
8.9
675
--
1801
--
540
--
75
--
265
--
--
1.7
--
--
311
--
11
--
28
--
17
--
494
--
--
95
Locations
8
2
10
8
2
10
2
10
1
8
2
10
1
2
10
1
2
10
1
8
2
10
1
8
2
10
1
2
10
N
8
2
10
8
2
10
2
10
1
7
1
10
1
1
10
1
1
10
1
7
1
10
1
7
1
10
1
2
10
Z1
--
--
--
0
--
0
--
0
--
0
--
0
--
--
0
--
--
0
--
0
--
0
--
0
--
0
--
--
0
48
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 6. Summary statistics for southern area ground water and spring data.
Data Sou rce
NURE
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
Newport
(1973)
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NURE
This study
Parameter
Fluoride
Fluoride
Fluoride
Bicarbonate
Bicarbonate
Bicarbonate
Nitrate
Nitrate
Nitrate
Silicon
Silicon
Silicon
Iron
Iron
Iron
Iron
Iron
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Uranium
Uranium
Dissolved/
Total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
total
total
total
dissolved
dissolved
total
total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
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
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mean
0.11
--
0.38
--
--
367
--
--
3.1
--
--
6.3
--
--
113
--
23
--
217
34
--
66
0.32
0.73
Median
0.1
--
0.08
--
--
327
--
--
0.59
--
--
6.3
--
--
67
--
13
--
12
22
--
10
0.25
0.78
SD
0.09
--
0.65
--
--
108
--
--
6.2
--
--
1.1
--
--
128
--
18
--
442
33
--
174
0.3
0.43
Min
0.02
--
0.03
--
--
274
--
--
<0.10
--
--
4.6
--
--
<22
--
<20
--
<4
10
--
<4
0.03
0.09
Max
0.23
--
2.03
--
--
605
--
--
20
--
--
8.1
--
--
423
--
60
--
1265
82
--
560
0.95
1.6
Locations
8
2
10
1
2
10
1
2
10
1
2
10
1
2
10
2
10
2
10
8
2
10
8
10
N
6
1
10
1
1
8
1
0
10
1
1
10
1
2
10
2
10
2
10
4
2
10
8
10
Z1
0
--
0
--
--
0
--
--
1
--
--
0
--
--
5
--
6
--
5
0
--
6
0
0
Z is the number of locations with left-censored data; concentration values were set at1/2 of the MDLor Reporting Level.
49
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 7. Summary statistics for countywide surface water data.
Data Sou rce
NURE
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
Parameter
PH
pH
PH
SPC
SPC
SPC
Alkalinity
Alkalinity
Sodium
Sodium2
Sodium
Potassium2
Potassium
Calcium2
Calcium
Magnesium
Magnesium2
Magnesium
Chloride
Chloride2
Chloride
Sulfate
Sulfate
Fluoride
Fluoride2
Fluoride
Bicarbonate2
Bicarbonate
Nitrate2
Nitrate
Silicon2
Silicon
Dissolved/
Total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
Units
U.S/CIT1
U.S/CIT1
u.S/cm
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
Mean
8.0
7.5
7.5
716
847
522
181
259
16
69
12
2.8
1.2
78
86
13
19
18
11
63
20
157
43
0.10
0.44
0.13
240
317
1.3
0.91
11
5
Median
8.1
7.5
7.4
550
788
553
166
235
9
36
8
2.4
1.2
77
92
8
20
18
8
26
11
123
44
0.09
0.33
0.14
241
331
0.42
0.68
11
5
SD
0.23
0.45
0.55
542
474
59
60
44
27
109
7
1.7
0.2
22
14
14
8
9
10
145
24
132
4
0.06
0.28
0.05
70
64
2.4
0.58
3
0.4
Min
7.1
5.8
7.0
330
365
454
96
232
1.4
9.2
7.5
1.2
1.1
30
71
2
7
10
2.3
2.2
1.9
26
39
0.01
0.15
0.06
144
250
0.01
0.48
6.3
4.5
Max
8.5
8.1
8.1
4300
3600
559
450
310
241
720
19
12
1.4
151
96
81
48
27
83
950
47
490
47
0.39
1.3
0.17
540
375
9
1.57
22
5.3
Locations
107
46
3
107
46
3
46
3
107
46
3
46
3
46
3
107
46
3
107
46
3
46
3
107
46
3
46
3
46
3
46
3
N
107
46
3
107
46
3
45
3
107
45
3
45
3
45
3
106
45
3
106
45
3
46
3
102
44
3
44
3
18
3
44
3
Z1
--
--
--
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 7. Summary statistics for countywide surface water data.
Data Sou rce
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NWIS
This study
NURE
NWIS
This study
NURE
This study
NWIS
This study
NURE
This study
Parameter
Iron
Iron
Iron
Iron
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Uranium
Uranium
Aluminum
Aluminum
Vanadium
Vanadium
Dissolved/
Total
total
total
dissolved
dissolved
total
total
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
total
total
dissolved
dissolved
Units
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
ug/L
ug/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mean
2355
327
1455
29
259
30
378
553
19
0.40
0.78
1965
120
0.77
0.34
Median
1135
349
665
19
140
9
181
192
2
0.33
0.65
686
19
0.60
--
SD
4932
305
2437
25
285
43
642
836
29
0.50
0.38
2780
190
0.52
--
Min
110
<22
95
<20
10
<4
9
10
<4
<0.002
0.48
0
<3.7
0.20
0.18
Max
33095
620
14620
58
1074
79
3752
4600
52
5
1.2
7600
339
2.1
0.50
Locations
46
3
46
3
46
3
107
46
3
107
3
46
3
107
2
N
46
3
42
3
45
3
104
44
3
107
3
8
3
107
2
Z1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
12
0
0
1
0
0
Z is the number of locations with left-censored data; concentration values were set at K of the MDL or Reporting Level. Data base
entries of "0" were not included in the statistical analysis.
Table 8. Summary statistics for countywide ground water and spring data, additional parameters.
Data
Source
This study
This study
This study
This study
This study
This study
Parameter
ORP
Dissolved
Oxygen
Organic
Carbon
Arsenic
Arsenic
Lithium
Dissolved/
Total
Dissolved
Dissolved
Total
Dissolved
Units
mV
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mean
86
3.7
0.76
0.49
1.02
9.0
Median
113
4.6
0.64
0.54
0.56
8.4
SD
87
2.8
0.42
0.24
1.36
4.9
Min
-128
0.05
0.25
<0.04
0.23
3.7
Max
224
7.7
1.99
0.84
5.9
18.8
Locations
19
19
17
19
19
13
N
19
19
17
19
19
13
Z1
-
-
0
2
0
0
Z is the number of locations with left-censored data; concentration values were set at K of the MDL.
51
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
1
n=14
400-
300-
:oo -
100-
0-
-
O)
O
Sodium
n=48
Newport NWIS NURE
Calcium
Newport
Newport NWIS NURE
Magnesium
&
NWIS
NURE
This Study
n=19
This Study
This Study
rth -,,-th
0 200-
, mg/
1
Co
8
Newport
Chloride
Newport NWIS NURE
Sulfate
Newport NWIS NURE
Bicarbonate
NWIS
NURE
n=19
SMCL
250 mg/L
This Study
SMCL
250 mg/L
This Study
This Study
Figure 16. Countywide box-and-whisker plots, showing the 5 , 25 , 50 , 75 , and 95 percentiles. The Newport, NWIS, and NURE water quality data are
representative of samples collected before Marcellus Shale gas development in Washington County.
52
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
"5l 1500-
E
c
o
15 1H»-
!
u
0 500-
o
Concentration. mg/L
§
rJ GO-
DJ
O ji
n
c
CD
g 20-
O
O
>-
Sodium
n=22
T *
». ^6 -;
Newport NWIS NURE This Study
Calcium
n=9
-T- »
• .
n-4 n=29
I »*. .'
-1- **
Newport NWIS NURE This Study
Magnesium
\
+
n=4 n-9
^A. i-4 &»:•;
Newport NWIS NURE This Study
tncentration, mg/L
S S S 8
a o o o
(J 200-
Concentration, mg/L
§ 8 S
o o o
500-
B>
c* 400 -
O
"1
§ :oo-
O
O
0-
Chloride
n=30
n=4
»
Newport NWIS NURE This Study
Sulfate
n-4 n=32 n=g
Newport NWIS NURE This Study
Bicarbonate
n=9
n=18
n=4
T
*
* I .,
T. '
Newport NWIS NURE This Study
SMCL
250 mg/L
SMCL
250 mg/L
Figure 17. Northern area box-and-whisker plots, showing the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 95th percentiles. The Newport, NWIS, and NURE water quality data are
representative of samples collected before Marcellus Shale gas development in Washington County.
53
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
i
'«
O
Newport
Sodium
Chloride
500-
_l 400 -
S
E
C 300-
o
a
i
£ 200-
I
C
o
(j 100-
-
n=10
«
i-
*
-
500 -
_| 4DO-
E
C 300-
o
s
10
•g 230-
1
O
o lj°-
.
• n=7
• ^ • .*»*** .
r=10
•
•
3**.V '
SMCL
250 mg>t
Newport NWIS NURE This Study
Calcium
NWIS NURE
Sulfate
350-
, m-
I .:
200-
^
•g 150-
(U
g ,00-
O
O
0-
:
*
n=10
-
« "
*
-
_
1000-
_J 300 .
£ •
§" 500 -
__
0
Q 200-
0-
-
n=10
_
•^=v* **»**.
SMCL
250 rng.'L
Newport NWIS NURE
Magnesium
This Study
Newport
NWIS NURE
Bicarbonate
n=10
This Study
n=10
NWIS
NURE
This Study
Newport
NWIS
NURE
This Study
Figure 18. Southern area box-and-whisker plots, showing the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 95th percentiles. The Newport, NWIS, and NURE water quality data are
representative of samples collected before Marcellus Shale gas development in Washington County.
54
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Southern area reduced-area analysis: In the southern area, only the NURE dataset allowed for any
comparison with the data from this study (see Figure 18). Overall, values for sodium, chloride, and
magnesium were higher from this study than in the NURE data. With the exceptions of sodium, calcium,
magnesium, and chloride from several specific sampling locations (SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14), the
data collected for this study in relation to major cations and anions generally fell within the ranges
observed in historical water quality data. Although historical water quality data in the southern area are
sparse, it is clear that chloride concentrations at one location (SWPAGW13) were anomalous, e.g.,
chloride concentrations exceeded secondary drinking water standards as described below and they
were within the upper 90th percentile of chloride concentrations available for Washington County (see
Figure 16). This sampling location is described in more detail in a following section ("Southern Area").
The concentration data in historical datasets indicate that secondary drinking-water standards (SMCLs)
of 250 mg/Lfor both chloride and sulfate have been exceeded in Washington County in some cases (see
Figure 16). For data collected in this study, exceedances of the chloride SMCL were noted at location
SWPAGW13 during each sampling event; no exceedances of the sulfate SMCL at any sampling location
were noted in the data collected for this study. Concentrations of aluminum, iron, and manganese, in
some cases, exceeded SMCLs (50 to 200 u.g/L, 300 u.g/L, and 50 u.g/L, respectively). These secondary
standards are limits based on aesthetic qualities of water, such as taste, odor, and staining properties.
Similar observations relating to ground water quality in Washington County, and throughout
Pennsylvania generally, were described in previous studies (PA DEP, 1998; Williams et al., 1993;
Newport, 1973). Iron and manganese concentrations are influenced by oxidation-reduction (redox)
processes as discussed in a following section ("Iron and Manganese"). Total aluminum concentrations in
this study ranged from <3.7 to 2,380 u.g/L and aluminum was detected above the QL in 9 of the 19
ground water and spring sampling locations. Aluminum was above the minimum value of the SMCL
range in seven ground water and spring samples across the three sampling events, but the SMCL
exceedances for aluminum were never repeated at specific sampling locations. Particulate aluminum in
ground water is generally considered to be fine-grained aluminum hydroxide or an aluminosilicate
(Hem, 1985).
In this study, primary MCL exceedances were observed for nitrate at location SWPAGW10 and total lead
at locations SWPAGW09 and SWPAGW12. Sources of nitrate to ground water include septic systems,
animal manure, and fertilizers applied to lawns and crops; nitrate is not typically considered to be
associated with hydraulic fracturing operations. A precise evaluation of the source of nitrate from the
well at location SWPAGW10 was beyond the scope of this project; however, isotopic tracer techniques
could be applied for this purpose. Other sample locations in proximity to SWPAGW10 did not show
elevated levels of nitrate, including surface water (SWPASW03) located about 250 feet to the northwest
(see Figure 3). In round 1 sampling (July 2011), a total lead concentration of 17 u.g/L (J) was detected at
location SWPAGW12; a field duplicate showed a concentration of 14 u.g/L (J), as compared to the lead
action level of 15 u.g/L. Concentrations of lead in the dissolved (filtered) samples were <17 u.g/L. In
round 2 sampling (March 2012), concentrations of total and dissolved lead were <1 u.g/L at location
SWPAGW12, and revealed no consistent pattern of detection. During the third round of sampling (May
2013), a total lead concentration of 25.6 u.g/L was detected at location SWPAGW09; the concentration
in the corresponding dissolved sample was 1.4 u.g/L, suggesting that the lead was partitioned to
particulate matter. The mobility of lead in ground water is limited due to the low solubility of lead
carbonates and hydroxy carbonates, and because of the tendency for lead to sorb to mineral surfaces
55
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
(Hem, 1985). Precise evaluation of the source of lead in these samples was outside the scope of the
study. Lead is not typically considered to be associated with hydraulic fracturing operations but can be
derived from weathering of natural lead-containing minerals (e.g., galena) and drinking water can
potentially be contaminated by lead pipes or copper pipes with lead solder.
Ground water quality characteristics are expected to be influenced by aquifer formation properties,
such as mineral content and bulk chemical composition. Studies have indicated that ground water
derived from the Monongahela Group may contain higher chloride levels than ground water from other
formations, but data are generally not available to make more detailed assessments of links between
geologic formations and water quality in Washington County (Battelle, 2013). The depth of wells
sampled in this study ranged from about 50 to 160 feet below land surface, with a median value of 95
feet below land surface. The distribution of well depths in the northern study area are compared to the
distribution of well depths from the NURE and NWIS datasets on a countywide and reduced-area basis
in Figure 19. Within the northern study area, well depths are highly comparable (p-value = 0.43) to well
depths represented in the historical water quality datasets, suggesting that similar formation
characteristics are captured in the analysis of ground water chemical data. The same depth
relationships are apparent in the southern study area, although data are not plotted in Figure 19.
Time-dependent trends in water quality parameters are critical for evaluating potential impacts because
natural variability as well as potential source-response trends can result in changing geochemical
signatures with time. Figure 20 shows time-trends for selected parameters in wells that were sampled
during each of the three events. Specific conductance values and other major ions showed consistent
patterns through time in samples from well locations SWPAGW03, SWPAGW04, SWPAGW06, and
SWPAGW08. In contrast, SWPAGW05 data showed increasing specific conductance values with time,
and data from location SWPAGW13 showed decreasing values. These time-dependent trends were
generally followed by other major cation and anion concentration data in these wells. For comparison,
the Cl/specific conductance ratio increased at location SWPAGW05 (0.09 to 0.17) over the three rounds
of sampling and the molar [Sr/Ca] ratio decreased from 0.006 to 0.003 (87Sr/86Sr ratios were invariant).
The molar [Sr/Ca] ratio in flowback and produced water from Marcellus Shale gas wells is >0.05
(Chapman et al., 2012). These characteristics suggest that the changing concentrations in this well may
not be associated with impacts from Marcellus Shale water or other identifiable sources of
contamination and are possibly related to natural variability, but mixing processes cannot be ruled out
at this location. For example, model results from Kolesar Kohl et al. (2014) indicate that very small shifts
in molar [Sr/Ca] ratios could result from the mixing of upward-migrating brines with shallow ground
water. Additional complicating factors include high dilution of deeper formation waters and possible
modification of ground water chemistry due to mineral-water processes like carbonate dissolution-
precipitation and cation exchange with clay minerals. State record searches indicated several violation
notices issued in June 2011 related to discharge of pollutants within 0.4 to 1 mile of location
SWPAGW05 although the nature and composition of the discharged material is not known (see
Appendix C). Time-dependent behavior of dissolved ions at location SWPAGW13 is discussed in a
following section ("Southern Area").
56
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Frequency
D fO -P^
l_ •• 1
Frequency
D ro -t^ o> c
II
w
c
161
>,
o 12-
0
—5 ft
—f O
CT
£ 4
LL ' .
n -
\j
(
>,30-
£24-
Sis:
S"12-
LL 6-
)
)
)
•
0
1
T '
1
50
1
50
I
50
1
This study
Northern Area
• i • i • i • i
100 150 200 250 300
NURE
Northern Area
II 1 1
100 150 200 250 300
NWIS
Northern Area
1C
i ' ' '
i ' i • i ' i r i
)0 150 200 250 300
NWIS & NURE
, — . \A/pcihinntnn ("!niint\/ PA
v vcioi iiiy \\Ji i v_/wu i i LV , i r\
1 1 . ,
I , i | i i | • i | •
50 100 150 200 250 300
Well Depth, ft
Figure 19. Frequency diagram showing well depths for samples collected in this study and samples
included in historical water quality databases (countywide and northern area).
57
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
600-
500-
200-
100-
4/29/2011
4/29/2012
Time
2000-
1600-
1200 -
O 800-
Q.
CO
400-
4/29/2011
4/29/2012
Time
350-
300-
250-
200-
S 150
CD
O
100-
50-
4/29/2013
4/29/2011
160-
120-
E
40-
4/29/2013 4/29/2011
SWPAGW13
SWPAGW05
SWPAGW03
SWPAGW04
- SWPAGW08
SWPAGW06
4/29/2012
Time
4/29/2012
Time
4/29/2013
4/29/2013
Figure 20. Time trends for chloride, calcium, sodium, and specific conductance in ground water samples from this
study. Only locations that were sampled in each of the three sampling rounds are plotted.
58
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Time-dependent trends have some implication regarding the use of data averaged across multiple
sampling events for calculating summary statistics of water quality parameters (Tables 4 through 8). At
most well locations, variability in major-ion (Na, K, Ca, Mg, Cl, SO4) concentration data was minimal. The
coefficient of variation (standard deviation/mean) was <0.30 in 81% of the major-ion comparisons
across all sampling locations of this study. However, locations SWPAGW05 and SWPAGW13 showed
more significant concentration trends with time. Using time-averaged values from these locations
reduces the maximum concentration values, but the overall shift in other statistical parameters (e.g.,
mean, median) is minor, indicating that the summary data in Tables 4 through 8 are representative of
the water quality data collected in this study.
Brantley et al. (2014) concluded that the most Marcellus-specific "fingerprint" elements are Ba, Sr, and
Br. The available information for these parameters is limited in the historical water quality datasets. For
example, concentrations of Ba and Sr are not reported in the NURE dataset or Newport (1973). The
NWIS database includes Ba concentrations from six locations in Washington County (samples collected
1985 to 1997; Table 4) and Sr concentrations from 11 locations (samples collected 1983 to 1999; Table
4). In general, Sr concentrations from this study are lower than those in the NWIS database and Ba
concentrations are higher (Table 4). Too few data are available in the historical datasets to draw any
inferences about water quality trends for these elements as a function of time. Historical
concentrations of bromide in ground water are not available in the NWIS dataset for Washington
County.
Surface waters were sampled primarily to establish potential links, if any, between observed ground
water quality and nearby surface water quality. Summary statistics for the historical data and the data
from this study for surface water are provided in Table 7. In all cases, median concentration data
determined in this study from surface water locations were comparable to or below median
concentrations determined from historical water quality data. Maximum concentration values
determined in this study were in all cases below maximum values from historical data. Surface water
location SWPASW02 is situated about 0.3 miles down gradient from the Carter impoundment, formerly
used for storage of flowback and produced water from hydraulic fracturing. Chloride concentrations at
this location ranged from about 40 to 60 mg/L, and [CI/Br] weight ratio values ranged from about 60 to
125; these were the highest values determined for any surface water in this study. Ground water from
nearby location SWPAGW04 showed lower chloride concentrations (27-30 mg/L) and lower [CI/Br]
ratios (15-24; see "Halogen Ions" section below). Thus, it is possible that the surface water in this area
shows some input from fluids stored in the impoundment or runoff of road salt used for deicing (see
Appendix C).
6.3. Organic Compounds
Water samples were analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, glycol ethers, low-molecular-weight acids, DRO, and
GRO. Measurements evaluated up to 133 organic compounds. The purpose of these analyses was to
examine the potential occurrence in ground water and surface water of chemicals generally
documented to be components of hydraulic fracturing fluids (e.g., Ely, 1989; Veatch et al., 1989; Vidic et
al., 2013; U.S. House of Representatives, 2011) and, more specifically, chemicals in fracturing fluids that
have been used in Pennsylvania (PA DEP, 2010). For example, organic chemicals frequently used in
hydraulic fracturing formulations are alcohols, glycol ethers, BTEX compounds (i.e., benzene, toluene,
ethyl benzenes, and xylenes), and organic acids, such as acetic acid. These chemicals are covered, in
59
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
large part, by the analytical methods used in this study. For example, glycols (diethylene glycol,
triethylene glycol, and tetraethylene glycol) and the chemically related compound 2-butoxyethanol, are
frequently used in hydraulic fracturing fluids, but are not found naturally in ground water. Thus, these
chemicals serve as potentially reliable indicators of water resource contamination from hydraulic
fracturing activities. The analytical method for glycols used in this study is an improved liquid
chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method (LC-MS-MS) developed to increase the sensitivity
and resolution of glycol analysis over existing methods (e.g., EPA Method 8015; see US EPA, 2012).
A summary of all organic compounds detected in this study is provided in Table 9. In terms of general
analytical groups, organic compounds detected included VOCs, SVOCs, and DRO (see Table 9). There
were no analytically significant detections of glycol ethers, GRO, or acetate in ground water or surface
water samples. None of the concentrations in Table 9 represent exceedances of EPA's drinking water
standards (MCLs), where available. Historical water quality data do not provide information on the
comprehensive set of analytes evaluated in this study; thus, meaningful comparisons between organic
compound data collected for this study and historical data collected before unconventional gas
development in Washington County are not possible. The nature of organic compound detections is
discussed below by analytical grouping.
Table 9. Detections of organic compounds in ground water and surface water.
Chemical/Location
Concentration (ug/L)
Qualifier1
Notes
July 2011
Volatile Organic Compounds
Toluene
SWPAGW04-0711
SWPASW01-0711
(MCL= 1,000 ug/L)
0.80
2.18
B
B
Trip blank = 0.75 ug/L, SWPAGW04 data
are used with caution.
Trip blank = 0.75 ug/L, SWPASW01 data
are used with caution.
Semivolatile Organic Compounds
2-butoxyethanol
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW08-0711
SWPAGW10-0711
SWPAGW11-0711
SWPAGW13-0711
SWPASW01-0711
SWPASW03-0711
Phenol
SWPAGW06-0711
SWPAGW11-0711
1.00
0.74
0.69
1.99
2.92
0.54
1.65
1.39
1.31
J-
J-, B
J-, B
J-
J-
J-
J-, B
J-
Present in the field duplicate of
SWPAGW05 at 0.56 ug/L (J-). Present in
the field duplicate of SWPAGW12 at 0.87
Ug/L (J-), but not in the primary sample.
Equipment blank detection at 3.61 ug/L (J-
). See Table A26 and discussion in report;
data are used with caution.
Potential low bias.
60
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 9. Detections of organic compounds in ground water and surface water.
Chemical/Location
Concentration (u.g/L)
Qualifier1
Notes
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (MCI = 6 u.g/L)
SWPAGW01-0711
SWPAGW02-0711
SWPAGW07-0711
SWPAGW08-0711
Butyl benzyl phthalate
SWPAGW06-0711
SWPAGW11-0711
2.17
1.51
1.38
1.06
1.40
2.16
J-
J-
Potential low bias.
Potential low bias.
Diesel-Range Organics
SWPAGW04-0711
SWPAGW06-0711
SWPAGW08-0711
SWPAGW10-0711
SWPAGW11-0711
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPASW01-0711
SWPASW02-0711
34.6
31.5
71.2
26.9
73.8
27.1
34.9
28.7
J-
J-
J-
J-
J-
J-
J-
J-
Detected in a field duplicate of
SWPAGW05 at 32.3 u.g/L (J-), but not in
primary field sample. Potential low bias.
March 2012
Semivolatile Organic Compounds
di-n-octyl phthalate
SWPAGW05-0312
1.13
Diesel-Range Organics
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW10-0312
SWPAGW11-0312
SWPAGW16-0312
SWPAGW17-0312
SWPASW02-0312
74.7
27.1
84.4
24.8
87.9
29.0
B
Detected in field duplicate at 71.1 u.g/L
Sample concentration was similar to but
greater than blank values; data are used
with caution.
May 2013
Volatile Organic Compounds
Acetone
SWPAGW03-0513
0.87
J
Below QL
61
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 9. Detections of organic compounds in ground water and surface water.
Chemical/Location
SWPAGW09-0513
SWPAGW19-0513
Chloroform
SWPAGW14-0513
SWPASW02-0513
Benzene
SWPAGW19-0513
Toluene
SWPAGW04-0513
SWPAGW18-0513
SWPAGW19-0513
Concentration (u.g/L)
0.48
1.3
(MCL = 80 ug/L)
0.15
0.28
(MCL = 5 ug/L)
0.07
(MCL = 1,000 u.g/L)
0.37
0.11
2.20
Qualifier1
J
J
J
J
J
J
Notes
Below QL.
Below QL.
Below QL.
Below QL.
Below QL.
Below QL.
Semivolatile Organic Compounds
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (MCL = 6 u.g/L)
SWPAGW09-0513
4.34
Diesel-Range Organics
SWPAGW04-0513
SWPASW02-0513
32.4
51.2
J = value is an estimate; J- = value is an estimate and may be biased low; B = analyte was found in a blank sample above the
QL. See Appendix A for additional details regarding these qualifiers.
6.3.1. Volatile Organic Compounds
VOCs are a subset of organic compounds with inherent physical and chemical properties (i.e., high vapor
pressure, low to medium water solubility, and low molecular weight) that allow these compounds to
move preferentially from water into air. Some VOCs occur naturally, while others result from
anthropogenic activities, and some VOCs have both origins (Zogorski et al., 2006). Toluene was detected
at a low concentration in one domestic well (location SWPAGW04) and one surface water sample
(location SWPASW01) during the first sampling event in July 2011. No VOCs were detected in any of the
ground water or surface samples collected during the second sampling event in March 2012. In the
third sampling round (May 2013), low concentrations of acetone, toluene, and benzene were detected
in one newly constructed domestic well (SWPAGW19). Most of these detections were below the QL,
but were above the MDL. The concentrations of VOCs in Table 9 are 1.9 to 4.0 orders of magnitude
below EPA's drinking water standards (maximum contaminant levels [MCLs] where available, for
benzene, toluene, and chloroform). The sources of acetone and benzene at location SWPAGW19 and
toluene at locations SWPAGW18 and SWPAGW19 possibly included newly installed well components
(pumps) and construction materials used for the wells. Toluene was also detected in the third round of
sampling at location SWPAGW04 at a concentration less than the QL. Toluene can be a constituent of
the petroleum distillate light fraction that is added to some hydraulic fracturing fluids and has been
detected in Marcellus Shale flowback and produced water (Abualfaraj et al., 2014; Maguire-Boyle and
62
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Barren, 2014). Toluene can also be present as a laboratory or field contaminant as indicated by
infrequent detections of toluene in blank samples (US EPA, 1992; Douglas, 2012; Miller, 2015; Table 9).
Lack of consistent correlation with other potential chemical indicators in ground water samples with
low-level VOC detections, such as elevated chloride and other organic compounds such as glycols,
suggest that the toluene detected did not likely originate from hydraulic fracturing activities. In
anaerobic ground water environments, natural breakdown products of organic compounds such
benzene, toluene, and glycols include acetate (e.g., Corseuil et al., 2011; Dwyer and Tiedje, 1983). The
absence of acetate in the ground water samples further suggests that significant degradation of organic
compounds, which could have resulted in the accumulation of daughter products, has not occurred at
the sampling locations.
6.3.2. Semivolatile Organic Compounds
SVOCs are typically hydrophobic organic compounds that have a moderate tendency to volatilize;
consequently, SVOCs are released slowly from their source and have a propensity to preferentially
distribute into organic phases, such as tissue (i.e., bioaccumulation) and/or sediments containing
organic carbon (Lopes and Dionne, 1998; Smith et al., 1988). Several phthalates were detected in the
three rounds of sampling, including bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, butylbenzyl phthalate, and di-n-octyl
phthalate; however, these compounds were not detected consistently at any sampling location (see
Table 9). Phthalates are common lab contaminants and are most commonly associated with plastics
(Griffiths et al., 1985; US EPA, 1992; Miller, 2015); thus, phthalates sometimes appear in equipment
blank samples and field samples that are passed through tubing, plastic fittings, and capsule filters made
of plastic. Phthalates can also leach from plastic components in well construction materials. Phenol was
detected in the first sampling round in two domestic wells (SWPAGW06 and SWPAGW11), but was not
detected in either well in the second round, or during the third round at location SWPAGW06. 2-
butoxyethanol was detected in several domestic wells, a spring, and two surface water samples during
the first round of sampling. Concentrations of 2-butoxyethanol ranged from 0.54 to 2.92 u.g/L. An
equipment blank collected in the field during the first round of sampling returned the highest 2-
butoxyethanol concentration (3.61 u.g/L). This chemical was not detected in subsequent rounds of
sampling; however, the method QL for 2-butoxyethanol increased in the second and third rounds due to
method updates at the Region 8 Laboratory resulting from annual MDL studies. The detections of 2-
butoxyethanol are of interest because of the common use of this chemical in hydraulic fracturing fluids
and occurrence of 2-butoxyethanol in Marcellus Shale wastewater (e.g., Ferrar et al., 2013). The
detections of 2-butoxyethanol are viewed with caution because: (i) they were not repeated past the first
round of sampling, (ii) there was detection in an equipment blank exceeding sample concentrations, and
(iii) there were no supportive qualified detections of 2-butoxyethanol using the LC-MS-MS method for
glycols and 2-butoxyethanol in any sampling round (see Table B-5; Appendix B). Because there were no
detections of 2-butoxyethanol in subsequent sampling rounds, detections in the July 2011 sampling
round were likely due to contamination in the laboratory, sampling equipment, and/or sample
containers because 2-butoxyethanol is commonly used in soaps and detergents (Harris et al., 1998;
Wess et al., 1998). Repeated low-level detections of these compounds would necessarily be viewed as a
potential water quality impact, by implying a continuous source. However, note that 2-butoxyethanol
and glycol ethers may be degraded rapidly in the environment by microorganisms under suitable
conditions (e.g., Howard et al., 1991; Dwyer and Tiedje, 1983; Mrklas et al., 2004; Carnegie and Ramsay,
2009).
63
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
6.3.3. Diesel- and Gasoline-Range Organics
DRO was detected in ground water and surface water samples during each of the three sampling
rounds. DRO are solvent-extracted compounds that include hydrocarbons from Ci0 to C28, found in
particular diesel fuels, fuel oils, and kerosene. However, non-targeted organic compounds, such as
pesticides, phenols, phthalates, and other hydrocarbons can be captured in the chromatographic
integration window and reported as DRO. Note that some of these compounds were detected in the
semivolatile scans previously described. Therefore, it is often helpful to view the DRO chromatograms
directly, as shown in Figure 21 for samples collected at locations SWPAGW08, SWPAGW10, SWPAGW11,
and SWPAGW17. The chromatograms indicate that most of the samples contain weathered or
degraded organic compounds at low levels. Phthalates are suggested in samples SWPAGW08-0711 and
SWPAGW10-0711 by the dual peaks that appear at a retention time of about 20 minutes. The
chromatogram available for the sample collected at location SWPAGW17 shows a broad feature with a
peak at about 27 minutes; this pattern implies longer, alkane-series carbon chains and the presence of
heavier oils. The environmental records search indicated two leaking underground storage tanks (USTs),
one gasoline and one diesel, about 1.2 miles from the sampling points in the southern area (see
Appendix C), which includes location SWPAGW17. These underground tanks are not likely sources of
DRO to ground water in the area due to their distance from the nearest sampling locations. There were
no analytically significant detections of GRO in this study (see Table 9).
6.4. Water Isotopes
Stable isotopes can be useful in water quality studies for understanding water sources and gaining
insight about the physical and biogeochemical processes affecting the composition of ground water and
surface water (e.g., Toran, 1982). Water samples were analyzed for the isotope ratios of hydrogen (52H)
and oxygen (518O) expressed as 5 values, in parts per thousand (permil), as the ratio of the heavy to the
light isotope relative to a standard:
5samp|e= 1000[(Rsamp|e/Rstandard)-l] (2)
where Rsamp|e and Rstandard are the ratio of the heavy to light isotope in the sample and the standard,
respectively. The standard for water used in this study is VSMOW such that SLAP (Standard Light
Antarctic Precipitation) reference water is -428 permil and -55.5 permil for 52H and 518O, respectively. A
larger 5 value shows enrichment of the heavier isotope, whereas a smaller value indicates depletion of
the heavier isotope. Results and interpretation of the stable isotope data for water are discussed below.
The 518O and 52H values of water samples collected in this study in rounds 2 and 3 using CRDS revealed a
narrow range, from -9.1 to -8.2 and -59.0 to -51.8 permil, respectively (see Figure 22). These data fall
within a similar range of water isotope data reported by Sharma et al. (2014) for shallow ground water
collected from the nearby Monongahela River Basin of north-central West Virginia, a basin where
limited Marcellus Shale gas development has occurred (see Figure 22A). The isotopic composition of
shallow ground water in this region (southwestern Pennsylvania and north-central West Virginia) is
different from water produced from the Marcellus Shale, Upper Devonian sands (Sharma et al., 2014),
and oil and gas brines from southwestern Pennsylvania (Dresel and Rose, 2010). The latter fluids are
64
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
600000 -
400000 -
0)
I
I
200000
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08-0711
600000 -
400000 -
200000 -
B
SWPAGW10-0312
SWPAGW10-0711
- lULj^-
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 05 10 15 20 25 30
Time, minutes
Time, minutes
1200000-
900000 -
c
8.
01
600000 -
300000 -
400000
300000 -
200000 -
100000 -
SWPAGW17-0312
0 5
10 15 20
Time, minutes
25 30
0 5
10 15 20
Time, minutes
25 30
Figure 21. DRO chromatograms (GC-FID) for selected samples: A) SWPAGW08, B) SWPAGW10, C) SWPAGW11
(rounds 1 and 2), and D) SWPAGW17 (round 2). The window of integration for DRO is shaded; the large peak at
about 16 minutes is the surrogate o-terphenyl.
65
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
VSMO
cln -k -k Co do
o en o en o
II l.ll
mi
cln
en
I
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
highly enriched in 18O and deuterium (2H) compared to shallow ground water, and they plot to the right
of the Global Meteoric Water Line (see Figure 22A). Enrichment of 18O compared to 2H in the produced
waters and brine is the result of extensive oxygen exchange between meteoric water and reservoir rocks
(Clayton et al., 1966). Mixing small quantities of brine or Marcellus Shale-produced water with local
ground water will cause increases in the 518O and 52H values of ground water and would be expected to
correlate with increasing brine signatures, e.g., concentrations of IDS and chloride. Because the isotope
signatures of the gas-producing fluids and shallow ground water are so different, 518O and 52H of water
can be informative probes of potential mixing of these water types. However, due to the very large
differences in solute concentrations between brines and shallow ground water, dilute mixtures of brine
and ground water will have a large effect on the concentrations of major and minor ions, but the effect
of mixing is expected to be less significant for 518O and 52H of water (e.g., Warner et al., 2012). Figure
22A shows that the water isotope data collected in this study falls within a similar range determined for
a nearby region in West Virginia without extensive Marcellus Shale gas development. There is no
discernible indication that the stable isotope signature of shallow ground water in Washington County,
based on the samples collected for this study, is impacted by deep brines, including flowback and
produced water from hydraulically fractured Marcellus Shale gas wells. The paired results for 52H and
518O define a trend for the local meteoric water line (LMWL) of:
52H=6.84*518O + 4.25 (R2=0.94) (3)
as shown in Figure 22B (linear regression of data collected in March 2012 and May 2013 using CRDS).
Note that the water isotope values from this study and from Sharma et al. (2014) fall above the Global
Meteoric Water Line of Craig (1961): 52H=8 518O + 10. This deviation from the global mean trend
reflects local patterns in the isotopic composition of precipitation and recharge water. Temporal
changes in the water isotope data collected in this study show variability along the LMWL and not along
inferred mixing lines with deep brine or flowback and produced water from the Marcellus Shale. The
isotopic composition of surface water also falls along the LMWL, suggesting limited isotopic enrichment
due to evaporation.
6.5. Dissolved Gases
In Pennsylvania, the PA DEP has set an action level of 7 mg/L for dissolved methane in ground water
(Pennsylvania Code, 2011). In cases where sustained concentrations in homeowner wells are equal to
or greater than 7 mg/L and operators are deemed responsible for the methane presence, operators—in
conjunction with the PA DEP—are required to "take measures necessary to ensure public health and
safety." The action level of 7 mg/L represents 25% of the approximate 28 mg/L solubility limit for
methane in water at atmospheric pressure (atmosphere 100% methane). Dissolved methane
concentrations at depth can be much greater than 28 mg/L (due to the effects of hydrostatic pressure);
as a result, dissolved methane in water pumped from depth may undergo significant outgassing to yield
free methane once at the surface. The Department of the Interior (DOI; Eltschlager et al., 2001) has
proposed an action level for dissolved methane in water of 10 mg/L, with the recommendations that at
concentrations between 10 mg/L and 28 mg/L, "remediation may be prudent to reduce the methane
concentration to less than 10 mg/L" and "ignition sources be removed from the immediate area." Other
federal action levels for dissolved methane in water were not available during the time of this study.
67
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Dissolved methane was detected above the analytical level of quantitation in nine ground water samples
(domestic wells and springs) collected during the three sampling rounds of this study, representing 24%
of the total ground water samples. Methane was not detected in any of the surface water samples.
When detected, methane concentrations in ground water ranged from about 0.002 to 15.5 mg/L, with a
median concentration of 0.045 mg/L (mean = 3.0 mg/L; n = 9). Concentrations above 0.5 mg/L were
detected in domestic well SWPAGW06 in each of the sampling events, and in domestic well SWPAGW17,
which was sampled in March 2012. A methane concentration exceeding PA DEP's 7 mg/L action level
was measured in domestic well SWPAGW17 during the second sampling event (15.5 mg/L). Dissolved
ethane was detected twice at location SWPAGW06 at concentrations of about 0.004 mg/L, and at
location SWPAGW17 at a concentration of 0.29 mg/L. The distribution of methane concentrations
observed in this study is shown in Figure 23 and compared to methane concentrations reported in
Sharma et al. (2014) for shallow ground water in north-central West Virginia. A similar positively
skewed concentration pattern is indicated in both datasets. Historical methane data are unavailable to
document pre-gas development concentrations in domestic wells in southwestern Pennsylvania,
analogous to the survey recently conducted in Sullivan County in north-central Pennsylvania (Sloto,
2013). Methane occurs naturally in the strata underlying southwestern Pennsylvania at depths above
the Devonian black shales, often at significant concentrations. For example, methane is present in coal
seams present in the Monongahela and Conemaugh Group aquifers and thus coal seams could provide a
natural source of methane gas to shallow ground water (e.g., Markowski, 1998).
Methane occurrence in natural systems is recognized to be the result of two main pathways:
thermogenic and microbial. Thermogenic methane is formed by the thermal breakdown, or cracking, of
organic material that occurs during deep burial of sediments (Schoell, 1980; 1988). In contrast,
microbial methane is produced via anaerobic decomposition of buried organic material, such as glacial
drift and other sedimentary deposits that contain organic carbon (e.g., Schoell, 1980; Whiticar et al.,
1986; Coleman et al., 1995; Martini et al., 1998). Microbial methane that forms in shallow subsurface
environments via acetate fermentation is called marsh gas, swamp gas, and landfill gas (Coleman et al.,
1995). In glacial-drift deposits, methane formed by microbial reduction of carbon dioxide (CO2) is
referred to as drift gas. Techniques that evaluate and analyze stable isotope signatures of methane and
related molecules can be used to help determine the importance of these different sources of methane
in the environment. Multiple post-genetic processes, such as oxidation, migration, and mixing of
sources, may alter isotope ratios and dissolved gas concentrations. Each of these processes (oxidation,
migration, and mixing) can change the isotopic composition of methane gas, making unambiguous
discrimination between thermogenic and microbial methane challenging.
6.5.1. Methane Isotopes
Schoell (1980) suggested that 613CCH4 values less than -64 permil and ethane concentrations less than 0.5
mol% may represent a signature of microbially generated methane gas, whereas increasingly more
positive 613CCH4 values grade into admixtures of thermogenic and microbial gas and finally pure
thermogenic gas. Discrimination criteria for evaluating methane sources have expanded to use multiple
isotopes and gas ratios (e.g., Whiticar et al., 1986; Whiticar, 1999).
68
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
0
0
This study
n=9
10
20
30
40
1 1
50
Sharma et al. (2014)
n=20
10 20 30 40
Dissolved Methane, mg/L
50
Figure 23. Dissolved methane concentrations in shallow ground water; data from this study and
from Sharma et al. (2014).
69
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Various isotopic fingerprint diagrams that utilize 613CCH4 and 62HCH4 have been applied to better
understand gas occurrences in ground water systems (e.g., Osborn et al., 2011; Jackson et al., 2013;
Revesz et al., 2010; Giustini et al., 2013; Baldassare and Laughrey, 1997; Taylor et al., 2000; Sharma et
al., 2014; Molofsky et al., 2013). Concentrations of methane were sufficient at two locations
(SWPAGW06 and SWPAGW17) for measurement of C and H isotope signatures. Figure 24 shows a
methane C and H isotope diagram, with genetic zonation from Giustini et al. (2013). Data plotted on this
diagram include methane isotope data for samples collected in this study at locations SWPAGW06 and
SWPAGW17; shallow ground water samples from north-central West Virginia (Sharma et al., 2014);
production gas from the Marcellus Shale and Upper Devonian sands in southwestern Pennsylvania
(Sharma et al., 2014); and production gas from the Marcellus Shale in Susquehanna County in
northeastern Pennsylvania (Molofsky et al., 2013).
In Figure 24, data from location SWPAGW17 plot within the "Microbial CO2 Reduction" field. The overall
methanogenic reaction implied by this process is:
CO2 + 4H2 ^> CH4 + 2H2O (4)
Methanogenesis occurs in highly reducing systems that are low in sulfate and elevated in hydrogen
(Chapelle et al., 1995). Ground water from location SWPAGW17 had low dissolved oxygen (<0.1 mg/L),
low sulfate (4.5 mg/L; lower 25th percentile), and a methane to ethane ratio of 100. Furthermore, the
513C value of DIG in this water was the most enriched (-7.8 permil) encountered in this study, suggesting
microbial fractionation as CO2 is reduced to CH4 (Simpkins and Parkin, 1993; Martini et al., 1998). All of
these features are consistent with the high levels of methane in this well (15.5 mg/L) resulting from
bacterial reduction of CO2 (i.e., drift gas). Note that the observed fractionation between DIG and CH4 (a
= RDIC/ROM = 1-0738) in ground water from location SWPAGW17 is in reasonable agreement with the
predicted temperature-dependent equilibrium fractionation factor between CO2and CH4 (a = 1.0753 at
13°C; see Botz et al., 1996). In addition, the 52HCH4 (-238.8 permil) is heavier than the model presented
in Waldron et al. (1999) for predicting 52HCH4 from 52HH2o in marine environments, which matches the
pattern for drift gas from wells in Illinois. This trend could also be due to gas migration and associated
fractionation of the lighter isotope (e.g., Prinzhofer and Pernaton, 1997). Note also that the highest
ethane concentration detected in this study was from location SWPAGW17.
The isotopic composition of Marcellus Shale methane, as reported by Sharma et al. (2014) and Molofsky
et al. (2013), is enriched in 13C and 2H and plots within the thermogenic field in Figure 24. These data
suggest that there may be subtle differences in the isotopic composition of methane from the Marcellus
Shale, depending on geographic location, which may reflect the thermal history of the Appalachian Basin
and the composition of organic carbon in the Marcellus Shale. An extensive dataset on the gas
composition and stable isotope compositions of methane and ethane from Neogene to Middle
Devonian-age strata was recently published by Baldasarre et al. (2014) for a five-county study area in
northeastern Pennsylvania. The results of this study indicate that similar datasets in other areas of
active Marcellus Shale gas development would be essential for stray gas investigations.
Methane concentrations in well SWPAGW06 ranged from 0.78 to 5.56 mg/L, and isotopic data reveal a
consistent pattern within the "Mixed" field in Figure 24. Note that the isotopic composition of methane
from well SWPAGW06 was similar to methane data reported by Sharma et al. (2014) for a nearby region
that has yet to experience extensive gas development of the Marcellus Shale. Samples from well
70
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
-100
-125-
-150-
-175-
o -200 -
CO -225 -
^ -250-
0)
Q- -275 -\
X
CN
-300-
-325-
-350-
-375-
Microbial
CO2 Reduction
SWPAGW17
Microbial
Fermentation
-90
\
-80
Thermogenic
dry
Thermogenic
condensate
SWPAGW06 July 2011
SWPAGW06 March 2012
SWPAGW06 May 2013
SWPAGW17 March 2012
Marcellus production gas
Washington County, PA: Sharma etal. (2014)
Upper Devonian Sands
Washington County, PA; Sharma etal. (2014)
Shallow ground water; Sharma et al. (2014)
Marcellus production gas
Susquehanna County, PA; Molofsky et al. (2013
-50
-40
-30
,13
8'°C , permil (VPDB)
CH4
Figure 24. Methane C and H isotope diagram with genetic zonation from Giustini et al. (2013). Data plotted are from this study, Sharma et al. (2014; ground
water and Marcellus production gas), and Molofsky et al. (2013; Marcellus production gas).
71
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
SWPAGW06 had detections of dissolved sulfide, up to 0.26 mg/L (J), generally low sulfate
concentrations, and slightly elevated 513C values of inorganic carbon compared to the mean of all
ground water samples. The presence of dissolved sulfide suggests that anaerobic methane oxidation
may play a role in controlling the C and H isotope ratios, as the 513C and 52H values of methane
potentially lie along an oxidation trend originating from a microbial end member. Sharma et al. (2014)
suggested that methane occurrence in the aquifers of north-central West Virginia is not the result of
recent microbiological activity, but rather is a consequence of migration from deeper formations over
millions of years through natural structural pathways and/or abandoned oil and gas wells, as there was
no shale drilling program in the region at the time their samples were collected. While this long-term
migration model may be somewhat speculative, it is clear from the results of this study and the Sharma
et al. (2014) study that the available isotopic and hydrocarbon signatures of methane in shallow ground
water aquifers of this region (north-central West Virginia and southwestern Pennsylvania), Upper
Devonian sands, and the Marcellus Shale are distinct from one another. As noted previously, these
differences in isotopic composition can be related to different sources as well as secondary effects, such
as oxidation, fractionation during transport, and/or mixing of different sources.
6.5.2. Inorganic Carbon Isotopes
The processes that control the stable isotope composition of inorganic carbon (513CD,C) in ground water
include breakdown of organic matter, carbonate mineral dissolution and precipitation, microbially
mediated processes that oxidize reduced carbon and generate CO2, microbially mediated processes that
reduce CO2 and generate CH4, and mixing of waters with different 513CD|C values (e.g., Deines et al. 1974;
Botz et al., 1996; Alperin et al., 1988). All 513CD|C values reported here are in permil relative to the VPDB.
513CD|C values in ground water ranged from -18.1 to -7.8 permil, with a mean value of -14.6 ± 1.9 permil
(n = 37), and 513CD,C values in surface water ranged from -16.2 to -11.9 permil, with a mean value of
-13.8 ± 1.7 permil (n = 7). In general, an apparent positive correlation was observed between DIG
concentrations and 513C (R2= 0.20; see Figure 25A).
Ground water undersaturated with respect to calcite tended to be depleted in 13C (see Figure 25B) and
low in TDS and may represent more recent recharge with a comparatively short residence time in the
aquifer. The most enriched 13C samples tended to be oversaturated with respect to calcite (see Figure
25B). As discussed in the previous section on dissolved gases, one sample from location SWPAGW17
had a 513CD,C of -7.8 permil and showed other chemical characteristics consistent with CO2 reduction.
During CO2 reduction, methanogenic bacteria preferentially oxidize isotopically light CO2 to CH4,
resulting in enriched inorganic carbon in the ground water. An elevated calcite saturation index for this
sample (SWPAGW17) was mainly the result of elevated pH (8.93), which may be a secondary effect
caused by methane off-gassing during water well purging (Taulis and Milke, 2013).
The carbon isotope ratios of DIG from this study are compared to the results presented in Sharma et al.
(2014) for samples collected from shallow ground water aquifers and streams overlying the Marcellus
Shale in north-central West Virginia and southwestern Pennsylvania, and wells producing gas from the
Middle Devonian Marcellus Shale and Upper Devonian sands in southwestern Pennsylvania (see Figure
26). The 513CD|C values in shallow ground water are similar between the datasets collected from similar
geographic and geologic regions. Surface water 513CD,C values from Sharma et al. (2014) tend to be more
enriched than those reported here. The 513CD,C values of DIG of produced waters from Devonian-age
72
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
120-
110-
100-
90-
E 80-
Q.
Q- 70-
0 60-
Q 50:
40-
30-
or\
*
s
•
M
™
**
i
%
m
>
**
i
«
%
ZU -1 | ,
-18
1 C
Calcite Saturation Index
->. A O o O ->• -
ji d 01 d en d c
111,1,1
-'
i
Low
IDS
•
i ,
-18
^
ft
• July 2011
• March 201 2
• May 201 3
i ' i • i • i • i
%
» •
^ -*
%T . '
^M%
*0 *• •
*\
<
6
-14
*~d
• ^
i •
-16
^/|
•
i
2 -1
*
m
** " ^=0.20
(p-value=0.0006) "
-
-
-
-
-
A
0 -8 -6
1 i • i
C02
reduction
•
Equilibrium
•
•
-
B
i ' i • i • i • i
-14 -12 -10 -8 -6
.13
8 CDIC, permil(VPDB)
Figure 25. 8 C of dissolved inorganic carbon in shallow ground water and correlation with dissolved inorganic
carbon concentration and the calcite saturation index.
73
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
2-
1 -
0 J
Sharma et al. (2014), Upper Devo
(n=4)
-20 -10 (
nian sands
) 10 20
31
2-
1 -
0
Sharma et al. (2014), Marcellus Shale produced water
(n=3)
20 1
10-
0
-20
-10
10
20
o
c
0)
^
C7
6-
4-
2-
-
[i ^K k
^
vs
\X
\N
r^^ I ^^^^^
^T-
^
|
Sharma
^ M (n=16)
1 1 1
• i
-20 -10 0
etal. (2014),
10
surface
'
20
water
1
2-
n
i
1
^Xl This study, surface water (n=7)
-20
-10
10
20
-20
-10
Sharma et al. (2014), ground water (n=41)
T
0
10
20
This study, ground water (n=37)
-20
-10
.13
0
10
20
5'°CDIC, permil(VPDB)
Figure 26. Frequency diagrams of 8 Cof dissolved inorganic carbon.
74
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
shales and sands are high, generally greater than +8 permil. The heavy 513CD,C signatures suggest an
origin through biogenic methanogenesis (e.g., Botz et al., 1996; Sharma and Baggett, 2011). Shallow
ground water from the study area in southwestern Pennsylvania does not show similarity in carbon
isotope ratios of DIG with water from Devonian-age gas-producing formations.
6.6. Strontium Isotopes
Samples were collected in each of the three field events for strontium isotope analysis by thermal
ionization mass spectrometry. Studies have shown that fluid mixing behavior can be understood by the
combined evaluation of strontium concentrations and strontium isotope signatures (87Sr/86Sr). This
technique is highly sensitive, especially in cases where two end member fluids differ significantly in both
concentration and isotope ratio (e.g., Capo et al., 1998; Frost and Toner, 2004; Shand et al., 2009;
Peterman et al., 2012). In this case study, the practical problem is applying strontium isotopes and
concentrations to evaluate whether or not shallow ground water has been impacted by deeper brine
and/or flowback and produced water from Marcellus Shale gas wells. For example, Myers (2012)
concluded that preferential flow through fractures could allow transport of contaminants from deep
hydraulically fractured zones to shallow aquifers over timescales of less than 10 years (see also Saiers
and Barth, 2012; Cohen et al., 2013; Flewelling and Sharma, 2014; and Rozell, 2014). Long-term (~104
years) migration of brine from depth to near-surface environments has also been suggested to explain
major ion and strontium isotope trends in northeastern Pennsylvania (e.g., Warner et al., 2012;
Llewellyn, 2014). Abandoned wells could also potentially connect deep and shallow aquifers that would
otherwise be separated by continuous aquitards (e.g., Newport, 1973; US EPA, 1977; Myers, 2012).
Figure 27A shows a semilog plot of strontium concentrations versus 87Sr/86Sr values for samples
collected in this study compared to Marcellus Shale flowback and produced waters from southwestern
Pennsylvania reported by Chapman et al. (2012). Although the Marcellus Shale is ostensibly dry (see
Engelder, 2012), Marcellus Shale flowback and produced waters have high strontium concentrations
compared to shallow ground water in Washington County (Chapman et al., 2012; Haluszczak et al.,
2013), and significant contrast is evident in the 87Sr/86Sr values. Figure 27A shows hypothetical mixing
curves between flowback and produced Marcellus water and selected points within the field of shallow
ground water data (SWPAGW16-0312 and SWPASW02-0513). The mixing curves were calculated using
the equation from Faure (1998):
(87Sr/86Sr)mix=o/[Sr]mix + fo (5)
where (87Sr/86Sr)mix is the isotope ratio in the fluid mixture, [Sr]mix is the strontium concentration in the
mixture, and a and b are constants that are calculated based on end member 87Sr/86Sr ratios and
strontium concentrations (Faure, 1998). The array of strontium isotope ratios in the shallow ground
water field and the modeled mixing relationships suggest that mixing very small amounts of Marcellus-
produced water (<0.1%) could explain some of the observed variability in the strontium data (e.g.,
Warner et al., 2012). The highest strontium concentration (up to 1,530 u.g/L) observed in ground water
in this study was from location SWPAGW05. Ground water from this location is similar to the Type D
water described by Warner et al. (2012), i.e., sodium-calcium-chloride composition and elevated salt
content. However, the 87Sr/86Sr value for location SWPAGW05 was distinctly greater than the value in
flowback and produced water from the Marcellus Shale, but could fall along a potential mixing curve
(see Figure 27A).
75
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
0.713-
ff\
\JJ
%J).712-
V)
co
0-74 -|
. / I I -
1
0 71^ -
.
(f)
^0.71 2-
s__
C/)
r^.
CO
0.711 -
i i i ' ' ' ' ""' '"' '
A • July 2011
* • March 201 2 "
0^ • May 20 13
„ * ^ anTswpTGwu ° surface water "
• ^^
• % SWPAGWOS Marce||us
% 1i^^ produced water
%GD^^. 0 1% Chapman et al. (2012) -
fo'': ''••--.- 1% ^^^ ••
— -gf
m
'
0 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000
Sr, u,g/L
• i • i
B ro
•" Q)
• •
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
In ideal situations, fixed end member fluid compositions are known or reasonably constrained. In this
case, the Marcellus data represent a fairly robust end member composition. Selection of the receiving
end member is more arbitrary, although adding produced water to shallow ground water should result
in increased strontium concentrations and decreased 87Sr/86Sr values. Fluid mixing is expected to be a
dynamic process and strontium concentrations and isotope ratios should vary in time as mixing occurs,
or after fluid mixing occurs and background conditions are reestablished. Figure 27B shows that, in fact,
87Sr/86Sr values were remarkably consistent at each of the sampling points through time. The estimated
uncertainty in the 87Sr/86Sr values is about 15xlfj~6 based on eight duplicate field samples collected over
the course of this study. Variability in 87Sr/86Sr values observed at the sampling locations ranged from
IxlO"6 to 446xlO"6, with a median value 22xlO"6. For comparison, Kolesar Kohl et al. (2014) recently
showed that variability in the strontium isotopic composition of spring water, representing shallow
ground water in Greene County, Pennsylvania (located just to the south of Washington County, see
Figure 1), was ~100xlO~6 over a 15-month period. Except locations SWPAGW03, SWPAGW08,
SWPAGW09, and SWPAGW13, all the other sampling locations showed 87Sr/86Sr values that were
independent of time within expected analytical and sampling uncertainties (see Figure 27B). Locations
SWPAGW08, SWPAGW09, and SWPAGW13 all showed 87Sr/86Sr trends that increased with time, i.e.,
strontium isotope ratios at these locations became less like flowback and produced water from the
Marcellus Shale; the 87Sr/86Sr ratio decreased with time at location SWPAGW03, becoming more similar
to fluids recovered from the Marcellus Shale, yet the concentration of strontium did not increase at this
location. The most significant change in 87Sr/86Sr was observed at location SWPAGW09 between the
first and third sampling event (Figure 27B). The reason for the positive shift in 87Sr/86Sr is not certain,
but other anomalous results were obtained at this well during the third sampling event, such as elevated
turbidity and increased concentrations of iron, manganese, strontium, and sodium. Thus, it is
challenging to draw conclusions from the data collected from this well. Note that the 87Sr/86Sr ratio was
slightly higher in the southern area (0.71190 to 0.71301) compared to the northern area (0.71109 to
0.71185; see Figure 27B). Regional trends and the general invariant strontium isotope ratios suggest
that the fluids are near equilibrium with surrounding aquifer materials. Lack of variability with time
suggests that deep brine or fluids derived from Marcellus Shale gas wells did not impact shallow ground
water at the selected sampling locations over the time scale of this study. The strontium isotope
method can be highly sensitive for evaluating potential brine migration into shallow aquifers and this
geochemical tool is most useful in cases where time-resolved data are available (e.g., Kolesar Kohl et al.,
2014).
6.7. Halogen Ions
Another sensitive method for evaluating fluid-mixing processes and potential impacts to shallow ground
water involves the use of dissolved halogen anions such as chloride and bromide (Davis et al., 1998;
Panno et al., 2006; Kight and Siegel, 2011; Wilson et al., 2014). Both of these anions are expected to
behave conservatively in ground water and surface water, and both anions are enriched in Pennsylvania
oilfield brines and Marcellus Shale flowback and produced water (Dresel and Rose, 2010; Haluszczak et
al., 2013; Barbot et al., 2013). Collectively, data from this study indicate that the [CI/Br] ratio of ground
water and surface water increases with increasing chloride concentration (see Figure 28). Similar trends
in [CI/Br] ratios were presented by Alawattegama et al. (2015) for ground water samples collected in
southwestern Pennsylvania. Samples with low chloride concentrations and low [CI/Br] ratios are
characteristic of precipitation (e.g., Panno et al., 2006). Samples with high chloride concentrations
77
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
(>5,000 mg/L) and [CI/Br] ratios ~100 are characteristic of oil and gas-produced waters in Pennsylvania
(Figure 28).
The results of several conservative mixing models are also shown in Figure 28. In each model, the
lowest chloride concentration/lowest [CI/Br] ratio sample (SWPASW01-0711) was selected as the dilute
end member composition. The sources of chloride and bromide were modeled as: (i) Marcellus Shale
flowback water (site 32 from Haluszczak et al., 2013); (ii) NaCI brine with 0.1 wt% Br; and (iii) NaCI brine
with 0.01 wt% Br. The latter two end members are representative of either Br-depleted road salt or
septic discharge of Br-depleted salts associated with water softeners, respectively. The model results
provide indistinguishable trends at low mixing concentrations (e.g., <0.1% salt source). Samples from
locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 with the highest observed chloride concentrations (>100 mg/L)
showed [CI/Br] ratios that were higher than the [CI/Br] ratio typical in Marcellus Shale flowback waters
and oilfield brines of southwestern Pennsylvania, presumably excluding flowback water and brine as
sources of chloride in these samples. It is important to note that the model results shown in Figure 28
are highly dependent on the choice of end member compositions and also on the assumption that a
similar mechanism (i.e., fluid mixing) is responsible for the apparent trend of increasing [CI/Br] ratio with
increasing chloride concentration. It is possible that different samples in the group are influenced by
different or multiple sources.
Concentrations of sodium, bromide, calcium, and lithium are compared to chloride concentrations in
Figure 29 for samples collected in this study, Marcellus Shale flowback water, and oil and gas brines
from western Pennsylvania. Analysis of geochemical data for water injected during hydraulic fracturing
and for water produced from Marcellus Shale gas wells indicated that: (i) water returned to the surface
after subsurface injection is modified by mixing of injected water with formation brines of evaporated
paleoseawater, and (ii) injection of sulfate-rich water during hydraulic fracturing may stimulate
microbial sulfate reduction at some sites (Engle and Rowan, 2014). Marcellus Shale-produced water
exhibits [Na/CI] and [Br/CI] ratios similar to those of other oil and gas brines from Pennsylvania (Barbot
et al., 2013; Haluszczak et al., 2013). However, Marcellus Shale flowback water has less calcium than
other brines in Pennsylvania. The origin of salinity in the brines is considered to be related to seawater
evaporation, precipitation of halite, and subsequent dilution by freshwater, seawater, or other brines
(Haluszczak et al., 2013). Similarly, major ion trends in Marcellus Shale flowback water can be explained
by mixtures of highly evaporated brine with more dilute water. With the exception of sodium, most
other major and minor ions in shallow ground water and surface water are not explained by simple
dilution of deep brine or Marcellus Shale flowback water (see Figure 29). Concentrations of chloride and
sodium in shallow ground water appear to coincide with extensive brine dilution (see Figure 29);
however, with some exceptions (notably locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14), most shallow ground
water data cluster around the molar [Na/CI] ratio of 1, suggesting that NaCI dissolution could in part
explain the concentrations of sodium and chloride in the aquifers used for drinking water. Lithium and
bromide data from this study show chloride-independent changes in concentration that are inconsistent
with brine dilution. Similarly, calcium shows several apparent trends with chloride: (i) surface water and
sodium-bicarbonate type ground water shows low and variable calcium concentrations, and (ii) all other
ground water samples show a slight regular increase in chloride with increasing calcium. Both trends
appear to be discontinuous with extensive brine dilution (see Figure 29). Note that similar non-linear
trends between brine and shallow ground water data were shown by Warner et al. (2012) for
78
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
O)
'd>
i_r
00
O
1000-
100-
10-
1
1 li 1 H I .1 H !
ro fc
5> CO
^—
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
en
E
T3
O
01
o
i -
• Ground water and springs
• Surface water
O Ground water and springs (MURE)
• Marcellus Shale flowback
(Haluszczak etal., 2013)
D Oil and gas brines
(Dresel and Rose. 2010)
molar[Na/CI]=1
4-
O)
E
03
O 2 -I
O)
o
1 -
SWPAGW13an<]
SWPAGW14
log Chloride, mg/L
SWPAGW13 and"
SWPAGW14
* •
2 3
log Chloride, mg/L
O)
E
Q
CD
O)
o
3-
2-
0-
5-
) 4-
CT)
° 2-
SWPAGW13and
SWPAGW14
log Chloride, mg/L
, JSWPAGW13and
t SWPAGW14
log Chloride, mg/L
Figure 29. Chloride versus sodium, bromide, calcium, and lithium. Data are shown for shallow ground water (this study, NURE), surface water (this study),
Marcellus Shale flowback water (Haluszcak et al., 2013), and oil and gas brines from Pennsylvania (Dresel and Rose, 2010).
80
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
northeastern Pennsylvania. These authors suggested that non-linear solute relationships were
potentially related to mixing processes with sources from sewers and/or deicing salt.
Wilson et al. (2014) developed an approach to distinguish oil and gas-produced water from various coal-
related wastewaters and brine treatment plant discharges in southwestern Pennsylvania using [SO4/CI]
weight ratios and bromide concentrations. These geochemical parameters are useful because they may
vary over many orders of magnitude, they are commonly measured anions, and because they may be
qualitatively diagnostic of distinct sources of water. For example, the [SO4/CI] weight ratio is much
higher in coal-related wastewaters than in oil and gas-produced waters, whereas bromide
concentrations are much lower in mine discharge compared to oil and gas-produced waters. Figure 30
shows a [SO4/CI] weight ratio versus bromide concentration plot for shallow ground water and surface
water of this study compared to Marcellus Shale flowback water, oil and gas brines from Pennsylvania,
and highlighted data regions from Wilson et al. (2014), representing abandoned mine drainage, surface
water, discharges from brine treatment plants, coal-fired power plant effluent, and Marcellus Shale-
produced water. The data collected in this study for shallow ground water and surface water cluster
near the data regions for surface water and mine drainage in Pennsylvania (Figure 30). The [SO4/CI]
ratios of ground water and surface water from this study are generally several orders of magnitude
higher than the ratios observed in Marcellus Shale-produced water. In contrast, bromide
concentrations in ground water and surface water collected in this study were generally orders of
magnitude lower than the bromide concentrations in Marcellus Shale-produced water (see Figure 30).
6.8. Radionuclides
Recent studies have indicated that saline Marcellus Shale brines can impact the quality of shallow
drinking-water aquifers, perhaps due to brine migration along natural pathways (e.g., Warner et al.,
2012; Myers, 2012; Vengosh et al., 2014). Data on the chemical composition of flowback and produced
waters from Marcellus Shale wells in central and western Pennsylvania were recently reported by
Haluszczak et al. (2013; see also Rowan et al., 2011). Their results show high concentrations of 226Ra and
228Ra in some of the flowback brines, with total 226Ra+228Ra concentrations ranging from 73 to 6,540
pCi/L; these concentrations exceed EPA's MCL (5 pQ/L) by 13 to 1,300 times.
In this study, analysis of gross radioactivity and specific radionuclides included gross a radioactivity,
gross P radioactivity, and the radium isotopes 226Ra and 228Ra. Analyses were conducted in the second
and third rounds of sampling in March 2012 and May 2013, respectively. Gross a and (3 measurements
are generally used as screening-level measurements and are often used to indicate whether more
detailed follow-up analyses are appropriate. The main a emitting radionuclides in natural decay series
are 238U, 234U, 230Th, 226Ra, 210Po, 232Th and 228Th. The major p emitting radionuclides are 210Pb, 228Ra, and
40K (Bonotto et al., 2009). Naturally occurring radioactivity in ground water is produced mainly by the
radioactive decay of 238U and 232Th. The 238U atom has a half-life of 4.5xl09 years, and its decay series
products include 226Ra and 222Rn.
A total of 24 ground water and four surface water samples were collected for radionuclide
measurements in the second and third sampling events. The isotopes of radium were not detected in
any of the samples above the method reporting limit (1 pQ/L). Gross a and (3 were detected above the
method reporting limit at activities of 6.3 and 10.3 pC/l, respectively, in one sample from location
SWPAGW09 collected in May 2013. The gross a and P activities in this well were below EPA's MCLs of
15 pC/l and 50 pC/l, respectively. (Note that the MCL for gross P activity is not an official regulatory
81
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
level, but is used as a trigger for additional testing). During the purging of this well, significant
drawdown of the water table was observed, which led to somewhat elevated turbidity at the time of
sampling (>15 NTU). Interestingly, total barium was also elevated in this well (675 u.g/L), which supports
the observed correlation of gross a (and 226Ra) and alkaline earths, such as barium (e.g., Haluszczak et
al., 2013). In this well, dissolved and total thorium concentrations were 0.16 (J) and 1.2 u.g/L,
respectively, indicating the presence of some form of particulate thorium. Note that location
SWPAGW09 also showed the presence of particulate lead above the primary action level for drinking
water treatment. The radionuclide results are consistent with the isotope data for water, DIG, and
strontium and suggest that shallow ground water and surface water from the selected sampling
locations of this study were not impacted by flowback or produced water from Marcellus Shale gas
wells, Upper Devonian sands, and/or other deep brines.
Dissolved uranium concentrations in ground water samples collected in March 2012 and May 2013
ranged from <0.05 to 1.6 u.g/L, with a median concentration of 0.53 u.g/L (n = 19). The distribution of
uranium concentrations determined in this study was in very good agreement with the NURE dataset
(see Table 4). These concentrations are below EPA's MCL for uranium of 30 u.g/L.
1000
100
*-l
03
£
D)
'0
0
-D
o
"0
I
3
CO
0.1
0.01
1E-3
1E-4
1E-5
1E-6
• Ground water and springs
• Surface water
• Marcellus Shale flowback
(Haluszcaketal., 2013)
n Oil and gas brines
(Dresel and Rose, 2010)
SWPAGW13 and •
SWPAGW14 -""*'
Surface
water
(Doal-fired power
plant effluent
Brine
treatment plants
Marcellus
produced water
1E-3
0.01
0.1
™i
10
100
1000 10000
log Bromide, mg/L
Figure 30. [SO4/CI] weight ratio versus bromide concentration for shallow ground water and surface water, as
well as Marcellus Shale flowback water (Haluszcak et al., 2013), oil and gas brines from Pennsylvania (Dresel and
Rose, 2010), and other water types identified in Wilson et al. (2014; yellow shaded regions).
82
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
7. Southern Area
The preceding analysis of historical water quality data and comparison to data collected for this study
indicates several locations in the southern area with anomalous major ion signatures, i.e., examples
where concentration data from this study fell near or above the 90th percentile in either the countywide
or the reduced-area comparisons of historical water quality. In particular, locations SWPAGW13 and
SWPAGW14 (springs) showed elevated ground water concentrations of chloride and calcium. The
average chloride concentration at location SWPAGW13 over the three sampling rounds represents the
third highest value (99th percentile) when compared to all of the historical water quality data from
Washington County considered in this study. When compared to chloride concentrations in samples
collected from springs only, locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 exceeded all historical data in the
NWIS and NURE datasets by up to 8.7 times. When comparing to historical data in this way, it is
necessary to establish a threshold for what is considered significantly different from the historical
background data.
Matschullat et al. (2000) presented several methods for estimating the upper limits of background
thresholds in geochemical data (see also Reimann et al., 2008). In each method, a critical mean±2o
value is determined as the normal range for background. The methods include: (i) inflection points on
cumulative frequency curves, (ii) 4o-outlier test, (iii) iterative 2o-technique, (iv) original data mean±2o
value (96th percentile), and (v) the calculated distribution function based on values in the lower 50th
percentile. Matschullat et al. (2000) concluded that the iterative 2o-technique and the calculated
distribution function provide realistic approximations of the background condition; however, they
further pointed out that no single method can provide absolute results due to the inherent complexity
of geochemical datasets. For example, environmental data may be collected using different sampling
approaches and analytical methods. Chloride data from ground water and springs in Washington
County are shown in Figure 31 using a histogram and a cumulative distribution curve. The results of the
different background approximation methods are also provided in Figure 31. For the Washington
County dataset, critical mean±2o values for chloride range from 33 mg/L using the calculated
distribution function to 405 mg/L using the inflection method. The average chloride concentration at
location SWPAGW13 exceeded the critical values determined using each of the background estimation
techniques and was, therefore, reasonably outside of background thresholds (see Figure 31). Average
chloride concentrations from location SWPAGW14 fell within the critical values determined using the
iterative 2o-technique and the 4o-outlier test; assessments about whether this location was within
background conditions are less certain. When compared to chloride concentrations from springs,
however, both SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 were consistently anomalous.
Chloride concentrations at location SWPAGW13 showed significant changes through time; chloride
concentrations decreased by 27% and 16% between the first and second and the second and third
rounds of sampling, respectively. Parallel concentration trends were also indicated for calcium,
strontium, barium, and sodium (see Figure 20). Decaying concentration trends are well-established
features of advective-dispersive transport of conservative tracers and contaminants that result from
instantaneous pulses or transient sources such as spills and leachate migration from buried waste (e.g.,
Freeze and Cherry, 1979; Guerrero et al., 2010, 2013; Olayiwola et al., 2013). Elevated concentrations of
chloride above background thresholds, time-dependent concentration behavior, and data collected at
83
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 before this study in 2009 (described below) indicate that an impact has
occurred at these sampling locations.
200
400
600
800
1000
99.5.
95.
.82
I 70.
o
0 40-
5 10.
|
o 1-
0.01.
o
O
75 -
50 -
25 -
original inflection
data method
<264) (405)
4rr-method
(178)
2a-method
(122)
calculated
distribution
(33)
SWPAGW13
SWPAGW14
n=234
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Chloride, mg/L
Figure 31. Histogram and cumulative distribution curve of chloride concentrations from ground water and springs
in Washington County, including data from this study and historical data. Critical background values were
determined using the methods presented by Matschullat et al. (2000; see text). The average and range of chloride
concentrations is shown for locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14.
84
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
The map locations of SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 and proximal sampling locations are shown in Figure
3. Locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 are both springs near the northern margin of the map area in
Figure 3. Both springs are located to the east (~250 feet and ~75 feet, respectively) of a paved county
road. SWPAGW13 is located east of SWPAGW14 and is about 35 feet higher in elevation; thus, location
SWPAGW14 represents discharge of somewhat deeper ground water. The water discharging from these
springs is protected within covered vaults. Both springs are located to the northwest and hydraulically
down gradient from an impoundment, a former reserve pit used for the disposal of drilling wastes, and a
gas well (well 7H, PA DEP permit no. 125-23824). Drilling of well 7H started in September 2009 and was
completed in November 2009 to a depth of 7,190 feet below land surface; the well was hydraulically
fractured in December 2009.
A common approach for evaluating background conditions in ground water investigations at hazardous
waste sites includes analysis of nearby wells that are not expected to be influenced by sources of
contamination (e.g., US EPA, 1995). The major ion composition of all water samples collected in the
southern area of the study were compared using a Schoeller diagram (see Figure 32). As noted
previously, samples collected in this study from locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 were calcium-
chloride type waters; all other waters in the area were calcium-bicarbonate type, with the exceptions of
SWPAGW18 and SWPAGW19, which were sodium-bicarbonate type. Samples from locations
SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 showed higher concentrations of calcium and chloride than all other
nearby samples, which collectively represent an approximation of background conditions in the area. In
addition, samples collected from locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 in August 2009, prior to drilling
activities at well 7H, showed calcium-bicarbonate type water typical of other water wells in the area (see
Appendix D and Figure 32). Note in particular that chloride concentrations in both SWPAGW13 and
SWPAGW14 were <5 mg/L in August 2009 before the impoundment was built. The chloride
concentration in SWPAGW13 during the first round of sampling, for example, was 631 mg/L, indicating
that a concentration change of over 155x occurred between August 2009 and July 2011. At location
SWPAGW14, the increase in chloride concentration from August 2009 to March 2012 was over 90x.
Similar abrupt increases in concentrations were indicated for calcium, strontium, barium, and sodium.
Secondary data from SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 were weighted similarly to other historical data and
were obtained using appropriate analytical methods (see Appendix D). Charge balance was within 2%
for the samples collected in 2009 (Appendix D). In all cases, major ion data collected in 2009 from
locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 fell within the range observed in nearby wells that are
reasonably representative of local background conditions (see Figure 32).
The molar increase in chloride (17.7 mmol/L) between the August 2009 and July 2011 sampling of
SWPAGW13 was not entirely balanced by molar increases in calcium (6.05 mmol/L) or sodium (1.71
mmol/L). This discrepancy suggests that water-rock interactions such as sodium for calcium cation
exchange (Howard and Beck, 1993) may have an important influence on water chemistry and,
consequently, the observed cation/anion distribution in ground water may not reflect the composition
of the source.
With the exception of location SWPAGW12, available data did not show significant time-dependent
changes in chloride or calcium concentrations in the other domestic wells and springs shown in Figure
32. The chloride concentration in well water from location SWPAGW12 decreased from 28.7 mg/L to
1.9 mg/L between the July 2011 and March 2012 sampling events. The chloride concentrations in this
well were within the range of other wells in the area (2.2 to 41.8 mg/L), excluding SWPAGW13 and
85
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
SWPAGW14. Thus, the changes in chloride concentrations at location SWPAGW12 cannot be viewed as
anomalous when compared to the chloride concentration distribution in nearby wells, although low-
level impacts in this well, and other wells in the area, may be indistinguishable from the range of
background concentrations.
1000
en
c
.0
'•»—>
03
"c
CD
O
c
O
O
100-
10-
1 -
Ca
Mg
Na+K
Cl
SO4
HCO3
h- SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14
July 2011 to May 2013
^—All other sampling locations in map area
July 2011 to May 2013
>- SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14
August 2009
Figure 32. Schoeller diagram showing the major ion composition of shallow ground water, springs, and surface water
in the southern area. Data are shown for locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 before (August 2009) and after
construction of the Yeager impoundment (July 2011 to May 2013). The shaded ovals highlight changes in chloride and
calcium concentrations at locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 (see text).
86
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Based on detailed background assessment and evaluation of existing data, potential candidate causes
for the issues concerning ground water chemistry at locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 include:
historical land use, current drilling processes and practices, historical drilling practices, naturally
occurring sources, and road salt, as described below (see Appendix C).
• The EDR search indicated that there are two abandoned coal mines about 1.5 miles northeast of
location SWPAGW13. Mines could affect ground water quality and are a candidate cause;
however, there are limited data on the regional ground water hydrology that would allow for a
definite cause-and-effect linkage. Other sampling locations in the vicinity of SWPAGW13 and
SWPAGW14 would be expected to show related water quality impacts if the identified
abandoned mines were a source term.
• One orphan CERCLIS landfill site was identified in the environmental records search; its location
could not be accurately determined based on information available. Without further
information about this landfill, particularly the location, it cannot be ruled out as a potential
contributor to ground water quality impacts.
• Contaminant sources related to the Yeager Unit 7H well—such as poor casing cement integrity
and potential leaks in the former Yeager reserve pit and impoundment—are potential causes.
Evaluation of elevation contours indicates that locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 are likely
hydraulically down gradient from the former reserve pit, and this source would be consistent
with the time-dependent behavior of water chemistry, as noted above. Infiltration of chloride
and associated constituents from impoundments into shallow ground water was previously
studied in other natural gas extraction regions (e.g., Healy et al., 2008, 2011).
• Background reports on hydrology in Washington County (Newport, 1973; Williams et al., 1993)
suggest that freshwater aquifers in some locations have been contaminated by brine, under
artesian conditions, migrating upward from deeper, non-potable aquifers through historical oil
and gas wells that were improperly abandoned or have corroded casings. Although specific
candidate wells were not identified in this study, this source or other natural pathways of brine
migration are considered to be a candidate cause. As indicated in previous sections, this
scenario is inconsistent with Sr isotope data and [CI/Br] ratio analysis.
• Road salt application to aid in snow and ice removal can impact shallow ground water and is
considered as a candidate source (e.g., Howard and Beck, 1993; Williams et al., 1999; Blasius
and Merritt, 2002). According to the Amwell Township Road Department, road salt is typically
used for deicing state roads but not for county roads (Barale, 2013). The township used cinders
that were generated from coal ash for deicing county roads. The nearest state road to the area
of interest, Route 19, is over a mile away; therefore, an impact from road salt in the area of
interest is not suspected. In addition, locations SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14 are significantly
higher in elevation compared to the adjacent county road and are unlikely to be impacted by
runoff.
• Site-specific data relating to local hydrology and ground water chemistry are unavailable to
provide more definitive assessments of the primary causes(s) and longevity of the ground water
impact.
87
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
8. Iron and Manganese
Many of the homeowner concerns regarding water quality from their domestic wells were related to
turbidity, taste, and staining properties of the water, particularly in the northern area. These water
quality issues are frequently linked to concentrations of particulate and dissolved iron and manganese,
and in some cases to elevated dissolved sulfide concentrations (Hem, 1985). Recall that dissolved
sulfide was only detected at one location (SWPAGW06), so elevated sulfide levels were not indicated to
be the cause of poor water quality at most of the sampling locations of this study. Previously, Williams
et al. (1993) concluded that the primary issues with ground water quality within Washington County are
occurrences of elevated levels of iron, manganese, dissolved solids, and hardness. Similar water quality
issues have been documented in other parts of Pennsylvania (e.g., PA DEP, 1998). Based on their
analysis of water samples collected to study the impacts of coal mining on water resources in
Washington County, Williams et al. (1993) showed that more than 33% of the water samples they
studied had dissolved iron concentrations higher than the SMCL (300 u.g/L; n = 104), and 30% had
dissolved manganese concentrations higher than the SMCL (50 u.g/L; n = 91). Williams et al. (1993)
noted that these elements are natural constituents of soils and rocks that can solubilize or precipitate in
ground water, typically as a consequence of oxidation-reduction processes. Water quality data collected
for this study are consistent with these historical observations and show the common occurrence and
wide-ranging concentrations of iron and manganese in ground water at the locations sampled in
Washington County (see Table 4 and Figure 33). Note that when iron and manganese were detected in
water samples, concentrations in the unfiltered (total) sample were typically greater than in the filtered
sample (see Figure 33). This relationship indicates the presence of particulate iron and/or manganese.
Particulate iron and manganese may be transported in ground water as fine-grained or colloidal
particles or might originate from accumulated solids present in the well bore that were suspended
during well purging. Note that the formation of iron encrustations is known to negatively affect the
performance of wells by reducing permeability and specific capacity (e.g., Walter, 1997; Houben, 2003).
The distributions of iron and manganese in ground water systems are largely controlled by redox
reactions. At near-neutral pH conditions typical of ground water, both elements tend to be more
soluble and mobile under conditions that are free of oxygen (anoxic). Under such conditions, iron and
manganese are primarily present as the dissolved cations Fe2+ and Mn2+. Mobile Fe2+ and Mn2+ may
precipitate in the presence of dissolved oxygen to form insoluble solids of Fe(OH)3 and MnO2, and/or
other related solids. In the presence of bicarbonate and carbonate, Fe2+ and Mn2+ may precipitate to
form siderite (FeCO3) or rhodochrosite (MnCO3). The effects of pH and redox conditions on the mobility
of manganese, for example, can be shown on an EH-pH diagram. Figure 34 shows the primary stability
fields of dissolved and solid forms of manganese as a function of pH and EH for the system Mn-H2O-CO2
(total manganese concentration 10"6 mol/L, ~50 u.g/L; bicarbonate concentration 10"3 mol/L, ~60 mg/L;
ideal solution behavior assumed) at 25 °C and 1 atmosphere pressure. The data points plotted on the
diagram are measured pH and EH values estimated from ORP measurements from the ground water
samples of this study. In most cases, field measurements of pH and ORP indicate that manganese
should be present in the soluble and mobile form. Note that precipitation of manganese-containing
minerals is favored with increasing pH and EH. Sulfur is not considered in Figure 34; however,
manganese sulfide (MnS, alabandite) is fairly soluble and would not be expected to precipitate based on
the negligible dissolved sulfide concentrations present in most of the domestic wells. Concentrations of
dissolved manganese and iron showed a negative correlation with EH; i.e., higher concentrations of
88
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
these elements were associated with lower EH, or more reducing conditions, consistent with
thermodynamic predictions (see Figure 35).
10000-
~g> 8000 -
zL
cf
.2 6000-
-i— «
0 4000-
o
O 2000-
0-
n=80 n=43
0
-
n=19
S
n=14
T • J 6 n=19~
^^* ^-^^ ^L« T"M — ^dK>
SMCL
300 nc
Total Fe
Newport (1973)
I I I I
Total Fe Dissolved Fe Total Fe Dissolved Fe
NWIS
This Study
1400-
1200-
?1000-
0 800-
"ro
•g 600 -|
(D
c 400-
o
0-
n=71
Dissolved Mn
NURE
n=66
n=19
n=19
o
SMCL
50 ng/L
i I I I
Total Mn Dissolved Mn Total Mn Dissolved Mn
NWIS
This Study
Figure 33. Iron and manganese concentrations in ground water from this study and historical data.
89
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
1.0
0.5
o
X
LLJ
0
-0.5
MnCO,
25°C
8
10
PH
Figure 34. EH-pH diagram for Mn (25°C, Mn = 10"6, HCO3" = 10"3). Data points are measured pH versus oxidation-
reduction potential (ORP) values of ground water converted to EH (voltage reading versus the standard hydrogen
electrode). The shaded green area indicates the EH-pH region in which manganese precipitation is expected.
90
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
0.5
LU
0.4-
0.3-
0.2-
0.1 -
0.0
-8
LJJ
R=0.34
(p-value=0.005)
4
R=0.36
(p-value=0.005)
Manganese
Iron
i
-7
\^
-6
1
-5
Log Concentration, mol/L
0.4-
0.2-
0.1 -
n n -
i '
*
*
*
I ' I '
\^ * -
1
-
-
9 R2=0.07 "----
(p-value=0.08) '
-
-9.0
-8.5 -8.0 -7.5
Log Arsenic, mol/L
-7.0
Figure 35. Concentrations of manganese, iron and arsenic as a function of redox potential (EH)
91
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Arsenic is a trace element that shows similar redox-related solubility characteristics and transport
behavior to iron and manganese (Smedley and Kinniburgh, 2002). Dissolved arsenic concentrations
measured in this study from ground water and springs ranged from <0.04 to 0.84 u.g/L (cf. the arsenic
MCL of 10 u.g/L); the median concentration of arsenic was 0.54 u.g/L (see Table 8). However, unlike iron
and manganese, arsenic concentrations were poorly correlated with EH (R2= 0.07; see Figure 35); the
poor correlation with EH and the low concentrations of dissolved arsenic in ground water may reflect low
concentrations of arsenic in the aquifer solids.
While the occurrences of iron and manganese in ground water of Washington County, and indeed
throughout the state, likely stem from geology and geochemical processes that result in the natural
enrichment of these elements in regional aquifers, this water quality issue may be amplified in areas of
active drilling. For example, Boyer et al. (2011) and Alawattegama et al. (2015) noted areas in
Pennsylvania where water wells sampled before and after drilling activities showed increased levels of
manganese and iron. Groat and Grimshaw (2012) suggested that these types of impacts may be related
to vibrations and energy pulses put into the ground during drilling and/or other operations. These
energy inputs could cause naturally formed particles containing iron and manganese to mobilize and
possibly increase turbidity in domestic wells in the vicinity of gas development. The overall process that
might be occurring would involve several key steps:
1. Dissolution of naturally occurring iron and manganese through redox-related processes.
2. Transport of iron and manganese through ground water seepage.
3. Slow oxidation and precipitation of iron and manganese solids in and around water wells that
serve to provide conduits for air (oxygen) into the subsurface.
4. Gradual accumulation of Fe- and/or Mn-solids through time in and around water wells.
5. Transient high-energy events related to drilling or other operations (e.g., Fontenot et al., 2013).
6. Temporary pulses in domestic wells of high turbidity, increased staining, and poor water quality.
Such transient events of increased turbidity, and related enrichment of iron and/or manganese,
were not captured at any location during the sampling events conducted for this study.
92
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
9. Summary of Case Study Results
Washington County, Pennsylvania, is underlain by the Marcellus Shale, which serves as an
unconventional reservoir of gas in the Appalachian Basin. Extensive drilling and production of Marcellus
gas wells began in 2005, with a progressive increase in development thereafter. As of December 2013,
approximately 1,435 wells were permitted in the Marcellus Shale in Washington County (PA DEP, 2013).
This retrospective case study was prompted by concerns about potential impacts on human health and
the environment. The focus of the study was on potential effects on drinking water resources from
current gas development in the Marcellus Shale. Environmental concerns include the potential for
contamination of shallow ground water by stray gases (methane), fracturing chemicals associated with
unconventional gas development, and deep formation waters (brine). Potential contaminant migration
pathways connecting hydraulically fractured zones to shallow ground water include advective transport
through sedimentary strata, fractures, faults, abandoned wells, and/or compromised boreholes. Surface
features, such as impoundments and pits used for storage of flowback and produced water and other
drilling wastes, also represent potential contaminant sources to shallow ground water and surface
water. Overall, the quality of shallow ground water used for drinking water in Washington County is
expected to be governed by a number of factors that modify the composition of infiltrated water,
including geology, land use, past coal mining activities, agricultural activities, industrial operations,
waste disposal, materials storage, deicing application and storage, and oil and gas development.
Washington County was selected for a retrospective case study in order to follow up on reported
instances in the county of decreased water quality in domestic wells related to appearance, odor, and
taste. The study focused on locations where homeowners expressed concerns about potential impacts
to their wells from nearby hydraulic fracturing activities and surface disposal/storage of wastes. In this
study, water quality samples were collected from 16 domestic wells, three springs, and three surface
water locations in Amwell, Cross Creek, Hopewell, and Mount Pleasant Townships during three rounds
in July 2011, March 2012, and May 2013. The domestic wells sampled ranged in depth from 50 to 160
feet below land surface (cf. the depth of the Marcellus Shale in Washington County, which is more than
5,000 feet below land surface). The water samples collected were analyzed for geochemical parameters
(temperature, pH, specific conductance, ORP, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity), major cations and
anions, nutrients, trace metals, VOCs, SVOCs, DRO, GRO, glycol ethers, low-molecular-weight acids,
radionuclides, strontium isotope ratios (87Sr/86Sr), and selected stable isotopes (618OH2o; 62HH2o, 613CD|C,
6 CCH4, and 6 HCH4).
The locations sampled in this study were not monitored extensively before drilling and gas production.
Therefore, identification of specific changes in water quality inclusive of the pre-drilling and gas
development time frame was not possible in most cases. The evaluation of new data from this study
with respect to potential impacts from unconventional gas development included consideration of the
chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, analysis of dissolved gases and their isotopic compositions,
analysis of deep brine geochemistry in relation to shallow ground water geochemistry, analysis of
historical ground water quality in Washington County, and analysis of time-dependent geochemical
trends. Land use factors and potential environmental stressors were also evaluated using available data.
Historical water quality data from Washington County were collected from literature sources and online
from the USGS NWIS and NURE databases. The historical data were used as points of reference for
screening-level comparisons in order to illustrate regional concentration ranges typical in ground water
93
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
and for constraining major water composition types that were encountered within Washington County
before gas development in the Marcellus Shale. Table 10 summarizes the potential ground water and
surface water impacts identified during this study.
Table 10. Potential ground water and surface water impacts identified in the retrospective case study in southwestern
Pennsylvania.
Impacted
Parameters
Dissolved
Methane
Nitrate
Total lead
Iron and
Manganese
Aluminum
Chloride
Study
Area
Northern
Southern
Southern
Northern
Southern
Northern
Southern
Northern
Southern
Northern
Southern
Locations
SWPAGW04
SWPAGW06
SWPAGW07
SWPAGW08
SWPAGW14
SWPAGW17
SWPAGW10
SWPAGW09
SWPAGW12
SWPAGW02
SWPAGW04
SWPAGW06
SWPAGW09
SWPASW02
SWPAGW11
SWPAGW12
SWPAGW14
SWPAGW04
SWPAGW08
SWPAGW09
SWPAGW10
SWPAGW12
SWPAGW13
SWPAGW14
SWPAGW05
SWPASW02
SWPAGW13
SWPAGW14
Sample
Type
Ground
water and
Springs
Ground
water
Ground
water
Ground
water,
Springs,
Surface
water
Ground
water and
Springs
Ground
water,
Springs,
Surface
water
Description
Detections from 0.002 to
15.5 mg/L; consistent with
biogenic and/or mixed
biogenic and thermogenic
sources
Primary MCL exceedance
Primary MCL exceedance
Secondary MCL
exceedances
Secondary MCL
exceedances
Elevated concentrations
compared to historical
data; secondary MCL
exceedances at location
SWPAGW13
Potential Sources
Drift gas; coal seams; long-
term migration from deep
shales, sandstones, and
coal beds
Septic systems; animal
manure; fertilizers
Natural sources; pipe
and/or solder corrosion
Natural sources; turbidity
potentially influenced by
drilling; coal-mine drainage
Natural particulates;
mineral content
Historical land use; current
and/or historical drilling
practices; impoundments;
reserve pits; natural
sources of brine; road salt
Three ground water types were identified in this study based on major ion chemistry: calcium-
bicarbonate, sodium-bicarbonate, and calcium-chloride. These water types coincide with major ion
types represented in historical water quality databases, except that (i) the calcium-chloride type water
was unique to this study; and (ii) the sodium-sulfate and calcium-sulfate water types were not identified
in this study, but are prevalent in the NWIS database. The sodium-sulfate type compositions included in
the NWIS data tend to be elevated in TDS and may be representative of more evolved water-rock
interactions, perhaps involving weathering of sulfide minerals such as pyrite contained in coal and other
sedimentary rocks.
94
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Methane occurs naturally in ground water in southwestern Pennsylvania and is present within glacial
deposits, Permian- and Pennsylvania-age coal seams/sedimentary deposits, as well as underlying
Devonian-age strata, including the Marcellus Shale. Dissolved methane was detected in 24% of the
ground water and spring samples collected in this study, at concentrations ranging from about 0.002 to
15.5 mg/L In samples for which methane isotope values could be determined, the C and H isotope
signatures were distinct from the reported thermogenic composition of methane from the Marcellus
Shale. The isotopic signature in the sample with the highest methane concentration was consistent with
a biogenic origin. Coal seams in the comparatively shallow Monongahela and Conemaugh Group
aquifers could also provide a natural source of methane to shallow ground water. Historical water
quality databases do not include information on dissolved gas concentrations and isotope compositions,
which is a limitation for this study. Literature data from a neighboring region (north-central West
Virginia), which has witnessed limited shale-gas development, shows similar methane concentration
distributions and isotopic signatures as described here for Washington County. Data on the gas
composition and stable isotope compositions of methane and other dissolved gases from glacial drift
deposits, Pennsylvanian and Permian coal seams, and Devonian strata would be essential to support
source identity evaluations for stray gas investigations in this area.
Evaluation of 87Sr/86Sr, 613CD,C, 618OH20, 62HH20, [CI/Br], and [SO4/CI] ratio data provides no clear evidence
of contamination of shallow ground water with water produced from the Marcellus Shale or other deep
brines. These geochemical techniques are sensitive and appropriate for detecting and assessing fluid
mixing processes. They provide the most certainty when well-constrained end members are
established, which for the purpose of evaluating potential impacts related to natural gas development
would necessarily include pre-drilling and development data. The isotopes of radium (226Ra and 228Ra)
have been noted to be elevated in flowback and produced water from some Marcellus Shale gas wells.
These radiogenic isotopes were not detected in any of the samples collected for this study above an
activity of 1 pQ/L Gross a and (3 radioactivity were detected above method reporting limits in one
sample collected from a domestic well in May 2013 at activities of 6.3 and 10.3 pQ/L, respectively. The
gross a activity determined in the ground water from this well, 6.3 pQ/L, was below EPA's maximum
contaminant level of 15 pC/L.
The purpose of extensive analysis of organic chemicals was to evaluate the potential occurrence in
ground water and surface water of chemicals documented as components of hydraulic fracturing fluids.
Low-level detections of VOCs (toluene, benzene, chloroform, and acetone) and SVOCs (2-butoxyethanol,
phenol, phthalates) and DRO compounds were observed at sampling locations on an inconsistent basis.
There were no significant detections in ground water or surface samples of glycol ethers, gasoline-range
organic compounds, or acetate. Concentrations of organic compounds did not exceed EPA's drinking
water standards, and over the three rounds of sampling there were no significant and repeated
detections at any location of organic chemicals known to be associated with the process of hydraulic
fracturing. Lack of correlation with other potential indicators (e.g., elevated TDS, chloride, and barium
concentrations) in ground water and surface water that contained low-level detections of organic
compounds suggests that the infrequent detections of these compounds did not originate from
hydraulic fracturing activities. Historical water quality databases include very little information on
organic chemicals in ground water from Washington County.
Primary MCL exceedances were observed in this study at one location for nitrate and at two locations
for total lead (Table 10). Sources of nitrate to ground water include septic systems, animal manure, and
95
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
fertilizers applied to lawns and crops; nitrate and lead are not typically considered to be associated with
hydraulic fracturing operations. A precise evaluation of the sources of nitrate and lead at the locations
was beyond the scope of this project. Water quality data collected for this study are consistent with
historical observations showing the common occurrence and wide-ranging concentrations of iron and
manganese in ground water in Washington County, Pennsylvania; the presence of these elements is
shown to be related to redox conditions. While the occurrences of iron and manganese in ground water
of Washington County likely stem from geology and geochemical processes that result in the natural
enrichment of these elements in regional aquifers, increased turbidity from iron and/or manganese
particulates may be amplified in areas of active drilling. Boyer et al. (2011) and Alawattegama et al.
(2015) noted a small number of wells in Pennsylvania where water samples collected before and after
drilling activities showed increased levels of iron and manganese. Such impacts may be related to
vibrations and energy pulses put into the ground during drilling and/or other operations (Groat and
Grimshaw, 2012). These energy inputs could cause, in geochemically favorable environments, naturally
formed particles containing iron and manganese to mobilize and possibly increase turbidity and may
explain reported instances of reduced water quality isolated in time. Such transient events were not
captured at any location during the sampling events of this study.
Elevated concentrations of chloride relative to historical water quality data and time-dependent
concentration behavior, including water quality results that predate this study, indicate that an impact
(elevated chloride) occurred at sampling locations of this study near the Yeager impoundment in Amwell
Township. Based on detailed background assessment and evaluation of existing data, candidate causes
for the issues concerning ground water chemistry at this location include: historical land use, current
drilling processes and practices, historical drilling practices, naturally occurring sources, and road salt.
County records and analysis of geochemical data collected for this study suggest that road salt and/or
upwelling of deep brines are unlikely candidate causes for the water quality impact. The water quality
trends with time suggest that the chloride anomaly is linked to sources associated with the
impoundment site; site-specific data are unavailable to provide more definitive assessments of the
primary causes(s) and longevity of the ground water impact. A plan for closure and reclamation of the
impoundment site was submitted to the PA DEP in February 2014.
Key observations/findings from this study are summarized below.
• Dissolved methane was detected in 24% of the ground water and spring water samples
collected in this study at concentrations that ranged from about 0.002 to 15.5 mg/L The
methane concentration in one domestic well sampled in this study was above the PA DEP
action level of 7 mg/L. Multiple lines of evidence including the C and H isotope signature of
methane, redox conditions, levels of sulfate and dissolved oxygen, and the isotope signature
of inorganic carbon indicate that the origin of methane from this location was from CO2
reduction, i.e., drift gas.
• Analysis of 87Sr/86Sr, 613CD|C, 618OH2o, 62HH20, gross a activity, gross B activity, 226Ra and 228Ra,
[CI/Br], and [SO4/CI] ratio data from the sampling locations selected for this study provide no
clear evidence of contamination of shallow ground water by flowback or produced water
from Marcellus Shale gas wells, Upper Devonian sands, and/or other deep brines. However,
these multiple lines of evidence provided inconclusive results regarding brine impacts at
96
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
three locations due to a lack of pre-drilling and development data (SWPAGW05, SWPAGW09,
and SWPASW02).
• There were no detections in this study of glycol ethers, GRO compounds, or acetate in
ground water and surface samples collected in Washington County. Detections of VOCs and
SVOCs were infrequent, below EPA's drinking water MCLs, and did not correlate with other
potential indicators of hydraulic fracturing fluids, such as elevated chloride and/or the
presence of glycol ethers.
• Primary MCL exceedances were observed in this study at one location for nitrate and at two
locations for total lead; the occurrences of nitrate and lead in ground water are not
considered to be associated with hydraulic fracturing operations.
• Secondary MCL exceedances for manganese and iron were common in homeowner wells;
increased concentrations of these elements correlate with moderately reducing ground
water conditions and are consistent with historical observations that demonstrate the
natural enrichment of these elements in regional aquifers. Transient episodes of decreased
water quality from increased concentrations of iron and/or manganese and increased
turbidity may be amplified in areas of active drilling.
• Elevated concentrations of chloride relative to historical water quality data and time-
dependent concentration behavior indicate that a recent ground water impact occurred at
sampling locations near the Yeager impoundment in Amwell Township. The impact resulted
in chloride concentrations in a drinking water supply that exceeded the secondary MCL and a
shift in ground water chemistry toward a calcium-chloride composition. The impoundment
site was used to store drilling wastes and wastewater associated with the hydraulic
fracturing water cycle. Site-specific data relating to local hydrology and ground water
chemistry are unavailable to provide more definitive assessments of the primary causes(s)
and longevity of the ground water impact.
97
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
References
Abualfaraj, N., Gurian, P.L, and Olson, M.S. (2014). Characterization of Marcellus Shale flowback water.
Environmental Engineering Science, v. 31, p. 514-524.
Alawattegama, S.K., Kondratyuk, T., Krynock, R., Bricker, M., Rutter, J.K., Bain, D.J., and Stolz, J.F. (2015).
Well water contamination in a rural community in southwestern Pennsylvania near nonconventional
shale gas extraction. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A, v. 50, p. 516-528.
Alperin, M.J., Reeburgh, W.S., and Whiticar, M.J. (1988). Carbon and hydrogen isotope fractionation
resulting from anaerobic methane oxidation. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, v. 2, p. 279-288.
Ashley, G.H. and Robinson, J.F. (1922). Oil and Gas Fields of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geological
Survey, Mineral Resource Report 1, 78 pp.
Baldassare, F.J. and Laughrey, C.D. (1997). Identifying the sources of stray methane by using
geochemical and isotopic fingerprinting. Environmental Geosciences, v. 4, p. 85-94.
Baldassare, F., McCaffrey, M.A., and Harper, J.A. (2014). A geochemical context for stray gas
investigations in the northern Appalachian Basin: Implications of analyses of natural gases from
Neogene-through-Devonian-age strata. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 98, p.
341-372.
Barale, E. (2013). Personal communication to Environment and Ecology, Inc., Amwell Township
Supervisor, June 6, 2013.
Barbot, E., Vidic, N.S., Gregory, K.B., and Vidic, R.D. (2013). Spatial and temporal correlation of water
quality parameters of produced waters from Devonian-age shale following hydraulic fracturing.
Environmental Science and Technology, v. 47, p. 2562-2569.
Battelle (2013). Washington County, Pennsylvania retrospective case study characterization report.
Submitted to American Petroleum Institute and America's Natural Gas Alliance (Battelle Contract No.
CON00011206).
Bethke, C.M. (1996). Geochemical Reaction Modeling. Oxford University Press, New York.
Blasius, B.J. and Merritt, R.W. (2002). Field and laboratory investigations on the effects of road salt
(NaCI) on stream macroinvertebrate communities. Environmental Pollution, v. 120, p. 219-231.
Bonotto, D.M., Bueno, T.O., Tessari, B.W., and Silva, A. (2009). The natural radioactivity in water by
gross alpha and beta measurements. Radiation Measurements, v. 44, p. 92-101.
Botz, R., Pokojski, H.-D., Schmitt, M., and Thomm, M. (1996). Carbon isotope fractionation during
bacterial methanogenesis by CO2 reduction. Organic Geochemistry, v. 25, p. 255-262.
Bowen, Z.H., Oelsner, G.P., Cade, B.S., Gallegos, T.J., Farag, A.M., Mott, D.N., Potter, C.J., Cinotto, P.J.,
Clark, M.L., Kappel, W.M., Kresse, T.M., Melcher, C.P., Paschke, S.S., Susong, D.D., and Varela, B.A.
(2015). Assessment of surface water chloride and conductivity trends in areas of unconventional oil and
gas development-Why existing national data sets cannot tell us what we would like to know. Water
Resources Research, v. 51, p. 704-715.
98
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Boyer, E.W., Swistock, B.R., Clark, J., Madden, M., and Rizo, D.E. (2011). The impact of Marcellus gas
drilling on rural drinking water supplies. The Center for Rural Pennsylvania.
Brantley, S.L, Yoxtheimer, D., Arjmand, S., Grieve, P., Vidic, R., Pollak, J., Llewellyn, G.T., Abad, A., and
Simon, C. (2014). Water resource impacts during unconventional shale gas development: The
Pennsylvania experience. International Journal of Coal Geology, v. 126, p. 140-156.
Capo, R.C., Stewart, B.W., and Chadwick, O.A. (1998). Strontium isotopes as tracers of ecosystem
processes: Theory and methods. Geoderma, v. 82, p. 197-225.
Carnegie, D. and Ramsay, J.A. (2009). Anaerobic ethylene glycol degradation by microorganisms in
poplar and willow rhizospheres. Biodegradation, v. 20, p. 551-558.
Carter, K.M. (2007). Subsurface rock correlation diagram, oil and gas producing regions of Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania Geological Survey, Fourth Series Open-File Report OFOG 07-01.1.
Carter, K.M., Harper, J.A., Schmid, K.W., and Kostelnik, J. (2011). Unconventional natural gas resources
in Pennsylvania: The backstory of the modern Marcellus Shale play. Environmental Geosciences, v. 18,
p. 217-257.
Chapelle, F.H., McMahon, P.B., Dubrovsky, N.M., Fujii, R.F., Oaksford, E.T., and Vroblesky, D.A. (1995).
Deducing the distribution of terminal electron accepting processes in hydrologically diverse ground-
water systems. Water Resources Research, v. 31, p. 359-371.
Chapman, E.G., Capo, R.C., Stewart, B.W., Kirby, C.S., Hammack, R.W., Schroeder, K.T., and Edenborn,
H.M. (2012). Geochemical and strontium isotope characterization of produced waters from Marcellus
Shale natural gas extraction. Environmental Science and Technology, v. 46, p. 3545-3553.
Clayton, R.N., Friedman, I., Graf, D.L, Mayeda, T.K., Meents, W.F., and Shimp, N.F. (1966). The origin of
saline formation waters: 1. Isotopic composition. Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 71, p. 3869-3882.
Cohen, H.A., Parratt, T., and Andrews, C.B. (2013). Comment on "Potential contaminant pathways from
hydraulically fractured shale to aquifers" by T. Myers. Ground Water, v. 51, p. 317-319.
Coleman, D.D., Liu, C.L, Hackley, K.C., and Pelphrey, S.R. (1995). Isotopic identification of landfill
methane. Environmental Geosciences, v. 2, p. 95-103.
Corseuil, H.X., Monier, A.L., Fernandes, M., Schneider, M.R., Nunes, C.C., Rosario, M., and Alvarez, P.J.J.
(2011). BTEX plume dynamics following an ethanol blend release: Geochemical footprint and
thermodynamic constraints on natural attenuation. Environmental Science and Technology, v. 45, p.
3422-3429.
Craig, H. (1961). Standard for reporting concentrations of deuterium and oxygen-18 in natural water.
Science, v. 133, p. 1833-1834.
Davis, S.N., Whittemore, D.O., and Fabryka-Martin, J. (1998). Uses of CI/Br ratios in studies of potable
water. Ground Water, v. 36, p. 338-350.
Deines, P., Langmuir, D., and Harmon, R.S. (1974). Stable carbon isotope ratios and the existence of a
gas phase in the evolution of carbonate ground water. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 38, p.
1147-1164.
99
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Delany J.M. and Lundeen S.R. (1990). The LLNLthermochemical database. Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory Report, UCRL-21658. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
Douglas, J.G. (2012). Volatile organic compound contamination in groundwater samples and field blanks.
Prepared by CH2MHNI for the U.S. Department of Energy, SGW-52194, 53 pp.
Dresel, P.E. and Rose, A.W. (2010). The geochemistry of oilfield brines from western Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania Geological Survey, Open-File Report OFOG 10-01.0, 48 pp.
Dwyer, D.F. and Tiedje, J.M. (1983). Degradation of ethylene glycol and polyethylene glycols by
methanogenic consortia. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, v. 46, p. 185-190.
Eltschlager, K.K., Hawkins, J.W., Ehler, W.C., and Baldassare, F.J. (2001). Technical measures for the
investigation and mitigation of fugitive methane hazards in areas of coal mining. Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Pittsburgh, PA, 129 pp.
Ely, J.W. (1989). Fracturing fluids and additives. In Recent Advances in Hydraulic Fracturing, edited by
J.L. Gidley, S.A. Holditch, D.E. Nierode, and R.W. Veatch. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Monograph
Volume 12, Richardson, TX, p. 131-146.
Engelder, T. (2012). Capillary tension and imbibition sequester frack fluid in Marcellus gas shale.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 109, p. E3625.
Engelder, T., Lash, G.G., and Uzacategui, R.S. (2009). Joint sets that enhance production from Middle
and Upper Devonian gas shales of the Appalachian Basin. American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Bulletin, v. 93, p. 857-889.
Engle, M.A. and Rowan, E.L. (2014). Geochemical evolution of produced waters from hydraulic
fracturing of the Marcellus Shale, northern Appalachian Basin: A multivariate compositional data
analysis approach. International Journal of Coal Geology, v. 126, p. 45-56.
Faure, G. (1998). Principles and Applications of Geochemistry, 2nd Edition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle
River, New Jersey.
Ferrar, K.J., Michanowicz, D.R., Christen, C.L., Mulcahy, N., Malone, S.L, and Sharma, R.K. (2013).
Assessment of effluent contaminants from three facilities discharging Marcellus Shale wastewater to
surface waters in Pennsylvania. Environmental Science and Technology, v. 47, p. 3472-3481.
Flewelling, S.A. and Sharma, M. (2014). Constraints on upward migration of hydraulic fracturing fluid
and brine. Groundwater, v. 52, p. 9-19.
Fontenot, B.E., Hunt, L.R., Hildenbrand, Z.L., Carlton Jr., D.D., Oka, H., Walton, J.L, Hopkins, D., Osorio,
A., Bjorndal, B., Hu, Q.H., and Schug, K.A. (2013). An evaluation of water quality in private drinking
water wells near natural gas extraction sites in the Barnett Shale Formation. Environmental Science and
Technology, v. 47, p. 10032-10040.
Freeze, R.A. and Cherry, J.A. (1979). Groundwater. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Frost, C.D. and Toner, R.N. (2004). Strontium isotopic identification of water-rock interaction and
ground water mixing. Ground Water, v. 42, p. 418-432.
100
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Giustini, F., Blessing, M., Brilli, M., Lombard!, S., Voltattoni, N., and Widory, D. (2013). Determining the
origin of carbon dioxide and methane in gaseous emissions of the San Vittorino (Central Italy) by means
of stable isotopes and noble gas analyses. Applied Geochemistry, v. 34, p. 90-101.
Griffiths, W.C., Camara, P., and Lerner, K.S. (1985). Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, an ubiquitous
environmental contaminant. Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science, v. 15, p. 140-151.
Groat, C.G. and Grimshaw, T.W. (2012). Fact-based regulation for environmental protection in shale gas
development. The University of Texas at Austin, Energy Institute.
Guerrero, J.S.P., Skaggs, T.H., and van Genuchten, M.Th. (2010). Analytical solution for multi-species
contaminant transport in finite media with time-varying boundary conditions. Transport in Porous
Media, v. 80, p. 373-387.
Guerrero, J.S.P., Pontedeiro, E.M., van Genuchten, M.Th., and Skaggs, T.H. (2013). Analytical solutions
of the one-dimensional advection-dispersion solute transport equation subject to time-dependent
boundary conditions. Chemical Engineering Journal, v. 221, p. 487-491.
Haluszczak, L.O., Rose, A.W., and Kump, L.R. (2013). Geochemical evaluation of flowback brine from
Marcellus gas wells in Pennsylvania, USA. Applied Geochemistry, v. 28, p. 55-61.
Harris, O., Wilbur, S., George, J., and Eisenmann, C. (1998). Toxicological profile for 2-butoxyethanol and
2-butoxyethanol acetate. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry.
Healy, R.W., Rice, C.A., Bartos, T.T., and McKinley, M.P. (2008). Infiltration from an impoundment for
coal-bed natural gas, Powder River Basin, Wyoming: Evolution of water and sediment chemistry. Water
Resources Research, v. 44, Issue 6, 16 pp.
Healy, R.W., Bartos, T.T., Rice, C.A., McKinley, M.P., and Smith, B.D. (2011). Groundwater chemistry
near an impoundment for produced water, Powder River Basin, Wyoming, USA. Journal of Hydrology, v.
403, p. 37-48.
Hem, J.D. (1985). Study and interpretation of the chemical characteristics of natural waters. U.S.
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2254, 263 pp.
Houben, G.J. (2003). Iron oxide incrustations in wells. Part 1: genesis, mineralogy and geochemistry.
Applied Geochemistry, v. 18, p. 927-939.
Howard, K.W.F. and Beck, P.J. (1993). Hydrogeochemical implications of groundwater contamination by
road de-icing chemicals. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, v. 12, p. 245-268.
Howard, P.H., Boethling, R.S., Jarvis, W.F., Meylan, W.M., and Michalenko, E.M. (1991). Handbook of
Environmental Degradation Rates. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, Ml.
Jackson, R.B., Vengosh, A., Darrah, T.H., Warner, N.R., Down, A., Poreda, R.J., Osborn, S.G., Zhao, K., and
Karr, J.D. (2013). Increased stray gas abundance in a subset of drinking water wells near Marcellus shale
gas extraction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 110, p. 11250-11255.
101
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Kampbell, D.H. and Vandegrift, S.A. (1998). Analysis of dissolved methane, ethane, and ethylene in
ground water by a standard gas chromatographic technique. Journal of Chromatographic Science, v. 36,
p. 253-256.
Kight, M. and Siegel, D.I. (2011). A protocol for characterizing flowback water contamination to shallow
waters from shale gas development. NE Geological Society of America Meeting, abstract (Pittsburgh,
PA), p. 76.
Kolesar Kohl, C.A., Capo, R.C., Stewart, B.W., Wall, A.J., Schroeder, K.T., Hammack, R.W., and Guthrie,
G.D. (2014). Strontium isotopes test long-term zonal isolation of injected and Marcellus Formation
water after hydraulic fracturing. Environmental Science and Technology, v. 48, p. 9867-9873.
Lash, G.C. and Engelder, T. (2011). Thickness trends and sequence stratigraphy of the Middle Devonian
Marcellus Formation, Appalachian Basin: Implications for Acadian foreland basin evolution. American
Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 95, p. 61-103.
Lentz, L.J. and Neubaum, J.C. (2005). A study of coal availability in the Hackett 7.5-minute quadrangle,
Washington County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geological Survey.
Llewellyn, G.T. (2014). Evidence and mechanisms for Appalachian Basin brine migration into shallow
aquifers in NE Pennsylvania, USA. Hydrogeology Journal, v. 22, p. 1055-1066.
Lopes, T.J. and Dionne, S.G. (1998). A review of semivolatile and volatile organic compounds in highway
runoff and urban stormwater. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 98-409, 73 pp.
MCOR (2013) (Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research). Available at
l]tt|K//wwwj]Tarce|Jj^ Accessed on September 26, 2013.
Maguire-Boyle, S.J. and Barren, A.R. (2014). Organic compounds in produced waters from shale gas
wells. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts, 12 pp.
MarcellusGas.Org (2014). Available at Jrttfil^www^ Accessed on March 7, 2014.
Markowski, A.K. (1998). Coalbed methane resource potential and current prospects in Pennsylvania.
International Journal of Coal Geology, v. 38, p. 137-159.
Martini, A.M., Walter, L.M., Budai, J.M., Ku, T.C.W., Kaiser, C.J., and Schoell, M. (1998). Genetic and
temporal relations between formation waters and biogenic methane: Upper Devonian Antrim Shale,
Michigan Basin, USA. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 62, p. 1699-1720.
Matschullat, J., Ottenstein, R., and Reimann, C. (2000). Geochemical background - can we calculate it?
Environmental Geology, v. 39, p. 990-1000.
Milici, R.C. and Swezey, C.S. (2006). Assessment of Appalachian Basin oil and gas resources: Devonian
shale-Middle and Upper Paleozoic total petroleum systems. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
2006-1237, 70 pp.
Miller, D.M. (2015). Frequency of positive results in laboratory method blanks. In PA Brownfields
Conference, May 13-15, 2015, Erie, PA.
102
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Molofsky, L.J., Connor, J.A., Wylie, A.S., Wagner, T., and Farhat, S.K. (2013). Evaluation of methane
sources in groundwater in northeastern Pennsylvania. Groundwater, v. 51, p. 333-349.
Mrklas, O., Chu, A., Lunn, S., and Bentley, L.R. (2004). Biodegradation of monoethanolamine, ethylene
glycol and triethylene glycol in laboratory bioreactors. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, v. 159, p. 249-263.
Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (2013). Frequently Asked Questions. Available at
http://www.mrlc.gov/faq Ic.php. Accessed on October 25, 2013.
Myers, T. (2012). Potential contaminant pathways from hydraulically fractured shale to aquifers.
Ground Water, v. 50, p. 872-882.
Newport, T.G. (1973). Summary of ground-water resources of Washington County, Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania Geological Survey, Water Resource Report 38, 32 pp.
Olayiwola, R.O., Jimoh, R.O., Yusef, A., and Abubakar, S. (2013). A mathematical study of contaminant
transport with first-order decay and time-dependent source concentration in an aquifer. Universal
Journal of Applied Mathematics, v. 1, p. 112-119.
Osborn, S.G., Vengosh, A., Warner, N.R., and Jackson, R.B. (2011). Methane contamination of drinking
water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, v. 108, p. 8172-8176.
PA DEP (1998). Summary of groundwater quality monitoring data (1985-1997) from Pennsylvania's
ambient and fixed station network (FSN) monitoring program. Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection, compiled by S.O. Reese and J.J. Lee.
PA DEP (2010). Chemicals used by hydraulic fracturing companies in Pennsylvania for surface and
hydraulic fracturing activities. Available at
http://files.dep.state.pa.us/OilGas/BOGM/BOGMPortalFiles/MarcellusShale/Frac%20list%206-30-
2010.pdf. Accessed on June 13, 2011.
PA DEP (2013). PA DEP oil and gas reporting website - well details. Available at
https://www.paoilandgasreporting.state.pa.us/publicreports/Modules/WellDetails/WellDetails.aspx.
Accessed on October 31, 2013.
PA DEP (2014a). Well Pads Report Viewer. Available at:
http://www.depreportingservices.state.pa.us/ReportServer/Pages/ReportViewer.aspx7/Oil Gas/Well P
ads. Accessed on May 19, 2014.
PA DEP (2014b). Report Instructions for the Oil and Gas Well Pads Report. Available at:
http://files.dep.state.pa.us/OilGas/BOGM/BOGMPortalFiles/OilGasReports/HelpDocs/Well Pad Report
Help.pdf. Accessed on May 19, 2014.
PADCNR(2007). Oil and gas fields of Pennsylvania, Map 10. Available at:
http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/econresource/oilandgas/resrefs/index.htm. Accessed on
November 1, 2013.
103
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Panno, S.V., Hackley, K.C., Hwang, H.H., Greenberg, S.E., Krapac, I.G., Landsberger, S., and O'Kelly, D.L
(2006). Characterization and identification of Na-CI sources in ground water. Ground Water, v. 44, p.
176-187.
Pennsylvania Code (2011). 025 Pa. Code § 78.89. Gas Migration Response. Available at:
Accessed on March 25, 2015.
Peterman, Z., Thamke, J., Futa, K., and Preston, T. (2012). Strontium isotope systematics of mixing
groundwater and oil-field brine at Goose Lake in northeastern Montana, USA. Applied Geochemistry, v.
27, p. 2403-2408.
Poth, C.W. (1962). The occurrence of brine in western Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geological Survey,
Fourth Series Bulletin M-47, 53 pp.
Prinzhofer, A. and Pernaton, E. (1997). Isotopically light methane in natural gas: bacterial imprint or
segregative migration? Chemical Geology, v. 142, p. 193-200.
Reimann, C, Filzmoser, P., Garrett, R., and Dutter, R. (2008). Statistical Data Analysis Explained. John
Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, UK.
Revesz, K.M., Breen, K.J., Baldassare, A.J., and Burruss, R. (2010). Carbon and hydrogen isotopic
evidence for the origin of combustible gases in water-supply wells in north-central Pennsylvania.
Applied Geochemistry, v. 25, p. 1845-1859.
Rimmer, S.M. (2004). Geochemical paleoredox indicators in Devonian-Mississippian black shales,
Central Appalachian Basin (USA). Chemical Geology, v. 206, p. 373-391.
Roen, J.B. (1984). Geology of the Devonian black shales of the Appalachian Basin. Organic
Geochemistry, v. 5, p. 241-254.
Rowan, E.L, Engle, M.A., Kirby, C.S., and Kraemer, T.F. (2011). Radium content of oil-and gas-field
produced waters in the northern Appalachian Basin (USA)-Summary and discussion of data. U.S.
Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2011-5135, 31 pp.
Rozell, D.J. (2014). Comment on "Constraints on upward migration of hydraulic fracturing fluid and
brine" by S.A. Flewelling and M. Sharma. Groundwater, v. 52, p. 491-492.
Ryder, R.T., Trippi, M.H., Swezey, C.S., Crangle, R.D., Jr., Hope, R.S., Rowan, E.L., and Lentz, E.E. (2012).
Geologic cross section C-C' through the Appalachian basin from Erie County, north-central Ohio, to the
Valley and Ridge province, Bedford County, south-central Pennsylvania. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific
Investigations Map 3172.
Saiers, J.E. and Barth, E. (2012). Comment on "Potential contaminant pathways from hydraulically
fractured shale to aquifers" byT. Myers. Ground Water, v. 50, p. 826-828.
Schoell, M. (1980). The hydrogen and carbon isotopic composition of methane from natural gases of
various origins. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 44, p. 649-661.
Schoell, M. (1988). Multiple origins of methane in the earth. Chemical Geology, v. 71, p. 1-10.
104
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Schumacher, B.A. and Zintek, L (2014). The verification of a method for detecting and quantifying
diethylene glycol, triethylene glycol, tetraethylene glycol, 2-butoxyethanol and 2-methoxyethanol in
ground and surface waters. EPA Report, EPA/600/R-14/008.
Shand, P., Darbyshire, D.P.F., Love, A.J., and Edmunds, W.M. (2009). Sr isotopes in natural waters:
applications to source characterisation and water-rock interaction in contrasting landscapes. Applied
Geochemistry, v. 24, p. 574-586.
Sharma, S. and Baggett, J.K. (2011). Application of carbon isotopes to detect seepage out of coalbed
natural gas produced water impoundments. Applied Geochemistry, v. 26, p. 1423-1432.
Sharma, S., Mulder, M.L., Sack, A., Schroeder, K., and Hammack, R. (2014). Isotope approach to assess
hydrologic connections during Marcellus Shale drilling. Groundwater, v. 52, p. 424-433.
Shultz, C.H. (1999). The Geology of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geological Survey, Harrisburg, PA.
Simpkins, W.W. and Parkin, T.B. (1993). Hydrogeology and redox geochemistry of CH4 in a late
Wisconsinian till and loess sequence in central Iowa. Water Resources Research, v. 29, p. 3643-3657.
Sloto, R.A. (2013). Baseline groundwater quality from 20 domestic wells in Sullivan County,
Pennsylvania, 2012. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2013-5085, 27 pp.
Smedley, P.L and Kinniburgh, D.G. (2002). A review of the source, behavior and distribution of arsenic
in natural waters. Applied Geochemistry, v. 17, p. 517-568.
Smith, J.A., Witkowski, P.J., and Fussilo, T.V. (1988). Manmade organic compounds in the surface waters
of the United States - A review of current understanding. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1007, 104 pp.
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (2012). Checking Analyses'
Correctness, Section 1030E, 22nd Edition, American Public Health Association, Washington, DC, p. 1-23
to 1-24.
Stumm, W. and Morgan, J.J. (1996). Aquatic Chemistry: Chemical Equilibria and Rates in Natural Waters,
3rd Edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York.
Taulis, M. and Milke, M. (2013). Chemical variability of groundwater samples collected from a coal seam
gas exploration well, Maramarua, New Zealand. Water Research, v. 47, p. 1021-1034.
Taylor, S.W., Sherwood-Lollar, B., and Wassenaar, L.I. (2000). Bacterogenic ethane in near-surface
aquifers: Implications for leaking hydrocarbon well bores. Environmental Science and Technology, v. 34,
p. 4727-4732.
Toran, L. (1982). Isotopes in ground-water investigations. Ground Water, v. 20, p. 740-745.
U.S. Census Bureau (2012). Population Division Table 3. Cumulative Estimates of Resident Population
Change for the United States, States, Counties, Puerto Rico, and Puerto Rico Municipios: April 1, 2010 to
July 1, 2011 (MAPS-EST2011-03). Available at:
httj3j//wwwx^^ Accessed on October 31,
2013.
105
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (1983). Soil survey of Greene and Washington Counties,
Pennsylvania.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (1977). Impact of abandoned wells on ground water,
EPA/600/3-77-095.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1992). Guidance for data usability in risk assessment (Part A).
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, 9285.7-09A.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1995). Establishing background levels, EPA/540/F-94/030.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2000a). Stressor identification guidance document,
EPA/822/BOO/025.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2000b). Assigning values to non-detected/non-quantified
pesticide residues in human health food exposure assessments. Office of Pesticide Programs.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2002). Workshop on monitoring oxidation-reduction processes
for ground-water restoration, EPA/600/R-02/002.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2010a). Science Advisory Board Staff Office; Notification of a
public meeting of the Science Advisory Board; Environmental Engineering Committee augmented for the
evaluation and comment on EPA's Proposed Research Approach for Studying the Potential Relationships
Between Hydraulic Fracturing and Drinking Water Resources. In Federal Register 75, No. 052, p. 13125.
March 28, 2010.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2010b). ProUCL version 4.1 user guide: Statistical software for
environmental applications for datasets with and without nondetect observations, EPA/600/R-07/041.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2011a). Draft plan to study the potential impacts of hydraulic
fracturing on drinking water resources, EPA/600/D-11/001. February 2011.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2011b). Plan to study the potential impacts of hydraulic
fracturing on drinking water resources, EPA/600/R-11/122. November 2011.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2012). Study of the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on
drinking water resources. Progress Report. EPA/601/R-12/011. December 2012.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2013). Summary of the technical workshop on case studies to
assess potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources, Workshop held July 30,
2013. Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-ll/documents/summarv-case-
studies-technical-workshop-20130730.pdf.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (2003). Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources of the
Appalachian Basin Province, 2002. U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-009-03.
U.S. Geological Survey (2012a). The National Land Cover Database. Available at
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2012/3020/fs2012-3020.pdf. Accessed on October 25, 2013.
106
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
U.S. Geological Survey (2012b). Landscape consequences of natural gas extraction in Bradford and
Washington Counties, Pennsylvania, 2004-2010. Available at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1154/of2012-1154.pdf. Accessed on November 6, 2013.
U.S. Geological Survey (2013a). National Water Information System. Available at
http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis. Accessed on August 1, 2013.
U.S. Geological Survey (2013b). National Uranium Resource Evaluation. Available at
http://mrdata.usgs.gov/nure/water. Accessed on August 1, 2013.
U.S. House of Representatives (2011). Chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing. United States House of
Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce, prepared for Waxman, H.A., Markey, E.J., and
DeGette, D. Available at:
http://democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Hvdraulic-Fracturing-
Chemicals-2011-4-18.pdf. Accessed on September I, 2013.
Veatch, R.W., Moschovidis, Z.A., and Fast, C.R. (1989). An overview of hydraulic fracturing. In Recent
Advances in Hydraulic Fracturing, edited byJ.L Gidley, S.A. Holditch, D.E. Nierode, and R.W. Veatch.
Society of Petroleum Engineers, Monograph Volume 12, Richardson, TX, p. 1-38.
Vengosh, A., Jackson, R.B., Warner, N., Darrah, T.H., and Kondash, A. (2014). A critical review of the risks
to water resources from unconventional shale gas development and hydraulic fracturing in the United
States. Environmental Science and Technology, v. 48, p. 8334-8348.
Vidic, R.D., Brantley, S.L., Vandenbossche, J.M., Yoxtheimer, D., and Abad, J.D. (2013). Impact of shale
gas development on regional water quality. Science, v. 340(6134): 1235009.
Wagner, W.R. (1969). Representative gamma-ray logs from shallow and deep wells, western
Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geological Survey, Fourth Series Progress Report 178.
Waldron, S., Lansdown, J.M., Scott, E.M., Fallick, A.E., and Hall, A.J. (1999). The global influence of the
hydrogen isotope composition of water on that of bacteriogenic methane from shallow freshwater
environments. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 63, p. 2237-2245.
Walter, D.A. (1997). Geochemistry and microbiology of iron-related well-screen encrustation and
aquifer biofouling in Suffolk County, Long Island, New York. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources
Investigations Report 97-4032, 37 pp.
Warner, N.R., Jackson, R.B., Darrah, T.H., Osborn, S.G., Down, A., Zhao, K., White, A., and Vengosh, A.
(2012). Geochemical evidence for possible natural migration of Marcellus Formation brine to shallow
aquifers in Pennsylvania. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 109, p. 11961-11966.
Washington County (2005). Washington County Comprehensive Plan. Available at
http://www.co.Washington.pa.us/index.aspx?NID=172. Accessed on October 28, 2013.
Wess, J., Ahlers, H., and Dobson, S. (1998). Concise international chemical assessment document 10: 2-
butoxyethanol. Prepared for the United Nations Environment Programme, International Labour
Organisation and the World Health Organization.
107
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Whiticar, M.J. (1999). Carbon and hydrogen isotope systematics of bacterial formation and oxidation of
methane. Chemical Geology, v. 161, p. 291-314.
Whiticar, M.J., Faber, E., and Schoell, M. (1986). Biogenic methane formation in marine and freshwater
environments: CO2 reduction vs. acetate fermentation - isotope evidence. Geochimica et Cosmochimica
Acta, v. 50, p. 693-709.
Wilkin, R.T. (2013). Hydraulic fracturing case study, Marcellus Shale, Washington County, PA, version 3.
Quality Assurance Project Plan (dated August 29, 2013). Available at:
http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-
11/documents/hydraulic fracturing retrospective case study marcellus shale Washington county pa
revision 3.pdf.
Williams, D.R., Felbinger, J.K., and Squillace, P.J. (1993). Water resources and the hydrologic effects of
coal mining in Washington County, Pennsylvania. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-620, 226
pp.
Williams, D.D., Williams, N.E., and Cao, Y. (1999). Road salt contamination of groundwater in a major
metropolitan area and development of a biological index to monitor its impact. Water Research, v. 34,
p. 127-138.
Wilson, J.M., Wang, Y., and VanBriesen, J.M. (2014). Sources of high total dissolved solids to drinking
water supply in southwestern Pennsylvania. Journal of Environmental Engineering, v. 140, B4014003-1.
Yeskis, D. and Zavala, B. (2002). Ground-water sampling guidelines for Superfund and RCRA project
managers. Ground Water Issue Paper, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, EPA/542/S-02/001.
Zogorski, J.S., Carter, J.M., Ivahnenko, T., Lapham, W.W., Moran, M.J., Rowe, B.L, Squillace, P.J., and
Toccalino, P.L (2006). Volatile organic compounds in the nation's ground water and drinking-water
supply wells. U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment Program Circular 1292, 112 pp.
108
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix A
QA/QC Summary
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/084
A-l
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Table of Contents
Table of Contents A-2
List of Tables A-3
A.I. Introduction A-5
A.I.I. July 2011 Sampling Event A-5
A.I.2. March 2012 Sampling Event A-5
A.I.3. May 2013 Sampling Event A-5
A.2. Chain of Custody A-6
A.2.1. July 2011 Sampling A-6
A.2.2. March 2012 Sampling A-6
A.2.3. May 2013 Sampling A-6
A.3. Holding Times A-7
A.3.1. July 2011 Sampling A-7
A.3.2. March 2012 Sampling A-7
A.3.3. May 2013 Sampling A-7
A.4. Blank Samples Collected During Sampling A-7
A.4.1. July 2011 Sampling A-8
A.4.2. March 2012 Sampling A-8
A.4.3. May 2013 Sampling A-9
A.5. Field Duplicate Samples A-10
A.5.1. All Sampling Events A-10
A.6. Laboratory QA/QC Results and Data Usability Summary A-ll
A.7. Double-lab Comparisons A-ll
A.8. Performance Evaluation Samples A-ll
A.9. QAPP Additions and Deviations A-ll
A.10. Field QA/QC A-12
A.ll. Data Qualifiers A-13
A. 12. Tentatively Identified Compounds A-14
A.13. Audits of Data Quality A-14
A.M. Laboratory Technical System Audits A-15
A.15. Field TSAs A-15
A-2
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
List of Tables
Table Al. Sample containers, preservation, and holding times for water samples A-17
Table A2. Field QC samples for ground water and surface water analysis A-21
Table A3. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Blanks A-22
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks A-24
Table A5. Total Metal Blanks A-30
Table A6. Volatile Organic Compound Blanks A-36
Table A7. Low Molecular Weight Acid Blanks A-45
Table A8. Dissolved Gas Blanks A-46
Table A9. Glycol Blanks A-47
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks A-48
Table All. DRO/GRO Blanks A-62
Table A12. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, Ra-226, and Ra-228 Blanks A-63
Table A13. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Duplicates A-64
Table A14. Dissolved Metal Duplicates A-65
Table A15. Total Metal Duplicates A-68
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates A-71
Table A17. Low Molecular Weight Acid Duplicates A-79
Table A18. Dissolved Gas Duplicates A-80
Table A19. Glycol Duplicates A-81
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates A-82
Table A21. DRO/GRO Duplicates A-96
Table A22. O and H Stable Isotopes of Water Duplicates A-97
Table A23. Carbon and Hydrogen Isotopes of DIG and Methane Duplicates A-98
Table A24. Strontium Isotope Duplicates A-99
Table A25. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, and Radium Isotope Duplicates A-100
Table A26. Data Usability Summary1 A-101
A-3
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Table A27. Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements A-116
Table A28. Data Qualifiers and Data Descriptors A-120
Table A29. Tentatively Identified Compounds (TICs) for SVOCs A-121
A-4
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
A.I. Introduction
This Appendix describes general Quality Assurance (QA) practices and the results of Quality Control (QC)
samples, including discussion of chain of custody (COC), holding times, blank results, field duplicate
results, laboratory QA/QC results, data usability, double lab comparisons, performance evaluation
samples, Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) additions and deviations, field QA/QC, application of
data qualifiers, tentatively identified compounds (TICs), Audits of Data Quality (ADQ), and field and
laboratory Technical System Audits (TSAs). All reported data for the Retrospective Case Study in
Southwestern Pennsylvania met project requirements unless otherwise indicated by the application of
data qualifiers in the final data summaries (see Appendix B). In rare cases, data were rejected as
unusable and not reported.
A.1.1. July 2011 Sampling Event
The sampling and analytical activities for the July 2011 sampling event were conducted under a QAPP
titled "Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Marcellus Shale, Washington County, PA," version
0 approved on July 21, 2011. Deviations from this QAPP are described in Section A9. Twelve domestic
wells, one spring, and three surface water locations were sampled during this event. A total of 340
samples were collected and delivered to six laboratories for analysis: Shaw Environmental, Ada, OK; EPA
Office of Research and Development/National Risk Management Research Laboratory (ORD/NRMRL),
Ada OK; EPA Region 8, Golden, CO; EPA Region 3, Fort Meade, MD; Isotech Laboratories, Inc.,
Champaign, IL; and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Laboratory, Denver, CO. Measurements were made
for over 225 analytes per sample location. Of the 340 samples, 78 samples (23%) were QC samples
including blanks, field duplicates, matrix spikes, and matrix spike duplicates.
A.1.2. March 2012 Sampling Event
The sampling and analytical activities for the March 2012 sampling event were conducted under a QAPP
titled "Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Marcellus Shale, Washington County, PA," version
1 approved on March 5, 2012. Specific changes made to the quality assurance documentation are
described in the revised QAPP. Deviations from this QAPP are described in Section A9. An Addendum to
version 1 approved on November 30, 2012 was prepared to document QC acceptance criteria for the
reanalysis of samples for metals collected during the March 2012 sampling event. Ten domestic wells,
three springs, and two surface water locations were sampled during this event. A total of 435 samples
were collected and delivered to eight laboratories for analysis: Shaw Environmental, Ada, OK; EPA
ORD/NRMRL, Ada OK; EPA Region 8, Golden, CO; EPA Region 3, Fort Meade, MD; Isotech Laboratories,
Inc., Champaign, IL; ALS Environmental, Fort Collins, CO; USGS Laboratory, Denver, CO; and A4 Scientific,
Inc., The Woodlands, TX. Measurements were made for over 230 analytes per sample location. Of the
435 samples, 135 samples (31%) were QC samples including blanks, field duplicates, matrix spikes, and
matrix spike duplicates.
A.I.3. May 2013 Sampling Event
The sampling and analytical activities for the May 2013 sampling event were conducted under a QAPP
titled "Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Marcellus Shale, Washington County, PA," version
2 approved on April 22, 2013. Specific changes made to the quality assurance documentation are
A-5
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
described in the revised QAPP. Deviations from the QAPP are described in Section A9. Eleven domestic
wells, two springs, and two surface water locations were sampled during this event. A total of 529
samples were collected and delivered to eight laboratories for analysis: CB&I, Ada, OK; EPA
ORD/NRMRL, Ada OK; SWRI, San Antonio, TX; EPA Region 8, Golden, CO; EPA Region 3, Fort Meade, MD;
Isotech Laboratories, Inc., Champaign, IL; ALS Environmental, Fort Collins, CO; and USGS Laboratory,
Denver, CO. Note that the Shaw Environmental Laboratory name changed to CB&I for the final round of
sampling (same laboratory equipment, procedures, and staff). Measurements were made for over 235
analytes per sample location. Of the 529 samples, 222 samples (42%) were QC samples including blanks,
field duplicates, matrix spikes, and matrix spike duplicates.
A final version of the QAPP titled "Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Marcellus Shale,
Washington County, PA," version 3 was approved on August 29, 2013. The QAPP is available at:
http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-ll/documents/hydraulic fracturing retrospective
case study marcellus shale Washington county pa revision 3.pdf.
A.2. Chain of Custody
Sample types, bottle types, sample preservation methods, analyte holding times, and the laboratories
that received samples for analysis are listed in Table Al. Samples collected in the field were packed on
ice into coolers for shipment by overnight delivery along with completed COC documents and
temperature blank containers. In general, all samples collected in the field were successfully delivered
to the laboratories responsible for conducting the analyses. The following sections describe any noted
issues related to the sample shipments and potential impacts on data quality.
A.2.1. July 2011 Sampling
One cooler, delivered to the Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Center (Ada, Oklahoma), was
received without attached custody seals. This cooler included samples SWPAGW11, SWPAGW12,
SWPAGW12dup, SWPAGW13, and a field blank collected on July 28, 2011. The analytical suites included
with these samples were: metals, dissolved gases, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), low-molecular-
weight acids, anions, nutrients, dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC)/dissolved organic carbon (DOC), and
water isotopes. There is no expected impact on data quality for these parameters in the noted samples.
One cooler sent to the EPA Region 3 Laboratory for glycol analysis containing samples from locations
SWPAGW11, SWPAGW12, SWPAGW12dup, SWPAGW13 and a field blank arrived at the laboratory at a
temperature of 17°C due to a delay in shipment. Glycols were not detected in any of the samples; these
samples were qualified with the "J-" qualifier as estimated with a potential low bias. Some samples for
Diesel Range Organics (DRO) analysis were not at the pH<2 preservation criterion; affected samples
were qualified with the "J-" qualifier as estimated.
A.2.2. March 2012 Sampling
There were no noted issues related to COCs, temperature blanks, or preservation.
A.2.3. May 2013 Sampling
There were no noted issues related to COCs, temperature blanks, or preservation.
A-6
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
A.3. Holding Times
Holding times are the length of time a sample can be stored after collection and prior to analysis without
significantly affecting the analytical results. Holding times vary with the analyte, sample matrix, and
analytical methodology. Sample holding times for the various analyses conducted in this investigation
are listed in Table Al and range from 7 days to 6 months. Generally, estimated analyte concentrations
for samples with holding time exceedances are considered to be biased low.
A.3.1. July 2011 Sampling
Glycol samples collected on 7/25/2011 and 7/26/2011 exceeded the 14-day holding time by 24 to 48
hours for diethylene glycol, triethylene glycol, and tetraethylene glycol. Affected samples were qualified
with the "H" qualifier. Glycols were not detected in any of the samples during this event.
A.3.2. March 2012 Sampling
All samples met holding times.
A.3.3. May 2013 Sampling
All samples met holding times.
A.4. Blank Samples Collected During Sampling
An extensive series of blank samples was collected during all sampling events, including field blanks,
equipment blanks, and trip blanks (Table A2). These quality control samples were intended to test for
possible bias from potential sources of contamination during field sample collection, equipment
cleaning, sample bottle transportation to and from the field, and laboratory procedures. The same
source water was used for the preparation of all blank samples (Barnstead NANOpure Diamond UV
water). Field blanks were collected to evaluate potential contamination from sample bottles and
environmental sources. Equipment blanks were collected to determine whether cleaning procedures or
sample equipment (filters, fittings, and tubing) potentially contributed to analyte detections. Trip blanks
consisted of sealed serum bottles and VOA vials filled with NANOpure water. Trip blanks were used to
evaluate whether VOA vials and dissolved gas serum bottles were contaminated during sample storage,
sampling, or shipment to and from the field. All analyses have associated field and equipment blanks,
except isotope ratio analyses for which no blank sampling schemes are appropriate. Sample bottle
types, preservation, and holding times were applied to blank samples in the same way as they were
applied to field samples (see Table Al).
The following criteria were used for flagging samples with potential blank contamination. Sample
contamination was considered significant if analyte concentrations in blanks were above the method
Quantitation Limit (QL) and if the analyte was present in an associated field sample at a level <10x the
concentration in the blank. In cases where both the sample and its associated laboratory, equipment,
field, or trip blank were between the Method Detection Limit (MDL) and the QL, the sample data were
reported as less than the QL with a "U" qualifier. Blank samples were associated to field samples by
dates of collection; for example, most sample shipments included both field samples and blank samples
that were used for blank assessments. Results of blank analyses are reported in Tables A3-A12. In
general, field blank samples were free from detections of a vast majority of analytes examined in this
A-7
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
study. The following sections describe instances where blank detections were noted and potential
impacts on data quality and usability. As previously stated, a majority of these blanks were free from
detections or were less than the QL, and in these cases, the sample data are not affected and are not
discussed in the following sections.
A.4.1. July 2011 Sampling
Nitrate was reported in one equipment blank collected on 7/27/2011 (see Table A3); several affected
samples were qualified with the "B" qualifier as estimated, but in all cases the field samples showed
higher levels of nitrate than were measured in the equipment blank.
There were detectable concentrations of toluene in one trip blank dated 7/21/2011 and one field blank
collected on 7/26/2011 (see Table A6). Due to the trip blank detection above the QL, the results for two
samples were qualified with the "B" qualifier: SWPAGW04 and SWPASW01.
For the low-molecular-weight acids, acetate was found to be a significant contaminant in the field and
equipment blanks; consequently, the acetate data were rejected (see Table A7). The source of acetate
contamination was later determined to be the preservative.
One equipment blank collected on 7/27/11 for semi-volatile organic compound (SVOC) analysis had
blank detection of 2-butoxyethanol above the QL of 0.50 u.g/L (see Table A10). This blank detection
affected three samples: SWPAGW08, SWPAGW10, and SWPASW03, which were qualified. Other
samples analyzed for 2-butoxyethanol were above the QL and not qualified; however, all 2-
butoxyethanol detections in this set of data are suspect due to the high level detected in the equipment
blank, i.e., the concentration detected in the equipment blank was higher than any detected level in the
samples. The source of this contamination appears to be from the sampling equipment or containers,
although other sources cannot be ruled out.
For gasoline range organic (GRO) samples, all field blanks had detectable concentrations (see Table All).
However, with the exception of SWPASW01, all field GRO samples were less than the QL, so no impact
to the data is suggested for these samples. In the case of SWPASW01, the sample was qualified for
GRO.
A.4.2. March 2012 Sampling
Two field blanks and one equipment blank had concentrations of nitrate + nitrite above the QL. These
blank detections resulted in the application of several "B" qualifiers to the nitrate + nitrite concentration
data; the source of this contamination is unknown, but in general, concentrations of nitrate + nitrite
were greater in the samples compared to levels in the blanks with detections above the QL.
There were numerous detections in blank samples submitted for inductively coupled plasma mass
spectrometry (ICP-MS) analysis by the EPA Superfund Analytical Services Contract Laboratory Program
(CLP) laboratory, including dissolved and total aluminum (Al), total cadmium (Cd), total chromium (Cr),
dissolved and total copper (Cu), dissolved and total nickel (Ni), and total lead (Pb) (see Tables A4 and
A5). In one case, the total Cd concentration in a field blank was 134 u.g/L. These blank detections were
likely related to laboratory contamination and in only one case (for dissolved Ni) did these detections
A-8
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
have an impact on data quality because concentrations of these elements in the samples were negligible
and below the QL
Formate and propionate were identified at detectable concentrations in some of the blank samples (see
Table A7). In the case of formate, all blank samples had significant concentrations and consequently
formate data were rejected. Propionate was detected at concentrations above the QL in a field blank
and an equipment blank, affecting one sample which was qualified with a "B." Follow-up studies
indicated that the likely source of contamination for formate was from the sample containers. Formate
was not reported in the last round of sampling for this reason.
For SVOC analytes, there was a single detection above the QL of bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate in a field
blank collected on 3/24/2013 (see Table A10). There was no impact on data quality because none of the
samples had detectable concentrations of this chemical.
There was a detection of DRO at the QL in one of the equipment blanks (see Table All). Two samples
were affected and qualified with a "B." For GRO, several blanks had concentrations above the QL;
however, there was no impact on data quality because none of the samples contained levels of GRO
above the QL.
A.4.3. May 2013 Sampling
Several equipment blanks and one field blank had detections of DOC both above and below the QL (see
Table A3). The blanks above the QL resulted in the qualification of several samples with the "B"
qualifier. One equipment blank for Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) collected on 5/17/2013 showed a
detection above the QL; this impacted two samples that were qualified with the "B" qualifier.
There were low level detections, both above and below the QL, in equipment and/or field blanks of
dissolved Al, calcium (Ca), cobalt (Co), Cr, Cu, iron (Fe), Pb, Si, Sr, titanium (Ti), and zinc (Zn) (see Table
A4). In most cases, these detections had no impact on data quality, with the exceptions of certain
samples for dissolved Al, dissolved Cu, and dissolved Pb that had the "B" qualifier applied. For total
metals, there were detections in field and equipment blanks for total arsenic (As), Ca, Cu, Fe, sodium
(Na), Pb, selenium (Se), Si, Sr, thorium (Th), Ti, vanadium (V), and Zn (see Table A5). Those with
detections greater than the QL led to the application of the "B" qualifier for some samples for total As,
Cu, Pb, V, and Zn. The source of this contamination is likely the laboratory.
For SVOC analytes, there was a single detection above the QL of bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate in a field
blank collected on 5/18/2013 (see Table A10). There was no impact on data quality because none of the
affected samples had detectable concentrations of this chemical.
DRO was detected above the QL in one equipment blank collected on 5/20/2013; this detection
impacted none of the samples because DRO detections were not observed in any samples collected on
that date.
A-9
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
A.5. Field Duplicate Samples
Field duplicate samples were collected to measure the reproducibility and precision of field sampling
and analytical procedures. The relative percent difference (RPD) was calculated to compare
concentration differences between the primary (sample 1) and duplicate sample (sample 2) using the
following equation:
RPD(%)=X\6S
2 x (sample 1 - sample 2)
(sample 1 + sample 2)
100
RPDs were calculated when the constituents in both the primary sample and duplicate sample were >5x
the method QLs. Sample results were qualified if RPDs were >30%. The results of field duplicate
analyses are provided in Tables A13-A25.
A.5.1. All Sampling Events
The only parameters that required qualification based on RPDs not meeting the 30% criterion were total
Fe and total Mn in the May 2013 sampling event. RPDs for one of the field duplicate pairs
(SWPAGW04/SWPAGW04d) were 32.0% and 32.5%, respectively, for these analytes. Overall
reproducibility of the multiple field duplicates was very good as shown on the cumulative percent
diagram below (Figure Al). RPD values of field duplicates from the first two rounds of sampling follow a
similar pattern, with 100% of the calculated RPD values less than 10%. Over 65% of the duplicate
analyses agreed to within 1%. During the third round of sampling, additional ICP-MS analyses were
completed. These analyses of trace metals tended to have overall higher RPD values. The third round of
sampling showed that over 90% of the duplicates agreed to within 15%.
120
u
•Round 3
•Round 2
Round 1
Figure Al. Cumulative % diagram showing the percent agreement of duplicate samples collected during the
three rounds of sampling for this case study.
A-10
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
A.6. Laboratory QA/QC Results and Data Usability Summary
The QA/QC requirements for laboratory analyses conducted as part of this case study are provided in
the QAPPs. Table A26 summarizes laboratory QA/QC results identified during sample analysis, such as
laboratory duplicate analysis, laboratory blank analysis, matrix spike results, calibration, continuing
calibration checks, and field QC. Impacts on data quality and usability, as well as any issues noted in the
QA/QC results, are presented in Table A26. Data qualifiers are listed in Table A28. Many of the specific
QA/QC observations noted in the Audits of Data Quality are summarized in Table A26.
A majority of the reported data met project requirements. Data that did not meet QA/QC requirements
specified in the QAPP are indicated by the application of data qualifiers in the final data summaries (see
Appendix B). Data determined to be unusable were rejected and qualified with an "R." Depending on
the data qualifier, data usability is affected to varying degrees. For example, data qualified with a "B"
would not be appropriate to use when the sample concentration is relatively close to the blank
concentration. But as the sample data increase in concentration and approach lOx the blank
concentration, they may be more appropriate to use. Data with a "J" flag are usable with the
understanding that the concentration is approximate, but the analyte is positively identified. A "J+" or
"J-" qualifier indicates a potential positive or negative bias, respectively. An "H" qualifier, for exceeding
sample holding time, is considered a negative bias. An "*" indicates that the data are less precise than
project requirements. Each case is evaluated to determine the extent that data are usable or not (see
Table A26).
A.7. Double-lab Comparisons
No double-lab comparisons were conducted for this case study.
A.8. Performance Evaluation Samples
A series of performance evaluation (PE) samples were analyzed by the laboratories conducting critical
analyses to support the Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Studies. The PE samples were analyzed
as part of the normal QA/QC standard operating procedures, and in the case of certified laboratories, as
part of the certification process and to maintain certification for that laboratory. The results of the PE
tests are presented in tabular form in the Wise County, Texas Retrospective Case Study QA/QC Appendix
and not repeated here. These tables show the results of 1354 tests; 98.6% of the reported values fell
within the acceptance range. For the ORD/NRMRL Laboratory a total of 95 tests were performed with
96.9% of the reported values falling within the acceptable range. Similarly, for the Shaw Environmental
Laboratory, a total of 835 tests were performed, with 98.7% of the reported values falling within the
acceptable range. The EPA Region 8 Laboratory had a total of 424 tests performed with 98.8% of the
reported values falling within the acceptable range. These PE sample results demonstrate the high
quality of the analytical data reported here. Analytes not falling within the acceptable range were
examined, and corrective action was undertaken to ensure data quality in future analysis.
A.9. QAPP Additions and Deviations
The July 2011 sampling was conducted using the "Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study,
Marcellus Shale, Washington County, PA" revision 0 QAPP. The March 2012 sampling was conducted
A-ll
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
using "Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Marcellus Shale, Washington County, PA" revision
1 QAPP. The May 2013 sampling was conducted using the "Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case
Study, Marcellus Shale, Washington County, PA" revision 2 QAPP.
During the first two sampling events several field and equipment blanks were not collected as described
in the QAPP. In cases when a particular blank was not collected on a day of sampling, blank results from
the previous day were used to evaluate application of qualifiers in situations where there were
detections in the blank samples. There was no expected impact on data quality resulting from this QAPP
deviation. As described previously, blank contamination issues did not impact a vast majority of the
analytes determined for this case study.
An additional deviation from planned analyses described in the QAPP was that all of the ICP-MS metals
data were not reported from the July 2011 sampling event. These data were not reported because of
concerns about the data quality and because the samples could not be re-analyzed within the specified
sample holding time. Instead, ICP-OES data were reported for the ICP-MS metals As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb,
and Se. ICP-MS data were collected for the March 2012 and May 2013 sampling events. In general, the
ICP-OES trace metal data cannot be compared with the subsequent ICP-MS data due to the large
differences in QLs and MDLs for the ICP-OES and ICP-MS methods, respectively. Therefore, trace metal
evaluations only consider data collected during the last two sampling events. Information about the
concentrations of As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Se from the first round of sampling is considered to be for
screening-level evaluation.
Analysis of the original ICP-MS results for the March 2012 sampling event indicated that the laboratory
did not analyze interference check solutions (ICSs) as described in EPA Method 6020A. These ICSs would
have enabled the laboratory to evaluate the analytical method's ability to appropriately handle known
potential interferences and other matrix effects. In ICP-MS analysis, the ICS is used to verify that
interference levels are corrected by the data system within quality control limits. Because of the
importance of this missing quality control check, it was deemed necessary to reject the data from the
original analysis. Because samples were within the method holding time, reanalysis was conducted by
the EPA Superfund Analytical Services CLP for Al, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, Sb, Se, Th, Tl, and uranium (U) by
ICP-MS. This additional work was completed under an Addendum to revision 1 of the QAPP. The CLP
ICP-MS data were reported for both dissolved and total metals for the metals listed above for the
samples collected during the March 2012 sampling event.
A.10. Field QA/QC
A YSI Model 556 electrode and flow-cell assembly was used to measure temperature, specific
conductance, pH, oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), and dissolved oxygen. YSI electrodes were
calibrated in the morning of each sampling day. Performance checks were conducted after initial
calibration, midday and at the end of each day. NIST-traceable buffer solutions (4.00, 7.00 and/or
10.01) were used for pH calibration and for continuing checks. Orion ORP standard was used for
calibration of redox potential measurements. Oakton conductivity standard was used for calibration of
specific conductance measurements. Dissolved oxygen sensors were calibrated with air and checked
with zero-oxygen solutions to ensure good performance at low oxygen levels. Table A27 provides the
A-12
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
results of initial, midday and end-of-the-day performance checks. Prior to field deployment, the
electrode assembly and meter were checked to confirm good working order. Field performance checks
were within acceptance limits (Table A27).
Field parameters for this case study consisted of turbidity, alkalinity, total dissolved sulfide species
(ZH2S), and ferrous iron. Because field measurements of ferrous iron and dissolved sulfide sometimes
required dilution and because all sample preparations and measurements were made in an uncontrolled
environment (i.e., the field), concentration data for these parameters are qualified in all cases as
estimated. Turbidity was measured using a Hach 2100Q Portable Turbimeter and was calibrated using a
Hach 2100QStablCal Calibration Set. The Hach 2100QStablCal Calibration Set consists of the 20
nephelometric turbidity unit (NTU), 100 NTU, and 800 NTU standards with a 10 NTU calibration
verification standard. For alkalinity measurements, a Hach Model AL-DT Digital Titrator was used. The
total dissolved sulfide and ferrous iron measurements were collected using Hach DR2700 and DR890
spectrometers, respectively. The equipment used for measuring alkalinity, total dissolved sulfide
species, and ferrous iron was tested in the lab prior to field deployment using known standards. In the
field, a blank sample was measured to confirm that no cross contamination occurred. This was also the
case for turbidity; however, a 10 NTU standard was also used to verify the calibration.
A.11. Data Qualifiers
Data qualifiers and their definitions are listed in Table A28. Many factors can impact the quality of data
reported for environmental samples, including factors related to sample collection in the field, transport
of samples to laboratories, and the analyses conducted by various laboratories. The list of qualifiers in
Table A28 is based on the Data Qualifier Definitions presented in the EPA CLP National Functional
Guidelines for Superfund Organic Methods Data Review (USEPA/540/R-01, 2008), and the EPA CLP
National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Inorganic Methods Data Review (USEPA/540/R/10/011,
2010), with the addition of data qualifiers "H" and "B", which are necessary for communicating issues
that occur during analysis in laboratories not bound by the CLP statement of work. The "R" qualifier is
used in cases where it was determined that data needed to be rejected. Data rejection can occur for
many reasons, which must be explained in QA/QC narratives. Conditions regarding the application of
qualifiers include:
• If the analyte was not detected, then it was reported as QL).
A-13
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
A.12. Tentatively Identified Compounds
The EPA Region 8 Laboratory reported tentatively identified compounds (TICs) from SVOC analyses.
Several SVOC TICs were identified in samples and blanks (see Table A29). To be identified as a TIC, a
peak had to have an area at least 10% as large as the area of the nearest internal standard and a match
quality greater than 80. The TIC match quality is based on the number and ratio of the major
fragmentation ions. A perfect match has a value of 99. Although the TIC report is essentially a
qualitative report, an estimated concentration was calculated based on a response factor of 1.00 and
the area of the nearest internal standard. The search for TICs included the whole chromatogram from
approximately 3.0 to 41.0 minutes for SVOCs. TICs are compounds that can be detected, but, without
the analysis of standards, cannot be confirmed or reliably quantified. Oftentimes, TICs are
representative of a class of compounds rather than indicating a specific compound. Only the top TIC
was reported for each peak.
A.13. Audits of Data Quality
An Audit of Data Quality (ADQ) was performed for each sampling event per EPA's NRMRL standard
operating procedure (SOP), "Performing Audits of Data Quality (ADQs)," to verify that the requirements
of the QAPP were properly implemented for the analysis of critical analytes for samples submitted to
laboratories identified in the QAPP associated with this project. The ADQs were performed by a QA
support contractor, Neptune and Company, Inc., and reviewed by NRMRL QA staff. NRMRL QA staff
provided the ADQ results to the project Principal Investigator for response and assisted in the
implementation of corrective actions. The ADQ process is an important element of Category I (highest
of four levels in EPA ORD) Quality Assurance Projects, which this study operated under for all aspects of
ground water and surface water sample collection and analysis.
Complete data packages were provided to the auditors for the July 2011, March 2012, and May 2013
sampling events. A complete data package consisted of the following: sample information; method
information; data summary; laboratory reports; raw data, including QC results; and data qualifiers. The
QAPP was used to identify data quality indicator requirements and goals, and a checklist was prepared
based on the types of data collected. The data packages were reviewed against the checklist by tracing
a representative set of the data in detail from raw data and instrument readouts through data
transcription or transference through data manipulation (either manually or electronically by
commercial or customized software) and through data reduction to summary data, data calculations,
and final reported data. All calibration and QA/QC data were reviewed for all available data packages.
Data summary spreadsheets prepared by the Principal Investigator were also reviewed to determine
whether data had been accurately transcribed from lab summary reports and appropriately qualified
based on lab and field QC results.
The ADQ focused on the critical analytes, as identified in revision 3 of the QAPP. These are GRO; DRO;
VOCs including alcohols (naphthalene, acrylonitrile, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, ethanol,
isopropyl alcohol and tert butyl alcohol); trace elements [As, Se, Sr, barium (Ba), and boron (B)]; major
cations [Ca, magnesium (Mg), Na, and potassium (K)]; and major anions (chloride, nitrate + nitrite,
sulfate). Also included in the ADQ were the glycols and all metals analyzed. The non-conformances
A-14
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
identified in an ADQmay consist of the following categories: finding (a deficiency that has or may have a
significant effect on the quality of the reported results; a corrective action response is required), or
observation (a deficiency that does not have a significant effect on the quality of the reported results; a
corrective action response is required). The ADQ for the July 2011 sampling event noted a series of five
observations; the March 2012 sampling event had two findings and six observations; the March 2012
CLP ICP-MS metals analysis had two findings and three observations; and, the May 2013 event had eight
observations. The ADQ findings and observations that had an impact on data quality and usability are
found in Table A26 along with the corrective actions taken and data qualifications. All findings and
observations were resolved through corrective actions.
A.14. Laboratory Technical System Audits
Laboratory Technical Systems Audits (TSAs) were conducted early in the project to allow for
identification and correction of any issues that may affect data quality. Laboratory TSAs focused on the
critical target analytes. Laboratory TSAs were conducted on-site at the ORD/NRMRL Laboratory and
Shaw Environmental [both laboratories are located at the Robert S. Kerr Research Center, Ada, OK] and
at the EPA Region 8 Laboratory (Golden, CO) which analyzed for SVOCs, DRO and GRO. Detailed
checklists, based on the procedures and requirements specified in the QAPP, related SOPs, and EPA
Methods, were prepared and used during the TSAs. These audits were conducted with contract support
from Neptune and Co., with oversight by NRMRL QA Staff. The QA Manager tracked implementation
and completion of any necessary corrective actions. The TSAs took place in July 2011. The TSAs found
good QA practices in place at each laboratory. There were no findings and six observations across the
three laboratories audited. All observations were resolved through corrective actions. The observations
had no impact on the sample data quality.
A.15. Field TSAs
For Category 1 QA projects, TSAs are conducted on both field and laboratory activities. Detailed
checklists, based on the procedures and requirements specified in the QAPP, SOPs, and EPA Methods
were prepared and used during the TSAs. The field TSA took place during the second sampling event in
March 2012 (audit date: March 26, 2012). The sample collection, documentation, field measurements
(and calibration), and sample handling were performed according to the QAPP. No findings and two
observations were noted in the field TSA related to sample labeling and collection of dissolved gas
samples. All observations were resolved through corrective actions. There was no impact on the sample
data quality.
A-15
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix A Tables
A-16
-------
A-17
Table Al. Sample containers, preservation, and holding times for water samples.
Sample Type
Dissolved gases
Dissolved Metals (Filtered)
Dissolved Metals (Filtered)
Dissolved Hg (Filtered)
Total Metals (Unfiltered)
Total Metals (Unfiltered)
Total Hg (Unfiltered)
Analysis Method (Lab Method)
Shaw Environmental3: No EPA
Method (RSKSOP-194v4 &-175v5)
Shaw Environmental: EPA
Methods 200.7 & 6020A (RSKSOP-
213v4&-257v2or-332vO)
EPA Region 7 RASP Contract
Southwest Research Institute:
EPA Methods 200.7 & 6020A
EPA Region 7 RASP Contract
Southwest Research Institute: EPA
Method 7470A
Shaw Environmental: Analysis-
EPA Methods 200.7 & 6020A
(RSKSOP-213v4 & -257v2 or -
332vO); and Digestion- EPA
Method 3015A (RSKSOP-179v3)
EPA Region 7 RASP Contract
Southwest Research Institute:
EPA Methods 200.7 & 6020A; and
Digestion EPA Method 200.7
EPA Region 7 RASP Contract
Southwest Research Institute: EPA
Method 7470A; and Digestion EPA
Method 200.7
Sample Bottles/ # of bottles1
60 mL serum bottles/2
125 mL plastic bottle/1
1 L plastic bottle/1
1 L plastic bottle/1
125 mL plastic bottle/1
1 L plastic bottle/1
1 L plastic bottle/1
Preservation/ Storage
NoheadspaceTSP4, pH
>10; refrigerate <6°C5
HNO3, pH<2
HNO3, pH<2
HNO3, pH<2
HNO3, pH<2
HNO3, pH<2
HNO3, pH<2
Holding
Sampling
Time(s) Rounds
14 days
6 months (Hg
28 days)
6 months
28 days
6 months
6 months
28 days
1,2,3
1,2
3
3
1,2
3
3
-------
A-18
Table Al. Sample containers, preservation, and holding times for water samples (cont).
Sample Type
Trace Metals (Total and
Dissolved)
Sulfate (SO4), Chloride (Cl),
Fluoride (F), Bromide (Br)
Br
Br
Nitrate+Nitrite (NO3+NO2)
Ammonia (NH3)
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Dissolved Inorganic Carbon
(DIG)
Dissolved Organic Carbon
(DOC)
Analysis Method (Lab Method)
EPA CLP Inorganic Statement of
Work (SOW) ISM01.3, Exhibit D-
Part B, "Analytical Methods for
Inductively Coupled Plasma -
Mass Spectrometry", with
modifications as noted in QAPP
revision 1 addendum
ORD/NRMRL(Ada): EPA Method
6500 (RSKSOP-276v3)
ORD/NRMRL(Ada): No EPA
Method (RSKSOP-214v5)
ORD/NRMRL(Ada): EPA Method
6500 (RSKSOP-288v3)
ORD/NRMRL(Ada): EPA Method
353.1 (RSKSOP-214v5)
ORD/NRMRL(Ada): EPA Method
350.1 (RSKSOP-214v5)
ORD/NRMRL(Ada): EPA Method
351.2 (RSKSOP-214v5)
ORD/NRMRL(Ada): EPA Method
9060A (RSKSOP-330vO)
ORD/NRMRL(Ada): EPA Method
9060A (RSKSOP-330vO)
Sample Bottles/ # of bottles1
125 mL plastic bottle/1
for each total and dissolved
fraction
30 mL plastic bottle/1
30 mL plastic bottle/1
30 mL plastic bottle/1
60 mL plastic bottle/1
60 mL plastic bottle/1
60 mL plastic bottle/1
40 mL clear glass VOA vial/2
40 mL clear glass VOA vial/2
Preservation/ Storage
HNO3, pH<2
Refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
H2S04, pH<2;
refrigerate <6°C
H2S04, pH<2;
refrigerate <6°C
H2SO4, pH<2;
refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
H3PO4; refrigerate <6°C
Holding
Sampling
Time(s) Rounds
6 months
28 days
28 days
28 days
28 days
28 days
28 days
14 days
28 days
2
1,2,3
3
3
1,2,3
1,2,3
3
1,2,3
1,2,3
-------
A-19
Table Al. Sample containers, preservation, and holding times for water samples (cont).
Sample Type
Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOC)
Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOC)
Low Molecular Weight Acids
Semi-volatile organic
compounds (SVOC)
Diesel Range Organics (DRO)
Gasoline Range Organics
(GRO)
Glycols
87Sr/86Sr Isotope Analysis
226Ra
228Ra
Analysis Method (Lab Method)
Shaw Environmental: EPA
Method 5021A + 8260C (RSKSOP-
299vl)
EPA Region 7 RASP Contract
Southwest Research Institute:
EPA Methods 8260B
Shaw Environmental3: No EPA
Method (RSKSOP-112v6)
EPA Region 8: EPA Method 8270D
(ORGM-515 rl.l)
EPA Region 8: EPA Method 8015D
(ORGM-508rl.O)
EPA Region 8: EPA Method 8015D
(ORGM-506 rl.O)
EPA Region 3: No EPA Method
(R3 Method6)
USGS: No EPA Method (Thermal
ionization mass spectrometry)
ALS SOP783v9 (EPA Method
903.1)
ALS SOP746v9 (EPA Method
904.0)
Sample Bottles/ # of bottles1
40 mL amber glass VOA vial/2
40 mL amber glass VOA vial/4
40 mL amber glass VOA vial/2
1 L amber glass bottle/2
1L amber glass bottle/2
40 mL amber VOA vial/2
40 mL amber VOA vial/2
500 mL plastic bottle/2
1 L plastic/1
2 L plastic/1
Preservation/ Storage
No headspace TSP4,pH
>10; refrigerate <6°C
No headspace HCI, pH
<2; refrigerate <6°C
TSP4, pH >10;
refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
HCI, pH<2; refrigerate
<6°C
No headspace HCI, pH
<2; refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
HNO3, pH<2; room
temperature
HNO3, pH<2; room
temperature
Holding
Sampling
Time(s) Rounds
14 days
14 days
30 days
7 days
extraction, 30
days after
extraction
7 days
extraction, 40
days after
extraction
14 days
14 days
6 months
6 months
6 months
1,2
3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
2,3
2,3
-------
A-20
Table Al. Sample containers, preservation, and holding times for water samples (cont).
Sample Type
Gross Alpha/Beta
O, H stable isotopes of water
O, H stable isotopes of water
813C of inorganic carbon
813C and 82H of methane
Analysis Method (Lab Method)
ALS SOP702v20 & 724vll (EPA
Method 900.0)
Shaw Environmental: No EPA
Method (RSKSOP-296vO); IRMS
Shaw Environmental : No EPA
Method (RSKSOP-334vO); CRDS
Isotech; gas stripping and IRMS
(No EPA Method)
Isotech; gas stripping and IRMS
(No EPA Method)
Sample Bottles/ # of bottles1
1 L plastic/1
20 ml glass VOA vial/1
20 ml glass VOA vial/1
60 mL plastic bottle/1
1 L plastic bottle/1
Preservation/ Storage
HNO3, pH<2; room
temperature
Refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
Caplet of benzalkonium
chloride; refrigerate
<6°C
Holding
Sampling
Time(s) Rounds
6 months
Stable
Stable
14 days
3 months
2,3
1
2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
Spare bottles were made available for laboratory QC samples and for replacement of compromised samples (broken bottle, QC failures, etc.).
1 Sampling rounds occurred in July 2011 (round 1), March 2012 (round 2), and May 2013 (round 3).
' Analyses in round 3 were performed by CB&I (name changed from Shaw).
'irisodium phosphate.
' Above freezing point of water.
3 EPA Methods 8000C and 8321 were followed for method development and QA/QC; method based on ASTM D773-11.
-------
A-21
Table A2. Field QC samples for ground water and surface water analysis.
QC Sample
Trip Blanks (VOCs and
Dissolved Gases only)
Equipment Blanks
Field Blanks1
Purpose
Assess contamination during
transportation.
Assess contamination from
field equipment, sampling
procedures, decontamination
procedures, sample
container, preservative, and
shipping.
Assess contamination
introduced from sample
container with applicable
preservation.
Method
Fill bottles with reagent
water and preserve, take to
field and return without
opening.
Apply only to samples
collected via equipment,
such as filtered samples:
Reagent water is filtered and
collected into bottles and
preserved same as filtered
samples.
In the field, reagent water is
collected into sample
containers with
preservatives.
Frequency
One in an ice chest with VOA
and dissolved gas samples.
One per day of sampling.
One per day of sampling.
Acceptance Criteria/
Corrective Actions
QL, but<10Xthe
concentration found in the
blank.
Field Duplicates
Represent precision of field
sampling, analysis, and site
heterogeneity.
One or more samples
collected immediately after
original sample.
One in every 10 samples, or if
<10 samples collected for a
water type (ground or
surface), collect a duplicate
for one sample.
RPD<30% for results > 5X the
QL.
Affected data were flagged
as needed.
Temperature Blanks
Measure temperature of
samples in the cooler.
Water sample that is
transported in cooler to lab.
One per cooler.
The temperature was
recorded by the receiving lab
upon receipt.
Blank samples were not required for isotope ratio measurements, including O/ O, H /H, and
and/or if the temperature recorded from the temperature blank was >6°C.
C/ C. The PI was notified if the samples arrived with no ice
-------
A-22
Table A3. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Blanks.
SWPA Field BlkOl
SWPA Fid Blk 02
SWPAEqBlkOl
MDL
QL
Detections in
samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
MDL
QL
Detections in
samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.07
0.50
16/18
0.54
1.80
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.07
<0.50
0.07
0.50
16/17
0.52
1.99
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.02
1.00
18/18
33.2
103
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.02
1.00
17/17
49.2
119
July 2
<0.10
<0.10
0.21
0.01
0.10
17/18
0.19
17.7
March
0.28
0.43
<0.10
0.27
<0.10
0.01
0.10
17/17
0.38
23
Dll
NA
NA
NA
2012
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
2/18
0.18
0.27
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
3/17
0.14
0.27
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.14
1.00
14/18
0.48
2.40
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.13
1.00
13/17
0.44
3.03
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.07
1.00
18/18
1.86
631
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.11
1.00
17/17
1.91
462
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.14
1.00
18/18
14.4
98.9
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.05
1.00
17/17
4.51
91.6
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.04
0.20
17/18
0.06
1.24
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.03
0.20
16/17
0.03
2.03
NA, not analyzed.
-------
A-23
Table A3. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Blanks (cont.).
Sample ID
Collected D°C
DIC N°3 +
N02
i ^^B
•• mi •• i ••
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA F Blank04
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPA Eq Blank04
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
0.05
0.45
0.08
0.12
0.56
0.05
0.25
15/15
0.39
1.85
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.09
1.00
15/15
24.2
98.3
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
<0.10
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.10
15/17
0.02
1.46
0.07
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.36
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.03
0.10
13/17
0.05
0.51
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.02
0.10
5/17
0.08
0.29
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.17
1.00
10/17
0.20
2.23
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.22
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.13
1.00
17/17
1.93
390
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.16
1.00
17/17
14.6
52.4
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.05
0.20
14/17
0.06
1.15
-------
A-24
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks.
July 2011
SWPA Field BlkOl
7/25/2011
<494
<20
<333
<4
<0.29
<4
<4
<7
<20
<67
NA
SWPA Fid Blk 02
7/26/2011
<494
<20
<333
<4
<0.29
<4
<4
<7
<20
<67
NA
SWPAEqBlkOl
7/27/2011
<494
<20
<333
<4
<0.29
<4
<4
<7
<20
<67
NA
MDL
148
100
0.09
20
QL
14
494
20
333
10
0.29
20
67
Detections in samples
3/18
0/18
0/18
1/18
18/18
0/18
18/18
0/18
2/18
0/18
9/18
4/18
Concentration min
<494
<20
256
34
12.4
<4
<7
23
Concentration max
<494
<20
256
465
351
<4
<7
60
1060
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
3/23/2012
<20.0
<333
<4
<0.29
<4
<2.0
<2.0
<67
NA
SWPA F Blank02
3/24/2012
7.7
<333
<4
<0.29
<4
<2.0
0.47
<67
NA
SWPA F BlankOS
3/26/2012
4.1
<333
<4
<0.29
<4
<2.0
0.55
<67
NA
SWPA Eq BlankOl
3/23/2012
<20.0
<333
<4
<0.29
<4
<2.0
0.52
<67
NA
SWPA Eq Blank02
3/26/2012
<20.0
<333
<4
<0.29
<4
<2.0
<2.0
<67
NA
MDL
3.7
0.44
100
0.09
0.22
0.43
0.46
20
QL
14
20.0
1.0
333
10
0.29
1.0
2.0
2.0
67
Detections in samples
0/17
3/17
16/17
2/17
17/17
0/17
17/17
1/17
0/17
0/17
6/17
5/17
Concentration min
15.7
0.51
109
33
6.21
0.31
<4
<2.0
<2.0
26
Concentration max
28.7
1.4
246
438
298
0.31
<4
<2.0
11.0
2750
NA, not analyzed.
-------
A-25
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks (cont.).
ID
•••
1
•HM
•HM
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA F Blank04
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPA Eq Blank04
MDL
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
1.4
10
2/17
2.2
2.9
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
21
<20
<20
3.5
20
2/17
<20
136
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.04
0.2
15/17
0.08
0.84
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
4.2
40
13/17
11
236
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
0.1
5.0
17/17
85
407
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
0.1
5.0
0/17
<5.0
<5.0
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.14
0.009
0.10
17/17
17.4
288
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.10
0.20
0/17
<0.20
<0.20
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
1.3
1.0
5.0
3/17
1.7
2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
0.31
0.30
2.0
5/17
0.32
1.3
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
1.6
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
2.7
0.20
0.50
15/17
0.24
78.6
<100
<100
31
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
14
100
14/17
27
888
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.01
0.20
0/17
<0.20
<0.20
-------
A-26
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks (cont.).
July 2011
SWPA Field BlkOl
SWPA Fid Blk 02
SWPAEqBlkOl
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
0.11
0.35
18/18
0.76
1.63
NA
NA
NA
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.03
0.10
18/18
3.85
27.5
<14
<14
<14
4
14
8/18
18
929
<17
<17
<17
5
17
1/18
26
26
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
0.51
1.71
18/18
4.44
160
<84
<84
<84
25
84
0/18
<84
<84
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
0.02
0.06
0/18
<0.06
<0.06
<17
<17
<17
5
17
0/18
<17
<17
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
0.14
0.46
18/18
5.66
31.4
R
R
R
<30
<30
<30
9
30
0/18
<30
<30
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
0.13
0.43
18/18
4.58
11.2
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
0.11
0.35
17/17
0.89
1.82
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.03
0.10
17/17
4.43
29.4
<14
<14
<14
<14
<14
4
14
8/17
20
1060
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
5
17
0/17
<17
<17
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
0.51
1.71
17/17
3.33
265
<1.0
21.2
6.0
0.29
<1.0
0.22
1.0
4/17
0.63
3.0
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
0.02
0.06
2/17
0.02
0.06
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.20
1.0
4/17
0.23
0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
0.14
0.46
17/17
1.53
32.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
0.44
2.0
0/17
<2.0
<2.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
1.0
5.0
3/17
1.8
4.2
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
0.13
0.43
17/17
4.55
9.70
NA, not analyzed. R, data rejected due to potential spectral interferences.
-------
A-27
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks (cont.).
Sarrmle ID
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
<0.50
<0.05
<5.0
<0.50
<0.25
<0.20
<0.05
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.10
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<0.50
<0.05
<5.0
<0.50
<0.25
<0.20
<0.05
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.10
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<0.50
<0.05
<5.0
<0.50
<0.25
<0.20
<0.05
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.10
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<0.50
<0.05
<5.0
<0.50
<0.25
<0.20
<0.05
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
0.03
SWPA Eg BlankOl
5/17/2013
<0.50
<0.05
<5.0
<0.50
<0.25
<0.20
<0.05
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.10
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<0.50
<0.05
<5.0
<0.50
<0.25
<0.20
<0.05
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.10
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<0.50
<0.05
<5.0
<0.50
<0.25
<0.20
<0.05
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.10
SWPA Eq Blank04
5/20/2013
<0.50
<0.05
<5.0
<0.50
<0.25
<0.20
<0.05
0.27
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.10
MDL
0.046
0.4
0.003
0.2
0.15
0.008
0.20
0.005
0.05
0.10
0.4
0.005
QL
0.50
10
0.05
5.0
0.50
0.25
0.20
0.05
0.20
0.20
2.0
0.10
Detects
17/17
17/17
17/17
17/17
7/17
17/17
17/17
5/17
7/17
3/17
0/17
17/17
Min
0.95
3.7
5.42
0.42
0.52
5.48
0.7
0.01
0.16
0.10
<2.0
3.76
Max
2.12
18.8
29.7
750
6.3
182
10.2
0.06
1.4
0.20
<2.0
9.02
NA, not analyzed.
-------
A-28
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks (cont.).
July 2011
SWPA Field BlkOl
SWPA Fid Blk 02
SWPAEqBlkOl
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
<4
<4
<4
1
4
18/18
200
1530
NA
NA
NA
<7
<7
<7
2
7
0/18
<7
<7
R
R
R
NA
NA
NA
<10
<10
<10
3
10
4/18
3
5
<50
<50
<50
15
50
15/18
17
245
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
1
4
17/17
86
1050
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.29
1.0
0/17
<1.0
<1.0
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
2
7
0/17
<7
<7
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.20
1.0
0/17
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.20
1.0
15/17
0.46
1.6
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
3
10
0/17
<10
<10
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
15
50
0/17
<50
<50
NA, not analyzed. R, data rejected due to spectral interferences.
-------
A-29
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks (cont.).
ID
•Hi
•HI
^K2s2U^^I^iH
•HM
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA F Blank04
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPA Eq Blank04
MDL
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
0.12
<2.0
0.18
0.18
0.83
0.1
2.0
17/17
215
1220
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.10
0.20
1/17
0.16
0.16
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
0.28
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
0.2
5.0
14/17
0.25
2.7
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.05
0.20
0/17
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.05
0.20
15/17
0.08
0.93
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.02
0.20
11/17
0.04
0.50
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
0.5
1.4
2.4
0.5
5.0
5/17
3.9
16.6
-------
A-30
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks.
ID
•Hi
SWPA Field BlkOl
SWPA Fid Blk 02
SWPAEqBlkOl
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
^BS*l|r?4I^*H
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
^^9
<16
<16
<16
4
16
0/18
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
4
16
0/17
<16
<16
•I
<548
<548
<548
164
548
5/18
182
1030
<20.0
17.6
4.9
<20.0
<20.0
3.7
20
6/17
21.8
469
<22
<22
<22
7
22
0/18
<22
<22
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.44
1.0
17/17
0.44
2.3
July
<370
<370
<370
111
370
1/18
247
247
March
<370
<370
<370
<370
<370
111
370
1/17
246
246
2011
<4
<4
<4
1
4
18/18
35
493
12012
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
1
4
17/17
33
446
<11
<11
<11
3
11
0/18
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
3
11
0/17
<11
<11
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
0.10
0.32
18/18
12.9
352
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
0.10
0.32
17/17
6.46
309
<4
<4
<4
1
4
2/18
2
2
<1.0
134
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.22
1.0
0/17
<1.0
<1.0
^mWm^M
<4
<4
<4
1
4
0/18
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
1
4
0/17
<4
<4
<8
<8
<8
2
8
3/18
4
7
<2.0
0.50
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
0.43
2.0
1/17
0.73
0.73
<22
<22
<22
7
22
6/18
27
70
0.51
1.1
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
0.46
2.0
11/17
0.63
24.9
<74
<74
<74
22
74
11/18
25
3040
<74
<74
<74
<74
<74
22
74
10/17
41
3080
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA, not analyzed.
-------
A-31
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks (cont).
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA F Blank04
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPA Eq Blank04
MDL
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
0.6
10
2/17
0.8
2.9
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
3.5
20
7/17
26.3
2380
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.24
0.30
0.23
0.21
0.23
0.04
0.2
17/17
0.23
5.9
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
2.1
20
16/17
3.1
230
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
0.05
2.5
17/17
81
675
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
0.05
2.5
1/17
0.21
0.21
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
0.004
0.05
17/17
19.0
274
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.10
0.20
0/17
<0.20
<0.20
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
0.5
2.5
3/17
0.54
10.8
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
0.3
2.0
1/17
15.8
15.8
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
1.1
<0.50
1.0
0.54
<0.50
0.20
0.50
17/17
0.59
74
<50
22
<50
<50
14
<50
<50
<50
7
50
16/17
44
10200
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.01
0.20
2/17
0.01
0.02
-------
A-32
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks (cont).
July 2011
SWPA Field BlkOl
SWPA Fid Blk 02
SWPAEqBlkOl
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
0.12
0.39
18/18
0.78
1.80
NA
NA
NA
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
0.03
0.11
18/18
4.03
28.1
<16
<16
5
4
16
8/18
33.7
1580
<19
<19
<19
6
19
0/18
<19
<19
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
0.57
1.90
18/18
4.75
157
<93
<93
<93
28
93
0/18
<93
<93
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
0.02
0.07
3/18
0.03
0.04
<19
<19
<19
6
19
2/18
14
17
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
0.15
0.51
18/18
4.78
28.8
R
R
R
<33
<33
<33
10
33
0/18
<33
<33
0.16
<0.48
<0.48
0.14
0.48
18/18
4.42
11.0
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
0.12
0.39
17/17
0.93
1.93
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
0.03
0.11
17/17
4.40
29.9
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
4
16
9/17
16
2200
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
6
19
0/17
<19
<19
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
0.57
1.90
17/17
3.60
265
<1.0
1.3
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.22
1.0
7/17
0.33
0.80
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
0.02
0.07
3/17
0.04
0.08
<1.0
0.47
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.20
1.0
6/17
0.21
4.3
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
0.25
<0.51
0.15
0.51
17/17
1.39
27.9
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
0.44
2.0
0/17
<2.0
<2.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
1.0
5.0
2/17
3.0
5.3
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
0.14
0.48
17/17
4.26
9.23
NA, not analyzed. R, data rejected due to potential spectral interferences.
-------
A-33
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks (cont).
Sarrmle ID
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
<0.25
<5.0
<0.03
<2.5
<0.50
<0.13
<0.20
<0.03
<0.20
NA
<0.20
0.55
<0.05
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<0.25
<5.0
<0.03
<2.5
<0.50
<0.13
<0.20
<0.03
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.05
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<0.25
<5.0
<0.03
<2.5
<0.50
<0.13
<0.20
<0.03
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.05
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<0.25
<5.0
<0.03
<2.5
<0.50
0.17
<0.20
<0.03
<0.20
NA
<0.20
0.47
0.05
SWPA Eg BlankOl
5/17/2013
<0.25
<5.0
<0.03
<2.5
<0.50
<0.13
<0.20
<0.03
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.05
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<0.25
<5.0
<0.03
<2.5
<0.50
<0.13
<0.20
<0.03
0.28
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.05
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<0.25
<5.0
<0.03
<2.5
<0.50
<0.13
<0.20
<0.03
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.05
SWPA Eq Blank04
5/20/2013
<0.25
<5.0
<0.03
<2.5
<0.50
<0.13
<0.20
<0.03
<0.20
NA
<0.20
<2.0
<0.05
MDL
0.023
0.2
0.002
0.1
0.15
0.004
0.20
0.002
0.05
0.10
0.4
0.003
QL
0.25
5.0
0.03
2.5
0.50
0.13
0.20
0.03
0.20
0.20
2.0
0.05
Detects
17/17
17/17
17/17
17/17
11/17
17/17
17/17
9/17
11/17
3/17
6/17
17/17
Min
0.90
3.9
5.55
0.42
0.21
5.30
1.1
0.003
0.06
0.14
0.46
3.99
Max
2.40
18.2
28.2
857
6.1
175
17.5
0.22
25.6
0.20
1.10
9.46
NA, not analyzed.
-------
A-34
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks (cont).
July 2011
SWPA Field BlkOl
SWPA Fid Blk 02
SWPAEqBlkOl
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
1
<4
<4
1
4
18/18
206
1560
NA
NA
NA
<8
<8
<8
2
8
4/18
7
28
R
R
R
NA
NA
NA
<11
<11
<11
3
11
7/18
4
5
<56
<56
<56
17
56
15/18
18
641
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
1
4
17/17
84
1030
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.29
1.0
0/17
<1.0
<1.0
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
2
8
11/17
2
30
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.20
1.0
0/17
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.20
1.0
15/17
0.46
2.0
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
3
11
0/18
<11
<11
<56
<56
<56
<56
<56
17
56
1/18
35
35
NA, not analyzed. R, data rejected due to potential spectral interferences.
-------
A-35
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks (cont).
Sample ID r II H Sr
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA F Blank04
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPA Eq Blank04
MDL
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
<25
<25
<25
0.16
<25
0.10
<25
<25
0.1
25
17/17
220
1310
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.16
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.10
0.20
2/17
0.18
1.20
0.16
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
0.1
2.5
14/17
0.50
43.3
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.05
0.20
0/17
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.05
0.20
16/17
0.05
0.92
0.34
0.38
0.38
2.3
0.51
0.35
0.34
0.54
0.02
0.20
16/17
0.22
6.1
1.3
0.34
<2.5
0.44
4.0
2.8
3.8
3.6
0.3
2.5
8/17
4.4
39.8
-------
Table A6. Volatile Organic Compound Blanks.
July 2011
A-36
SWPATrip Blank
7/21/2011
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Field BlkOl
7/25/2011
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Fid Blk 02
7/26/2011
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Fid Blk 03
7/27/2011
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
<0.5
Field Blk 04
7/28/2011
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAEq Blk 01
7/27/2011
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
<0.5
MDL
12.4
6.4
6.8
0.16
0.63
2.8
0.41
0.12
0.17
0.15
0.18
0.07
QL
100
25
25
0.5
1.0
5.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
Detections in samples
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
Concentration min
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
<0.5
Concentration max
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
<0.5
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
3/23/2012
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F Blank02
3/24/2012
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F BlankOS
3/26/2012
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
R
<0.5
SWPA Eq BlankOl
3/23/2012
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
R
<0.5
R, data rejected. 1,1,2-trichloroethane is subject to alkaline hydrolysis to 1,1-dichloroethene. This reaction could be supported by the sample preservative
(trisodium phosphate).
-------
A-37
Table A6. Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
R, data rejected. 1,1,2-trichloroethane is subject to alkaline hydrolysis to 1,1-dichloroethene. This reaction could be supported by the sample preservative
(trisodium phosphate).
-------
A-38
Table A6. Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq BlankOl
5/17/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq Blank04
5/20/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blankl
5/17/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blank2
5/18/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blanks
5/19/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blank4
5/20/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
MDL
63
7.4
0.07
0.05
0.28
4.9
0.07
0.08
0.11
0.51
0.14
0.09
0.10
QL
100
10
1.0
0.5
1.0
10
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Detections in samples
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
3/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
Concentration min
<100
<0.5
0.48
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
Concentration max
<100
<0.5
1.3
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-------
A-39
Table A6. Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
July 2011
SWPATrip Blank
7/21/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.75
<0.5
SWPA Field BlkOl
7/25/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Fid Blk 02
7/26/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.59
<0.5
SWPA Fid Blk 03
7/27/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
Field Blk 04
7/28/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq Blk 01
7/27/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
MDL
0.14
0.11
0.08
0.14
0.07
0.09
0.1
0.07
0.16
0.15
0.1
0.1
QL
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Detections in samples
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
2/18
0/18
Concentration min
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.80
<0.5
Concentration max
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
2.18
<0.5
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
3/23/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F Blank02
3/24/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.43
<0.5
SWPA F BlankOS
3/26/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
R
<0.5
SWPA Eq BlankOl
3/23/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
R
<0.5
R, data rejected. 1,1,2-trichloroethane is subject to alkaline hydrolysis to 1,1-dichloroethene. This reaction could be supported by the sample preservative
(trisodium phosphate).
-------
A-40
Table A6. Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
R, data rejected. 1,1,2-trichloroethane is subject to alkaline hydrolysis to 1,1-dichloroethene. This reaction could be supported by the sample preservative
(trisodium phosphate).
-------
A-41
Table A6. Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq BlankOl
5/17/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq Blank04
5/20/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blankl
5/17/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blank2
5/18/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blanks
5/19/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blank4
5/20/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
MDL
0.10
0.07
0.06
0.10
0.05
0.09
0.09
0.05
0.04
0.12
0.07
0.07
0.13
QL
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Detections in samples
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
2/17
0/17
0/17
1/17
0/17
0/17
3/17
0/17
0/17
Concentration min
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.15
<0.5
<0.5
0.07
<0.5
<0.5
0.11
<0.5
<0.5
Concentration max
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.28
<0.5
<0.5
0.07
<0.5
<0.5
2.2
<0.5
<0.5
-------
A-42
Table A6. Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
July 2011
SWPATrip Blank
7/21/2011
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Field BlkOl
7/25/2011
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Fid Blk 02
7/26/2011
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Fid Blk 03
7/27/2011
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
Field Blk 04
7/28/2011
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq Blk 01
7/27/2011
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
MDL
0.09
0.07
0.17
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.1
0.08
0.12
0.13
0.12
QL
0.5
1.0
2.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Detections in samples
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
Concentration min
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
Concentration max
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
3/23/2012
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F Blank02
3/24/2012
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F BlankOS
3/26/2012
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq BlankOl
3/23/2012
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
R, data rejected. 1,1,2-trichloroethane is subject to alkaline hydrolysis to 1,1-dichloroethene. This reaction could be supported by the sample preservative
(trisodium phosphate).
-------
A-43
Table A6. Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
R, data rejected. 1,1,2-trichloroethane is subject to alkaline hydrolysis to 1,1-dichloroethene. This reaction could be supported by the sample preservative
(trisodium phosphate).
-------
A-44
Table A6. Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq BlankOl
5/17/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Eq Blank04
5/20/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blankl
5/17/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blank2
5/18/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blanks
5/19/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPA Trip Blank4
5/20/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
MDL
0.08
0.06
0.15
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.03
0.09
0.07
0.15
0.05
0.08
QL
0.5
0.5
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Detections in samples
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
Concentration min
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
Concentration max
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-------
A-45
Table A7. Low Molecular Weight Acid Blanks.
Date Lactate Formate Acetate Propionate Butyrate
Sample ID Collected (50 21 5) (64 18 6) (64 19 7) (79 09 4) (107 92 6)
Isobutyrate
•Ha
1
July 2011
SWPA Field BlkOl
SWPA Fid Blk 02
SWPAEqBlkOl
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
0/18
<0.10
<0.10
0.07
0.06
0.07
0.01
0.10
14/18
0.11
0.38
R
R
R
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.02
0.10
0/18
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
0/18
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
0/18
<0.10
<0.10
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
2/17
0.04
0.06
R
R
R
R
R
<0.10
<0.10
0.05
<0.10
0.06
0.01
0.10
0/17
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
<0.10
0.11
0.02
0.10
1/17
0.11
0.11
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
0/17
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
0/17
<0.10
<0.10
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA F Blank04
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPA Eq Blank04
MDL
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.02
0.10
0/15
<0.10
<0.10
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
0/15
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.02
0.10
0/15
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.02
0.10
0/15
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.02
0.10
0/15
<0.10
<0.10
R, data rejected, formate contamination in preservative. NR, not reported.
-------
A-46
Table A8. Dissolved Gas Blanks.
Sample ID
QH
Butane
(106-97-8)
July 2011
SWPA Trip Blank
SWPA Field BlkOl
SWPA Fid Blk02
SWPA Fid BlkOS
Field Blk 04
SWPAEqBL
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/21/2011
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
7/28/2011
7/27/2011
<0.0015
<0.0015
<0.0015
<0.0015
<0.0015
<0.0015
0.0002
0.0015
3/18
0.0276
5.56
<0.0029
<0.0029
<0.0029
<0.0029
<0.0029
<0.0029
0.0008
0.0029
1/18
0.0043
0.0043
<0.0041
<0.0041
<0.0041
<0.0041
<0.0041
<0.0041
0.0008
0.0041
0/18
<0.0041
<0.0041
<0.0055
<0.0055
<0.0055
<0.0055
<0.0055
<0.0055
0.0010
0.0055
0/18
<0.0055
<0.0055
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Trip BlankOl
SWPA Trip Blank02
MDL
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
0.0003
0.0014
6/17
0.0016
15.50
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
0.0005
0.0027
1/17
0.291
0.291
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
0.0007
0.0038
0/17
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
0.0007
0.0048
0/17
<0.0048
<0.0048
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA F Blank04
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPA Eq Blank04
SWPA Trip Blankl
SWPA Trip Blank2
SWPA Trip Blanks
SWPA Trip Blank4
MDL
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
<0.0013
<0.0013
<0.0013
<0.0013
<0.0013
<0.0013
<0.0013
<0.0013
<0.0013
<0.0013
<0.0013
<0.0013
0.0002
0.0013
1/15
<0.0013
5.35
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
<0.0027
0.0008
0.0027
1/15
<0.0027
0.0045
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0037
0.0004
0.0037
0/15
<0.0037
<0.0037
<0.0047
<0.0047
<0.0047
<0.0047
<0.0047
<0.0047
<0.0047
<0.0047
<0.0047
<0.0047
<0.0047
<0.0047
0.0003
0.0047
0/15
<0.0047
<0.0047
-------
A-47
Table A9. Glycol Blanks.
July 2011
SWPA Fid Blk 01
7/25/2011
<5
<50
<5
<25
SWPA Fid Blk 02
7/26/2011
<5
<50
<5
<25
Field Blk04
7/28/2011
<5
<50
<5
<25
EQ Blk-01
7/27/2011
<5
<50
<5
<25
QL
50
25
Detections in samples
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
Concentration min
<5
<50
<5
<25
Concentration max
<5
<50
<5
<25
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
3/23/2012
<25
<25
<50
SWPA F Blank02
3/24/2012
<25
<25
<50
SWPA F BlankOS
3/26/2012
<25
<25
<50
SWPA Eq BlankOl
3/23/2012
<25
<25
<50
SWPA Eq Blank02
3/26/2012
<25
<25
<50
QL
10
25
25
50
Detections in samples
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
Concentration min
<25
<25
<50
Concentration max
<25
<25
<50
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
SWPA Eq BlankOl
5/17/2013
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
SWPA Eq Blank04
5/20/2013
QL
10
10
10
10
Detects
0/15
0/15
0/15
0/15
Min
Max
-------
A-48
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks.
Collected
BiHuaAiB^
| 1
i 1
i 1
j 1
j j
i 1
j j
July 2011
SWPA Field Blank
SWPA FLD BLk 02
SWPA Eq BLk-01
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
-------
A-49
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq BlankOl
5/17/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq Blank04
_QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/20/2013
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
-------
A-50
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
Sample ID
K i*i i L"MX"i* ^B ^^S^EH^^I ^^S^E'^^I ^^S^BM ^^S^EM ^^S^BS ^R^^E^^I
July 2011
SWPA Field Blank
SWPA FLD BLk 02
SWPA Eq BLk-01
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
5.00
0/18
<5.00
<5.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
3.61
0.50
9/18
0.54
2.92
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/17
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
-------
A-51
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq BlankOl
5/17/2013
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq Blank04
_QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/20/2013
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
3.00
0/15
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
-------
A-52
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
Sample ID
^•gigjgM
PO 2. PO • — • PO Si
ug/L ug/L ug/L
BjfH
KfMJ
KIM
-------
A-53
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA F Blank04
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPA Eq Blank04
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
5.00
0/15
<5.00
<5.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/15
<3.00
<3.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/15
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/15
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/15
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-54
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
July 2011
SWPA Field Blank
7/25/2011
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<5.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
SWPA FLD BLk 02
7/26/2011
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<5.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
SWPA Eq BLk-01
7/27/2011
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<5.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
QL
1.00
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
5.00
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
Detections in samples
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
Concentration min
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<5.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
Concentration max
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<5.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
3/23/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F Blank02
3/24/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F BlankOS
3/26/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq BlankOl
3/23/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq Blank02
3/26/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
QL
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
3.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Detections in samples
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
Concentration min
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
Concentration max
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-55
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq BlankOl
5/17/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq Blank04
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/20/2013
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
3.00
0/15
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-56
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
July 2011
SWPA Field Blank
SWPA FLD BLk 02
SWPA Eq BLk-01
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/18
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
4/18
1.06
2.17
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
2/18
1.40
2.16
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.60
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/18
<0.50
<0.50
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
2.88
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/17
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/17
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
1/17
1.13
1.13
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/17
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-57
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
May 2013
SWPAFBIankOl
5/17/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<1.00
8.80
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq BlankOl
5/17/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq Blank04
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/20/2013
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
2.00
1/15
4.34
4.34
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
3.00
0/15
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-58
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
July 2011
SWPA Field Blank
7/25/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
SWPA FLD BLk 02
7/26/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
SWPA Eq BLk-01
7/27/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
QL
0.50
0.50
1.00
0.50
1.00
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
1.00
Detections in samples
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
Concentration min
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
Concentration max
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
3/23/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F Blank02
3/24/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F BlankOS
3/26/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq BlankOl
3/23/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq Blank02
3/26/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
QL
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Detections in samples
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
Concentration min
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
Concentration max
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-59
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq BlankOl
5/17/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
SWPA Eq Blank04
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/20/2013
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
-------
A-60
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
July 2011
SWPA Field Blank
7/25/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
SWPA FLD BLk 02
7/26/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
SWPA Eq BLk-01
7/27/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
QL
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
1.00
0.50
1.00
Detections in samples
0/18
2/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
0/18
Concentration min
<0.50
1.31
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
Concentration max
<0.50
1.39
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
3/23/2012
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F Blank02
3/24/2012
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F BlankOS
3/26/2012
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq BlankOl
3/23/2012
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq Blank02
3/26/2012
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
QL
1.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
Detections in samples
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
0/17
Concentration min
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
Concentration max
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-61
Table A10. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Blanks (cont).
Sample ID
Uni
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
5/17/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F Blank02
5/18/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F BlankOS
5/19/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA F Blank04
5/20/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq BlankOl
5/17/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq Blank02
5/18/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq BlankOS
5/19/2013
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPA Eq Blank04
.QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/20/2013
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
2.00
0/15
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/15
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-62
Table All. DRO/GRO Blanks.
Sample ID Date Collected
GRO/TPH
July 2011
SWPA Field Blank
SWPA FLD BLk 02
SWPA Eq BLk-01
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
7/25/2011
7/26/2011
7/27/2011
27.0
25.7
24.4
20.0
1/18
<20.0
25.4
<20.0
<21.1
<21.1
20.0
9/18
<20.0
73.8
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
QL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<20.0
<20.0
20.0
24.2
27.4
20.0
0/17
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
20.0
<20.0
20.0
8/17
<20.0
87.9
May 2013
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA F Blank04
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPA Eq Blank04
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
20.0
0/15
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
24.6
20.0
2/15
<20.0
51.2
-------
A-63
Table A12. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, Ra-226, and Ra-228 Blanks.
jjjJUHL^H
March 2012
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
RL
Detections in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
3/23/2012
3/24/2012
3/26/2012
3/23/2012
3/26/2012
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
3.0
0/17
<3.0
<3.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
4.0
0/17
<4.0
<4.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0/17
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0/17
<1.0
<1.0
May2013
SWPA F BlankOl
SWPA F Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA F Blank04
SWPA Eq BlankOl
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPA Eq Blank04
QL
Detects
Min
Max
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
5/17/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/20/2013
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
3.0
1/15
6.3
6.3
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
4.0
1/15
10.3
10.3
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0/15
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0/15
<1.0
<1.0
Samples for gross alpha, gross beta, Ra-226, and Ra-228 were not collected during the July 2011 sampling event.
-------
A-64
Table A13. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Duplicates.
Samp,e,D
m i
HfPV
1 BBI i •• i •• i •• i ••
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
2.50
0.80
0.86
NC
0.83
0.84
NC
5.0
103
102
1.0
70.2
70.2
0.0
0.50
0.49
0.50
NC
4.54
4.53
0.2
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
5.00
1.00
1.00
NC
1.99
1.94
NC
5.00
75.7
75.7
0.0
28.7
28.6
0.3
5.00
53.9
53.8
0.2
56.2
55.6
1.1
1.00
0.11
0.11
NC
0.09
0.07
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
2.50
0.55
0.54
NC
0.52
0.54
NC
5.00
55.6
55.4
0.4
55.6
55.7
0.2
0.50
2.26
2.24
0.9
1.21
1.10
9.5
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
5.00
0.72
0.71
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
12.7
12.6
0.8
462
455
1.5
5.00
36.0
36.2
0.6
27.3
26.2
4.1
1.00
0.09
0.09
NC
0.05
0.07
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
1.25
0.69
0.66
NC
0.62
0.63
NC
5.00
60.7
60.4
0.5
24.2
25.1
3.7
0.50
0.05
0.05
NC
1.09
1.10
0.9
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
5.00
1.54
1.55
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
14.8
14.7
0.7
111
112
0.9
5.00
38.4
38.2
0.5
35.1
34.9
0.6
1.00
0.17
0.14
NC
<0.20
<0.20
NC
0.15
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.09
0.10
NC
NA, not analyzed. NC, not calculated.
-------
A-65
Table A14. Dissolved Metal Duplicates.
Sample ID
PDate
Collected
D
D
|jg/L mg/L
K^^l
Hlfl
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
70
4
<14
NC
<14
<14
NC
2470
<494
<494
NC
<494
<494
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
<20
<20
NC
1665
<333
<333
NC
<333
<333
NC
20
175
175
0.0
37
37
0.0
50
<10
<10
NC
<10
<10
NC
1.5
125
126
0.8
103
102
1.0
20
<4
<4
NC
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
1
NC
<4
<4
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
<7
<7
NC
100
11
9
NC
21
20
NC
335
<67
<67
NC
<67
<67
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
70
<14
<14
NC
<14
<14
NC
100
28.1
<20.0
NC
<20.0
<20.0
NC
5
0.69
0.60
NC
1.0
1.4
NC
1665
<333
<333
NC
<333
<333
NC
20
129
129
0.0
223
223
0.0
50
<10
<10
NC
<10
<10
NC
1.5
91.3
89.2
2.3
295
298
1.0
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
<4
<4
NC
10
<2.0
<2.0
NC
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10
3.6
3.5
NC
<2.0
<2.0
NC
335
<67
<67
NC
<67
<67
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
50
<10
<10
NC
<10
2.9
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
<20
<20
NC
1.0
0.17
0.18
NC
0.12
0.08
NC
200
11
24
NC
17
14
NC
25
97
99
2.0
85
86
1.2
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
<5.0
<5.0
NC
0.5
75.8
76.3
0.7
59.1
60.0
1.5
1.0
<0.20
<0.20
NC
<0.20
<0.20
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
<5.0
<5.0
NC
10
0.32
<2.0
NC
<2.0
<2.0
NC
2.5
0.57
0.52
NC
78
79
1.4
500
122
101
NC
<100
<100
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-66
Table A14. Dissolved Metal Duplicates (cont.).
Samp.e.D
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
HlMi
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.0
<0.20
<0.20
NC
<0.20
<0.20
NC
1.8
1.57
1.55
NC
1.04
1.03
NC
1.8
1.24
1.24
NC
1.21
1.22
NC
2.5
1.18
1.24
NC
1.34
1.30
NC
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
r
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
50
3.9
5.0
NC
3.7
4.2
NC
Q
July 201
0.5
19.6
19.7
0.5
15.0
14.9
0.7
March 20
0.5
8.75
8.57
2.1
14.1
14.3
1.4
May 201
0.25
22.7
23.2
2.2
10.4
10.6
1.9
Mn
1
70
<14
<14
NC
18
19
NC
12
70
20
20
NC
<14
<14
NC
3
25
78
80
2.5
0.4
0.7
NC
Mo
Hg/L
85
<17
26
NC
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
<17
<17
NC
2.5
0.52
0.57
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
8.6
47.8
47.9
0.2
12.0
12.0
0.0
8.6
6.14
6.11
NC
23.3
23.3
0.0
1.3
7.32
7.52
2.7
39.0
39.2
0.5
420
<84
<84
NC
<84
<84
NC
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
1.0
3.1
3.5
12.1
2.6
3.0
14.3
0.3
<0.06
<0.06
NC
<0.06
<0.06
NC
0.3
<0.06
<0.06
NC
<0.06
<0.06
NC
0.25
<0.05
<0.05
NC
<0.05
<0.05
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
<17
<17
NC
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
1.0
<0.20
<0.20
NC
0.84
0.82
NC
2.3
17.3
17.7
2.3
18.0
17.9
0.6
2.3
13.0
12.5
3.9
11.1
10.8
2.7
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
R
R
R
R
R
10
<2.0
<2.0
NC
<2.0
<2.0
NC
1.0
<0.20
<0.20
NC
<0.20
<0.20
NC
NA, not analyzed. NC, not calculated. R, data rejected.
-------
A-67
Table A14. Dissolved Metal Duplicates (cont.).
Sample ID
PDate
Collected
D
D
Mg/L
Mg/L
D
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
150
<30
<30
NC
<30
<30
NC
2.2
6.01
6.11
1.7
6.10
6.07
0.5
20
1530
1530
0.0
310
300
3.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
35
<7
<7
NC
<7
<7
NC
R
R
R
R
R
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
50
<10
<10
NC
<10
3
NC
250
29
26
NC
245
243
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
3.2
4.2
NC
2.2
5.33
5.33
0.0
5.60
5.60
0.0
20
201
201
0.0
690
690
0.0
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
<7
<7
NC
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5
0.55
0.50
NC
0.88
0.86
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
<10
<10
NC
250
<50
<50
NC
<50
<50
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
10
<2.0
<2.0
NC
<2.0
<2.0
NC
0.5
4.05
4.07
0.5
5.42
5.50
1.5
10
455
458
0.7
229
218
4.9
1.0
<0.20
<0.20
NC
<0.20
<0.20
NC
25
0.61
0.59
NC
0.81
0.81
NC
1.0
<0.20
<0.20
NC
<0.20
<0.20
NC
1.0
0.63
0.64
NC
0.14
<0.20
NC
1.0
<0.20
<0.20
NC
0.05
0.04
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
17
16
NC
NA, not analyzed. NC, not calculated.
-------
A-68
Table A15. Total Metal Duplicates.
Sample ID
^KflMltM^T*^!
D
D
D
Cu Fe
Mg/L MS/L
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
80
<16
<16
NC
<16
<16
NC
2740
<548
<548
NC
986
881
NC
110
<22
<22
NC
<22
<22
NC
1850
<370
<370
NC
<370
<370
NC
20
178
176
1.1
76
74
2.7
55
<11
<11
NC
<11
<11
NC
1.6
127
127
0.0
104
105
1.0
20
<4
<4
NC
2
2
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
<4
<4
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
7
6
NC
110
<22
<22
NC
47
45
NC
370
<74
<74
NC
835
749
10.9
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
80
<16
<16
NC
<16
<16
NC
100
54.8
55.5
NC
<20.0
<20.0
NC
5
0.50
0.48
NC
0.87
1.9
NC
1850
<370
<370
NC
<370
<370
NC
20
129
130
0.8
222
222
0.0
55
<11
<11
NC
<11
<11
NC
1.6
93.5
93.9
0.4
309
306
1.0
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
<4
<4
NC
10
<2.0
<2.0
NC
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10
4.1
4.4
NC
<2.0
<2.0
NC
370
41
48
NC
<74
<74
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
50
<10
<10
NC
<10
<10
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
<20
<20
NC
1
1.3
1.1
16.7
0.23
0.32
NC
100
24
26
NC
23
27
NC
12.5
102
100
2.0
81
83
2.4
12.5
<2.5
<2.5
NC
<2.5
<2.5
NC
0.25
73.3
73.9
0.8
56.1
57.8
3.0
1.00
<0.20
<0.20
NC
<0.20
<0.20
NC
12.5
<2.5
<2.5
NC
<2.5
<2.5
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
<2.0
<2.0
NC
2.5
0.80
0.85
NC
72
74
2.7
250
902
653
32
<50
44
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-69
Table A15. Total Metal Duplicates (cont).
Sample ID
^KflMltM^T*^!
D
^Eij^j^B
mg/L ug/L
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
2.0
1.61
1.61
0.0
1.28
1.23
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.6
20.1
19.9
1.0
15.2
15.4
1.3
80
<16
<16
NC
1580
1490
5.9
95
<19
<19
NC
<19
<19
NC
9.5
48.0
47.9
0.2
12.4
12.5
0.8
465
<93
<93
NC
<93
<93
NC
0.4
<0.07
<0.07
NC
<0.07
<0.07
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
17
14
NC
2.6
16.1
16.1
0.0
16.3
16.3
0.0
R
R
R
R
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
2.0
1.24
1.27
NC
1.23
1.28
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.6
8.63
8.69
0.7
14.2
14.1
0.7
80
33
35
NC
<16
<16
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
<19
<19
NC
9.5
6.27
6.26
NC
23.6
23.5
0.4
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
0.4
<0.07
<0.07
NC
<0.07
<0.07
NC
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
2.6
11.2
11.4
1.8
9.73
9.93
2.0
10
<2.0
<2.0
NC
<2.0
<2.0
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
1.0
<0.20
<0.20
NC
<0.20
<0.20
NC
1.25
1.18
1.18
NC
1.28
1.28
0
25
4.2
4.4
NC
3.9
4.0
NC
0.15
22.0
22.2
0.9
9.68
10.0
3.3
12.5
508
366
32.5
0.5
0.4
13.3
2.5
0.66
0.68
NC
0.21
<0.50
NC
0.63
7.46
7.26
2.7
37.4
37.9
1.3
1.00
3.7
3.0
20.9
2.6
2.4
8.0
0.15
<0.03
<0.03
NC
0.01
<0.03
NC
1
<0.20
<0.20
NC
0.82
0.91
NC
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
<0.20
<0.20
NC
<0.20
<0.20
NC
NA, not analyzed. NC, not calculated. R, data rejected.
-------
A-70
Table A15. Total Metal Duplicates (cont).
Sample ID
^L^^I^M^^I
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
165
<33
<33
NC
<33
<33
NC
2.4
5.85
5.81
0.7
7.17
6.91
3.7
20
1560
1560
0.0
325
330
1.5
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
13
9
NC
R
R
R
R
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
55
<11
4
NC
4
5
NC
280
23
23
NC
641
632
1.4
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
3.0
5.3
NC
2.4
5.02
5.05
0.6
5.31
5.32
0.2
20
197
197
0.0
683
675
1.2
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
40
3
3
NC
3
3
NC
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5
0.51
0.52
NC
0.93
1.0
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
<11
<11
NC
280
<56
<56
NC
<56
<56
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
10
0.46
0.76
NC
<2.0
1.10
NC
0.25
3.99
4.02
0.7
5.19
5.31
2.3
125
475
475
0.0
228
220
3.6
1.00
<0.20
<0.20
NC
0.18
<0.20
NC
12.5
0.50
0.64
NC
0.72
0.64
NC
1.00
<0.20
<0.20
NC
<0.20
<0.20
NC
1.00
0.66
0.66
NC
0.06
0.05
NC
1.0
0.53
0.53
NC
0.28
0.50
NC
12.5
<2.5
<2.5
NC
10.3
11.0
NC
NA, not analyzed. NC, not calculated. R, data rejected.
-------
A-71
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates.
July 2011
5xQL
500
125
125
2.5
25
2.5
SWPAGW05-0711
7/26/2011
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
SWPAGW05d-0711
7/26/2011
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW12-0711
7/28/2011
<100
<25.0
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
SWPAGW12d-0711
7/28/2011
<100
<25.0
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
March 2012
5xQL
500
125
125
2.5
25
2.5
SWPAGW08-0312
3/24/2012
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
SWPAGW08d-0312
3/24/2012
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NA, not analyzed. NC, not calculated. R, data rejected.
-------
A-72
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont.).
Sample ID
March 2012
5xQL
500
125
125
2.5
25
2.5
SWPAGW13-0312
3/24/2012
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
SWPAGW13d-0312
3/24/2012
<100
<25
<25
<0.5
<5.0
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
May 2013
5xQL
500
100
2.5
50
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
SWPAGW02-0513
5/18/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW02d-0513
5/18/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW07-0513
5/19/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW07d-0513
5/19/2013
<100
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD i
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NA, not analyzed. NC, not calculated. R, data rejected.
-------
A-73
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont.).
July 2011
5xQL
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
SWPAGW05-0711
7/26/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW05d-0711
7/26/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW12-0711
7/28/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW12d-0711
7/28/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
March 2012
5xQL
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
SWPAGW08-0312
3/24/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW08d-0312
3/24/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-74
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont.).
Sample ID
March 2012
5xQL
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
SWPAGW13-0312
3/24/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW13d-0312
3/24/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
May 2013
5xQL
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
SWPAGW02-0513
5/18/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW02d-0513
5/18/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW07-0513
5/19/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW07d-0513
5/19/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD i
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-75
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont.).
July 2011
5xQL
2.5
2.5
10
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
SWPAGW05-0711
7/26/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW05d-0711
7/26/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW12-0711
7/28/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW12d-0711
7/28/2011
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
March 2012
5xQL
2.5
2.5
10
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
SWPAGW08-0312
3/24/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW08d-0312
3/24/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC, not calculated. R, data rejected.
-------
A-76
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont.).
Sample ID
March 2012
5xQL
2.5
2.5
10
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
SWPAGW13-0312
3/24/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW13d-0312
3/24/2012
<0.5
<0.5
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
May 2013
5xQL
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
SWPAGW02-0513
5/18/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW02d-0513
5/18/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW07-0513
5/19/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
SWPAGW07d-0513
5/19/2013
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
RPD i
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC, not calculated. R, data rejected.
-------
A-77
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont.).
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPDi
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
July 2011
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
2.5
<0.5
<0.5
NC
<0.5
<0.5
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
2.5
<0.5
<0.5
NC
NC, not calculated.
2.5
<0.5
<0.5
NC
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.5
<0.5
<0.5
NC
-------
A-78
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont.).
5xQL
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD i
NC, not calculated.
March 2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
2.5
<0.5
<0.5
NC
May 2013
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
2.5
<0.5
<0.5
NC
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.5
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.5
<0.5
<0.5
NC
<0.5
<0.5
NC
-------
A-79
Table A17. Low Molecular Weight Acid Duplicates.
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Lactate Form
(50 21 5) (64 18
Propionate Butyrate Isobutyrate
(79 09 4) (107 92 6) (79 31 2)
mg/L mg/L mg/L
mg/L mg/L
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
0.19
0.21
NC
0.14
0.13
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
<0.10
<0.10
NC
NC, not calculated. R, data rejected. NA, not analyzed.
-------
A-80
Table A18. Dissolved Gas Duplicates.
Sample ID
• Collected
Methane
(74 82 8)
Ethane
(74 84 0)
Propane
(74 98 6)
Butane
(106 97 8)
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
0.0075
<0.0015
<0.0015
NC
<0.0015
<0.0015
NC
0.0145
<0.0029
<0.0029
NC
<0.0029
<0.0029
NC
0.0205
<0.0041
<0.0041
NC
<0.0041
<0.0041
NC
0.0275
<0.0055
<0.0055
NC
<0.0055
<0.0055
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
0.0070
0.0016
0.0017
NC
<0.0014
<0.0014
NC
0.0135
<0.0027
<0.0027
NC
<0.0027
<0.0027
NC
0.0190
<0.0038
<0.0038
NC
<0.0038
<0.0038
NC
0.0240
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513 A
SWPAGW02d-0513 A
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513 A
SWPAGW07d-0513 A
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
0.0065
<0.0013
<0.0013
NC
<0.0013
<0.0013
NC
0.0135
<0.0027
<0.0027
NC
<0.0027
<0.0027
NC
0.0185
<0.0037
<0.0037
NC
<0.0037
<0.0037
NC
0.0235
<0.0047
<0.0047
NC
<0.0047
<0.0047
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-81
Table A19. Glycol Duplicates.
July 2011
5xQL
25
250
25
125
SWPAGW05-0711
7/26/2011
<5
<50
<5
<25
SWPAGW05d-0711
7/26/2011
<50
<25
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW12-0711
7/28/2011
<50
<25
SWPAGW12d-0711
7/28/2011
<5
<50
<5
<25
RPD i
NC
NC
NC
NC
March 2012
5xQL
50
125
125
250
SWPAGW08-0312
3/24/2012
<25
<25
<50
SWPAGW08d-0312
3/24/2012
<25
<25
<50
RPD i
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW13-0312
3/24/2012
<25
<25
<50
SWPAGW13d-0312
3/24/2012
<25
<25
<50
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
May 2013
5xQL
50
50
50
50
SWPAGW02-0513
5/18/2013
SWPAGW02d-0513
5/18/2013
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW07-0513
5/19/2013
SWPAGW07d-0513
5/19/2013
RPD i
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-82
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates.
July 2011
5xQL
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
SWPAGW05-0711
7/26/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
SWPAGW05d-0711
7/26/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
RPDi
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW12-0711
7/28/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
SWPAGW12d-0711
7/28/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
March 2012
5xQL
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
10.0
10.0
SWPAGW08-0312
3/24/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPAGW08d-0312
3/24/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-83
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
March 2012
5xQL
5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
5.00 5.00
10.0 10.0
SWPAGW13-0312
3/24/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPAGW13d-0312
3/24/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
RPDi
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
May 2013
5xQL
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
10.0
10.0
SWPAGW02-0513
5/18/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPAGW02d-0513
5/18/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
RPDi
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW07-0513
5/19/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
SWPAGW07d-0513
5/19/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-84
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
25.00
<5.00
<5.00
NC
<5.00
<5.00
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
1.00
0.56
NC
<0.50
0.87
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-85
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds Duplicates (cont).
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
<3.00
<3.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-86
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
12.50
<2.50
<2.50
NC
<2.50
<2.50
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-87
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
<5.00
<5.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
<3.00
<3.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
<3.00
<3.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
<3.00
<3.00
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-88
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
25.00
<5.00
<5.00
NC
<5.00
<5.00
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-89
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
<3.00
<3.00
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-90
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-91
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds Duplicates (cont).
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.0
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
<3.00
<3.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-92
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
July 2011
5xQL
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
5.00
2.50
5.00
2.50
2.50
SWPAGW05-0711
7/26/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
SWPAGW05d-0711
7/26/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
RPDi
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW12-0711
7/28/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
SWPAGW12d-0711
7/28/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
March 2012
5xQL
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
SWPAGW08-0312
3/24/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPAGW08d-0312
3/24/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-93
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
March 2012
5xQL
5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
SWPAGW13-0312
3/24/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPAGW13d-0312
3/24/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
RPDi
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
May 2013
5xQL
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
SWPAGW02-0513
5/18/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPAGW02d-0513
5/18/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
RPDi
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SWPAGW07-0513
5/19/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
SWPAGW07d-0513
5/19/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-94
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
<0.50
<0.50
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-95
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates (cont).
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
<2.00
<2.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
<1.00
<1.00
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-96
Table A21. DRO/GRO Duplicates.
Sample ID
^L^ni^M^^i
mmm
——
July 2011
5xQL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<21.5
32.3
NC
27.1
<20.0
NC
March 2012
5xQL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
100
<20
<20
NC
<20
<20
NC
100
74.7
71.1
NC
<20.0
<20.0
NC
May 2013
5xQL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
<20.0
<20.0
NC
NC, not calculated.
-------
A-97
Table A22. O and H Stable Isotopes of Water Duplicates.
Sample ID
^K^SjTFTnTTI
••I
July 2011
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
-54.60
-54.22
0.70
-53.91
-54.04
0.24
-8.10
-8.03
0.87
-8.39
-8.42
0.36
March 2012
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
-53.14
-53.10
0.08
-53.18
-53.08
0.19
-8.40
-8.42
0.24
-8.38
-8.47
1.1
May 2013
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
-56.02
-56.00
0.04
-55.97
-55.91
0.11
-8.66
-8.73
0.81
-8.72
-8.79
0.80
-------
A-98
Table A23. Carbon and Hydrogen Isotopes of DIG and Methane Duplicates.
Sample ID
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
Date Collected
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
513C DIC
July 2011
-13.04
-12.92
0.92
-16.34
-16.19
0.92
March 2012
-14.55
-14.48
0.48
-15.07
-14.75
2.2
May 2013
-14.6
-14.6
0.0
-17.6
-17.7
0.57
^rat^^Q
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR, not reported by laboratory, no methane detected. NC, not calculated.
-------
A-99
Table A24. Strontium Isotope Duplicates.
'
Date Collected
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
7/26/2011
7/26/2011
7/28/2011
7/28/2011
Hg/L
Atom Ratio L/u.g Weight Ratio
July 2011
1550
1540
0.65
294
305
3.67
0.711733
0.711762
0.004
0.712413
0.712409
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.00
0.0034
0.0033
2.99
0.000645
0.000649
0.65
0.002041
0.001967
3.67
March 2012
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
200
204
1.98
699
705
0.85
0.711536
0.711535
0.0001
0.711940
0.711937
0.0004
0.00500
0.00490
1.98
0.00143
0.00142
0.85
0.009500
0.009314
1.98
0.001187
0.001163
2.07
May 2013
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
443
442
0.23
213
214
0.47
0.711236
0.711247
0.00155
0.711852
0.711880
0.00393
0.00226
0.00226
0.23
0.00469
0.00467
0.47
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR, not reported by laboratory. NC, not calculated.
-------
A-100
Table A25. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, and Radium Isotope Duplicates.
Units pCi/L pCi/L
HuMu^l
July 2011
5xRL
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
RPD (%)
SWPAGW12-0711
SWPAGW12d-0711
RPD (%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
March 2012
5xRL
SWPAGW08-0312
SWPAGW08d-0312
RPD (%)
SWPAGW13-0312
SWPAGW13d-0312
RPD (%)
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
3/24/2012
15
<3.0
<3.0
NC
<3.0
<3.0
NC
20
<4.0
<4.0
NC
<4.0
<4.0
NC
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
May 2013
5xRL
SWPAGW02-0513
SWPAGW02d-0513
RPD (%)
SWPAGW07-0513
SWPAGW07d-0513
RPD (%)
5/18/2013
5/18/2013
5/19/2013
5/19/2013
15
<3.0
<3.0
NC
<3.0
<3.0
NC
20
<4.0
<4.0
NC
<4.0
<4.0
NC
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
NA, not analyzed. NC, not calculated.
-------
A-101
Table A26. Data Usability Summary1.
Summary of QA/QC Results
Impact on Data/Usability
July 2011
Field Parameters/EPA on-
site
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Results for ferrous iron and sulfide are
considered screening values as they
were measured on site with field kits.
Meets project requirements.
All detected results were qualified with "J"
as estimated. Data usability is unaffected.
Dissolved gases/ Shaw
Environmental
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
DOC/ORD/NRMRL-Ada
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
DIC/ORD/NRMRL-Ada
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
Nitrate + Nitrite: One Equipment Blank
was above the QL
Anions/Ammonia
ORD/NRMRL-Ada
Nitrate + Nitrite: Affected samples were
qualified with "B." The SWPAGW08
concentration was almost lOx the blank
value and is considered usable. The
remaining qualified samples can be used
with caution.
Dissolved Metals/Shaw
Environmental
ICP-MS: All ICP-MS results were
rejected and replaced with ICP-OES
results. The reasons stated were
potential interferences and that
interference check standards were not
run.
ICP-OES: Dissolved Sb and Tl results
were rejected due to potential spectral
interference.
Continuing calibration checks were
analyzed at appropriate intervals,
however, some metals (B, Ba, K, Na,
Ag, Si, S, P, and U) were not always
included in the check standards at the
required intervals.
ICP-MS: The ICP-MS data were replaced
with ICP-OES data. Detection and
quantitation limits are higher than
desirable. The ICP-OES data should not be
compared with the subsequent ICP-MS data
for trace metals from the last two sampling
events.
ICP-OES: Sb and Tl results were rejected as
unusable.
All samples with detected quantities for
these metals were qualified "J" as
estimated. Data for B, Ba, K, Na, Ag, Si, S, P,
and U are usable as positive identifications
with estimated concentrations.
-------
A-102
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
'ma lysis/La'
Total Metals/Shaw
Environmental
Summary of QA/QC Results
ICP-MS: All ICP-MS results were
rejected and replaced with ICP-OES
results. The reasons stated were
potential interferences and that
interference check standards were not
run.
ICP-OES: Total Sb and Tl results were
rejected due to potential spectral
interference.
Continuing calibration checks were
being analyzed at appropriate
intervals, however, some metals (B, Ba,
K, Na, Ag, Si, S, P, and U) were not
always included in the check standards
at the required intervals.
Digestion: It was determined that all
parameters were not adhered to in
EPA Method 3015A.
Impact on Data/Usability
ICP-MS: The ICP-MS data were replaced
with ICP-OES data. Detection and
quantitation limits are higher than
desirable. The ICP-OES data should not be
compared with the subsequent ICP-MS data
for trace metals from the last two sampling
events.
ICP-OES: Sb and Tl results were rejected as
unusable.
All samples with detected quantities for
these metals were qualified "J" as
estimated. Data for B, Ba, K, Na, Ag, Si, S, P,
and U are usable as positive identifications
with estimated concentrations.
The "J" qualifier was applied to detections
above the QL for digested samples. Data
are usable as positive identifications with
estimated concentrations.
Charge Balance
The calculated charge balance error
ranged from 0.5 to 5.3%, based on the
major cations (dissolved Na, K, Ca, and
Mg) and anions (Cl, SO4, and DIG).
Meets project requirements.
Measured versus
calculated values of
Specific Conductance
(SPC)
The error in measured SPC versus
calculated SPC ranged from 0.6 to
19.2%.
Samples SWPAGW01, SWPAGW02,
SWPAGW03, SWPAGW04, SWPASW01, and
SWPASW02 were above the acceptance
criterion of 15%; SPC data for these
samples are used with caution. In all cases,
for samples outside of the acceptance
range, the measured SPC value was less
than the calculated value; thus, SPC values
for these samples could be biased low.
VOC/Shaw
Environmental
The matrix spike results for 1,1-
dichloroethene and 1,1,2-
trichloroethane were significantly
outside of the control limits. These
compounds are known to be affected
All data for 1,1-dichloroethene and 1,1,2-
trichloroethane were qualified with "R" and
rejected as unusable.
-------
A-103
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
'ma lysis/La'
Summary of QA/QC Results
by base hydrolysis. The preservative,
trisodium phosphate (TSP), is a base
and elevated temperatures (heated
headspace sample introduction) will
accelerate the hydrolysis of 1,1,2-
trichloroethane to 1,1-dichloroethene.
Toluene: The Trip Blank and Field Blank
2 had detections of toluene greater
than the QL
Impact on Data/Usability
Toluene: Affected samples (SWPAGW04
and SWPASW01) were qualified with "B".
SWPAGW04 concentration was similar to
the blanks and is usable with caution.
SWPASW01 was ~3x the Trip Blank and
should be used with caution.
Low Molecular Weight
Acids/Shaw
Environmental
All field blanks for acetate were
greater than the QL It was later
determined that the TSP preservative
was the source of the acetate
contamination.
Low recovery (0%) was noted for the
isobutyrate matrix spike.
For acetate, the data were qualified with
"R" and rejected as unusable.
Samples were qualified with "J-". Negative
bias to the data is possible. As there were
no sample detections, it is possible the
negative bias may be a factor.
The method for glycols was under
development.
Glycols/EPA Region 3
Laboratory
One cooler that contained samples
SWPAGW11, SWPAGW12,
SWPAGW12D, SWPAGW13, and a field
blank arrived at the lab at temperature
above 6° C at 17° C.
The samples collected on July 25th and
26th 2011 exceeded the 14 day holding
time for diethylene, triethylene, and
tetraethylene glycol by 24-48 hours.
The QAPP stated these data are to be
considered screening values until the
method was validated. Even though the
data are considered as screening level
values, these data are usable as on-going
QC checks provide confidence that the
method can detect glycols.
Affected sample results were qualified with
"J-" due to the temperature exceedance;
the potential negative bias is taken into
account for data usability.
Sample results were qualified with "H" to
indicate potential impact. Holding time
exceedance is considered a potential
negative bias. However, the holding time
exceedance was minor, so an impact on
data usability is considered unlikely.
-------
A-104
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
\na lysis/La'
SVOC/EPA Region 8
Laboratory
Summary of QA/QC Results
The laboratory control spike for a
sample batch had low recoveries for
limonene, aniline,
hexachlorocyclopentadiene, and
pyridine. The laboratory control spike
for another sample batch had low
recoveries for aniline,
hexachlorocyclopentadiene, and
pyridine.
The matrix spike of sample
SWPAGW11 had low recovery for the
following analytes: limonene, 1,2-
dichlorobenzene, 1,3-dichlorobenzene,
1,3-dimethyl adamantine, 1,4-
dichlorobenzene, 2,4-dichlorophenol,
2-butoxyethanol, and
hexachloroethane. Also one surrogate
in sample SWPAGW11 was at 47%
recovery, below the lower limit of 50%.
This further supports the potential for
a low bias.
A laboratory refrigerator lost coolant
and exceeded the 6°C upper limit,
reaching a maximum of 10.7° C.
One equipment blank had 2-
butoxyethanol detected above the QL
Impact on Data/Usability
These analytes and affected samples were
qualified with "J-" to indicate a potential
negative bias that is taken into account for
data usability.
These analytes were qualified for sample
SWPAGW11 with "J-" to indicate a potential
negative bias. The detections for 2-
butoxyethanol, butyl benzyl phthalate, and
phenol may be biased low.
Affected samples (SWPAGW03,
SWPAGW08, SWPAGW09, SWPAGW10,
SWPAGW11, SWPAGW12, SWPAGW12-
DUP, SWPAGW13, SWPASW03, and SWPA
Eq Blk-1) were qualified with "J-" due to a
potential negative bias that is taken into
account for data usability.
Samples collected on the same day as the
equipment blank (SWPAGW08,
SWPAGW10, and SWPASW03) with
detected quantities were qualified with "B."
Samples collected on another day with
detections were not qualified with "B"
(SWPAGW05, SWPAGWOSd, and
SWPAGW11, SWPAGW12d, SWPAGW13,
and SWPASW01). Detections in all of these
samples are viewed with caution. There are
other factors that support this approach.
See discussion in report.
-------
A-105
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
'ma lysis/La'
DRO/GRO/EPA Region 8
Laboratory
Summary of QA/QC Results
GRO: Both field blanks and the
equipment blank were above the QL
DRO: The MS/MSD for sample
SWPAGW11 had a low recovery of 69%
and 67.2% (limits 70-130%).
A refrigerator lost coolant and
exceeded the 6 °C upper limit, reaching
a maximum of 10.7 °C.
Some samples were received with a pH
greater than two.
Impact on Data/Usability
GRO: SWPASW01 was qualified with "B."
The sample concentration was less than the
associated field blank and is therefore
considered unusable.
DRO: Affected samples were qualified with
"J-" for a potential negative bias
(SWPAGW04, SWPAGW05, SWPAGW05D,
SWPAGW06, SWPAGW07, SWPAGW08,
SWPAGW09, SWPAGW10, SWPAGW11,
SWPAGW12, SWPAGW12D, SWPAGW13,
SWPASW03, SWPA Fid Blk 2, and SWPA Eq
Blk-1). Data may be biased low.
These samples were qualified with "J-" for a
potential negative bias (SWPAGW04,
SWPAGW05, SWPAGWOSd, SWPAGW06,
SWPAGW07, SWPAGW08, SWPAGW09,
SWPAGW10, SWPAGW11, SWPAGW12,
SWPAGW12D, SWPAGW13, SWPASW02,
SWPASW03, SWPA Fid Blk 2, and SWPA Eq
Blk-1). Data may be biased low.
Affected samples were qualified with "J-"
for a potential negative bias (SWPAGW04,
SWPAGW05, SWPAGWOSd, SWPAGW06,
SWPAGW08, and SWPASW02). Data may
be biased low.
For DRO, due to each of the factors listed,
all results should be used with caution as
biased low.
O, H Stable Isotopes of
Water/ Shaw
Environmental
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
Sr Isotopes/ USGS
Laboratory- Denver
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
Isotech Gas Isotopes
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
-------
A-106
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
'ma lysis/La'
Summary of QA/QC Results
Impact on Data/Usability
Field Parameters/EPA on-
site
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Results for ferrous iron and sulfide are
considered screening values as they
were measured on site with field kits.
Meets project requirements.
All detected results were qualified with "J"
as estimated. Data usability is unaffected.
Dissolved gases/ Shaw
Environmental
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
DOC/ORD/NRMRL-Ada
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
DIC/ORD/NRMRL-Ada
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
Nitrate+Nitrite: Two field blanks and
one equipment blank had detections of
above the QL
Anions/Ammonia
ORD/NRMRL-Ada
Nitrate+Nitrite: Affected samples
(SWPAGW03, SWPAGW04, SWPAGW05,
SWPAGW06, SWPAGW08, SWPAGWOSd,
SWPAGW12, SWPAGW13, SWPAGWISd,
SWPAGW15, and SWPASW02) were
qualified with "B."
These data are indicative of low levels of
nitrate in the samples and may be used
with caution, with the exception of sample
SWPAGW06, in which the blank
concentration was greater than the sample
concentration.
Dissolved Metals/Shaw
Environmental
ICP-MS: All ICP-MS results were
rejected due to potential interferences
and that interference check standards
were not run. Samples were re-
analyzed using a CLP lab.
ICP-OES: Continuing calibration checks
were analyzed at appropriate intervals,
however, these metals (B, Ba, K, Na,
Ag, Si, S, and P) were not always
included in the check standards at the
required intervals.
ICP-MS: CLP lab ICP-MS data were used.
ICP-OES: All samples with detected
quantities for these metals were qualified
"J" as estimated.
Data for B, Ba, K, Na, Ag, Si, S, P, and U are
usable as positive identifications with
estimated concentrations.
Total Metals/Shaw
Environmental
ICP-MS: All ICP-MS results were
rejected due to potential interferences
and that interference check standards
were not run. Samples were re-
analyzed using a CLP lab.
ICP-MS: CLP ICP-MS data were used.
-------
A-107
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
\na lysis/La'
Summary of QA/QC Results
Digestion: It was determined that all
parameters were not adhered to in
EPA Method 3015A.
ICP-OES: Continuing calibration checks
were analyzed at appropriate intervals,
however, these metals (B, Ba, K, Na,
Ag, Si, S, and P) were not always
included in the check standards at the
required intervals.
Impact on Data/Usability
Digestion: The "J" qualifier was applied to
detections above the QL for digested
samples. Data are usable as positive
identifications with estimated
concentrations.
ICP-OES: All samples with detected
quantities for these metals were qualified
"J" as estimated.
Data for B, Ba, K, Na, Ag, Si, S, P, and U are
usable as positive identifications with
estimated concentrations.
Total and Dissolved
Metals by ICP-MS/CLP
The ICP-MS metal analytes, as
identified in the QAPP, which were
analyzed by the CLP lab are total and
dissolved: Al, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, Ni, Sb,
Se,Th,TI, andU.
Field blanks SWPAFBIk02 and
SWPAFBIkOS both had dissolved Ni
concentrations exceeding the QL at
21.2 and 6.0 ng/L, respectively.
SWPAFBIank02 also had total
concentrations of cadmium (134 ng/L)
and nickel (1.3 ng/L) above the CRQL
The only affected sample was
SWPAGW11 for dissolved Ni. No
samples were reported with detects
for Cd, and no samples were >QL for
total Ni.
For dissolved Ni, SWPAGW11 was qualified
with a "B". The sample concentration was
below the blank value and is therefore
unusable.
Charge Balance
The calculated charge balance error
ranged from 0.1 to 5.4%, based on the
major cations (dissolved Na, K, Ca, and
Mg) and anions (Cl, SO4, and DIG). NO3
was also used for samples SWPAGW10
and SWPAGW16.
Meets project requirements.
Measured versus
calculated values of
Specific Conductance
(SPC)
The error in measured SPC versus
calculated SPC ranged from 0.0 to
7.5%.
Meets project requirements.
-------
A-108
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
'ma lysis/La'
VOC/Shaw
Environmental
Summary of QA/QC Results
The matrix spike results for 1,1-
dichloroethene and 1,1,2-
trichloroethane were significantly
outside of the control limits. These
compounds are known to be affected
by base hydrolysis. The preservative,
trisodium phosphate (TSP), is a base
and elevated temperatures (heated
headspace sample introduction) will
accelerate the hydrolysis of 1,1,2-
trichloroethane to 1,1-dichloroethene.
The carbon disulfide matrix spike had a
low recovery.
Impact on Data/Usability
All data for 1,1-dichloroethene and 1,1,2-
trichloroethane were qualified with "R" and
rejected as unusable.
Affected samples (SWPAGW03,
SWPAGW04, SWPAGW05, SWPAGW06,
SWPAGW08, SWPAGWOSd, SWPAGW12,
SWPAGW13, SWPASWISd, SWPAGW15,
and SWPASW02) were qualified with "J-" as
a potential negative bias that is taken into
account for data usability.
Low Molecular Weight
Acids/Shaw
Environmental
Formate: All field blank samples
contained formate above the QL and
were greater than or similar to the
sample concentrations. It was
determined this was due to
contamination from the preservative.
Propionate was above QL in a field and
an equipment blank.
Formate: All results were rejected and
qualified with an "R" as unusable.
The affected sample (SWPASW03) was
qualified with "B." Data are considered
usable with caution as the sample
concentration is similar to the blank levels.
The method for glycols was under
development.
Glycols/EPA Region 3
Laboratory
A blank spike was below recovery
limits at 76% for tetraethylene glycol.
Lab reported low (34%) recovery for
tetraethylene glycol in a low blank
spike at 25 ng/L and low (44%)
recovery for 2-butoxyethanol in a low
blank spike at 5 ng/L.
The QAPP stated these data are to be
considered screening values until the
method was validated. The data are usable
as on-going QC checks provide confidence
that the method can detect glycols.
All samples were qualified with "J-" for
these two analytes for a potential negative
bias that is taken into account for data
usability.
-------
A-109
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
'ma lysis/La'
SVOC/EPA Region 8
Laboratory
Summary of QA/QC Results
Method Blank Spike 1, Batch 1200101,
had low recoveries for limonene,
adamantane, and 1,3-dimethyl
adamantane.
Method Blank Spike 1, Batch 1200102,
had a low recovery for limonene,
adamantane, and 1,3-dimethyl
adamantane.
Matrix spike MSI, Batch 1200101, had
low recoveries for limonene and 1,3-
dimethyl adamantane. The duplicate
for this spike (MSD1) had a low
recovery for adamantane.
Impact on Data/Usability
Affected samples (SWPAGW03,
SWPAGW04, SWPAGW05, SWPAGW08,
SWPAGWOSd, SWPAGW12, SWPAGW13,
SWPAGWISd, SWPAGW15 and
SWPASW02) were qualified with "J-" for a
potential negative bias that is taken into
account for data usability.
Affected samples (SWPAGW06-0312,
SWPAGW10-0312, SWPAGW11-0312,
SWPAGW14-0312, SWPAGW16-0312,
SWPAGW17-0312 and SWPASW03-0312)
were qualified with "J-" for a potential
negative bias that is taken into account for
data usability.
The affected sample (SWPAGW05) was
already qualified with "J-" (see above). As a
result of the spike recoveries noted above,
all samples were qualified for limonene,
adamantane, and 1,3-dimethyl adamantane
with "J-" for a potential negative bias that is
taken into account for data usability.
DRO: Diesel range organics were
detected in an equipment blank SWPA
Eq BlankOl at the RL (20.0 ng/L).
DRO/GRO/EPA Region 8
Laboratory
GRO: There were detections in one
field blank and both equipment blanks;
concentrations ranged from 20.0 to
27.4 ng/L. Because TPH as gasoline was
not detected in any samples, no
qualifications were necessary.
DRO: Affected samples (SWPAGW05 and
SWPASW02) were qualified with "B." The
result for SWPAGW05 was at the blank
concentration and is unusable. The DRO
concentration in SWPASW02 was greater
than the blank; data for this sample are
therefore considered to be usable with
caution.
GRO: No impact to data usability.
O, H Stable Isotopes of
Water/ Shaw
Environmental
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
Sr Isotopes/ USGS
Laboratory- Denver
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
-------
A-110
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
All QA/QC criteria were met
Isotech Gas Isotopes
Meets project requirements
All QA/QC criteria were met
ALS Radionuclides
Meets project requirements
Field Parameters/EPA on-
site
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Results for ferrous iron and sulfide are
considered screening values as they
were measured on-site with field kits.
Meets project requirements.
All detected results were qualified with "J"
as estimated. Data usability is unaffected.
Dissolved gases/ CB&I
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
DOC/ORD/NRMRL-Ada
Two equipment blanks with detections
above QL
Affected samples (SWPAGW01,
SWPAGW03, SWPAGW05, SWPAGW09,
SWPAGW13, and SWPAGW14) were
qualified with "B." Sample concentrations
for SWPAGW03 and SWPAGW13 were less
than the equipment blank concentrations
and are unusable, but indicative of low level
DOC concentrations. Sample
concentrations for SWPAGW01,
SWPAGW05, SWPAGW09, and SWPAGW14
were greater than the blank concentrations
and are usable with caution.
DIC/ORD/NRMRL-Ada
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
TKN: One equipment blank with
detection above QL.
TKN: Affected samples (SWPAGW05 and
SWPAGW09) were qualified with "B."
SWPAGW05 concentration was less than
the equipment blank and is therefore
unusable. SWPAGW09 was similar to the
blank value and is therefore usable with
caution.
Anions/Ammonia
ORD/NRMRL-Ada
-------
A-lll
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
'ma lysis/La'
Dissolved Metals/
Southwest Research
Institute
Summary of QA/QC Results
ICP-MS Dissolved Metals, field and
equipment blank detections were >QL
as listed below:
Al: Equipment Blank 2
Cu: Equipment Blank 4 and Field Blank
4
Pb: Equipment Blank 4
ICP-OES: All QA/QC criteria were met.
Cold vapor AA for Hg: All QA/QC
criteria were met.
Impact on Data/Usability
ICP-MS: Affected samples were qualified as
follows:
Al: SWPASW02 was qualified with a "B."
The sample concentration was greater than
the equipment blank concentration and is
therefore usable with caution.
Cu: SWPAGW03, SWPAGW13, and
SWPAGW14 were qualified with a "B."
SWPAGW03 was ~4x the concentration of
Field Blank 4 and should be used with
caution. SWPAGW13 and SWPAGW14
concentrations were less than Field Blank 4
and are therefore unusable.
Pb: SWPAGW03 was qualified with a "B."
The sample concentration was greater than
the blank and is therefore usable with
caution.
ICP-OES: Meets project requirements.
Cold vapor AA for Hg: Meets project
requirements.
Total Metals/Southwest
Research Institute
ICP-OES:
Fe: Samples SWPAGW02 and
SWPAGW02d were field duplicates.
The requirement for field duplicates
was a RPD <30% for results >5xQL The
results for samples SWPAGW02 and
SWPAGW02d were 902 and 653 ng/L,
respectively. These results were both
greater than 5xQL and the RPD for
these field duplicates was 32%.
Mn: Samples SWPAGW02 and
SWPAGW02d were field duplicates.
The requirement for field duplicates
was an RPD <30% for results >5xQL
ICP-OES: Affected samples were qualified as
follows:
Fe: Samples SWPAGW02 and SWPAGW02d
as well as SWPAGW04 were qualified with
an '
' for total Fe results. Precision of
these sample results exceeded the project
requirement by just 2%, but this variation is
considered when using the data.
Mn: Samples SWPAGW02 and
SWPAGW02d as well as SWPAGW04 were
qualified with an "*" for total Mn results.
Precision of these sample results exceeded
-------
A-112
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
'ma lysis/La'
Summary of QA/QC Results
The results for samples SWPAGW02
and SWPAGW02d were 508 and 366
Hg/L, respectively. These results were
both greater than 5xQL and the RPD
for these field duplicates was 32.5%.
ICP-OES Total Metals, field and
equipment blank had detections >QL
as listed below:
Zn : EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4; the associated
samples with concentrations <10x
blank: GW03, GW04, GW05, GW07,
GW07d, GW08, GW09
GW01, required a "B" qualifier.
ICP-MS:
V: V was detected in the preparation
blank for Sample Delivery Group (SDG)
524043 at 0.22 ng/L This affected
samples: GW01, GW02, GW02d,
GW03, GW04, GW05, GW06, GW07d,
GW08, SW01, SW02, FBI, FB2, FB3,
EB1, EB2, EB3, and EB4. V was also
detected in the preparation blank for
SDG 524061 at 0.23 ng/L This affected
samples GW07, GW14, GW18, and
GW19.
ICP-MS Total Metals, field and
equipment blank detections >QL listed
below:
Impact on Data/Usability
project requirements by just 2.5% but this
variation is considered when using the data.
Zn: Samples SWPAGW03, SWPAGW04,
SWPAGW05, SWPAGW07, SWPAGW07d,
SWPAGW08, and SWPAGW09 were
qualified with "B". The SWPAGW09
concentration was almost lOx the blank
and is usable. The remaining samples had
similar to up to 3x the blank concentration
and are considered to be usable with
caution.
ICP-MS: Affected samples were qualified as
follows:
V: Samples SWPAGW01,SWPAGW02,
SWPAGW02d, SWPAGW03, SWPAGW04,
SWPAGW05, SWPAGW06, SWPAGW07,
SWPAGW07d, SWPAGW08, SWPAGW14,
SWPAGW18, SWPAGW19, SWPASW01,
SWPASW02, FBI, FB2, FB3, EB1, EB2, EB3,
and EB4 were qualified with a "B." Most
sample concentrations were ~2-4x the
laboratory preparation blanks. Due to the
detection of vanadium in preparation
blanks and the similarity of the sample
concentrations, the blank detections
appear to be a laboratory contamination
issue or possibly an interference problem
with the instrument; the data should be
considered unusable.
-------
A-113
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
'ma lysis/La'
Summary of QA/QC Results
As: EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4, FB4; the
associated samples with
concentrations <10x blank - GW01,
GW02, GW02d, GW03, GW05, GW06,
GW07, GW07d, GW08, GW13, GW14,
GW18, GW19, SW01, and SW02 .
Cu: EB2, EB3, FB4; the associated
samples with concentrations <10x
blank - GW02, GW02d, GW03, GW04,
GW06,GW08, GW13, GW14, GW18,
GW19, SW01, and SW02.
Pb : EB2; the associated samples with
concentrations <10x blank - GW04,
SW01, and SW02.
V: EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4, FBI, FB2, FB3,
FB4; the associated samples with
concentrations <10x blank - GW01,
GW02, GW02d, GW03, GW04, GW05,
GW06, GW07, GW07d, GW08, GW14,
GW18, GW19, SW01, and SW02.
Impact on Data/Usability
As: Samples SWPAGW01, SWPAGW02,
SWPAGW02d, SWPAGW03, SWPAGW05,
SWPAGW06, SWPAGW07, SWPAGW07d,
SWPAGW08, SWPAGW13, SWPAGW14,
SWPAGW18, SWPAGW19, SWPASW01, and
SWPASW02 were qualified with "B".
Samples were ~2-5x the blank
concentrations; the data should be used
with caution.
Cu: Samples SWPAGW02, SWPAGW02d,
SWPAGW03, SWPAGW04, SWPAGW06,
SWPAGW08, SWPAGW13, SWPAGW14,
SWPAGW18, SWPAGW19, SWPASW01, and
SWPASW02 were qualified with "B".
SWPAGW02, SWPAGW02d, SWPAGW03,
SWPAGW13, SWPAGW14, SWPAGW18,
SWPAGW19, and SWPASW01
concentrations were all below the blank
concentrations and are therefore unusable.
SWPASW02 had a concentration similar to
the blank and should be considered usable
with caution. SWPAGW03, SWPAGW04,
SWPAGW06, and SWPAGW08 were up to
~6x the blank value and can be used with
caution.
Pb: Samples SWPAGW04, SWPASW01, and
SWPASW02 were qualified with "B". The
SWPAGW04 concentration was less than
the blank and is therefore unusable. The
other two samples are less than 2x the
blank; therefore, these data should be used
with caution.
V: Samples SWPAGW01,SWPAGW02,
SWPAGW02d, SWPAGW03, SWPAGW04,
SWPAGW05, SWPAGW06, SWPAGW07,
SWPAGW07d, SWPAGW08, SWPAGW14,
SWPAGW18, SWPAGW19, SWPASW01,
SWPASW02 qualified with "B". Most
sample concentrations were similar to the
blanks. This is related to the issue discussed
-------
A-114
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
\na lysis/La'
Summary of QA/QC Results
Cold vapor AA for Hg: All QA/QC
criteria were met.
Impact on Data/Usability
above with V. These data should be
considered unusable.
Cold vapor AA for Hg: Meets project
requirements.
Charge Balance
The calculated charge balance error
ranged from 2.9 to 9.0%, based on the
major cations (dissolved Na, K, Ca, and
Mg) and anions (Cl, SO4, NO3, and DIG).
Alkalinity was used for samples
SWPAGW18 and SWPAGW19.
Meets project requirements.
Measured versus
calculated values of
Specific Conductance
(SPC)
The error in measured SPC versus
calculated SPC ranged from 0.1 to
5.9%.
Meets project requirements.
VOC/ Southwest Research
Institute
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
Low Molecular Weight
Acids/Shaw
Environmental
Low recovery (0%) for isobutyrate
matrix spike.
All samples were qualified with "J-" with
potential negative bias to the data. As there
were no sample detections, it is possible
the negative bias may be a factor (note the
0% recovery for the matrix spike).
Glycols/EPA Region 3
The method for glycols was under
development.
The QAPP stated these data are to be
considered screening values until the
method was validated. The data are usable
as on-going QC checks provide confidence
that the method can detect glycols.
SVOC/EPA Region 8
Laboratory
The following samples had low
surrogate recoveries: SWPAGW07d: p-
terphenyl = low; SWPAGW03:
nitrobenzene d5 = low, 2-
flourobiphenyl = low.
Analytes that were associated with these
surrogates for samples SWPAGW03 and
SWPAGW07d were qualified with "J-" for a
potential negative bias that is taken into
account for data usability.
See Appendix B for samples qualified.
DRO/GRO/EPA Region 8
Laboratory
GRO: All QA/QC criteria were met.
DRO: SWPA Eq Blank04 (collected
5/20/13) was above the RL (20 ng/L) at
24.6 ng/L. This affected samples
SWPAGW03, SWPAGW13, SWPAGW14
and SWPA F Blank04; all samples were
non-detect so no B qualifiers are
necessary.
GRO: Meets project requirements.
DRO: No impact to data usability.
-------
A-115
Table A26. Data Usability Summary (cont).
Analysis/Lab
O, H Stable Isotopes of
Water/ Shaw
Environmental
Summary of QA/QC Results
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Impact on Data/Usability
Meets project requirements.
Sr Isotopes/ USGS
Laboratory- Denver
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
Isotech Gas Isotopes
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
ALS Radionuclides
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
L
1 QA/QC criteria and project requirements were met with exceptions as listed.
-------
A-116
Table A27. Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements.
Parameter Electrode Reading Acceptance Range Performance Evaluation
•mWJiTlB
July 25, 2011 initial/ mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1385
208
7.01
0.02
1272-1554
204-234
6.80-7.20
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
July 25, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
Zero-DO
1350
208
7.03
0.05
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
July 26, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1413
205
7.00
0.01
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
July 26, 2011 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
1401
208
7.02
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
July 26, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1309
210
7.04
0.01
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
July 27, 2011 mid-day/end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
Zero-DO
1396
NR
7.04
NR
1272-1554
NR
6.8-7.2
NR
Acceptable
Not evaluated
Acceptable
Not evaluated
July 28, 2011 mid-day/ end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1400
209
6.98
0.00
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
March 23, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
1412
214
7.00
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
-------
A-117
Table A27. Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements (cont.).
Parameter Electrode Reading Acceptance Range Performance Evaluation
March 23, 2012 mid-day
pH
7.03
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
March 23, 2012 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1380
215
7.02
0.01
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
March 24, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1410
216
7.00
0.02
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
March 24, 2012 mid-day/end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
Zero-DO
1398
215
7.05
0.03
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
March 25, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1412
215
7.00
0.06
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
March 25, 2012 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7732
230
6.88
7690-8080
204-234
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
March 25, 2012 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
NR
NR
7.01
NR
NR
NR
6.8-7.2
NR
Not evaluated
Not evaluated
Acceptable
Not evaluated
March 26, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
Zero-DO
1411
216
6.99
0.04
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
March 26, 2012 mid-day/end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Turbidity
1350
226
6.97
6.87
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
0-10
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
March 27, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
Alkalinity
1413
216
7.00
0.05
100
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
106
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
-------
A-118
Table A27. Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements (cont.).
Parameter Electrode Reading Acceptance Range Performance Evaluation
March 27, 2012 mid-day/end-of-day
pH
7.02 6.8-7.2
Acceptable
May 2013
May 17, 2013 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1420
214
7.00
0.07
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 17, 2013 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
Zero-DO
1398
214
7.05
0.05
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 17, 2013 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
Turbidity
1398
216
7.05
0.11
6.70
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
0-10
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 18, 2013 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1413
216
7.00
0.11
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 18, 2013 mid-day/end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1379
214
6.98
0.06
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 19, 2013 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
Zero-DO
1413
215
7.01
0.07
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 19, 2013 mid-day/end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1389
217
7.06
0.22
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 20, 2013 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
Zero-DO
1413
215
7.00
0.21
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
-------
A-119
Table A27. Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements (cont.).
Parameter
Electrode Reading Acceptance Range Performance Evaluation
May 20, 2013 mid-day/end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
Zero-DO
1490
216
7.12
0.12
1272-1554
204-234
6.8-7.2
<0.25
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
-------
A-120
Table A28. Data Qualifiers and Data Descriptors.
Q IT Dpfinitinn
U
J
J+
J-
B
H
*
R
The analyte was analyzed for, but was not detected above the reported quantitation limit (QL).
The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the analyte
to the quality of the data generated because certain quality control criteria were not met, or the concentration of the
QL).
in the sample (due either
analyte was below the
The result is an estimated quantity, but the result may be biased high.
For both detected and non-detected results, there may be a low bias due to low spike recoveries or sample preservation issues.
The analyte is found in a blank sample above the QL and the concentration found in the sample is less than 10 times the concentration found
in the blank.
The sample was prepared or analyzed beyond the specified holding time. Sample results may be biased low.
Relative percent difference of a field or lab duplicate is outside acceptance criteria.
The data are unusable. The sample results are rejected due to serious deficiencies in the ability to analyze the sample
control criteria. Sample results are not reported. The analyte may or may not be present in the sample.
and/or meet quality
Data Descriptors
Descriptor Definition
NA
NR
ND
NS
Not Applicable (See QAPP)
Not Reported by Laboratory or Field Sampling Team
Not Detected
Not Sampled
-------
A-121
Table A29. Tentatively Identified Compounds (TICs) for SVOCs.
Compound (CAS Number)
Estimated
concentration
SWPASW01-0711
SWPAGW04-0711
SWPASW02-0711
SWPAGW05-0711
SWPAGW05d-0711
SWPAGW06-0711
SWPAGW10-0711
SWPASW03-0711
SWPA EQ BLK-01
SWPAGW13-0711
<;\A/PAr;\A/i9 n?ii
SWPAGW12d-0711
SWPAGW1 1-071 1
SWPA EQ Blank
SWPAGW06-0312
SWPAFBIankOS
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPAGW11-0312
July 2011 Sampling Event
Toluene (108-88-3)
3-Hexen-2-one (763-93-9)
2-Cyclohexen-l-one, 2-methyl-5
Caprolactum (105-60-2)
Octacosane (630-02-4)
Toluene (108-88-3)
Caprolactum (105-60-2)
Toluene (108-88-3)
Caprolactum (105-60-2)
Caprolactum (105-60-2)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (010544-50-0)
l-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (872-50-4)
l-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (872-50-4)
Caprolactum (105-60-2)
l-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (872-50-4)
Caprolactum (105-60-2)
2-methyl-propanoic acid (79-31-2)
3,5-bis(l...)-benzenepropanoic acid (70331-94-1)
l-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (872-50-4)
2-(2-butoxyethoxy)ethanol (112-34-5)
Caprolactum (105-60-2)
1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid (88-99-3)
2-hydroxy-l-(...)-octdecanoic acid
l-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (872-50-4)
2,6-dimethylbenzoquinone (527-61-7)
2,6-dimethylbenzoquinone (527-61-7)
Caprolactam (105-60-2)
2-ethyl-l-hexanol (104-76-7)
2-undecanone (112-12-9)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (010544-50-0)
2-undecanone (112-12-9)
2-undecanone (112-12-9)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (010544-50-0)
0.57
0.29
0.32
0.53
0.28
0.34
0.56
0.52
0.39
0.39
5.51
0.47
0.42
0.37
0.67
0.44
0.37
0.34
1.23
0.78
0.39
0.32
0.37
0.35
0.44
0.54
0.42
0.74
1.12
2.02
1.20
0.89
1.48
-------
A-122
Table A29. Tentatively Identified Compounds f TICs) for SVOCs (cont.
Sample
Compound (CAS Number)
Estimated
concentration
SWPAFBIankOl
SWPA Eq BlankOl
C\A/DA^\A/nR HR13
SWPAGW09-0513
oVVrA r bianKUZ
SWPA Eq Blank02
SWPA F BlankOS
SWPA Eq BlankOS
SWPAGW08-0513
C\A/DA Fn Dl^nl/n/l
2-undecanone (112-12-9)
2-undecanone (112-12-9)
1-propene, 1,2,3-trichloro (013116-57-9)
Propylene glycol (57-55-6)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (010544-50-0)
2-undecanone (112-12-9)
3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxy (001620-98-0)
2-undecanone (112-12-9)
3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxy (1620-98-0)
Phenol, 2,4-bis(l,l-dimethyl) (96-76-4)
2-undecanone (112-12-9)
Thiophene, 2-(l,l-dimethyl) (1689-78-7)
3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxy (001620-98-0)
2-undecanone (112-12-9)
3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxy (001620-98-0)
Phenol, 2,4-bis(l,l-dimethyl) (96-76-4)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (010544-50-0)
3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxy (001620-98-0)
2-undecanone (112-12-9)
1.21
1.19
1.05
7.46
3.40
1.32
0.64
1.09
0.53
0.66
1.25
0.55
0.79
1.01
0.61
0.57
29.5
0.64
2.13
-------
Appendix B Sample Results, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix B
Sample Results
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/084
B-l
-------
Appendix B Sample Results, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Table of Contents
Tables
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Washington County, Pennsylvania) B-6
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Washington County, Pennsylvania) B-12
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania) B-18
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania) B-36
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols,
and Low Molecular Weight Acids (Washington County, Pennsylvania) B-50
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds
(Washington County, Pennsylvania) B-57
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters
(Washington County, Pennsylvania) B-78
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Washington County, Pennsylvania) B-84
B-2
-------
B-3
Appendix B. Sample Results. Legend (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Data Qualifiers
< The analyte concentration is less than the quantitation limit (QL).
U The analyte was analyzed for, but was not detected above the reported QL.
The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is the approximate concentration of the analyte in the sample (due either to the quality of the data
J+
J-
B
H
*
R
Notes
Table B-l
Table B-3
Table B-4
Table B-5
generated because certain quality control criteria were not met, or the concentration of the analyte was below the QL).
The result is an estimated quantity, but the result may be biased high.
For both detected and non-detected results, the result is estimated but may be biased low.
The analyte is found in a blank sample above the QL and the concentration found in the sample is less than 10 times the concentration found in the blank.
The sample was prepared or analyzed beyond the specified holding time. Sample results may be biased low.
Relative percent difference of a field or lab duplicate is outside acceptance criteria.
The data are unusable. The sample results are rejected due to serious deficiencies in the ability to analyze the sample and/or meet quality control criteria. Sample results are not
reported. The analyte may or may not be present in the sample.
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) is estimated based on Specific Conductance (SPC): TDS(mg/L) = SPC(mS/cm) * 650.
Field-determined concentrations of ferrous iron and hydrogen sulfide are screening values.
R. Data rejected. Potential spectral (mass or emission) interference.
R. Data rejected. 1,1,2-trichloroethane is subject to alkaline hydrolysis to 1,1-dichloroethene. This reaction could be supported by the sample preservative (trisodium
phosphate).
R. Data rejected. Acetate contamination in samples and blanks is due to the sample preservative (trisodium phosphate).
The method used for glycol analysis is under development.
-------
B-4
Appendix B. Sample Results - Legend (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Acronyms
CAS Chemical Abstracts Service
DIC Dissolved Inorganic Carbon
DO Dissolved Oxygen
DOC Dissolved Organic Carbon
DRO Diesel Range Organics
GRO Gasoline Range Organics
NA Not Applicable (See QAPP)
ND Not Detected
NR Not Reported by Laboratory or Field Sampling Team
NS Not Sampled
ORP Oxidation reduction potential
SPC Specific Conductance
IDS Total Dissolved Solids
TKN Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Gross Alpha Gross alpha particle activity
Gross Beta Gross beta particle activity
Units
BTU
°C
mg/L
mS/cm
pCi/L
Key
GW
SW
04
d
British thermal unit
Degrees Celsius
Micrograms per liter
Milligrams per liter
Millisiemens per centimeter at 25°C
Picocuries per liter
Ground water sample
Surface water sample
Sampling location
Field Duplicate
-------
B-5
Appendix B. Sample Results. Legend (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Metals and Isotopes
Ag
Al
As
B
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Silver
Aluminum
Arsenic
Boron
Barium
Beryllium
Calcium
Cadmium
Cobalt
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Hg
K
Li
Mg
Mn
Mo
Na
Ni
P
Pb
Rb
S
Mercury
Potassium
Lithium
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Nickel
Phosphorus
Lead
Rubidium
Sulfur
Sb
Se
Si
Sr
Th
Ti
Tl
U
V
Zn
Antimony
Selenium
Silicon
Strontium
Thorium
Titanium
Thallium
Uranium
Vanadium
Zinc
6 H [( H/H) Samf
6180 [(180/160) Sa
613C [(13C/12C) Sai
Ra-226 Radium-226
Ra-228 Radium-228
-------
B-6
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Round 3
Temperature
SPC
IDS
DO
PH
ORP
Turbidity
Alkalinity
Ferrous Iron
Hydrogen Sulfide
°C
mS/cm
mg/L
mg/L
mV
NTU
mg CaCO3/L
mg Fe2+/L
mgS/L
17.2
0.379
247
0.01
7.12
17
2.0
350
<0.03 U
<0.01U
14.1
0.537
349
0.15
6.87
78
0.6
281
<0.03 U
0.01 J
12.6
0.343
223
0.00
7.56
-132
8.2
300
0.03 J
<0.01U
12.3
0.537
349
0.09
6.90
-25
27.7
240
0.03 J
<0.01 U
16.0
0.581
378
4.47
7.52
23
5.2
262
<0.03 U
<0.01U
11.9
0.752
489
7.64
7.06
99
10.6
252
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
12.3
0.798
519
8.52
6.85
235
2.5
187
<0.03 U
<0.01U
-------
B-7
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Temperature
SPC
IDS
DO
PH
ORP
Turbidity
Alkalinity
Ferrous Iron
Hydrogen Sulfide
°C
mS/cm
mg/L
mg/L
mV
NTU
mg CaCO3/L
mg Fe2+/L
mgS/L
14.8
0.398
258
0.03
7.29
-29
17
244
1.65 J
<0.01U
14.2
0.587
382
0.06
7.20
-49
5.7
232
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
13.4
0.597
388
0.14
7.06
-31
15.2
274
0.55 J
<0.01U
13.4
0.874
568
2.86
7.14
127
16
340
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
12.3
1.352
879
7.42
6.84
82
4.4
320
<0.03 U
<0.01U
12.7
1.472
957
4.49
6.77
130
0.9
365
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
16.3
0.645
420
0.47
8.60
-157
19
428
0.15 J
<0.01 U
11.7
0.642
417
0.23
6.99
-98
0.8
205
0.83 J
0.05 J
12.0
0.694
452
0.12
7.14
-130
7.1
278
0.78 J
0.26 J
-------
B-8
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW07 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/26/11 5/19/13 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Temperature
SPC
IDS
DO
PH
ORP
Turbidity
Alkalinity
Ferrous Iron
Hydrogen Sulfide
°C
mS/cm
mg/L
mg/L
mV
NTU
mg CaCO3/L
mg Fe2+/L
mgS/L
13.2
0.442
287
3.97
6.88
115
9.0
94
<0.03 U
<0.01U
13.0
0.592
385
4.94
6.20
134
3.0
115
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
20.1
0.481
312
5.41
7.52
75
7.6
208
<0.03 U
<0.01U
10.8
0.525
341
6.12
7.35
14
1.6
202
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
12.3
0.527
343
6.49
7.18
178
2.2
210
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
13.0
0.583
379
8.24
7.17
98
5.0
216
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
12.3
0.754
490
7.22
6.92
153
25.2
252
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
13.4
0.816
531
3.89
7.13
99
4.3
396
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
11.5
0.894
581
7.28
6.98
41
3.5
290
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
-------
B-9
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13 GW14 GW14
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13 3/27/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
Temperature
SPC
IDS
DO
PH
ORP
Turbidity
Alkalinity
Ferrous Iron
Hydrogen Sulfide
°C
mS/cm
mg/L
mg/L
mV
NTU
mg CaCO3/L
mg Fe2+/L
mgS/L
16.6
0.608
395
0.19
7.11
68
4.5
264
<0.03 U
<0.01U
13.6
0.710
462
0.25
6.98
23
2.3
290
0.05 J
<0.01 U
19.1
0.568
369
2.86
6.97
90
7.0
111
<0.03 U
<0.01U
14.7
0.413
268
6.35
6.82
105
2.2
210
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
16.9
2.005
1303
1.85
7.02
103
13
198
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
10.7
1.869
1215
9.68
6.95
63
2.0
192
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
12.4
1.530
994
6.21
7.05
257
2.9
225
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
9.0
1.120
728
6.36
7.10
120
3.7
194
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
11.6
1.002
651
4.64
6.74
187
12.0
224
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
-------
B-10
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Round 3
Temperature
SPC
IDS
DO
PH
ORP
Turbidity
Alkalinity
Ferrous Iron
Hydrogen Sulfide
°C
mS/cm
mg/L
mg/L
mV
NTU
mg CaCO3/L
mg Fe2+/L
mgS/L
11.1
0.503
327
6.86
7.00
79
0.8
216
<0.03 U
<0.01U
12.2
0.617
401
6.30
6.63
224
2.4
200
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
12.6
1.024
666
0.06
8.93
123
1.0
540
<0.03 U
<0.01U
17.5
0.531
345
3.25
7.82
193
4.7
294
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
16.1
0.840
546
1.82
7.70
124
5.4
407
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
-------
B-ll
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Round 2
Temperature
SPC
IDS
DO
PH
ORP
Turbidity
Alkalinity
Ferrous Iron
Hydrogen Sulfide
°C
mS/cm
mg/L
mg/L
mV
NTU
mg CaCO3/L
mg Fe2+/L
mgS/L
16.1
0.370
241
4.87
7.45
-10
5.4
326
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
11.8
0.538
349
8.45
7.33
219
18.3
293
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
22.1
0.457
297
6.06
8.13
-1
47
292
0.03 J
<0.01 U
16.7
0.610
397
11.17
8.27
84
27.0
198
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
18.9
0.593
386
9.81
7.89
148
19.8
205
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
19.1
0.566
368
4.55
7.14
-23
3.0
252
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
10.2
0.551
358
6.94
6.90
64
0.7
218
<0.03 U
<0.01 U
-------
B-12
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Round 3
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
TKN
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
1.8
<0.50 U
75.3
0.55
<0.10 U
NA
1.24
5.17
43.2
0.13 J
8.4
0.46 B
72.8
0.18
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
1.70
4.85
37.1
0.17 J
5.3
0.64
65.1
0.21
<0.10 U
NA
1.41
5.04
38.9
0.18 J
7.2
0.69
60.7
0.05 J
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
1.54
14.8
38.4
0.17 J
3.0
<0.50 U
68.5
0.73
<0.10 U
NA
<2.00 U
92.7
57.3
0.16 J
3.3
0.60
72.0
2.50 B
<0.10 U
NA
1.88
50.9
41.3
0.10 J
6.9
0.52 B
70.2
1.20
<0.10 U
0.05 J
<1.00 U
73.4
52.2
0.06 J
-------
B-13
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
TKN
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
3.5
1.02
68.8
0.19
0.18
NA
1.75
27.0
28.1
0.17 J
1.2
0.98
62.9
0.57 B
0.14
NA
1.17
27.9
26.0
0.09 J
5.0
0.92
63.3
0.02 J
0.09 J
0.25
1.60
29.5
23.6
0.13J
3.5
0.80
103
0.49
<0.10 U
NA
1.00 J
75.7
53.9
0.11 J
2.1
1.19
97.4
1.51 B
<0.10 U
NA
<1.00 U
210
37.0
0.05 J
4.3
1.10 B
98.3
0.38
<0.10 U
0.16B
<1.00 U
249
44.7
0.06 J
0.8
0.54
75.9
<0.10 U
0.27
NA
<1.00 U
46.1
14.4
1.24
2.2
<0.50 U
54.2
0.41 B
0.27
NA
0.66 J
58.1
47.1
0.22
6.3
0.45
71.7
<0.10 U
0.17
0.36
<1.00 U
51.3
14.6
1.15
-------
B-14
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW07 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/26/11 5/19/13 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
TKN
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
4.8
0.56
33.2
2.55
<0.10 U
NA
<1.00 U
73.2
37.7
0.10 J
7.3
0.62
24.2
1.09
<0.10 U
0.09 J
<1.00 U
111
35.1
<0.20 U
1.6
0.61
56.3
1.93 B
<0.10 U
NA
1.53
16.7
40.4
0.13J
2.2
0.55
55.6
2.26 B
<0.10 U
NA
0.72 J
12.7
36.0
0.09 J
7.6
0.39
54.1
1.46
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
1.06
11.9
37.8
0.09 J
1.8
0.58
62.1
0.84 B
<0.10 U
NA
1.57
46.7
42.4
0.06 J
9.0
0.60 B
72.8
0.28
0.29
0.51 B
<1.00 U
68.0
52.4
0.09 J
5.2
1.06
80.5
17.7
<0.10 U
NA
2.05
40.4
69.8
0.06 J
1.0
1.07
79.2
23
<0.10 U
NA
3.03
43.2
70.9
0.07 J
-------
B-15
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13 GW14 GW14
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13 3/27/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
TKN
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
2.3
0.65
80.1
0.38 B
<0.10 U
NA
2.40
16.7
98.9
0.10 J
1.9
0.73
80.0
0.73
<0.10 U
NA
1.98
16.6
91.6
0.08 J
1.4
0.83
70.2
4.54
<0.10 U
NA
1.99
28.7
56.2
0.09 J
5.4
0.55
55.1
0.84 B
<0.10 U
NA
0.44 J
1.91
26.8
0.11 J
2.3
0.55
52.6
0.32 B
<0.10 U
NA
<6.00 U
631
25.7
<0.20 U
1.3
0.52
55.6
1.21 B
<0.10 U
NA
<1.00 U
462
27.3
0.05 J
2.9
0.54 B
53.6
0.32
<0.10 U
0.14
2.23
390
31.3
<0.20 U
0.7
0.67
54.6
0.71
<0.10 U
NA
0.54 J
228
25.8
<0.20 U
5.7
0.61 B
57.2
0.31
<0.10 U
0.12
0.64 J
179
31.3
0.07 J
-------
B-16
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Round 3
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
TKN
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
4.2
0.62
60.0
1.68 B
<0.10 U
NA
0.72 J
7.76
30.9
0.08 J
3.9
1.33
66.0
3.88
<0.10 U
NA
1.39
34.5
56.6
0.06 J
2.4
1.99
119
0.38
0.27
NA
<1.00 U
41.2
4.51
2.03
0.6
NS
NS
0.32
0.13
0.26
0.20 J
2.23
22.7
0.3
2.8
NS
NS
<0.10 U
0.08 J
0.24
<1.00 U
33.9
24.6
0.96
-------
B-17
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Round 2
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
TKN
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
2.7
1.17
69.0
0.57
<0.10 U
NA
1.15
1.86
38.3
0.17 J
6.3
0.94
61.4
0.38
<0.10 U
0.05 J
1.17
1.93
38.7
0.17 J
0.5
1.80
51.9
0.42
<0.10 U
NA
0.48 J
60.4
43.6
0.14J
0.9
1.24
49.2
1.29 B
<0.10 U
NA
0.66 J
41.9
40.5
0.13 J
3.1
1.85
46.2
0.32
<0.10 U
0.17
0.70 J
40.1
49.3
0.16 J
2.9
0.90
80.8
0.71 B
<0.10 U
NA
1.15
8.59
48.8
0.10 J
3.74
0.72
66.7
2.42
<0.10 U
NA
0.99 J
13.2
45.5
0.03 J
-------
B-18
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Dissolved Ag
Total Ag
Dissolved Al
Total Al
Dissolved As
Total As
Dissolved B
Total B
Dissolved Ba
Total Ba
Dissolved Be
Total Be
Dissolved Ca
Total Ca
Dissolved Cd
Total Cd
Dissolved Co
Total Co
Dissolved Cr
Total Cr
Dissolved Cu
Total Cu
Dissolved Fe
Total Fe
Dissolved Hg
Total Hg
Dissolved K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
163 J
161 J
<10U
<11U
74.6
74.7 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
12 J
<22U
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
0.76 J
0.78 J
NA
NA
27.5
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
<0.20 U
0.31 B
<40U
16 J
166
162
<5.0U
<2.5 U
78.8
75.4
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
0.46 J
<2.0U
9.4
9.4
100
94
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.95
0.90
6.5 J
6.7
29.7
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
89 J
93 J
<10U
<11U
69.9
71. 1J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
67
297 J
NA
NA
0.96 J
1.03 J
NA
NA
21.4
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.17J
1.3 B
11 J
24
97
102
<5.0U
<2.5 U
75.8
73.3
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
0.32 J
<2.0U
0.57
0.80 B
122
902*
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.18
1.18
3.9 J
4.2 J
Tin
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
96 J
97 J
<10U
<11U
127
130 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
38J
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
1.23 J
1.30 J
NA
NA
15.6
<16U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
0.53 J
0.54 J
<333 U
<370U
109 J
109 J
<10U
<11U
121
125 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
6.4
6.1
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
1.13 J
1.14J
NA
NA
12.7
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.14J
0.57 B
11 J
21
101
100
<5.0U
<2.5 U
135
135
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
0.54 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
5.8 B
6.2B
106
139
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.27
1.25
8.6 J
8.2
15.1
-------
B-19
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13
Round 3
Dissolved Ag
Total Ag
Dissolved Al
Total Al
Dissolved As
Total As
Dissolved B
Total B
Dissolved Ba
Total Ba
Dissolved Be
Total Be
Dissolved Ca
Total Ca
Dissolved Cd
Total Cd
Dissolved Co
Total Co
Dissolved Cr
Total Cr
Dissolved Cu
Total Cu
Dissolved Fe
Total Fe
Dissolved Hg
Total Hg
Dissolved K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
465 J
493 J
<10U
<11U
92.0
94.2 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
1060
3040 J
NA
NA
1.35 J
1.36 J
NA
NA
11.7
<16U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
0.77 J
2.3
<333 U
<370U
438 J
446 J
<10U
<11U
91.8
93. 8J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
773
1950 J
NA
NA
1.20 J
1.25 J
NA
NA
12.1
<10U
<10U
<20U
85
0.55
4.1
30 J
36
407
460
<5.0U
<2.5 U
93.7
91.9
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.7 J
0.62 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
0.44 J
3.5 B
348
5450*
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.33
1.30
8.4 J
7.8
13.5
4J
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
175 J
178 J
<10U
<11U
125
127 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
11 J
<22U
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
1.57 J
1.61 J
NA
NA
19.6
<16U
<16U, J-
28.7
21.8
0.83 J
0.96 J
<333U
<370U
280 J
274 J
<10U
<11U
164
167 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
265
44 J
NA
NA
1.82 J
1.93 J
NA
NA
21.0
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.11J
0.46 B
29 J
39
265
264
<5.0U
<2.5 U
176
181
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
0.86 J
<2.0U
1.1
1.4
77 J
89
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
2.08
2.04
8.4 J
8.2
22.3
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
256 J
247 J
231 J
239 J
<10U
<11U
12.4
12.9 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
201
800 J
NA
NA
0.83 J
0.88 J
NA
NA
3.85
<16U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
1.3
1.4
109 J
<370U
410 J
394 J
<10U
<11U
52.6
53. 9 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
12.2
2750
3080 J
NA
NA
1.32 J
1.34 J
NA
NA
13.6
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.19 J
0.67 B
236
230
293
301
<5.0U
<2.5 U
17.4
19.0
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
0.24 J
1.5 B
888
1480
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.97
0.96
19
18
5.42
-------
B-20
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW07 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/26/11 5/19/13 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Dissolved Ag
Total Ag
Dissolved Al
Total Al
Dissolved As
Total As
Dissolved B
Total B
Dissolved Ba
Total Ba
Dissolved Be
Total Be
Dissolved Ca
Total Ca
Dissolved Cd
Total Cd
Dissolved Co
Total Co
Dissolved Cr
Total Cr
Dissolved Cu
Total Cu
Dissolved Fe
Total Fe
Dissolved Hg
Total Hg
Dissolved K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
74 J
77 J
<10U
<11U
53.7
54.4 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
60
70 J
<67U
25 J
NA
NA
1.26 J
1.29 J
NA
NA
10.0
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.12 J
0.23 B
17 J
23
85
81
<5.0U
<2.5 U
59.1
56.1
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
78
72
<100U
<50U
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.34
1.28
3.7 J
3.9 J
10.4
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
125 J
127 J
<10U
<11U
89.4
90.8 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
8J
27 J
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
1.30 J
1.31 J
NA
NA
8.83
<16U
<16U,J-
28.1
54.8
0.69 J
0.50 J
<333 U
<370U
129 J
129 J
<10U
<11U
91.3
93. 5 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
3.6
4.1
<67U
41 J
NA
NA
1.24J
1.24J
NA
NA
8.75
<10U
<10U
<20U
33
<0.20 U
0.38 B
<40U
<20U
121
120
<5.0U
<2.5 U
98.5
93.5
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
1.5
1.9 B
<100U
46 J
<0.20 U
0.01 J
1.09
1.08
4.6 J
4.6 J
9.28
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
264 J
273 J
<10U
<11U
98.5
100 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
4J
<20U
<22U
<67U
150 J
NA
NA
0.90 J
1.00 J
NA
NA
13.0
<10U
<10U
136
2380
0.46
5.9
52
35
179
675
<5.0U
0.21 J
56
109
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
2.0 J
10.8
1.3 J
15.8
2.9
36.1
832
10200
<0.20 U
0.02 J
2.12
2.40
18
14
9.74
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
104 J
107 J
<10U
<11U
129
131 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
1.63 J
1.66 J
NA
NA
21.5
<16U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
69.7
0.59 J
1.2
<333 U
<370U
90 J
91 J
<10U
<11U
134
141 J
0.31 J
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
1.3 J
<67U
58 J
NA
NA
1.82 J
1.87 J
NA
NA
21.3
-------
B-21
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13 GW14 GW14
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13 3/27/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
Dissolved Ag
Total Ag
Dissolved Al
Total Al
Dissolved As
Total As
Dissolved B
Total B
Dissolved Ba
Total Ba
Dissolved Be
Total Be
Dissolved Ca
Total Ca
Dissolved Cd
Total Cd
Dissolved Co
Total Co
Dissolved Cr
Total Cr
Dissolved Cu
Total Cu
Dissolved Fe
Total Fe
Dissolved Hg
Total Hg
Dissolved K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
34 J
35 J
<10U
<11U
102
103 J
<4U
<4U
1J
<4U
<7U
<8U
9J
<22U
23 J
48 J
NA
NA
1.54 J
1.63 J
NA
NA
27.5
<16U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
0.63 J
0.78 J
<333 U
<370U
33 J
33 J
<10U
<11U
104
104 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
2.9
24.9
75
383 J
NA
NA
1.59 J
1.69 J
NA
NA
29.4
<14U
<16U
<494U
986 J
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
37 J
76 J
<10U
<11U
103
104 J
<4U
2J
<4U
<4U
<7U
7J
21
47 J
<67U
835 J
NA
NA
1.04 J
1.28 J
NA
NA
15.0
<16U
<16U,J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
0.56 J
0.71 J
<333 U
<370U
43 J
44 J
<10U
<11U
70.8
72.1J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
5.7
6.5
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
1.09 J
1.15 J
NA
NA
9.09
4J
<16U
<494U
182 J
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
291 J
298 J
<10U
<11U
351
352 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
27 J
NA
NA
1.39 J
1.44 J
NA
NA
16.1
<16U
<16U,J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
1.0
0.87 J
<333 U
<370U
223 J
222 J
<10U
<11U
295
309 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
1.21J
1.23J
NA
NA
14.1
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.08 J
0.23 B
<40U
3.1J
172
163
<5.0U
<2.5 U
288
274
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
0.84 B
0.71 B
27 J
61
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.36
1.29
6.9 J
6.9
13.0
<16U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
66.0
1.1
1.1
<333 U
<370U
142 J
142 J
<10U
<11U
190
194 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
0.63 J
26 J
210 J
NA
NA
1.10 J
1.22J
NA
NA
12.2
<10U
<10U
<20U
26
0.31
0.56 B
<40U
8.2 J
122
115
<5.0U
<2.5 U
175
175
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
1.0 B
0.68 B
93 J
135
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.11
1.06
5.4 J
5.4
12.1
-------
B-22
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Round 3
Dissolved Ag
Total Ag
Dissolved Al
Total Al
Dissolved As
Total As
Dissolved B
Total B
Dissolved Ba
Total Ba
Dissolved Be
Total Be
Dissolved Ca
Total Ca
Dissolved Cd
Total Cd
Dissolved Co
Total Co
Dissolved Cr
Total Cr
Dissolved Cu
Total Cu
Dissolved Fe
Total Fe
Dissolved Hg
Total Hg
Dissolved K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
<16U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
0.51 J
0.44 J
<333U
<370U
49 J
50 J
<10U
<11U
94.9
98.5 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
0.92 J
1.05 J
NA
NA
5.94
<16U
<16U,J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
0.78 J
0.75 J
<333 U
<370U
44 J
46 J
<10U
<11U
96.5
99 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
11.0
10.2
<67U
63 J
NA
NA
1.65 J
1.71 J
NA
NA
14.3
<16U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
0.64 J
1.0
246 J
246 J
60 J
60 J
<10U
<11U
6.21
6.46 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
0.90 J
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
0.89 J
0.93 J
NA
NA
4.43
2.2 J
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.19 J
0.31 B
132
138
131
127
<5.0U
<2.5 U
38.7
40.1
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<0.50 U
0.59 B
29 J
94
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.58
1.58
12
12
10.8
<10U
0.8 J
<20U
46
0.84
0.94 B
97
105
137
127
<5.0U
<2.5 U
27.7
25.5
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<0.50 U
0.60 B
27 J
71
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.26
1.18
12
12
6.02
-------
B-23
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Dissolved Ag
Total Ag
Dissolved Al
Total Al
Dissolved As
Total As
Dissolved B
Total B
Dissolved Ba
Total Ba
Dissolved Be
Total Be
Dissolved Ca
Total Ca
Dissolved Cd
Total Cd
Dissolved Co
Total Co
Dissolved Cr
Total Cr
Dissolved Cu
Total Cu
Dissolved Fe
Total Fe
Dissolved Hg
Total Hg
Dissolved K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
5J
<16U
<494U
364 J
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
105 J
110 J
<10U
<11U
67.5
69 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
196 J
NA
NA
1.22 J
1.34 J
NA
NA
25.8
<10U
<10U
<20U
339
0.16 J
0.61 B
11 J
21
105
107
<5.0U
<2.5 U
73.5
71.3
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
0.34 J
<2.0U
0.58
0.93 B
105
502
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.22
1.24
4.6 J
5.4
27.5
<14U
<16U
<494U
1030 J
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
144 J
155 J
<10U
<11U
101
103 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
699 J
NA
NA
1.55 J
1.80 J
NA
NA
10.2
<16U
<16U,J-
15. 7 J
469
0.79 J
0.91 J
<333 U
<370U
130 J
140 J
<10U
<11U
94.7
99.2 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
0.73 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<67U
679 J
NA
NA
1.22J
1.44 J
NA
NA
8.82
<10U
2.9 J
22 B
359
0.61
1.0 B
13 J
23
118
118
<5.0U
<2.5 U
93.1
90.7
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.8 J
<2.5 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
4.5
1.3 B
38 J
481
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.45
1.40
5.5J
5.2
9.80
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
45 J
46 J
<10U
<11U
96.2
97.9 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
7J
38 J
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
0.86 J
0.91 J
NA
NA
18.1
<16U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<1.0U
0.53 J
<333U
<370U
40 J
41 J
<10U
<11U
87.0
88.9 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
0.74 J
<67U
<74U
NA
NA
1.24 J
1.32 J
NA
NA
17.3
-------
B-24
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
Total Mn
Dissolved Mo
Total Mo
Dissolved Na
Total Na
Dissolved Ni
Total Ni
Dissolved P
Total P
Dissolved Pb
Total Pb
Dissolved S
Total S
Dissolved Sb
Total Sb
Dissolved Se
Total Se
Dissolved Si
Total Si
Dissolved Sr
Total Sr
Dissolved Th
Total Th
Dissolved Ti
Total Ti
Dissolved TI
Total TI
Dissolved U
Total U
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
27.9 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
4.76 J
4.97 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
13.7 J
12.7 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
5.44 J
5.31J
520
521J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
28.2
5.4
8.5
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
5.48
5.30
4.3
2.9
<0.05 U
<0.03 U
1.20
1.3
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
5.01
4.84
494
528
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.32
0.34
21.8 J
113
223 J
<17U
<19U
4.44 J
4.75 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
12.7 J
11.6 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
4.58 J
4.42 J
450
451 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
22.0
78
508*
0.52
0.66
7.32
7.46
3.1
3.7
<0.05 U
<0.03 U
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
0.46 J
4.05
3.99
455
475
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.61 J
0.50 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.63
0.66
16.0 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
22.7 J
22.5 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
18.6 J
17 .4 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
5.72J
5.63J
690
716 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
12.7 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
16.9 J
17.1 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
0.21 J
14.6 J
13. OJ
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
6.13J
5.83 J
524
520 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.48 J
0.46 J
14.5
18
18
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
19.8
19.3
6.0
4.4
<0.05 U
<0.03 U
0.29 B
0.31
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
5.31
5.13
566
604
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.20 J
1.7 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.57
0.60
-------
B-25
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13
Round 3
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
Total Mn
Dissolved Mo
Total Mo
Dissolved Na
Total Na
Dissolved Ni
Total Ni
Dissolved P
Total P
Dissolved Pb
Total Pb
Dissolved S
Total S
Dissolved Sb
Total Sb
Dissolved Se
Total Se
Dissolved Si
Total Si
Dissolved Sr
Total Sr
Dissolved Th
Total Th
Dissolved Ti
Total Ti
Dissolved TI
Total TI
Dissolved U
Total U
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
11.9 J
929
1060 J
<17U
<19U
11. 1J
11.3 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
0.03 J
<17U
<19U
9.01 J
8.22 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
11. 2 J
11.0 J
790
824 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
12.0 J
1060
1090 J
<17U
<19U
10.9 J
11.2 J
<1.0U
0.70 J
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
8.88 J
8.07 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
9.70 J
9.23 J
794
780 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
2J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
12.6
750
857*
0.78
0.97
12.6
12.2
4.0
3.3
<0.05 U
0.09
<0.20 U
0.21 B
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
9.02
9.46
871
874
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.20 J
2.2 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.08 J
0.10 J
20.1 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
47.8 J
48.0 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
17.3 J
16.1 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
6.01 J
5.85 J
1530
1560 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
20.9 J
77
16 J
<17U
<19U
80.8 J
80.5 J
3.0
0.68 J
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
0.23 J
<1.0U
12.5 J
11.9 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
6.38 J
6.01 J
1050
1030 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
3J
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.46 J
0.47 J
21.8
2.6 J
34
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
106
106
7.8
6.6
<0.05 U
<0.03 U
<0.20 U
0.10 J
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
5.29
5.22
1220
1310
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.52
0.56
4.03 J
143
188 J
<17U
<19U
160 J
157 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
0.03 J
<17U
<19U
5.66J
4.78 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
6.01 J
5.87J
200
208 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
13. 8 J
690
745 J
<17U
<19U
64.4 J
57.4 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.02 J
0.04 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
16.9 J
14.9 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
9.64 J
8.97 J
622
573 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
5.99
233
273
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
149
138
0.7
1.1
0.06
0.04
<0.20 U
0.06 J
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
6.26
6.38
215
239
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.29 J
<2.5 U
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
-------
B-26
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW07 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/26/11 5/19/13 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
Total Mn
Dissolved Mo
Total Mo
Dissolved Na
Total Na
Dissolved Ni
Total Ni
Dissolved P
Total P
Dissolved Pb
Total Pb
Dissolved S
Total S
Dissolved Sb
Total Sb
Dissolved Se
Total Se
Dissolved Si
Total Si
Dissolved Sr
Total Sr
Dissolved Th
Total Th
Dissolved Ti
Total Ti
Dissolved TI
Total TI
Dissolved U
Total U
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
10. 1J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
23.0 J
23.0 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
12.9 J
11.8 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
6.09 J
5.96J
200
206 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
9.68
0.42 J
0.48 J
<0.50 U
0.21 J
39.0
37.4
2.6
2.6
<0.05 U
0.01 J
0.84
0.82
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
5.42
5.19
229
228
<0.20 U
0.18J
0.81 J
0.72 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.14 J
0.06 J
8.88 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
7.32 J
7.50 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
13.0 J
11.7 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
5.11J
4.98 J
230
237 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
8.63 J
20
33 J
<17U
<19U
6.14 J
6.27 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
13. OJ
11.2 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.33 J
5.02 J
201
197 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
3J
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.55 J
0.51 J
8.89
1.8 J
3.0
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
7.23
7.20
4.2
2.9
<0.05 U
<0.03 U
0.56
0.60
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
0.90 J
4.82
4.70
216
Til
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.68 J
1.1 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.46
0.50
13. 3 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
10.8 J
11.3 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
13. 8 J
12.6 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.95 J
5.89 J
380
398 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
16.3
172
425
<0.50 U
1.2
132
47.6
4.4
17.5
0.06
0.22
1.40
25.6
NA
NA
0.10 J
0.20
<2.0U
<2.0U
3.76
9.13
603
690
0.16 J
1.20
<5.0U
43.3
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.24
0.45
21.9 J
20
34 J
<17U
<19U
24. 1J
24. 1J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
23. 2 J
21.4 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
7.27 J
7.17 J
690
686 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
21.3 J
<14U
21 J
<17U
<19U
24.3 J
24.6 J
<1.0U
0.40 J
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
0.23 J
24.4 J
21.9 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
7.18 J
6.89 J
577
584 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
3J
<1.0U
<1.0U
1.6
2.0
-------
B-27
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13 GW14 GW14
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13 3/27/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
Total Mn
Dissolved Mo
Total Mo
Dissolved Na
Total Na
Dissolved Ni
Total Ni
Dissolved P
Total P
Dissolved Pb
Total Pb
Dissolved S
Total S
Dissolved Sb
Total Sb
Dissolved Se
Total Se
Dissolved Si
Total Si
Dissolved Sr
Total Sr
Dissolved Th
Total Th
Dissolved Ti
Total Ti
Dissolved TI
Total TI
Dissolved U
Total U
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
28.1 J
299
330 J
<17U
<19U
11.3 J
11.7 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
31.4 J
28.8 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
6.69 J
6.46 J
310
319 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
29.9 J
821
2200 J
<17U
<19U
11.0 J
11.9 J
3. OB
0.33 J
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
0.46 J
4.3
32.0 J
27.9 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
6.66 J
6.20 J
309
307 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.90 J
0.92 J
15. 2 J
18
1580 J
<17U
<19U
12.0 J
12.4 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
17 J
18.0 J
16.3 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
6.10 J
7.17 J
310
325 J
NA
NA
<7U
13 J
R
R
NA
NA
8.95 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
4.52 J
4.69 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
0.40 J
<1.0U
9.19 J
7.94 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.21J
4.93 J
168
165 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.57 J
0.70 J
16.3 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
43. 4 J
43.7 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
8.39 J
7.27 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.79J
5.83J
830
849 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
14. 2 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
23. 3 J
23. 6 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
11.1 J
9.73 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
3.2J
3.0J
5.60 J
5.31 J
690
683 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
3J
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.88 J
0.93 J
12.1
1.7 J
2.0 J
<0.50 U
0.36 J
20.6
19.5
10.2
8.0
<0.05 U
0.003 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
4.91
4.72
595
602
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
2.70 J
2.0 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.93
0.92
12.2 J
38
46 J
<17U
<19U
11.8 J
11.9 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
0.22 J
9.94 J
8.78 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
1.8 J
<5.0U
5.38 J
5.53 J
514
500 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
10 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.73 J
0.69 J
11.4
57
58
<0.50 U
0.32 J
11.8
11.2
6.4
5.3
0.01 J
0.01 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
4.97
4.74
499
493
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.40 J
2.3 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.77
0.71
-------
B-28
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Round 3
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
Total Mn
Dissolved Mo
Total Mo
Dissolved Na
Total Na
Dissolved Ni
Total Ni
Dissolved P
Total P
Dissolved Pb
Total Pb
Dissolved S
Total S
Dissolved Sb
Total Sb
Dissolved Se
Total Se
Dissolved Si
Total Si
Dissolved Sr
Total Sr
Dissolved Th
Total Th
Dissolved Ti
Total Ti
Dissolved TI
Total TI
Dissolved U
Total U
mg/L
Mg/L
MgA
MgA
MgA
mg/L
mg/L
Mg/L
MgA
mg/L
mg/L
Mg/L
MgA
mg/L
mg/L
Mg/L
MgA
MgA
MJ/L
mg/L
mg/L
Mg/L
MJ/L
Mg/L
MJ/L
Mg/L
MJ/L
MJ/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
6.06 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
3.33J
3.60J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
11. 1J
9.85 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
6.04 J
5.67J
219
216 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
3J
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.80 J
0.77 J
14. 2 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
12.0 J
12.2 J
1.0
0.43 J
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
0.26 J
0.41 J
19.3 J
17.1 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
7.08 J
6.70 J
250
249 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.83 J
0.76 J
4.4 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
265 J
265 J
0.63 J
0.77 J
0.06 J
0.08 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
1.53 J
1.39 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
4.55 J
4.26 J
86
84 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.70 J
0.68 J
11.0
13
15
0.62
0.62
76.8
67.0
1.6
1.7
0.01 J
0.01 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
NA
NA
0.12 J
0.14 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
8.06
8.06
1080
1160
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.31 J
0.68 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.12 J
0.12 J
5.55
9.0
9.2
0.67
0.58
182
175
1.1
1.5
0.05 J
0.05
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
NA
NA
0.20
0.17 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
6.63
6.22
424
419
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.25 J
1.8 J
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.09 J
0.09 J
-------
B-29
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
Total Mn
Dissolved Mo
Total Mo
Dissolved Na
Total Na
Dissolved Ni
Total Ni
Dissolved P
Total P
Dissolved Pb
Total Pb
Dissolved S
Total S
Dissolved Sb
Total Sb
Dissolved Se
Total Se
Dissolved Si
Total Si
Dissolved Sr
Total Sr
Dissolved Th
Total Th
Dissolved Ti
Total Ti
Dissolved TI
Total TI
Dissolved U
Total U
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
Hg/L
ug/L
Hg/L
ug/L
lig/L
ug/L
uj/L
MgA
26.5 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
7.94 J
8.19J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
12.5 J
11.6 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
4.97 J
5.54J
730
750 J
NA
NA
<7U
7J
R
R
NA
NA
26.5
2.8 J
16
0.96
1.0
7.09
6.66
3.2
2.5
<0.05 U
<0.03 U
<0.20 U
0.42 B
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
0.97 J
4.11
4.60
630
666
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.52 J
6.1
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.48
0.52
10.4 J
78
100 J
<17U
<19U
21. 1J
21. 1J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
0.04 J
<17U
<19U
14.4 J
13. 2 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
6.01 J
1.11 \
400
402 J
NA
NA
<7U
28 J
R
R
NA
NA
8.94 J
29
70 J
<17U
<19U
17.3 J
17.3 J
<1.0U
0.80 J
<0.06 U
0.05 J
<1.0U
0.91 J
14.4 J
13. OJ
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.24J
6.56 J
606
599 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
30 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.65 J
0.66 J
9.34
50
68
6.3
6.1
19.1
18.0
4.2
3.4
<0.05 U
0.04
0.16 J
0.48 B
NA
NA
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
<2.0U
1.00 J
4.73
5.05
324
320
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
1.2 J
9.0
<0.20 U
<0.20 U
0.64
0.68
18.6 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
8.51 J
8.71 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<17U
<19U
15. 9 J
14.7 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
4.86 J
4.79 J
370
381 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
R
R
NA
NA
17.3 J
<14U
<16U
<17U
<19U
7.37 J
7.76 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
15.7 J
13.7 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.67J
5.38J
345
338 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<7U
26 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
1.2
1.2
-------
B-30
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Dissolved V
Total V
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<10U
<11U
24 J
21J
<0.20 U
0.51 B
15
13. 7 B
<10U
4J
<50U
<56U
<0.20 U
0.53 B
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<10U
<11U
25 J
25 J
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
0.04 J
0.59 B
<5.0U
5. IB
-------
B-31
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13
Round 3
Dissolved V
Total V
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<10U
<11U
19 J
20 J
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
<0.20 U
0.81 B
<5.0U
5. IB
<10U
<11U
29 J
23 J
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
0.05 J
0.49 B
3.9 J
4.4 B
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
<0.20 U
0.49 B
<5.0U
<2.5 U
-------
B-32
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW07 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/26/11 5/19/13 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Dissolved V
Total V
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
0.05 J
0.28 B
17
10.3 B
<10U
<11U
24 J
22 J
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
<0.20 U
0.54 B
<5.0U
4.4 B
<10U
<11U
19 J
19 J
0.28
6.1
5.0
39.8 B
4J
4J
25 J
25 J
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
-------
B-33
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13 GW14 GW14
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13 3/27/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
Dissolved V
Total V
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<10U
<11U
34 J
34 J
<10U
<11U
<50U
35 J
<10U
4J
245
641 J
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
5J
<11U
48 J
40 J
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
0.07 J
<0.20 U
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
0.07 J
0.36 B
<5.0U
<2.5 U
-------
B-34
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Round 3
Dissolved V
Total V
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
0.04 J
0.22 B
<5.0U
<2.5 U
0.04 J
0.34 B
<5.0U
<2.5 U
-------
B-35
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Dissolved V
Total V
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<10U
<11U
18 J
18 J
0.18J
1.2 B
<5.0U
<2.5 U
<10U
4J
21 J
20 J
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
0.50
1.7 B
<5.0U
<2.5 U
3J
5J
17 J
18 J
<10U
<11U
<50U
<56U
-------
B-36
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Round 3
ethanol (64-17-5)
isopropanol (67-63-0)
acrylonitrile (107-13-1)
styrene (100-42-5)
acetone (67-64-1)
tert-butyl alcohol (75-65-0)
methyl tert-butyl ether (1634-04-4)
diisopropyl ether (108-20-3)
ethyl tert-butyl ether (637-92-3)
tert-amyl methyl ether (994-05-8)
vinyl chloride (75-01-4)
1,1-dichloroethene (75-35-4)
carbon disulfide (75-15-0)
methylene chloride (75-09-2)
trans-l,2-dichloroethene (156-60-5)
1,1-dichloroethane (75-34-3)
cis-l,2-dichloroethene (156-59-2)
chloroform (67-66-3)
1,1,1-trichloroethane (71-55-6)
carbon tetrachloride (56-23-5)
benzene (71-43-2)
1,2-dichloroethane (107-06-2)
trichloroethene (79-01-6)
toluene (108-88-3)
1,1,2-trichloroethane (79-00-5)
tetrachloroethene (127-18-4)
chlorobenzene (108-90-7)
ethylbenzene (100-41-4)
m+p xylene (108-38-3, 106-42-3 )
o-xylene (95-47-6)
isopropylbenzene (98-82-8)
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene (108-67-8)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U, J-
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
0.87 J
<10U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-37
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
ethanol (64-17-5)
isopropanol (67-63-0)
acrylonitrile (107-13-1)
styrene (100-42-5)
acetone (67-64-1)
tert-butyl alcohol (75-65-0)
methyl tert-butyl ether (1634-04-4)
diisopropyl ether (108-20-3)
ethyl tert-butyl ether (637-92-3)
tert-amyl methyl ether (994-05-8)
vinyl chloride (75-01-4)
1,1-dichloroethene (75-35-4)
carbon disulfide (75-15-0)
methylene chloride (75-09-2)
trans-l,2-dichloroethene (156-60-5)
1,1-dichloroethane (75-34-3)
cis-l,2-dichloroethene (156-59-2)
chloroform (67-66-3)
1,1,1-trichloroethane (71-55-6)
carbon tetrachloride (56-23-5)
benzene (71-43-2)
1,2-dichloroethane (107-06-2)
trichloroethene (79-01-6)
toluene (108-88-3)
1,1,2-trichloroethane (79-00-5)
tetrachloroethene (127-18-4)
chlorobenzene (108-90-7)
ethylbenzene (100-41-4)
m+p xylene (108-38-3, 106-42-3 )
o-xylene (95-47-6)
isopropylbenzene (98-82-8)
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene (108-67-8)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
0.80 B
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25U
<25U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U,J-
<1.0U
<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
<0.5U
R
<0.5U
<0.5U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
0.37 J
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
<0.5U
R
<0.5U
<0.5U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U, J-
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<1.0U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
-------
B-38
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW07
Sample Date 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/26/11 5/19/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3
ethanol (64-17-5)
isopropanol (67-63-0)
acrylonitrile (107-13-1)
styrene (100-42-5)
acetone (67-64-1)
tert-butyl alcohol (75-65-0)
methyl tert-butyl ether (1634-04-4)
diisopropyl ether (108-20-3)
ethyl tert-butyl ether (637-92-3)
tert-amyl methyl ether (994-05-8)
vinyl chloride (75-01-4)
1,1-dichloroethene (75-35-4)
carbon disulfide (75-15-0)
methylene chloride (75-09-2)
trans-l,2-dichloroethene (156-60-5)
1,1-dichloroethane (75-34-3)
cis-l,2-dichloroethene (156-59-2)
chloroform (67-66-3)
1,1,1-trichloroethane (71-55-6)
carbon tetrachloride (56-23-5)
benzene (71-43-2)
1,2-dichloroethane (107-06-2)
trichloroethene (79-01-6)
toluene (108-88-3)
1,1,2-trichloroethane (79-00-5)
tetrachloroethene (127-18-4)
chlorobenzene (108-90-7)
ethylbenzene (100-41-4)
m+p xylene (108-38-3, 106-42-3 )
o-xylene (95-47-6)
isopropylbenzene (98-82-8)
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene (108-67-8)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25U
<25U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U,J-
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-39
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
ethanol (64-17-5)
isopropanol (67-63-0)
acrylonitrile (107-13-1)
styrene (100-42-5)
acetone (67-64-1)
tert-butyl alcohol (75-65-0)
methyl tert-butyl ether (1634-04-4)
diisopropyl ether (108-20-3)
ethyl tert-butyl ether (637-92-3)
tert-amyl methyl ether (994-05-8)
vinyl chloride (75-01-4)
1,1-dichloroethene (75-35-4)
carbon disulfide (75-15-0)
methylene chloride (75-09-2)
trans-l,2-dichloroethene (156-60-5)
1,1-dichloroethane (75-34-3)
cis-l,2-dichloroethene (156-59-2)
chloroform (67-66-3)
1,1,1-trichloroethane (71-55-6)
carbon tetrachloride (56-23-5)
benzene (71-43-2)
1,2-dichloroethane (107-06-2)
trichloroethene (79-01-6)
toluene (108-88-3)
1,1,2-trichloroethane (79-00-5)
tetrachloroethene (127-18-4)
chlorobenzene (108-90-7)
ethylbenzene (100-41-4)
m+p xylene (108-38-3, 106-42-3 )
o-xylene (95-47-6)
isopropylbenzene (98-82-8)
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene (108-67-8)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25U
<25U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U,J-
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
0.48 J
<10U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-40
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
ethanol (64-17-5)
isopropanol (67-63-0)
acrylonitrile (107-13-1)
styrene (100-42-5)
acetone (67-64-1)
tert-butyl alcohol (75-65-0)
methyl tert-butyl ether (1634-04-4)
diisopropyl ether (108-20-3)
ethyl tert-butyl ether (637-92-3)
tert-amyl methyl ether (994-05-8)
vinyl chloride (75-01-4)
1,1-dichloroethene (75-35-4)
carbon disulfide (75-15-0)
methylene chloride (75-09-2)
trans-l,2-dichloroethene (156-60-5)
1,1-dichloroethane (75-34-3)
cis-l,2-dichloroethene (156-59-2)
chloroform (67-66-3)
1,1,1-trichloroethane (71-55-6)
carbon tetrachloride (56-23-5)
benzene (71-43-2)
1,2-dichloroethane (107-06-2)
trichloroethene (79-01-6)
toluene (108-88-3)
1,1,2-trichloroethane (79-00-5)
tetrachloroethene (127-18-4)
chlorobenzene (108-90-7)
ethylbenzene (100-41-4)
m+p xylene (108-38-3, 106-42-3 )
o-xylene (95-47-6)
isopropylbenzene (98-82-8)
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene (108-67-8)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25U
<25U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U,J-
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U, J-
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-41
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW14 GW14 GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/27/12 5/20/13 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Round 3
ethanol (64-17-5)
isopropanol (67-63-0)
acrylonitrile (107-13-1)
styrene (100-42-5)
acetone (67-64-1)
tert-butyl alcohol (75-65-0)
methyl tert-butyl ether (1634-04-4)
diisopropyl ether (108-20-3)
ethyl tert-butyl ether (637-92-3)
tert-amyl methyl ether (994-05-8)
vinyl chloride (75-01-4)
1,1-dichloroethene (75-35-4)
carbon disulfide (75-15-0)
methylene chloride (75-09-2)
trans-l,2-dichloroethene (156-60-5)
1,1-dichloroethane (75-34-3)
cis-l,2-dichloroethene (156-59-2)
chloroform (67-66-3)
1,1,1-trichloroethane (71-55-6)
carbon tetrachloride (56-23-5)
benzene (71-43-2)
1,2-dichloroethane (107-06-2)
trichloroethene (79-01-6)
toluene (108-88-3)
1,1,2-trichloroethane (79-00-5)
tetrachloroethene (127-18-4)
chlorobenzene (108-90-7)
ethylbenzene (100-41-4)
m+p xylene (108-38-3, 106-42-3 )
o-xylene (95-47-6)
isopropylbenzene (98-82-8)
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene (108-67-8)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
0.15 J
<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
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U, J-
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
0.11 J
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
1.3
<10U
<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
0.07 J
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
2.2
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-42
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
ethanol (64-17-5)
isopropanol (67-63-0)
acrylonitrile (107-13-1)
styrene (100-42-5)
acetone (67-64-1)
tert-butyl alcohol (75-65-0)
methyl tert-butyl ether (1634-04-4)
diisopropyl ether (108-20-3)
ethyl tert-butyl ether (637-92-3)
tert-amyl methyl ether (994-05-8)
vinyl chloride (75-01-4)
1,1-dichloroethene (75-35-4)
carbon disulfide (75-15-0)
methylene chloride (75-09-2)
trans-l,2-dichloroethene (156-60-5)
1,1-dichloroethane (75-34-3)
cis-l,2-dichloroethene (156-59-2)
chloroform (67-66-3)
1,1,1-trichloroethane (71-55-6)
carbon tetrachloride (56-23-5)
benzene (71-43-2)
1,2-dichloroethane (107-06-2)
trichloroethene (79-01-6)
toluene (108-88-3)
1,1,2-trichloroethane (79-00-5)
tetrachloroethene (127-18-4)
chlorobenzene (108-90-7)
ethylbenzene (100-41-4)
m+p xylene (108-38-3, 106-42-3 )
o-xylene (95-47-6)
isopropylbenzene (98-82-8)
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene (108-67-8)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
2.18B
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<1.0U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U,J-
<1.0U
<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
<0.5U
R
<0.5U
<0.5U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<100U
<10U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<10U
<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
0.28J
<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
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25 U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
<0.5U
R
<0.5U
<0.5U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<100U
<25U
<25 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<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
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-43
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Round 3
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (95-63-6)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene (526-73-8)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
naphthalene (91-20-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-44
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (95-63-6)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene (526-73-8)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
naphthalene (91-20-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-45
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW07
Sample Date 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/26/11 5/19/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (95-63-6)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene (526-73-8)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
naphthalene (91-20-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
-------
B-46
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (95-63-6)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene (526-73-8)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
naphthalene (91-20-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-47
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (95-63-6)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene (526-73-8)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
naphthalene (91-20-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-48
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW14 GW14 GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/27/12 5/20/13 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Round 3
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (95-63-6)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene (526-73-8)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
naphthalene (91-20-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-49
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (95-63-6)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene (526-73-8)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
naphthalene (91-20-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-50
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Dissolved Gases
Methane (74-82-8)
Ethane (74-84-0)
Propane (74-98-6)
Butane (106-97-8)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Diesel and Gas Range Organics
GRO/TPH
DRO
ug/L
ug/L
Glycols
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
Diethyleneglycol (111-46-6)
Triethylene glycol (112-27-6)
Tetraethylene glycol (112-60-7)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Low Molecular Weight Acids
Lactate (50-21-5)
Formate (64-18-6)
Acetate (64-19-7)
Propionate (79-09-4)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<20.0 U
<21.3U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<21.1U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5U
<50 H, U
<5 H, U
<25 H, U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<5U
<50 H, U
<5 H, U
<25 H, U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<5U
<50 H, U
<5 H, U
<25 H, U
<10U, J-
<25 U
<25 U
<50U, J-
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
NA
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
0.11
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
NA
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NA
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
-------
B-51
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Dissolved Gases
Methane (74-82-8)
Ethane (74-84-0)
Propane (74-98-6)
Butane (106-97-8)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Diesel and Gas Range Organics
GRO/TPH
DRO
ug/L
ug/L
Glycols
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
Diethyleneglycol (111-46-6)
Triethylene glycol (112-27-6)
Tetraethylene glycol (112-60-7)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Low Molecular Weight Acids
Lactate (50-21-5)
Formate (64-18-6)
Acetate (64-19-7)
Propionate (79-09-4)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
0.0276
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
0.0304
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<20.0 U
34.6 J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
32.4
<20.0 U
<21.5 U, J-
<20.0 U
20.1 B
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5 U
<50 H, U
<5 H, U
<25 H, U
<10U, J-
<25U
<25U
<50U, J-
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<5 U
<50 H, U
<5 H, U
<25 H, U
<10U,J-
<25 U
<25 U
<50U,J-
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NA
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
0.19
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
NA
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
-------
B-52
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08
Sample Date 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/26/11 5/19/13 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Dissolved Gases
Methane (74-82-8)
Ethane (74-84-0)
Propane (74-98-6)
Butane (106-97-8)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Diesel and Gas Range Organics
GRO/TPH
DRO
ug/L
ug/L
Glycols
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
Diethyleneglycol (111-46-6)
Triethylene glycol (112-27-6)
Tetraethylene glycol (112-60-7)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Low Molecular Weight Acids
Lactate (50-21-5)
Formate (64-18-6)
Acetate (64-19-7)
Propionate (79-09-4)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
5.560
0.0043
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
0.7810
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
5.35
0.0045
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
0.0447
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
0.0016
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<20.0 U
31.5 J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
71. 2 J-
<20.0 U
74.7
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5 U
<50 H, U
<5 H, U
<25 H, U
<10U, J-
<25U
<25U
<50U, J-
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<5 U
<50 H, U
<5 H, U
<25 H, U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<5 U
<50U
<5U
<25 U
<10U,J-
<25 U
<25 U
<50U, J-
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<0.10U
0.21
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NA
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
0.13
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
NA
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
0.37
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
NA
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
-------
B-53
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12
Sample Date 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2
Dissolved Gases
Methane (74-82-8)
Ethane (74-84-0)
Propane (74-98-6)
Butane (106-97-8)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Diesel and Gas Range Organics
GRO/TPH
DRO
ug/L
ug/L
Glycols
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
Diethyleneglycol (111-46-6)
Triethylene glycol (112-27-6)
Tetraethylene glycol (112-60-7)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Low Molecular Weight Acids
Lactate (50-21-5)
Formate (64-18-6)
Acetate (64-19-7)
Propionate (79-09-4)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20.0 U
<21.1U,J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
26.9 J-
<20.0 U
27.1
<20.0 U
73. 8 J-
<20.0 U
84.4
<20.0 U
27.1 J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5 U
<50U
<5 U
<25 U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<5 U
<50U
<5 U
<25 U
<10U, J-
<25 U
<25U
<50U, J-
<5 U, J-
<50U, J-
<5 U, J-
<25 U, J-
<10U, J-
<25 U
<25 U
<50U, J-
<5 U, J-
<50U, J-
<5 U, J-
<25 U, J-
<10U, J-
<25 U
<25 U
<50U, J-
<0.10 U
0.26
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
NA
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
0.20
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
0.31
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
0.14
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
-------
B-54
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW13 GW13 GW13 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW16 GW17
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13 3/27/12 5/20/13 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2
Dissolved Gases
Methane (74-82-8)
Ethane (74-84-0)
Propane (74-98-6)
Butane (106-97-8)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Diesel and Gas Range Organics
GRO/TPH
DRO
ug/L
ug/L
Glycols
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
Diethyleneglycol (111-46-6)
Triethylene glycol (112-27-6)
Tetraethylene glycol (112-60-7)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Low Molecular Weight Acids
Lactate (50-21-5)
Formate (64-18-6)
Acetate (64-19-7)
Propionate (79-09-4)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
0.0027
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
15.50
0.291
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20.0 U
<21.3U,J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
24.8
<20.0 U
87.9
<5 U, J-
<50U, J-
<5 U, J-
<25 U, J-
<10U, J-
<25U
<25U
<50U, J-
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U, J-
<25 U
<25 U
<50U, J-
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U, J-
<25 U
<25 U
<50U, J-
<10U, J-
<25 U
<25 U
<50U, J-
<10U, J-
<25 U
<25 U
<50U, J-
<0.10U
0.38
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NA
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
0.06 J
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NA
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
-------
B-55
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW18 GW19
Sample Date 5/20/13 5/20/13
Unit Round 3 Round 3
Dissolved Gases
Methane (74-82-8)
Ethane (74-84-0)
Propane (74-98-6)
Butane (106-97-8)
Diesel and Gas Range Organics
GRO/TPH
DRO
Glycols
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
Diethyleneglycol (111-46-6)
Triethylene glycol (112-27-6)
Tetraethylene glycol (112-60-7)
Low Molecular Weight Acids
Lactate (50-21-5)
Formate (64-18-6)
Acetate (64-19-7)
Propionate (79-09-4)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NA
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NA
NS
NS
NS
NS
-------
B-56
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Dissolved Gases
Methane (74-82-8)
Ethane (74-84-0)
Propane (74-98-6)
Butane (106-97-8)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Diesel and Gas Range Organics
GRO/TPH
DRO
ug/L
ug/L
Glycols
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
Diethyleneglycol (111-46-6)
Triethylene glycol (112-27-6)
Tetraethylene glycol (112-60-7)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Low Molecular Weight Acids
Lactate (50-21-5)
Formate (64-18-6)
Acetate (64-19-7)
Propionate (79-09-4)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0013 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0037 U
<0.0047 U
<0.0015 U
<0.0029 U
<0.0041 U
<0.0055 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0027 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
25.4 B
34.9 J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
28.7 J-
<20.0 U
29.0 B
<20.0 U
51.2
<20.0 U
<21.7U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5 U
<50 H, U
<5 H, U
<25 H, U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<5 U
<50 H, U
<5 H, U
<25 H, U
<10U, J-
<25U
<25U
<50U, J-
<10U
<10U
<10U
<10U
<5 U
<50U
<5U
<25 U
<10U,J-
<25 U
<25 U
<50U, J-
<0.10U
0.16
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
NA
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NA
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
0.22
R
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
0.04 J
R
<0.10U
0.11 B
<0.10U
<0.10 U
-------
B-57
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Round 3
R-(+)-limonene (5989-27-5)
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (120-82-1)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
1,2-dinitrobenzene (528-29-0)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,3-dimethyladamantane (702-79-4)
1,3 -dinitrobenzene (99-65-0)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,4-dinitrobenzene (100-25-4)
1-methylnaphthalene (90-12-0)
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol (58-90-2)
2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol (935-95-5)
2,4,5-trichlorophenol (95-95-4)
2,4,6-trichlorophenol (88-06-2)
2,4-dichlorophenol (120-83-2)
2,4-dimethylphenol (105-67-9)
2,4-dinitrophenol (51-28-5)
2,4-dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)
2,6-dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
2-chloronaphthalene (91-58-7)
2-chlorophenol (95-57-8)
2-methylnaphthalene (91-57-6)
2-methylphenol (95-48-7)
2-nitroaniline (88-74-4)
2-nitrophenol (88-75-5)
3&4-methylphenol (108-39-4 & 106-44-5)
3,3'-dichlorobenzidine (91-94-1)
3-nitroaniline (99-09-2)
4,6-dinitro-2-methylphenol (534-52-1)
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether (101-55-3)
4-chloro-3-methylphenol (59-50-7)
tii/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<5.0U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<5.0U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.0U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00UJ-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00U, J-
<2.00U, J-
<2.00U, J-
<2.00U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00U, J-
<5.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00U, J-
-------
B-58
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
R-(+)-limonene (5989-27-5)
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (120-82-1)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
1,2-dinitrobenzene (528-29-0)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,3-dimethyladamantane (702-79-4)
1,3 -dinitrobenzene (99-65-0)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,4-dinitrobenzene (100-25-4)
1-methylnaphthalene (90-12-0)
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol (58-90-2)
2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol (935-95-5)
2,4,5-trichlorophenol (95-95-4)
2,4,6-trichlorophenol (88-06-2)
2,4-dichlorophenol (120-83-2)
2,4-dimethylphenol (105-67-9)
2,4-dinitrophenol (51-28-5)
2,4-dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)
2,6-dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
2-chloronaphthalene (91-58-7)
2-chlorophenol (95-57-8)
2-methylnaphthalene (91-57-6)
2-methylphenol (95-48-7)
2-nitroaniline (88-74-4)
2-nitrophenol (88-75-5)
3&4-methylphenol (108-39-4 & 106-44-5)
3,3'-dichlorobenzidine (91-94-1)
3-nitroaniline (99-09-2)
4,6-dinitro-2-methylphenol (534-52-1)
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether (101-55-3)
4-chloro-3-methylphenol (59-50-7)
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
lig/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<5.0U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<5.0U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
1.00 J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
-------
B-59
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
^^^^^ ^^^^^H ^^^^^ ^^^^H ^^^^^H ^^^^H ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW07
Sample Date 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/26/11 5/19/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3
R-(+)-limonene (5989-27-5)
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (120-82-1)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
1,2-dinitrobenzene (528-29-0)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,3-dimethyladamantane (702-79-4)
1,3 -dinitrobenzene (99-65-0)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,4-dinitrobenzene (100-25-4)
1-methylnaphthalene (90-12-0)
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol (58-90-2)
2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol (935-95-5)
2,4,5-trichlorophenol (95-95-4)
2,4,6-trichlorophenol (88-06-2)
2,4-dichlorophenol (120-83-2)
2,4-dimethylphenol (105-67-9)
2,4-dinitrophenol (51-28-5)
2,4-dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)
2,6-dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
2-chloronaphthalene (91-58-7)
2-chlorophenol (95-57-8)
2-methylnaphthalene (91-57-6)
2-methylphenol (95-48-7)
2-nitroaniline (88-74-4)
2-nitrophenol (88-75-5)
3&4-methylphenol (108-39-4 & 106-44-5)
3,3'-dichlorobenzidine (91-94-1)
3-nitroaniline (99-09-2)
4,6-dinitro-2-methylphenol (534-52-1)
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether (101-55-3)
4-chloro-3-methylphenol (59-50-7)
tii/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<5.0U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<5.0U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
-------
B-60
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
R-(+)-limonene (5989-27-5)
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (120-82-1)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
1,2-dinitrobenzene (528-29-0)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,3-dimethyladamantane (702-79-4)
1,3 -dinitrobenzene (99-65-0)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,4-dinitrobenzene (100-25-4)
1-methylnaphthalene (90-12-0)
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol (58-90-2)
2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol (935-95-5)
2,4,5-trichlorophenol (95-95-4)
2,4,6-trichlorophenol (88-06-2)
2,4-dichlorophenol (120-83-2)
2,4-dimethylphenol (105-67-9)
2,4-dinitrophenol (51-28-5)
2,4-dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)
2,6-dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
2-chloronaphthalene (91-58-7)
2-chlorophenol (95-57-8)
2-methylnaphthalene (91-57-6)
2-methylphenol (95-48-7)
2-nitroaniline (88-74-4)
2-nitrophenol (88-75-5)
3&4-methylphenol (108-39-4 & 106-44-5)
3,3'-dichlorobenzidine (91-94-1)
3-nitroaniline (99-09-2)
4,6-dinitro-2-methylphenol (534-52-1)
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether (101-55-3)
4-chloro-3-methylphenol (59-50-7)
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.0U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
0.74 J-, B
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.0U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.0U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
0.69 J-, B
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
-------
B-61
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
R-(+)-limonene (5989-27-5)
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (120-82-1)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
1,2-dinitrobenzene (528-29-0)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,3-dimethyladamantane (702-79-4)
1,3 -dinitrobenzene (99-65-0)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,4-dinitrobenzene (100-25-4)
1-methylnaphthalene (90-12-0)
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol (58-90-2)
2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol (935-95-5)
2,4,5-trichlorophenol (95-95-4)
2,4,6-trichlorophenol (88-06-2)
2,4-dichlorophenol (120-83-2)
2,4-dimethylphenol (105-67-9)
2,4-dinitrophenol (51-28-5)
2,4-dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)
2,6-dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
2-chloronaphthalene (91-58-7)
2-chlorophenol (95-57-8)
2-methylnaphthalene (91-57-6)
2-methylphenol (95-48-7)
2-nitroaniline (88-74-4)
2-nitrophenol (88-75-5)
3&4-methylphenol (108-39-4 & 106-44-5)
3,3'-dichlorobenzidine (91-94-1)
3-nitroaniline (99-09-2)
4,6-dinitro-2-methylphenol (534-52-1)
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether (101-55-3)
4-chloro-3-methylphenol (59-50-7)
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.0U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
1.99 J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.0U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50UJ-
<0.50UJ-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.0U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
2.92 J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50UJ-
<0.50UJ-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
-------
B-62
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW14 GW14 GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/27/12 5/20/13 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Unit Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3 Round 3
R-(+)-limonene (5989-27-5)
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (120-82-1)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
1,2-dinitrobenzene (528-29-0)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,3-dimethyladamantane (702-79-4)
1,3 -dinitrobenzene (99-65-0)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,4-dinitrobenzene (100-25-4)
1-methylnaphthalene (90-12-0)
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol (58-90-2)
2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol (935-95-5)
2,4,5-trichlorophenol (95-95-4)
2,4,6-trichlorophenol (88-06-2)
2,4-dichlorophenol (120-83-2)
2,4-dimethylphenol (105-67-9)
2,4-dinitrophenol (51-28-5)
2,4-dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)
2,6-dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
2-chloronaphthalene (91-58-7)
2-chlorophenol (95-57-8)
2-methylnaphthalene (91-57-6)
2-methylphenol (95-48-7)
2-nitroaniline (88-74-4)
2-nitrophenol (88-75-5)
3&4-methylphenol (108-39-4 & 106-44-5)
3,3'-dichlorobenzidine (91-94-1)
3-nitroaniline (99-09-2)
4,6-dinitro-2-methylphenol (534-52-1)
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether (101-55-3)
4-chloro-3-methylphenol (59-50-7)
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
-------
B-63
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Round 2
R-(+)-limonene (5989-27-5)
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (120-82-1)
1,2-dichlorobenzene (95-50-1)
1,2-dinitrobenzene (528-29-0)
1,3-dichlorobenzene (541-73-1)
1,3-dimethyladamantane (702-79-4)
1,3 -dinitrobenzene (99-65-0)
1,4-dichlorobenzene (106-46-7)
1,4-dinitrobenzene (100-25-4)
1-methylnaphthalene (90-12-0)
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol (58-90-2)
2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol (935-95-5)
2,4,5-trichlorophenol (95-95-4)
2,4,6-trichlorophenol (88-06-2)
2,4-dichlorophenol (120-83-2)
2,4-dimethylphenol (105-67-9)
2,4-dinitrophenol (51-28-5)
2,4-dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)
2,6-dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)
2-butoxyethanol (111-76-2)
2-chloronaphthalene (91-58-7)
2-chlorophenol (95-57-8)
2-methylnaphthalene (91-57-6)
2-methylphenol (95-48-7)
2-nitroaniline (88-74-4)
2-nitrophenol (88-75-5)
3&4-methylphenol (108-39-4 & 106-44-5)
3,3'-dichlorobenzidine (91-94-1)
3-nitroaniline (99-09-2)
4,6-dinitro-2-methylphenol (534-52-1)
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether (101-55-3)
4-chloro-3-methylphenol (59-50-7)
tii/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<5.0U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
0.54 J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<5.0U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U,J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.0U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
1.65 J-, B
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<5.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
-------
B-64
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Round 3
4-chloroaniline (106-47-8)
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether (7005-72-3)
4-nitroaniline (100-01-6)
4-nitrophenol (100-02-7)
Acenaphthene (83-32-9)
Acenaphthylene (208-96-8)
Adamantane (281-23-2)
Aniline (62-53-3)
Anthracene (120-12-7)
Azobenzene (103-33-3)
Benzo(a)anthracene (56-55-3)
Benzo(a)pyrene (50-32-8)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene (205-99-2)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (191-24-2)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene (207-08-9)
Benzoic Acid (65-85-0)
Benzyl alcohol (100-51-6)
Bis-(2-chloroethoxy)methane (111-91-1)
Bis-(2-chloroethyl)ether (111-44-4)
Bis-(2-chloroisopropyl)ether (108-60-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (103-23-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (117-81-7)
Butyl benzyl phthalate (85-68-7)
Carbazole (86-74-8)
Chrysene (218-01-9)
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (53-70-3)
Dibenzofuran (132-64-9)
Diethyl phthalate (84-66-2)
Dimethyl phthalate (131-11-3)
Di-n-butyl phthalate (84-74-2)
Di-n-octyl phthalate (117-84-0)
Diphenylamine (122-39-4)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
2.17
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
1.51
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<2.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00U, J-
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-65
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
4-chloroaniline (106-47-8)
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether (7005-72-3)
4-nitroaniline (100-01-6)
4-nitrophenol (100-02-7)
Acenaphthene (83-32-9)
Acenaphthylene (208-96-8)
Adamantane (281-23-2)
Aniline (62-53-3)
Anthracene (120-12-7)
Azobenzene (103-33-3)
Benzo(a)anthracene (56-55-3)
Benzo(a)pyrene (50-32-8)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene (205-99-2)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (191-24-2)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene (207-08-9)
Benzoic Acid (65-85-0)
Benzyl alcohol (100-51-6)
Bis-(2-chloroethoxy)methane (111-91-1)
Bis-(2-chloroethyl)ether (111-44-4)
Bis-(2-chloroisopropyl)ether (108-60-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (103-23-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (117-81-7)
Butyl benzyl phthalate (85-68-7)
Carbazole (86-74-8)
Chrysene (218-01-9)
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (53-70-3)
Dibenzofuran (132-64-9)
Diethyl phthalate (84-66-2)
Dimethyl phthalate (131-11-3)
Di-n-butyl phthalate (84-74-2)
Di-n-octyl phthalate (117-84-0)
Diphenylamine (122-39-4)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U,J-
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
1.13
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-66
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
^^^^^ ^^^^^H ^^^^^ ^^^^H ^^^^^H ^^^^H ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW07
Sample Date 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/26/11 5/19/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3
4-chloroaniline (106-47-8)
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether (7005-72-3)
4-nitroaniline (100-01-6)
4-nitrophenol (100-02-7)
Acenaphthene (83-32-9)
Acenaphthylene (208-96-8)
Adamantane (281-23-2)
Aniline (62-53-3)
Anthracene (120-12-7)
Azobenzene (103-33-3)
Benzo(a)anthracene (56-55-3)
Benzo(a)pyrene (50-32-8)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene (205-99-2)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (191-24-2)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene (207-08-9)
Benzoic Acid (65-85-0)
Benzyl alcohol (100-51-6)
Bis-(2-chloroethoxy)methane (111-91-1)
Bis-(2-chloroethyl)ether (111-44-4)
Bis-(2-chloroisopropyl)ether (108-60-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (103-23-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (117-81-7)
Butyl benzyl phthalate (85-68-7)
Carbazole (86-74-8)
Chrysene (218-01-9)
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (53-70-3)
Dibenzofuran (132-64-9)
Diethyl phthalate (84-66-2)
Dimethyl phthalate (131-11-3)
Di-n-butyl phthalate (84-74-2)
Di-n-octyl phthalate (117-84-0)
Diphenylamine (122-39-4)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
1.40
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U,J-
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
1.38
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-67
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
4-chloroaniline (106-47-8)
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether (7005-72-3)
4-nitroaniline (100-01-6)
4-nitrophenol (100-02-7)
Acenaphthene (83-32-9)
Acenaphthylene (208-96-8)
Adamantane (281-23-2)
Aniline (62-53-3)
Anthracene (120-12-7)
Azobenzene (103-33-3)
Benzo(a)anthracene (56-55-3)
Benzo(a)pyrene (50-32-8)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene (205-99-2)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (191-24-2)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene (207-08-9)
Benzoic Acid (65-85-0)
Benzyl alcohol (100-51-6)
Bis-(2-chloroethoxy)methane (111-91-1)
Bis-(2-chloroethyl)ether (111-44-4)
Bis-(2-chloroisopropyl)ether (108-60-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (103-23-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (117-81-7)
Butyl benzyl phthalate (85-68-7)
Carbazole (86-74-8)
Chrysene (218-01-9)
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (53-70-3)
Dibenzofuran (132-64-9)
Diethyl phthalate (84-66-2)
Dimethyl phthalate (131-11-3)
Di-n-butyl phthalate (84-74-2)
Di-n-octyl phthalate (117-84-0)
Diphenylamine (122-39-4)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<2.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<1.00U,J-
1.06 J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<2.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
4.34
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<2.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
-------
B-68
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
4-chloroaniline (106-47-8)
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether (7005-72-3)
4-nitroaniline (100-01-6)
4-nitrophenol (100-02-7)
Acenaphthene (83-32-9)
Acenaphthylene (208-96-8)
Adamantane (281-23-2)
Aniline (62-53-3)
Anthracene (120-12-7)
Azobenzene (103-33-3)
Benzo(a)anthracene (56-55-3)
Benzo(a)pyrene (50-32-8)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene (205-99-2)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (191-24-2)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene (207-08-9)
Benzoic Acid (65-85-0)
Benzyl alcohol (100-51-6)
Bis-(2-chloroethoxy)methane (111-91-1)
Bis-(2-chloroethyl)ether (111-44-4)
Bis-(2-chloroisopropyl)ether (108-60-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (103-23-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (117-81-7)
Butyl benzyl phthalate (85-68-7)
Carbazole (86-74-8)
Chrysene (218-01-9)
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (53-70-3)
Dibenzofuran (132-64-9)
Diethyl phthalate (84-66-2)
Dimethyl phthalate (131-11-3)
Di-n-butyl phthalate (84-74-2)
Di-n-octyl phthalate (117-84-0)
Diphenylamine (122-39-4)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<2.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<1.00U,J-
<1.00U, J-
2.16 J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<2.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50UJ-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50UJ-
<1.00UJ-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<2.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50UJ-
<0.50UJ-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00UJ-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
-------
B-69
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW14 GW14 GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/27/12 5/20/13 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Unit Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3 Round 3
4-chloroaniline (106-47-8)
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether (7005-72-3)
4-nitroaniline (100-01-6)
4-nitrophenol (100-02-7)
Acenaphthene (83-32-9)
Acenaphthylene (208-96-8)
Adamantane (281-23-2)
Aniline (62-53-3)
Anthracene (120-12-7)
Azobenzene (103-33-3)
Benzo(a)anthracene (56-55-3)
Benzo(a)pyrene (50-32-8)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene (205-99-2)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (191-24-2)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene (207-08-9)
Benzoic Acid (65-85-0)
Benzyl alcohol (100-51-6)
Bis-(2-chloroethoxy)methane (111-91-1)
Bis-(2-chloroethyl)ether (111-44-4)
Bis-(2-chloroisopropyl)ether (108-60-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (103-23-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (117-81-7)
Butyl benzyl phthalate (85-68-7)
Carbazole (86-74-8)
Chrysene (218-01-9)
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (53-70-3)
Dibenzofuran (132-64-9)
Diethyl phthalate (84-66-2)
Dimethyl phthalate (131-11-3)
Di-n-butyl phthalate (84-74-2)
Di-n-octyl phthalate (117-84-0)
Diphenylamine (122-39-4)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
-------
B-70
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Round 2
4-chloroaniline (106-47-8)
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether (7005-72-3)
4-nitroaniline (100-01-6)
4-nitrophenol (100-02-7)
Acenaphthene (83-32-9)
Acenaphthylene (208-96-8)
Adamantane (281-23-2)
Aniline (62-53-3)
Anthracene (120-12-7)
Azobenzene (103-33-3)
Benzo(a)anthracene (56-55-3)
Benzo(a)pyrene (50-32-8)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene (205-99-2)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (191-24-2)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene (207-08-9)
Benzoic Acid (65-85-0)
Benzyl alcohol (100-51-6)
Bis-(2-chloroethoxy)methane (111-91-1)
Bis-(2-chloroethyl)ether (111-44-4)
Bis-(2-chloroisopropyl)ether (108-60-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (103-23-1)
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (117-81-7)
Butyl benzyl phthalate (85-68-7)
Carbazole (86-74-8)
Chrysene (218-01-9)
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (53-70-3)
Dibenzofuran (132-64-9)
Diethyl phthalate (84-66-2)
Dimethyl phthalate (131-11-3)
Di-n-butyl phthalate (84-74-2)
Di-n-octyl phthalate (117-84-0)
Diphenylamine (122-39-4)
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<2.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<5.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<2.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-71
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Round 3
Fluoranthene (206-44-0)
Fluorene (86-73-7)
Hexachlorobenzene (118-74-1)
Hexachlorobutadiene (87-68-3)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (77-47-4)
Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)
lndeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene (193-39-5)
Isophorone (78-59-1)
Naphthalene (91-20-3)
Nitrobenzene (98-95-3)
N-nitrosodimethylamine (62-75-9)
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine (621-64-7)
Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)
Phenanthrene (85-01-8)
Phenol (108-95-2)
Pyrene (129-00-0)
Pyridine (110-86-1)
Squalene (111-02-4)
Terpiniol (98-55-5)
tri-(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate (78-51-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
liS/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
tii/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
-------
B-72
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Fluoranthene (206-44-0)
Fluorene (86-73-7)
Hexachlorobenzene (118-74-1)
Hexachlorobutadiene (87-68-3)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (77-47-4)
Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)
lndeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene (193-39-5)
Isophorone (78-59-1)
Naphthalene (91-20-3)
Nitrobenzene (98-95-3)
N-nitrosodimethylamine (62-75-9)
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine (621-64-7)
Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)
Phenanthrene (85-01-8)
Phenol (108-95-2)
Pyrene (129-00-0)
Pyridine (110-86-1)
Squalene (111-02-4)
Terpiniol (98-55-5)
tri-(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate (78-51-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-73
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
^^^^^ ^^^^^H ^^^^^ ^^^^H ^^^^^H ^^^^H ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW07
Sample Date 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/26/11 5/19/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3
Fluoranthene (206-44-0)
Fluorene (86-73-7)
Hexachlorobenzene (118-74-1)
Hexachlorobutadiene (87-68-3)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (77-47-4)
Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)
lndeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene (193-39-5)
Isophorone (78-59-1)
Naphthalene (91-20-3)
Nitrobenzene (98-95-3)
N-nitrosodimethylamine (62-75-9)
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine (621-64-7)
Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)
Phenanthrene (85-01-8)
Phenol (108-95-2)
Pyrene (129-00-0)
Pyridine (110-86-1)
Squalene (111-02-4)
Terpiniol (98-55-5)
tri-(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate (78-51-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
tii/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U,J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
1.39
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-74
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Fluoranthene (206-44-0)
Fluorene (86-73-7)
Hexachlorobenzene (118-74-1)
Hexachlorobutadiene (87-68-3)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (77-47-4)
Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)
lndeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene (193-39-5)
Isophorone (78-59-1)
Naphthalene (91-20-3)
Nitrobenzene (98-95-3)
N-nitrosodimethylamine (62-75-9)
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine (621-64-7)
Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)
Phenanthrene (85-01-8)
Phenol (108-95-2)
Pyrene (129-00-0)
Pyridine (110-86-1)
Squalene (111-02-4)
Terpiniol (98-55-5)
tri-(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate (78-51-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Mi/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-75
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Fluoranthene (206-44-0)
Fluorene (86-73-7)
Hexachlorobenzene (118-74-1)
Hexachlorobutadiene (87-68-3)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (77-47-4)
Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)
lndeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene (193-39-5)
Isophorone (78-59-1)
Naphthalene (91-20-3)
Nitrobenzene (98-95-3)
N-nitrosodimethylamine (62-75-9)
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine (621-64-7)
Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)
Phenanthrene (85-01-8)
Phenol (108-95-2)
Pyrene (129-00-0)
Pyridine (110-86-1)
Squalene (111-02-4)
Terpiniol (98-55-5)
tri-(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate (78-51-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tii/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Mi/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
1.31J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-76
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW14 GW14 GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/27/12 5/20/13 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Unit Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3 Round 3
Fluoranthene (206-44-0)
Fluorene (86-73-7)
Hexachlorobenzene (118-74-1)
Hexachlorobutadiene (87-68-3)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (77-47-4)
Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)
lndeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene (193-39-5)
Isophorone (78-59-1)
Naphthalene (91-20-3)
Nitrobenzene (98-95-3)
N-nitrosodimethylamine (62-75-9)
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine (621-64-7)
Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)
Phenanthrene (85-01-8)
Phenol (108-95-2)
Pyrene (129-00-0)
Pyridine (110-86-1)
Squalene (111-02-4)
Terpiniol (98-55-5)
tri-(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate (78-51-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
-------
B-77
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Round 2
Fluoranthene (206-44-0)
Fluorene (86-73-7)
Hexachlorobenzene (118-74-1)
Hexachlorobutadiene (87-68-3)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (77-47-4)
Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)
lndeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene (193-39-5)
Isophorone (78-59-1)
Naphthalene (91-20-3)
Nitrobenzene (98-95-3)
N-nitrosodimethylamine (62-75-9)
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine (621-64-7)
Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)
Phenanthrene (85-01-8)
Phenol (108-95-2)
Pyrene (129-00-0)
Pyridine (110-86-1)
Squalene (111-02-4)
Terpiniol (98-55-5)
tri-(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate (78-51-3)
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
liS/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
tii/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U,J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U,J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-78
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Washington County,
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Round 3
Water Isotopes
62H
6180
%0
%0
Strontium Isotopes
Sr
Rb
87Sr/86Sr
1/Sr
Rb/Sr
Hg/L
Hg/L
Atom Ratio
L/Hg
Weight Ratio
Radiological Parameters
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Radium-226
Radium-228
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
-54.96
-9.01
-54.59
-8.60
-54.93
-9.01
-56.02
-8.66
-54.95
-9.04
-53.90
-8.42
-56.40
-8.85
516
<0.5
0.711222
0.0019
NR
483
<1
0.711221
0.00207
NR
448
<0.5
0.711229
0.0022
NR
443
<1
0.711236
0.00226
NR
719
0.70
0.711634
0.0014
0.0010
525
0.64
0.711549
0.00190
0.001219
568
<1
0.711571
0.00176
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
-------
B-79
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Washington County,
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Water Isotopes
62H
6180
%0
%0
Strontium Isotopes
Sr
Rb
87Sr/86Sr
1/Sr
Rb/Sr
Mi/L
Hg/L
Atom Ratio
L/Hg
Weight Ratio
Radiological Parameters
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Radium-226
Radium-228
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
-54.57
-8.88
-53.09
-8.29
-54.65
-8.59
-54.60
-8.10
-52.52
-8.25
-56.97
-8.97
-53.84
-7.47
-52.07
-8.36
-54.23
-8.54
810
1.0
0.711614
0.0012
0.0012
779
0.80
0.711619
0.00128
0.001027
888
<1
0.711629
0.00113
NR
1550
1.0
0.711733
0.0006
0.0006
1050
1.3
NR
0.00095
0.001238
1190
1.1
0.711710
0.00084
0.000924
197
0.8
0.711706
0.0051
0.0041
626
1.2
0.711694
0.00160
0.001917
216
<1
0.711675
0.00463
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
-------
B-80
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Washington County,
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW07 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/26/11 5/19/13 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Water Isotopes
62H
6180
%0
%0
Strontium Isotopes
Sr
Rb
87Sr/86Sr
1/Sr
Rb/Sr
Mi/L
Hg/L
Atom Ratio
L/Hg
Weight Ratio
Radiological Parameters
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Radium-226
Radium-228
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
-53.88
-7.75
-55.97
-8.72
-54.01
-7.80
-53.14
-8.40
-54.22
-8.67
-54.83
-8.50
-55.34
-8.74
-53.40
-7.71
-51.85
-8.16
204
<0.5
0.711858
0.0049
NR
213
<1
0.711852
0.00469
NR
229
2.2
0.711499
0.0044
0.0096
200
1.9
0.711536
0.00500
0.009500
214
1.4
0.711557
0.00467
0.006542
388
0.8
0.711092
0.0026
0.0021
581
2.6
0.711538
0.00172
0.004475
689
1.0
0.712666
0.0015
0.0015
570
1.1
0.712645
0.00175
0.001930
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
6.3
10.3
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
-------
B-81
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Washington County,
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13 GW14 GW14
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13 3/27/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
Water Isotopes
62H
6180
%0
%0
Strontium Isotopes
Sr
Rb
87Sr/86Sr
1/Sr
Rb/Sr
Mi/L
Hg/L
Atom Ratio
L/Hg
Weight Ratio
Radiological Parameters
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Radium-226
Radium-228
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
-54.07
-7.59
-52.93
-8.21
-53.91
-8.39
-51.76
-8.29
-54.25
-8.42
-53.18
-8.38
-54.20
-8.57
-52.67
-8.28
-55.04
-8.67
306
0.8
0.712993
0.0033
0.0026
301
0.82
0.713013
0.00332
0.002724
294
0.6
0.712413
0.0034
0.0020
159
0.72
0.712448
0.00629
0.004528
811
<1
0.711904
0.0012
NR
699
0.83
0.711940
0.00143
0.001187
592
<2
0.711955
0.00169
NR
509
0.47
0.712120
0.00196
0.000923
467
<2
0.712126
0.00214
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
-------
B-82
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Washington County,
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Round 3
Water Isotopes
62H
6180
%0
%0
Strontium Isotopes
Sr
Rb
87Sr/86Sr
1/Sr
Rb/Sr
Mi/L
Hg/L
Atom Ratio
L/Hg
Weight Ratio
Radiological Parameters
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Radium-226
Radium-228
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
-53.26
-8.46
-52.18
-8.30
-52.64
-8.25
-59.00
-9.14
-55.25
-8.80
211
0.40
0.711983
0.00474
0.001896
243
0.63
0.712797
0.00412
0.002593
64.9
0.83
0.712210
0.01541
0.012789
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
-------
B-83
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Washington County,
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Round 2
Water Isotopes
62H
6180
%0
%0
Strontium Isotopes
Sr
Rb
87Sr/86Sr
1/Sr
Rb/Sr
Mi/L
Hg/L
Atom Ratio
L/Hg
Weight Ratio
Radiological Parameters
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Radium-226
Radium-228
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
-55.08
-9.00
-56.18
-8.81
-53.72
-8.03
-51.67
-8.20
-55.94
-8.83
-54.16
-8.20
-53.63
-8.50
774
<0.5
0.711421
0.0013
NR
622
<1
0.711372
0.00161
NR
380
0.6
0.711506
0.0026
0.0016
605
0.54
0.711100
0.00165
0.000893
313
<1
0.711491
0.00319
NR
374
<0.5
0.712527
0.0027
NR
336
0.20
0.712556
0.00298
0.000595
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
-------
B-84
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/17/13 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/20/13
Round 3
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
62HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
factor
NR
NR
1.54
4.30
6.94
87.22
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.10
1.018
0
0.70
NR
ND
1.70
1.30
10.26
86.74
ND
0.0014
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.0
1.033
0
0.78
NR
NR
1.68
5.02
5.52
87.78
ND
0.0031
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.60
1.012
0
0.71
NR
ND
1.74
1.46
6.82
89.98
ND
0.0033
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.6
1.014
0
0.76
NR
NR
1.40
24.89
4.46
69.23
0.018
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-13.56
1.032
0
0.70
NR
ND
1.50
20.55
7.51
70.40
0.038
0.0021
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.67
1.043
0
0.71
NR
ND
1.36
27.33
5.25
66.06
ND
0.0014
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-13.9
1.039
0
0.72
-------
B-85
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW04 GW04 GW04 GW05 GW05 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06
Sample Date 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/26/11 3/23/12 5/17/13 7/26/11 3/24/12 5/19/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
62HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
factor
NR
NR
1.63
6.69
5.51
86.00
ND
0.169
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-16.66
1.013
2
0.72
NR
ND
1.72
4.21
5.13
88.75
ND
0.193
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-16.46
1.008
2
0.75
NR
ND
1.70
2.09
5.81
90.12
ND
0.284
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.7
1.008
3
0.75
NR
NR
1.51
10.89
12.06
75.54
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-13.04
1.055
0
0.69
ND
ND
1.4
20.93
12.74
64.91
0.023
0.0011
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.77
1.07
0
0.72
NR
ND
1.47
10.83
14.47
73.23
ND
0.0012
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-13.5
1.068
0
0.74
NR
NR
1.21
4.26
0.79
65.43
0.007
28.29
0.0151
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-55.34
-175.9
NR
-11.38
0.866
287
0.66
NR
ND
1.45
2.73
6.16
85.04
ND
4.62
0.0038
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-52.51
-160.9
NR
-13.14
0.992
47
0.71
NR
ND
1.16
0.24
2.32
65.09
ND
31.18
0.011
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-55.16
-179.4
NR
-11.4
0.856
316
0.68
-------
B-86
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW07 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 7/26/11 5/19/13 7/27/11 3/24/12 5/19/13 7/27/11 5/17/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
62HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
factor
NR
NR
1.48
15.86
8.31
74.33
0.018
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-17.59
1.041
0
0.68
NR
ND
1.49
12.00
9.10
77.41
ND
0.0010
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-17.6
1.040
0
0.70
NR
NR
1.50
20.18
3.17
75.11
0.044
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.37
1.019
0
0.72
NR
ND
1.59
19.67
2.99
75.70
0.036
0.0121
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.55
1.017
0
0.72
NR
ND
1.59
14.84
2.48
81.09
ND
0.0027
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.4
1.008
0
0.73
NR
NR
1.43
26.67
3.97
67.92
0.014
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.19
1.032
0
0.70
NR
ND
1.42
24.16
4.36
70.05
ND
0.0051
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-13.2
1.030
0
0.72
NR
NR
1.41
16.24
8.29
74.05
0.012
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.65
1.041
0
0.70
NR
ND
1.38
21.31
7.75
69.53
0.031
0.0011
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-16.03
1.045
0
0.73
-------
B-87
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13 GW13 GW14 GW14
Sample Date 7/28/11 3/26/12 7/28/11 3/25/12 7/28/11 3/24/12 5/20/13 3/27/12 5/20/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
62HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
factor
NR
NR
1.55
4.69
6.59
87.17
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.28
1.016
0
0.68
NR
ND
1.60
3.89
6.85
87.66
ND
0.0014
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.41
1.017
0
0.70
NR
NR
1.51
10.07
6.63
81.78
0.015
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-16.34
1.024
0
0.69
NR
ND
1.56
15.85
7.74
74.82
0.031
0.0007
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.98
1.038
0
0.72
NR
NR
1.33
25.55
6.04
67.08
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.74
1.041
0
0.71
NR
ND
1.42
26.17
6.07
66.34
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.07
1.043
0
0.72
NR
ND
1.38
27.73
3.87
67.02
ND
0.0019
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.4
1.032
0
0.73
NR
ND
1.54
21.12
4.38
72.94
ND
0.0151
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.70
1.027
0
0.72
NR
ND
1.52
16.97
7.02
74.48
ND
0.0117
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.7
1.036
0
0.74
-------
B-88
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW15 GW16 GW17 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 3/25/12 3/27/12 3/27/12 5/20/13 5/20/13
Round 3
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
62HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
factor
NR
ND
1.49
21.85
5.76
70.88
0.020
0.0011
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.20
1.035
0
0.73
NR
ND
1.36
20.43
12.21
65.98
0.023
0.0014
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-18.14
1.068
0
0.71
NR
ND
0.581
2.31
0.18
21.96
ND
74.34
0.631
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-76.02
-238.8
NR
-7.79
0.667
765
0.63
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
-------
B-89
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Washington County, Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample SW01 SW01 SW02 SW02 SW02 SW03 SW03
Sample Date 7/25/11 5/18/13 7/25/11 3/23/12 5/18/13 7/27/11 3/26/12
Round 2
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
62HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
factor
NR
NR
1.39
25.29
4.10
69.17
0.049
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-14.41
1.030
0
0.71
NR
ND
1.44
26.23
2.37
69.96
ND
0.0008
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-12.9
1.022
0
0.73
NR
NR
1.38
28.71
0.76
69.08
0.050
0.0205
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-12.83
1.017
0
0.74
NR
ND
1.38
31.69
0.58
66.29
0.050
0.0064
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-12.64
1.020
0
0.73
NR
ND
1.31
33.00
0.44
65.24
ND
0.0135
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-11.9
1.020
0
0.73
NR
NR
1.40
21.57
9.19
67.76
0.085
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-16.22
1.053
0
0.72
NR
ND
1.45
21.30
7.76
69.46
0.035
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.71
1.045
0
0.72
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix C
Background Data
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/084
C-l
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Table of Contents
Table of Contents C-2
List of Tables C-3
List of Figures C-5
C.I. Land Use C-6
C.2. Search Areas C-6
C.2.1. Land Use C-6
C.2.2. Crop Land C-7
C.2.3. Land Use Changes C-7
C.3. Environmental Records Search C-7
C.3.1. Oil and Gas Well Inventory C-8
C.3.2. State Record Summary C-8
C.4. Evaluation of Data for the Northern Area C-9
C.4.1. Northern Area EDR Search Results C-9
C.4.2. Oil and Gas Well Inventory Summary C-ll
C.4.3. State Record Summary C-ll
C.5. Evaluation of Data for the Southern Area C-13
C.5.1. Southern Area EDR Search Results C-13
C.5.2. Oil and Gas Well Inventory Summary C-15
C.5.3. State Record Summary C-15
C.6. References C-16
Attachment 1 EDR Record Search C-121
C-2
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
List of Tables
Table Cl Major Agricultural Land Uses in Washington County (2012) C-19
Table C2 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, in Washington County C-19
Table C3 Largest Industries, by Employment, in Washington County C-19
Table C4 Land Use in Search Area C in 1992 and 2006 C-20
Table C5 Land Use in Search Area D in 1992 and 2006 C-20
Table C6 Land Use in Search Area E in 1992 and 2006 C-20
Table C7 Land Use in Search Area F in 1992 and 2006 C-21
Table C8 Land Use in Search Area 7H in 1992 and 2006 C-21
Table C9 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Search Area C C-21
Table CIO Major Agricultural Land Uses in Search Area D C-22
Table Cll Major Agricultural Land Uses in Search Area E C-22
Table C12 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Search Area F C-22
Table C13 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Search Area 7H C-22
Table C14 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, in Search Area C C-23
Table CIS Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, in Search Area D C-23
Table C16 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, in Search Area E C-23
Table C17 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, in Search Area F C-24
Table CIS Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Search Area 7H C-24
Table C19 Environmental Database Review Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern
Area -Search Area C C-25
Table C20 Environmental Database Review Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern
Area - Search Area D C-29
Table C21 Environmental Database Review Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern
Area -Search Area E C-31
Table C22 Environmental Database Review Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern
Area -Search Area F C-32
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County) C-39
C-3
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table C24 Number of Permitted Oil and Gas Wells in Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern
Area C-77
Table C25 Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area, Locations of Impoundments and
Reserve Pits C-78
Table C26 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area C-81
Table C27 Notice of Violations - Identified Potential Candidate Causes and Distances from EPA
Sampling Points, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area C-87
Table C28 Environmental Database Review Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern
Area C-88
Table C29 Number of Permitted Oil and Gas Wells in Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern
Area C-91
Table C30 Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern Area, Locations of Impoundments and
Reserve Pits C-92
Table C31 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern Area C-95
Table C32 Notable Notice of Violations - Identified Potential Candidate Causes and Distances
(less than 2 Miles) to EPA Sampling Points, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern
Area C-98
C-4
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
List of Figures
Figure C-l 2012 Crop Lands C-100
Figure C-2 Land Use Change, 1992-2001 and 2001-2006 C-101
Figure C-3 Population in Washington County, Pennsylvania, 1950-2010 C-102
Figure C-4 Land Use/Land Cover 1992 and 2006, Search Area C C-103
Figure C-5 Land Use/Land Cover 1992 and 2006, Search Area D C-104
Figure C-6 Land Use/Land Cover 1992 and 2006, Search Area E C-105
Figure C-7 Land Use/Land Cover 1992 and 2006, Search Area F C-106
Figure C-8 Land Use/Land Cover 1992 and 2006, Search Area 7H C-107
Figure C-9 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area C C-108
Figure C-10 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area D C-109
Figure C-ll 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area E C-110
Figure C-12 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area F C-lll
Figure C-13 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area 7H C-112
Figure C-14 Land Use Change, 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Search Area C C-113
Figure C-15 Land Use Change, 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Search Area D C-114
Figure C-16 Land Use Change, 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Search Area E C-115
Figure C-17 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area F C-116
Figure C-18 Land Use Change, 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Search Area 7H C-117
Figure C-19 Sample Location Map C-118
Figure C-20 Impoundments and Reserve Pits, Northern Area C-119
Figure C-21 Impoundments and Reserve Pits, Southern Area C-120
C-5
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
C.I. Land Use
This section presents descriptions of land uses in Washington County as a whole, followed by
descriptions of land uses in and around the sampling points of this study. Building on information
provided in the Background section of this report, information on the use of planted/cultivated land can
be obtained from the Cropland Data Layer produced by the US Department of Agriculture's National
Agricultural Statistics Service, which provides data on agricultural uses of land based on satellite imagery
and extensive agricultural ground checking of the imagery (US Department of Agriculture, 2012). Figure
Cl shows land uses, including the agricultural uses, in Washington County in 2012. Table Cl shows the
percentages of county land devoted to the largest agricultural uses. Alfalfa growing was the largest
agricultural land use accounting for approximately 19% of land in the county.
Turning to land use changes, data from the US Geological Survey's National Land Cover Database for
1992 and 2006 are not directly comparable (US Geological Survey, 2012). However, it is possible to
compare data from 1992 to data from 2001, and to then compare data from 2001 to that from 2006 to
identify changes in land use in the 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006 sub-periods (Multi-Resolution Land
Characteristics Consortium, 2013). Figure C2 shows land use changes between 1992 and 2001 and
between 2001 and 2006, respectively. Table C2 contains data on the changes in land use in the same
two sub-periods. It can be seen from the table that a very small proportion of the land in the county
changed use in each sub-period and that <1% of the county's land was developed and thereby
converted to urban land in each sub-period.
This lack of significant change in land use is consistent with the relative stability of the county's
population (i.e., an indicator of the intensity of land use) over decades as indicated by US Census data
(see Figure C3) (US Census Bureau, 2013a, 2013b, 2013c). In 2011, the population density in the county
was approximately 243 persons per square mile, as compared to approximately 285 persons per square
mile for the entire state (US Census Bureau, 2012a). In 2010, the percentage of the land in the county
taken up by urban areas (i.e., another indicator of the intensity of land use) was 11.8%, as compared to
10.5% for the entire state (US Census Bureau, 2012b).
Employment is another broad indicator of land use in the county. Table C3 identifies the largest
industries, by employment, in the county. Among the production industries (i.e., manufacturing, mining,
and utilities), manufacturing is the largest individual industry, accounting for just over 1 in 6 jobs in the
county.
C.2. Search Areas
C.2.1. Land Use
Figures C4 through C8, which were created using data from the National Land Cover Database, show
land use maps for Search Areas C, D, E, F and 7H, respectively, in 1992 and 2006. The search areas
encompass a 3-mile search radius in the Southern Area and 1-mile or 3-mile search radii around
sampling points in the Northern Area. These search areas are used to focus the analysis of land use
patterns and environmental records searches in the areas around the sampling points of this study.
Tables C4 through C8 contain data on land use in Search Areas C, D, E, F and 7H, respectively, in 1992
C-6
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
and 2006. Although the data for land use in the two years are not comparable due to methodological
differences, they do indicate that forest cover and planted/cultivated land accounted for the vast
majority of land use in all of the search areas in both years.
C.2.2. Crop Land
Figures C9 through C13 show land uses, including the agricultural uses of land, in Search Areas C, D, E, F,
and 7H, respectively, in 2012. Tables C9 through C13 show the percentages of land devoted to the
largest agricultural uses in Search Areas C, D, E, F and 7H, respectively. Alfalfa growing comprises the
largest agricultural land use in all of the search areas, with the percentage of land devoted to alfalfa
growing ranging from 24.5% in Search Area 7H to 53.6% in Search Area E.
C.2.3. Land Use Changes
Figures C14 through CIS show land use changes in Search Areas C, D, E, F and 7H, respectively, between
1992 and 2001 and between 2001 and 2006. Tables C14 through CIS present the changes in land use in
the two sub-periods. The tables show that, in general, only a tiny proportion of the land in the search
areas changed use in either sub-period. In the particular case of Search Area E, no land changed use
between 2001 and 2006.
C.3. Environmental Records Search
Environmental record searches for the Northern and Southern areas were obtained by Environmental
Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). EDR provides a service for searching publically available databases and also
provides data from their own proprietary databases. The database searches included records reviews of
several federal, state, tribal, and EDR proprietary environmental databases for the two study areas with
regard to the documented use, storage, or release of hazardous materials or petroleum products (see
Attachment I).1 Record dates varied based on the particular database from which the record was
obtained. EDR began collecting a majority of the records in 1991 from the standard databases (State
Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act Site Lists [SHWS]; Landfills [LF]; Leaking Underground Storage Tanks [LUST];
Underground Storage Tanks [UST]; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act [RCRA]; National Priority
List [NPL]; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System
[CERCLIS]; etc.). However, some databases (e.g., Spills) may have records dating back to the 1980s.
The record search areas were based on 1- and 3-mile-radius search areas centered around a single
sampling point or a cluster of EPA sampling points. These search areas were chosen based on
professional judgment considering the large size of the study area, as described below:
1 Note: Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) does not search the EnviroFacts and its associated EnviroMapper databases,
but searches 19 of the 20 environmental databases covered by EnviroFacts, either as standalone databases (such as
CERCLIS, RCRA, TSCA, etc.) or as databases searched as part of the Facility Index System/Facility Registry System (FINDS)
database. The only EnviroFacts database that is not reviewed as part of an EDR search is the Cleanups in My Community
(Cleanup) database, which maps and lists areas where hazardous waste is being or has been cleaned up throughout the
United States. However, it is likely the information in the Cleanup database is also found in other databases that are part of
EDR searches.
C-7
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
1. In general, a 3-mile search radius extended from either a specific production well (e.g., the 7H
well for the Southern Area) or the mean center point based on the sample cluster locations
(Northern Area).
2. In the Northern Area, there were sample points beyond the 3-mile radius. In those cases, an
additional 1-mile radius was generated for each extraneous point that was not clustered with
other points.
3. Lastly, if a sample point was less than 1 mile from the edge of the 3-mile search radius, they
were considered an extraneous point and a 1-mile radius was used.
The identified records included historically contaminated properties; businesses that use, generate,
transport, or dispose of hazardous materials or petroleum products in their operations; active
contaminated sites that are currently under assessment and/or remediation; sites that have NPDES and
SPDES permits; and active and abandoned mines and landfills. All properties listed in the Environmental
Records Search Report were reviewed and screened based on the EDR record search findings to
determine whether they are potential candidate causes. The criteria used for the screening included
relevant environmental information (including, but not limited to, notices of violations, current and
historical use of the site, materials and wastes at the site, releases and/or spills) and distance from the
sampling points.
Sites that could not be mapped due to poor or inadequate address information were not included on
the EDR Radius Map. However, EDR, determined that based on the limited address information
available, it is possible that these sites could be located within the stated search radius (e.g., zip code
listed within searched radius) and are listed on the Environmental Records Search Report as "orphan
sites." Even though they were not mappable, the orphan sites were screened to the extent possible
based on limited information on those sites available through additional searches of the databases listed
above and information obtained through internet searches (i.e., EPA and eFACTS Web sites).
C.3.1. Oil and Gas Well Inventory
Well inventories were prepared for the same search areas described above for the EDR reports and for
the land use analysis. All oil and gas wells within these areas were selected for review. Specific focus
was placed on wells within 1 mile of EPA sampling locations. Information was obtained from desktop
surveys performed using searchable state agency databases. The oldest well spud date identified in this
study was June 1982.
C.3.2. State Record Summary
The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) Web site containing Pennsylvania's
Environment Facility Application Compliance Tracking System (eFACTS at
http://www.ahs.dep.pa.gov/eFACTSWeb/criteria site.aspx) was used to find up-to-date well records for
wells within the search radii. The database provides information on inspection and pollution prevention
visits, including a listing of all inspections that have occurred at each well on record, whether violations
were noted, and any enforcement that may have resulted. The system provides multiple options to
search for records. Due to the large number of wells in each study area, this record search was
C-8
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
performed only on oil and gas wells within a 1-mile radius of each EPA sampling point. Not all of the
state's records are included in the state's electronic database. Access to additional paper records can be
obtained by appointment only from the particular state regional office. The oldest violation identified
by the desktop survey for this investigation is from April 1987.
C.4. Evaluation of Data for the Northern Area
C.4.1. Northern Area EDR Search Results
Four separate search radii (search areas) were established to perform database searches that captured
all 11 EPA sampling points (see Figure C19). The search radii for Search Areas C, D, E, and F ranged from
1 to 3 miles. The database search located 30 mapped sites within these search areas. An additional 140
orphan sites were identified during the searches. Orphan sites are those sites with poor locational
information in the databases that may or may not exist outside the actual search radius. EPA attempted
to locate these sites with information available in the reports and through internet searches to aid in
determining the potential of these sites as a candidate cause. The evaluation of records is summarized
in Tables C19 through C22.
Of the 170 sites contained in the EDR reports, only 33 were retained as potential candidate causes. Sites
were retained only if they were within a plausible distance from an EPA sampling point (i.e., a distance
the contaminant could plausibly migrate from the source to the sampling location. In this case, EPA
conservatively chose a 2-mile radius) and consisted of an incident that involved a contaminant(s) of
concern (petroleum product, brine, or fracturing fluid constituent). The following is a summary of the
potential candidate causes and the databases used to identify them:
• US MINES and MINES - Two databases were used to identify mines: US MINES, which is
maintained by the United States Department of Energy and includes all mine identification
numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971 and violation information; and MINES,
which is maintained by the Pennsylvania Spatial Data Access (PASDA) and includes the
approximate locations of Abandoned Mine Land Problem Areas containing public health, safety,
and public welfare problems created by past coal mining. Abandoned and active mine lands can
contribute to poor water quality over large areas and thus are retained as a potential candidate
cause until more data, such as hydrologic framework, can be evaluated to make a more accurate
determination. One US Mines site was retained and is located in Search Area F within about 0.4
miles of SWPAGW09.
• Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
(CERCLIS)/CERCLIS - No Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP) -These databases contain
sites that are, or were, under evaluation for inclusion in the National Priority List
(NPL)/Superfund Program because of a potential uncontrolled release of hazardous waste. A
total of two CERCLIS sites were retained, one in Search Area C (orphan site) and the other site in
Search Area F (orphan site). The orphan site in Search Area F was also listed in the FINDS
database. However, the location information for both sites could not be accurately determined
based on information in the report or information found through internet searches. Additional
C-9
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
location information and information in regards to the status of the potential uncontrolled
hazardous waste release is needed for these sites.
• Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) - This database records and stores
information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. A total of 13 ERNS subject
sites were retained, with one site in Search Area C, five sites in Search Area D, one site in Search
Area E, and six sites in Search Area F. One of the sites in Search Area F was also listed in the VCP
and FINDS databases. The ERNS records may include multiple calls about the same property
overtime. The emergency response records included releases of natural gas, methanol,
unknown causes of diesel and other air odors, aboveground storage tank (AST) explosion,
ground water contamination, and leaks of unknown substances.
• Historic Landfills (HIST LF) - This database contains a listing of inactive non-hazardous facilities,
solid waste facilities, or abandoned landfills, although portions of this database are no longer
maintained by the PADEP. Two HIST LF sites were retained, one site in Search Area C (orphan
site) and one site in Search Area D (orphan site), primarily because the location could not be
determined. Without further information about these landfills, particularly their locations, they
cannot be ruled out as potential contributors to ground water quality impacts.
• UST/LUST/AST Storage Tanks - Includes sites listed in one of three databases: Underground
Storage Tank (UST), which contains a list of registered USTs regulated under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Incident
Reports, which contains an inventory of reported leaking USTs that comes from the Department
of Environmental Resources' list of confirmed releases; and Aboveground Storage Tank (AST),
which contains a list of registered ASTs from the PADEP's listing of Pennsylvania regulated ASTs.
A total of six UST sites (three in Search Area F, two in Search Area C, and one in Search Area D),
two LUST (one in Search Area F and one in Search Area C), and three AST sites (one each in
Search Areas E, D, and F) were retained. Besides a known leaking UST in Search Area F, the
other 10 sites were orphans included as potential contributors to ground water quality impacts
due to their proximity to the nearest sampling point or because the location could not be
determined.
• US Hist Auto STAT - This database is a select list of business directories of potential gas
station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR that may not show up in
current government record searches. A total of three US HIST Auto STAT sites were retained, all
of which are located in Search Area F, as potential gas station/filling station/service station sites
and were included as potential contributors to ground water quality impacts due to their
proximity to the nearest sampling point. One of the sites was also listed in the NPDES, FINDS,
and Manifest databases.
• Facility Index System (FINDS) - This database contains both facility information and other
sources of information from the EPA/National Technical Information Service (NTIS). Two
different FIND sites were retained, both of which are located in Search Area F: one site involves
a gas station with an NPDES permit, and the other involves violations related to the improper
storage of the flammable liquids in tanks that lacked sufficiently sized venting capability and
C-10
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
maintenance of the thief hatches. Both sites were included as potential contributors to ground
water quality impacts due to their proximity to the nearest sampling point.
C.4.2. Oil and Gas Well Inventory Summary
As described above, the EPA sampling locations were compared to the distance to the inventory of wells
identified in the PADEP oil and gas well database files as of May 20, 2013(see Table C23).
The Northern Area of Washington County was split into four distinct regions, designated as "Search C"
through "Search F" (see Figure C19). There are 188 oil and gas wells in these four search areas, of which
108 are within 1 mile of EPA sampling points (see Table C24).
In addition to obtaining well inventory data, Google Earth Aerial Imagery from 1988 to 2012 was
reviewed to determine whether impoundments or reserve pits associated with oil and gas wells were
present in the study area. Prior to 2008, no impoundments/reserve pits were visible in the aerial images
that were reviewed. However, since these features are relatively short-term and the time frame
between the images can span multiple years, additional impoundments/reserve pits could have been
present but not captured by the available imagery. Since 2008, at least 24 impoundments and 10
reserve pits were identified in the study area. Most of these impoundments/reserve pits were installed
after 2010; however, at least three impoundments were installed in 2008. The distances of the
impoundments/reserve pits from the EPA sampling locations are identified in Table C25, and the
locations relative to the search areas are shown on Figure C20. The specific use of each impoundment is
unknown; however, impoundments are generally used to store fresh water for hydraulic fracturing, and
are later mixed with treated flowback fluids (brines and spent hydraulic fracturing fluid) from the
hydraulic fracturing process. In addition, many of the well pads contain, or previously contained,
reserve pits, which are generally used for drill cuttings.
In summary, numerous oil and gas production wells are located in the study area, most well pads
contain/contained a reserve pit, and many of the well pads were associated with an impoundment.
However, all of the impoundments/reserve pits identified from the aerial imagery are located within
Search Areas C, D, and F. The presence of numerous oil and gas wells, reserve pits, and impoundments
increases the probability of one or more of these features to be a potential source of contamination.
CAS. State Record Summary
Notice of Violations. The notice of violation records within a 1-mile radius of Search Areas C, D, E, and F
included 96 oil and gas wells scattered throughout the following townships: Canton - 7, Cross Creek -19,
Hopewell - 9, and Mount Pleasant - 61 (see Table C26). Nine of the wells are listed as inactive or
plugged. No violations were reported for 86 of the wells; however, violations were reported for the
remaining 25 wells and 2 impoundments. All of the violations noted in eFACTS for these wells are listed
as corrected or abated, with the exception of two instances where the resolution was not listed and four
instances where Legacy Data was listed in the resolution field. Fines ranging from $17,500 to $58,000
were applied for some of these violations (although these fines may reflect violations at multiple
facilities).
C-ll
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
The following details for the most notable violations that could be linked to a candidate cause are
summarized in Table C27 along with the distance of the violation from the nearest EPA sampling points:
• LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT 3H - A violation involving the discharge of industrial waste, including drill
cuttings, oil, brine, and/or silt was noted during an inspection performed as a result of an
incident-response to accident or event stream for well LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT 3H, located in
Hopewell Township (Search Area C) in February 2010. The EPA sampling point closest to this
unit is SWPAGW08 (0.8 miles to the southeast).
• ALEXANDER UNIT 2 - A similar violation involving the discharge of industrial waste, including
drill cuttings, oil, brine, and/or silt was noted during an inspection performed in March 2008 due
to a complaint about well ALEXANDER UNIT 2, located in Mount Pleasant Township (Search Area
D). During this inspection, a second violation involving the discharge of pollutional material to
waters of the Commonwealth was noted. The sampling points closest to this unit are
SWPAGW02 (0.6 miles to the southeast), SWPASW01 (0.6 miles to the southeast), SWPAGW01
(0.8 miles to the southeast), and SWPAGW03 1.8 miles to the northwest. The EPA surface water
sampling location is approximately 50 feet lower in elevation than the point of discharge;
however, the sampling location was a small stream with no apparent connection to the spill site.
• CHRISTMAN UNIT 2 - A violation involving the discharge of pollutional material to waters of the
Commonwealth was noted for CHRISTMAN UNIT 2, located in Cross Creek Township (Search
Area F), during a site restoration inspection performed in April 2008. The EPA sampling points
closest to this unit are SWPAGW05 (1 mile to the north/northeast), SWPAGW06 (1.9 miles to
the northwest), SWPAGW07 (1.8 miles to the northwest), and SWPAGW09 (1.9 miles to the
northwest).
• COWDEN 47H - A violation involving the discharge of pollutional material to waters of the
Commonwealth was also noted for COWDEN 47H, located in Cross Creek Township (Search Area
F), during a site restoration inspection performed in April 2008. The EPA sampling points closest
to this unit are SWPAGW06 (0.9 miles to the northwest), SWPAGW07 (0.8 miles to the
northwest), SWPAGW09 (0.9 miles to the northwest), and SWPAGW05 (1.6 miles to the
northeast).
• OHIO VALLEY LBC Unit 8H - Failure to properly store, transport, process or dispose of a residual
waste, and failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent
pollution of waters of the Commonwealth in Search Area F. The EPA sampling points closest to
this unit are SWPAGW05 (0.4 miles to the west) and SWPAGW03 (0.9 miles to the northeast).
• BEST IMPOUNDMENT DAM - Impoundment not structurally sound, impermeable, 3rd-party
protected, greater than 20 inches of seasonal high ground water table (March 17, 2010) in
Search area D. The EPA sampling point closest to this impoundment is SWPAGW08 (0.1 miles to
the west).
• CARTER IMPOUNDMENT - Failure to properly store, transport, process or dispose of a residual
waste, and failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent
pollution of waters of the Commonwealth in Search Area E. The EPA sampling points closest to
C-12
-------
Appendix CBackground Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
this impoundment are SWPAGW04 (0.3 miles to south/southeast) and SWPASW02 (0.4 miles to
the south/southeast).
Each of these violations could be a potential candidate cause.
C.5. Evaluation of Data for the Southern Area
C.5.1. Southern Area EDR Search Results
The environmental database search for the Southern Area was completed using one 3-mile search
radius (Site-7H Search) centered around the Yeager 7H well at Latitude 40.0915270 (40° 5' 29.40") and
Longitude 80.2281111 (80° 13' 41.16") (see Figure C19). This center point was used to efficiently
capture information for a cluster of sampling points in the Southern Area. EDR located a total of 27 sites
within the 3-mile search radius. An additional 18 orphan sites were identified during the searches. EPA
attempted to locate these sites with information available in the reports and through internet searches
to aid in determining the potential of these sites as a candidate cause. The evaluation of records is
summarized in Table C28.
Of the 45 sites, a total of 22 records (16 sites) were retained as potential candidate causes and were
identified in the databases described below:
• US MINES and MINES - Two databases were used to identify mines: US MINES, which is
maintained by the United States Department of Energy and includes all mine identification
numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971 and violation information; and MINES,
which is maintained by the Pennsylvania Spatial Data Access (PASDA) and includes the
approximate location of Abandoned Mine Land Problem Areas containing public health, safety,
and public welfare problems created by past coal mining. Abandoned and active mine lands can
contribute to poor water quality over large areas and thus are retained as a potential candidate
cause until more data, such as hydrologic framework, can be evaluated to make a more accurate
determination. Two abandoned mine land sites were retained, both located approximately 1.5
miles northeast from sampling location SWPAGW13.
• Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
(CERCLIS)/CERCLIS-No Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP) -These databases contain sites
that are under, or were under, evaluation for inclusion on the National Priority List
(NPL)/Superfund Program because of a potential uncontrolled release of hazardous waste. One
orphan CERCLIS landfill site was retained, the location of which could not be accurately
determined based on information in the report. Without further information about this landfill,
particularly the location, it cannot be ruled out as a potential contributor to ground water
quality impacts.
• Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) - This database records and stores
information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. The ERNS records may
include multiple calls about the same property over time. Two ERNS records (also in the Spills
database) were retained that included incidents reported from an address near the Yeager
impoundment regarding Range Resources notifications of releases to the ground and/or water
from a frac water retaining pond and a tanker. The site of the releases is likely the Yeager
C-13
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
impoundment. Another cluster of ERNS records was reported from a different address (0.5
miles east of Yeager 7H) regarding a frac pond overflowing into the stream system on the
property.
• UST/LUST/AST Storage Tanks - Includes sites listed in one of three databases: Underground
Storage Tank (UST) contains a list of registered USTs regulated under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA); Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Incident Reports contains
an inventory of reported leaking USTs that comes from the PADEP list of confirmed releases;
and Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) contains list of registered ASTs from the PADEP listing of
Pennsylvania regulated ASTs. A total of one UST and two LUST sites were retained. Two leaking
USTs (one gasoline and one diesel) are located approximately 1.2 miles from the sampling
points, with the other two orphan sites included as potential contributors to ground water
quality impacts due to their proximity to the nearest sampling point or because the location
could not be determined.
• US Hist STAT Auto - This database is a select list of business directories of potential gas
station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR that may not show up in
current government record searches. A total of four US HIST Auto STAT sites were retained as
potential gas station/filling station/service station sites and were included as potential
contributors to ground water quality impacts due to their proximity to the nearest sampling
point. One of these sites was also listed in the RCRA-Small Quantity Generator, FINDS, and
Manifest databases.
• Facility Index System (FINDS) - This database contains both facility information and other
sources of information from the EPA/NTIS. Two FIND sites were retained. One was an orphan
site that involved a violation for not submitting a discharge monitoring report for discharging
gasoline-contaminated water from a remediation system. This site was included as a potential
contributor to ground water quality impacts due to its proximity to the nearest sampling point.
The other site is a compressor station 0.68 miles southeast of SWPAGW11. No details were
reported, but compressor stations could be a source of contamination.
• Manifest Sites - This database includes sites that have used manifests (a document that lists and
tracks hazardous waste from a generator through transporters to a disposal facility) in the states
of PA, CT, NJ, NY, Rl, VT, and Wl. One Manifest site was retained because the site was reported
to contain metal drums, barrels, and kegs. Although the contents are unknown, the site was
retained because the containers' contents are a potential source of contamination.
. RCRA Non-Gen/No Longer Regulated (NLR) Site - This database includes selective information
on sites that generate, transport, store, treat, and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently
generate hazardous waste. One site located approximately 1.48 miles north-northeast of
SWPAGW13 was retained because of methanol waste handling.
• US Hist Cleaners - This database includes searches of selected national collections of business
directories and has collected listings of potential dry cleaner sites that were available to EDR
researchers. EDR's review was limited to those categories of sources that might, in EDR's
opinion, include dry cleaning establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not
C-14
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
limited to, dry cleaners, cleaners, laundry, laundromat, cleaning/laundry, wash and dry, etc.
This database falls within a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical
Records", or HRHR. EDR's HRHR effort presents unique and sometimes proprietary data about
past sites and operations that typically create environmental concerns, but which may not show
up in current government records searches. Although no releases were identified in the record,
a site located 1.3 miles southwest of SWPAGW11 was retained because it is a potential source
of contamination.
C.5.2. Oil and Gas Well Inventory Summary
As described above, the EPA sampling locations were compared to the inventory of wells identified in
the PADEP database files as of May 20, 2013 (see Table C23).
There are 152 oil and gas wells in the 3-mile search area. Of the 152 wells, 33 are within 1 mile of the
EPA sampling points. Table C29 summarizes the number of oil and gas wells within the search area and
the number of oil and gas wells within a 1-mile radius of Yeager 7H.
Google Earth Aerial Imagery was also reviewed as described above for the SWPA Northern Area. Prior
to 2008, no impoundments/reserve pits were visible in the aerial images reviewed. However, since
these features are relatively short-term and the time frame between the images can span multiple
years, additional impoundments/reserve pits could have been present but not captured by the available
Google Earth Imagery. Since 2008, six impoundments and two reserve pits were identified in the study
area associated with the wells listed above. Most of these impoundments/reserve pits were installed
after 2009; however, one impoundment was installed in 2008. The distances of the
impoundments/reserve pits from the EPA sampling locations are identified in Table C30, and the
locations within the search area are shown on Figure C21. The specific use of each impoundment is
unknown; however, impoundments are generally used to store fresh water for hydraulic fracturing, and
are later mixed with treated flowback fluids (brines and spent hydraulic fracturing fluid) from the
hydraulic fracturing process. In addition, many of the well pads contain, or previously contained,
reserve pits, which are generally used for drill cuttings.
In summary, there are numerous production wells in the study area, most well pads contain a reserve
pit, and many of the well pads are associated with an impoundment. The presence of numerous oil and
gas wells, reserve pits, and impoundments increases the probability of one or more of these features to
be a potential candidate cause.
C.5.3. State Record Summary
Notice of Violations. Notice of violations records within the 1-mile-radius of the Yeager 7H well were
reviewed for 38 oil and gas wells, one pit, and one impoundment. Four of the wells are located in South
Franklin Township, and 34 are located in Amwell Township; the pit and impoundment also are located in
Amwell Township (see Table C31). These notices of violations were inventoried using eFACTS. Seven of
the wells are listed as inactive or plugged. No violations were reported for 26 of the wells, and two wells
and the one pit did not have any inspections. Violations were reported for the remaining four wells and
the impoundment.
C-15
-------
Appendix CBackground Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
All the violations noted in eFACTS for these wells are listed as corrected or abated, with one exception
where a resolution is not listed. Fines ranging from $18,025 to $49,500 were applied for some of these
violations (although these fines may reflect violations at multiple facilities). Additional details are
provided in Table C31.
Details for the most notable violations that could be linked to a candidate cause are listed below and
summarized on Table C32. The distance of the violation from the nearest EPA sampling points also is
provided on Table C32:
• Yeager Unit 7H - Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent
pollution of waters of the Commonwealth from the Yeager Unit 7H well. All of the EPA sampling
points are in the immediate vicinity of this well (i.e., 0.1 to 0.5 miles).
• Sierzega Unit 2H - Failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of a residual waste.
The EPA sampling point closest to this unit is SWPAGW11 (0.6 miles to the north/northwest). All
of the other sampling points are less than 1 mile away.
• Yeager Impoundment - Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to
prevent pollution of waters of the Commonwealth.
Each of these violations could be a potential candidate cause.
C.6. References
Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (2013). Frequently Asked Questions. Available at:
http://www.mrlc.Rov/faq Ic.php. Accessed on October 25, 2013.
US Census Bureau (2012a). Population Division. Table 3. Cumulative Estimates of Resident Population
Change for the United States, States, Counties, Puerto Rico, and Puerto Rico Municipios: April 1, 2010 to
July 1, 2011 (MAPS-EST2011-03). Available at:
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/maps/2011/Countv-Densitv-ll.html. Accessed on October 31,
2013.
US Census Bureau (2012b). PctUrbanRural_County.xls and PctUrbanRural State.xls. Available at:
http://www2.census.gov/geo/ua. Accessed on November 5, 2013.
US Census Bureau (2013a). County Population Census Counts 1900-90. Available at:
http://www.census.gov/population/www/censusdata/cencounts/index.html. Accessed on November
11, 2013.
US Census Bureau (2013b). DP-1 Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000. Census 2000
Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100-Percent Data. Washington County, Pennsylvania. Available at:
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/isf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=DEC 00 SF1 DP1&
prodType=table. Accessed on November 11, 2013.
C-16
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
US Census Bureau (2013c). Community Facts. Census 2010 Total Population. Washington County,
Pennsylvania. Available at:
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/isf/pages/community facts.xhtmlffnone. Accessed on
November 11, 2013.
US Department of Agriculture (2012). National Agricultural Statistics Service Cropland Data Layer.
Published crop-specific data layer. Available at: http://nassgeodata.gmu.edu/CropScape. Accessed on
October 28,2013.
US Geological Survey (2012). The National Land Cover Database. Available at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2012/3020/fs2012-3020.pdf. Accessed on October 25, 2013.
Washington County (2005). Washington County Comprehensive Plan. Available at:
http://www.co.washington.pa.us/index.aspx?NID=172. Accessed on October 28, 2013.
C-17
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix C Tables
C-18
-------
C-19
Table Cl Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Washington County
(2012)
Agricultural Land Use % of County Land
Alfalfa
Grassland/herbaceous
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Fallow/idle crops
Corn
Soybeans
19.1
3.8
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.7
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table C2
Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and
2001 to 2006, in Washington County
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use
-to agriculture
- to forest
-to urban
- other changes
% of County Land Area
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
97.8
2.2
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.5
98.9
1.1
0.1
0.0
0.7
0.3
Source US Geological Survey, 2012.
Table C3 Largest Industries, by Employment, in
Washington County
Industry Employees
Health care and social assistance
Manufacturing
Retail trade
Local government
Accommodation and food service
Construction
Wholesale trade
Other services, except public administration
Administration/support, waste management/remediation
services
Transportation and warehousing
All other sectors
Total employment for all sectors
10,463
10,333
9,868
6,980
5,852
5,841
2,931
2,829
2,349
2,218
20,300
79,964
Source: Washington County (2005), derived from PA Center for Workforce Information
and Analysis.
-------
C-20
Table C4 Land Use in Search Area C in 1992
and 2006
1992 2006
Square %of Square %of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Planted/cultivated
Forest
Developed
Others
Total
2.15
1.01
0.00
0.00
3.15
68
32
0
0
100
1.67
1.33
0.14
0.02
3.15
53
42
4
0
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
Table C5 Land Use in Search Area D in 1992
and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Planted/cultivated
Forest
Developed
Water
Barren
Total
1.61
1.54
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.16
51
49
0
0
0
100
1.28
1.70
0.13
0.01
0.02
3.15
41
54
4
0
1
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
Table C6 Land Use in Search Area E in 1992
and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Planted/cultivated
Forest
Developed
Total
2.51
0.64
0.00
3.16
80
20
0
100
2.24
0.81
0.10
3.16
71
26
3
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
-------
C-21
Table C7 Land Use in Search Area F in 1992
and 2006
1992
Square % of
Miles Total
55
2006
Square % of
Miles Total
Forest
Water
Developed
Barren
Herbaceous
Total
12.60
0.15
0.09
0.01
0.00
28.39
44
100
12.64
13.84
0.26
1.47
0.04
0.14
28.39
45
49
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
Table C8 Land Use in Search Area 7H in 1992
and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Forest
Planted/cultivated
Developed
Water
Barren
Shrubland
Herbaceous
Total
14.59
13.34
0.46
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
28.41
51
47
2
0
0
0
0
100
16.62
9.06
2.37
0.06
0.09
0.01
0.20
28.41
59
32
8
0
0
0
1
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding
Table C9 Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Search Area C
Agricultural Land Use % of Land
Alfalfa
Grassland/herbaceous
Corn
Fallow/idle crops
Soybeans
46.3
2.5
1.2
0.8
0.4
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
-------
C-22
Table CIO Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Search Area D
Agricultural Land Use % of Land
Alfalfa
Grassland/herbaceous
Corn
Fallow/idle crops
Soybeans
29.2
3.5
2.3
1.7
1.2
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table Cll Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Search Area E
Agricultural Land Use % of Land
Alfalfa
Grassland/herbaceous
Fallow/idle crops
Soybeans
Corn
Other hay/non-alfalfa
53.6
5.1
3.1
3.0
2.0
0.8
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table C12 Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Search Area F
Agricultural Land Use % of Land
Alfalfa
Grassland/herbaceous
Corn
Fallow/idle crops
Soybeans
Other hay/non-alfalfa
33.6
4.1
1.8
1.2
1.0
0.4
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table CIS Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Search Area 7H
Agricultural Land Use % of Land
Alfalfa
Grassland/herbaceous
Fallow/idle crops
Corn
Other hay/non-alfalfa
24.5
3.3
0.9
0.5
0.2
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
-------
C-23
Table C14 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001
and 2001 to 2006, in Search Area C
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use
-to agriculture
- to forest
- to grassland/shrub
-to barren
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
98.0
1.0
0.9
0.1
0.0
99.2
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.5
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Table CIS Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001
and 2001 to 2006, in Search Area D
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use
-to agriculture
- to forest
-to urban
-to barren
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
98.7
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
99.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Table C16 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001
and 2001 to 2006, in Search Area E
Change in Land use
No change
Change in land use
-to agriculture
- to forest
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
99.1
0.8
0.1
100.0
0.0
0.0
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
-------
C-24
Table C17 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001
and 2001 to 2006, in Search Area F
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use
-to agriculture
- to forest
-to barren
- other change
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
98.5
1.0
0.4
0.0
0.1
99.8
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Table CIS Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001
and 2001 to 2006, Search Area 7H
Change in Land Use
No change
Changed in land use
-to agriculture
- to forest
-to urban
-to barren
- other change
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
98.9
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.1
99.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
-------
C-25
Table C19
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area C
Distance from
Nearest Sample
Database Name of Facility Facility Address Point
ERNS
ORPHAN ARCHIVE UST
Orphan RCRA-CESQG, FINDS,
MANIFEST
Orphan UST
Orphan CERCLIS-NFRAP
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan LUST
Orphan HIST LF
Orphan RCRA NonGen / NLR,
FINDS
Orphan NPDES
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan RCRA-CESQG, FINDS,
MANIFEST
Orphan LUST
Orphan ICIS
Orphan RMP
Orphan NPDES
Orphan NPDES, FINDS
Not Reported
Washington East
Washington Junction
Cessna Auto Body
PITT Ohio Term
Falconi Route 18
Karluk Supply
Washington OPR CTR
Roseto Dump
Courtney Contracting Corp
Trinity South Elem Sch
WWTP
GG&CBusCo
Kenny's Autobody
PPLEIimsportSubsta
Wheeling Pittsburgh Steel
Corp
Washington East
Washington Joint A
SGT Patrick McMullen
Washington Penn Plastic
Co Inc.
42 Wotring Rd. #1
RR1
1515 Route 136
Route 136 N
Route 18
Route 18N
Route 19
Listed as Route 191; assumed to
be an error and Route 19 used
Corporation is currently listed at
320 Springdale Road, Venetia, PA
2500 South Main Street
1100 West Chestnut St.
3445 Route 40 W
Route 54
Allenport Plant - Allenport Boro
98 Arden Station Rd.
PA Army National Guard
1500 Weirich, Washington, PA
0.26 mi. WNWof
SWPAGW08
Nl
8.75 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
8.1 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
>6.5 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
>5.0 mi. E of
SWPAGW08
>6.0 mi. E of
SWPAGW08
>6.0 mi. E of
SWPAGW08
>15mi. ENEof
SWPAGW08
8.1 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
4.6 mi. E of
SWPAGW08
>9.0 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
Nl
>29 mi. SE of
SWPAGW05
5.4 mi. NEof
SWPAGW08
4.75 mi. NWof
SWPAGW08
3. 3 mi. NEof
SWPAGW08
Potential Candidate Cause
Yes/
No Justification Ground Water Wells
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Emergency response request from public complaining of diesel-like odor in the
evenings. Record indicates several potential responsible parties, including drilling and
ponding operations in vicinity.
Record is for a 1,000-gallon gasoline tank. Site included due to potential for
contamination.
Small-quantity generator of ignitable, lead, benzene, methyl ethyl keytone, and volatile
compounds. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest
sampling point.
Record is for a 12,000-gallon diesel UST. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
Site is no longer under consideration for inclusion on EPA NPL. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a 1,500-gallon tank containing kerosene. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a leaking tank containing petroleum. Cleanup completed. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site is listed as a historic landfill. Little information available. Uncontrolled landfills can
impact water quality; however, not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a transporter of hazardous waste; no violations reported.
Elementary school, no violations cited.
Record is for a 2,000-gallon tank holding diesel fuel. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Small-quantity generator of ignitable and volatile wastes. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a leaking tank containing petroleum. Cleanup completed. Site included
due to potential for contamination.
Record is for a civil judicial action against this company. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Liquid waste treatment unit but has no accident history. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
In database for NPDES program. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Manufacturer of polypropylene and polyethylene compounds. In database for NPDES
program. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling
point.
10 Federal USGS
Wells
0 Federal FRDS
Public Water Supply
System
24 State Wells
-------
C-26
Table C19
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area C
Distance from
Nearest Sample
Database Name of Facility Facility Address Point
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan FINDS
Orphan RCRA-SQG, FINDS
Orphan MANIFEST
Orphan MANIFEST
Orphan FINDS
Orphan DRYCLEANERS
Orphan LUST
Orphan CERCLIS-NFRAP
Orphan LUST
Orphan NPDES
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan MANIFEST
Orphan RCRA-CESQG, FINDS
Orphan NPDES
Orphan ARCHIVE AST
Washington Co Jail
Courthouse
Washington ENGR&
CONSTR
Douglas Battery Service
Center
BP Oil Co 07607/New Site
25972
Washington County
Housing Authority
Multi Chem Group LLC
Washington FA
Imperial Clnr &
Tailors/Washington
Washington BP 964
Tri-State Engineering
Exxon RAS 2 0578
United Refining Co of PA
Scott Motors
Columbia Gas
Transmission LLC LOWR
Washington Armory
Victory Storage Field -
Pipeline 1
Washington Opr Ctr
Beau St.
PO Box 1203, Washington, PA
East Buffalo Church Rd.
Cameron & Route 19
100 N Franklin St.
200 Detroit St.
Hemlock St.
2433 W Jefferson Street
Jefferson Ave.
879 Jefferson Ave.
Kwik Fill 79 S
W Liberty & Jefferson Ave
(intersection does not exist)
4301 Infirmary Rd., West Carroll,
OH
78 Maiden St.
Address not properly entered
into EDR database. Locations are
in West Virginia
2 Manifold Rd.
5. 9 mi. NEof
SWPAGW08
>20mi. ENEof
SWPAGW08
Nl
8 mi. E of
SWPAGW08
6.8 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
7.3 mi. ESE of
SWPAGW08
7 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
3.8 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
>0.80mi. Sof
SWPAGW08
5.5 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
>16.0 mi. Eof
SWPAGW08
Nl
>200mi. Wof
SWPAGW08
6.9 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
>9. 4 mi. Wof
SWPAGW08
8 mi. SEof
SWPAGW08
Potential Candidate Cause
Yes/
No Justification Ground Water Wells
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Record is for a 10,000-gallon heating oil tank. Not a likely source of contamination due
to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site had a permit (PAG-056182) for discharge from gasoline-contaminated-ground
water remediation systems (ceased in Nov. 2011), with only an administration
violation for incomplete DMR. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Small-quantity generator of lead and corrosives. No record of a release.
Record is for disposal of 150 gallons of ignitable waste and 150 gallons of benzene.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for transportation of 90 pounds of ignitable waste and 8 gallons of an
unreported waste. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest
sampling point.
Site is in the state Environmental Cleanup and Brownfields Program. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for drycleaner operations. Dry-cleaning contaminants not found in EPA
samples. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling
point.
Record is for a leaking tank containing petroleum. Cleanup completed. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site is no longer under consideration for inclusion on EPA NPL. Cannot be found in
state records. Site included due to potential for contamination.
Record is for a leaking tank containing petroleum. Cleanup completed. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
In database for NPDES program. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Tank used to store used motor oil and auto fluids. Site included due to potential for
contamination.
Record is for transportation and disposal of ignitable waste. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Small-quantity generator of ignitable and volatile wastes. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
NPDES site located in West Virginia. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
Leaking UST containing petroleum; cleanup completed. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
-------
C-27
Table C19
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area C
Distance from
Nearest Sample
Database Name of Facility Facility Address Point
Orphan NPDES
Orphan NPDES
Orphan NPDES
Orphan NPDES
Orphan NPDES
Orphan CERCLIS
Orphan ARCHIVE AST
Orphan LUST
Orphan HIST LF
Orphan NPDES
Orphan AST
Orphan HIST LF
Orphan FINDS
Orphan DRYCLEANERS
Orphan FINDS
Orphan RCRA-CESQG
Orphan ARCHIVE UST, RMP
Orphan FINDS, RMP
Lines 1758 & 10100-
Longwall Mining
Line 1754 - Longwall
Mining
Line 8243 - Cathodic
Protection Pr
Line 1528 - Replacement
Project
Lines 1758 10100-
Longwal Mining
Yeager Impoundment Site
Bell of PA
Washington Work Ctr
Washington Twp Landfill
Washington KOA
Campground
Lowes of Washington PA
0671
Washington Township
Landfill
Washington County
Checkers one hour
Clnr/Washington
Waste Management of PA
Inc.
Multi Chem Group LLC
Washington FA
Washington Steel Corp
Allegheny Ludlum
Cor/Washington FL
Address not properly entered
into EDR database. Locations are
in West Virginia
400 McAdams Rd.
Meadowland Blvd.
Meadowlands Blvd.
Off of Forbees Rd. & Slatington
(separate records)
7 KOA Rd.
Strabane Sq.
Tower Rd.
Non-specific
Washington Plz.
Washington Hauling
200 W Wiley Ave.
Woodland Ave.
Woodland Ave.
>9.4mi. Wof
SWPAGW08
11.6 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
5. 3 mi. ESEof
SWPAGW08
5. 3 mi. ESEof
SWPAGW08
Nl
9 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
6.7 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
>18.0mi. Sof
SWPAGW08
Non-
specific/located
within the county
Nl
4.0 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
5.1 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
5.1 mi. SEof
SWPAGW08
4.9 mi. SEof
SWPAGW08
Potential Candidate Cause
Yes/
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Justification
Record is for a wastewater discharge permit, which can impact ground water quality.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site is listed in CERCLIS database as a removal only site (no assessment needed). Not a
likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for two 450-gallon storage tanks containing motor oil. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Leaking storage tank. Remedial action initiated. Not a likely source of contamination
due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Two records for same site. Listed as historic landfill. Landfills can potentially impact
ground water quality over large areas.
In database for NPDES program. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Record is for an active 1,500-gallon AST used to store diesel. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for National Emissions Inventory. Not a source of contaminants; monitoring
air pollutants.
Record is for drycleaner operations. No indication of release.
In database for NPDES program. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Small-quantity generator of ignitable, corrosive, barium, silver, chloroform, and volatile
wastes. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling
point.
Record is for a 2,000-gallon tank containing gasoline. No record of a release. Not a
likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Facility is listed in the emission inventory system. One accident reported was a release
of one pound of 70% hydrogen fluoride/hydrofluoric acid in gaseous form. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Ground Water Wells
-------
C-28
Table C19
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area C
Database
Name of Facility
Facility Address
Distance from
Nearest Sample Yes/
Point No
Potential Candidate Cause
Justification
Ground Water Wells
Orphan US MINES
Orphan FINDS
Therm-o-rock East Inc.
Washington Wash Stp
Therm-o-rock PA Plant
102 Arden Station Rd.
>21mi. ESEof
SWPAGW08
4.7 mi. SE of
SWPAGW08
No
No
Facility is listed as a vermiculite plant. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
Site is listed as a ground water quality monitoring point. Not a source of ground water
quality impacts.
Primary Source: Environmental records search report by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR)
Notes:
ORPHAN SITE: A site of potential environmental interest that appear in the records search but due to incomplete location information (i.e., address and coordinates) is unmappable and not included in the records search report provided by EDR Inc.
Search Area C
EDR Inquiry Number: 3602489.7s
EDR Search Radius: 1 mi.
Search Center: Lat. 40.2333000 (40° 13' 59.88") Long. 80.3410000 (-80° 20' 27.60")
Key:
AST= Above ground storage tank.
DMR = Discharge Monitoring Report
E = East.
EPA = Environmental Protection Agency
FRDS = Federal Reporting Data System.
mi = Mile.
N = North.
NE= Northeast.
Nl = No information.
NPL = National Priorities List
NPDES = National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
PA = Pennsylvania.
RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
USGS = United States Geological Survey.
UST = Underground storage tank.
W= West.
S= South.
Databases:
ARCHIVE AST: Local list of Archived Above Ground Storage Tank Sites
ARCHIVE UST: Local list of Archived Underground Storage Tank Sites
AST: Listing of Pennsylvania Regulated Aboveground Storage Tanks
CERC-NFRAP: Federal CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System) NFRAP (No Further Remedial Action Planned) site list
DRYCLEANERS: Listing of drycleaner facility locations.
ERNS: Emergency Reponse Notification System
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
FTTS : FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) Tracking System
HIST LF: Abandoned Landfill Inventory
ICIS: Compliance Information System
LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites
MANIFEST: Hazardous waste manifest information
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Listing
RCRA-CESQG: Federal RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator List
RCRA NonGen / NLR: RCRA: Non Generators List
RMP: Risk Management Plans Records
US HIST AUTO STATION: EDR exclusive database of listings of potential gas station, filling station, or service station sites .
US MINES: Mines Master Index File. The source of this database is the Dept. of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
-------
C-29
Table C20
Database
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area D
Name of Facility
Facility Address
Distance from Yes/
Nearest Sample Point No
Potential Candidate Cause
Justification
Ground Water Wells
ERNS
ERNS
ERNS
ERNS
ERNS
FINDS
FINDS, RMP
Orphan ARCHIVE
AST
Orphan HIST LF
Orphan FINDS, US
AIRS
Orphan ARCHIVE
UST
Orphan FINDS, US
AIRS
Orphan US MINES
Private Residence
Private Residence
Private residences at 200 McCarrell Rd.
& 220 McCarrell Rd.
Private Residence
Private residence at well number GULLA
#1
MARK WEST FULTON COMPRESSOR
STATION
WASHINGTON COMPRESSOR STATION
CORWIN JEEP SALES & SVC
HICKORY-KINGSLEYTWP LANDFILL
MARKWEST LIBERTY MIDSTREAM &
RESOURCES/F
FRANKS EXCAVATING
MARKWEST LIBERTY MIDSTREAM &
RESOURCES/N
THERM-O-ROCK EAST INC
200 McCarrell Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
200 McCarrell Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
220 McCarrell Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
162 McCarrell Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
29 Guilla Lane
Hickory, PA 15340
103 Washington Ave.
Hickory, PA 15340
2 Elm Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
Route 50
Hickory, PA 15340
Route 666
Hickory, PA 15340
Between Washington Ave. &
McCarrell Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
Elm Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
Hwy231
Mount Pleasant, PA 15666
THERM-O-ROCK PLANT
Washington County
0.05 mi. S from
SWPAGW02
0.05 mi. S from
SWPAGW02
0.1 mi. S from
SWPAGW01
0.3ml. NNW from
SWPASW01
0.15ml. SSW from
SWPAGW02
1 mi NE of from
SWPAGW02
0.7 mi NE from
SWPAGW02
1.5 NW from
SWPAGW02
Nl
0.6 NE from
SWPAGW02
Nl
0.6 NE from
SWPAGW02
> 19 mi SE from
SWPAGW01
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Caller (on 03/08/10) stated their water supply is contaminated because of gas well drilling in the area that is affecting
their well water. Caller had their property tested by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in November
2009 and it was determined the area is contaminated. Caller also stated they have had contamination problems for
years. Also, they stated that there have been animals in the area that died because of the contamination. Acrylonitrile
is listed as the spilled material.
On a separate report, caller stated (5/11/2010) that there was a strong natural gas odor coming from an unknown
source in the vicinity of the address location. Caller did not know the exact source of natural gas odor, but the smell
Caller reported on 5/23/2010 a discharge of an unknown oil from a leaking line attached to a Range Resources
separator tank due to an unknown cause at this time. Caller stated this leak has occurred several times before. Media
reoorted to have been affected: land. soil, oossiblv a nearby Stream.
Caller stated (3/10/10) their water is contaminated because of nearby gas drilling (approx. 1,000 feet from their
property) being performed (Mark West/Range Resources). Caller suspected the materials involved are contaminating
their water supply. Caller has notified several agencies about this incident. Acrylonitrile, chloroform, m p-xylenes,
toluene, iron, and manganese are listed as spilled material in the report.
Caller stated (8/7/2010) while looking out the window they observed brown foggy smoke coming from the
compression station due to unknown causes (they also took 3 photos).
Caller reported on 5/23/2010 a discharge of an unknown oil from a leaking line attached to a separator tank due to an
unknown cause at this time. Caller stated this leak has occurred several times before.
Not a likely a source of contamination due to no record of a release or violation.
Not a likely a source of contamination due to no record of a release or violation.
Used motor oil AST-site in Environmental Cleanup & Brownfields and Waste Handling DEP programs. Site included
due to potential for contamination.
Historical landfill. Actual location cannot be determined. Landfill activities may impact regional ground water quality.
Site included due to potential for contamination.
Site has permit for stationary sources of air pollution. Not a likely source of contamination due to no violations found
in PA eFACTS.
Record is for a diesel UST. The location could not be determined. Site included due to potential for contamination.
Site has permit for stationary sources of air pollution. Not a likely source of contamination due to no violations found
in PA eFACTS.
Facility is listed as a vermiculite plant. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling
point.
0 Federal USGS Wells
1 Federal FRDS Public
Water Supply System
3 State Wells
-------
Table C20
Database
C-30
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area D
Name of Facility
Facility Address
Distance from Yes/
Nearest Sample Point No
Potential Candidate Cause
Justification
Ground Water Wells
Primary Source: Environmental records search report by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR)
Notes:
ORPHAN SITE: A site of potential environmental interest that appear in the records search but due to incomplete location information (i.e., address and coordinates) is unmappable and not included in the records search report provided by EDR Inc.
Search Area D
EDR Inquiry Number:3602489.10s
EDR Search Radius: 1 mi.
Search Center: Lat. 40.2752000 (40° 16' 30.72"), Long. 80.3036000 (-80° 18' 12.96")
Key:
AST= Above ground storage tank.
DEP = Department of Environmental Protection
E = East.
FRDS = Federal Reporting Data System.
mi = Mile.
N = North.
Nl = No information.
PA= Pennsylvania.
RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
USGS = United States Geological Survey.
UST= Underground storage tank.
W= West.
S= South.
Databases:
ARCHIVE AST: Local list of Archived Above Ground Storage Tank Sites
ARCHIVE UST: Local list of Archived Underground Storage Tank Sites
ERNS: Emergency Reponse Notification System
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
HIST LF: Abandoned Landfill Inventory
PAeFACTS = Pennsylvania Environmental Facility Application Compliance Tracking System
RMP: Risk Management Plans Records
US MINES: Mines Master Index File. The source of this database is the Dept. of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
-------
C-31
Table C21
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area. Search Area E
Potential Candidate Cause
Yes/
Database Name of Facility Facility Address Distance from Nearest Sample Point No Justification Groundwater Wells
ERNS
FINDS, NPDES
Orphan ARCHIVE AST
Orphan MANIFEST
Orphan CERC-NFRAP
Orphan LUST, AST
Orphan RCRA NonGen / NLR, FINDS
Orphan ICIS
Orphan FINDS, US AIRS
Orphan US MINES
PRIVATE RESIDENCE
MOVER SR STP
CORWIN JEEP SALES & SVC
RANGE RESOURCES
WASHINGTON COUNTY DRUM DUMP
CECIL TWP WASHINGTON CNTY
SUNOCO SERVICE STATION-MCDONALD
IRELAND OIL, INCORPORATED
MARKWEST LIBERTY MIDSTREAM &
RESOURCES/N
THERM-O-ROCK EAST INC
101 WALNUT RD.
MCDONALD, PA 15057
231 WALNUT RD.
MCDONALD, PA 15057
ROUTE 50
HICKORY, PA 15340
FORT CHERRY ROAD
HICKORY, PA 15340
ROUTE 22
ROBINSON TWP, PA 15057
SR50&TR662
MCDONALD, PA 15057
ROUTE 980
MCDONALD, PA 15057
LAUREL HILL SOUTH FAYETTE TWP
MCDONALD, PA 15057
HWY231
MOUNT PLEASANT, PA 15340
THERM-O-ROCK PA PLANT
WASHINGTON COUNTY
0.69 mi. NNW of SWPAGW04
0.63 mi. W of SWPAGW04
1.1 mi. NW of SWPAGW04
7 mi. north of SWPAGW04
5.5 mi. NEofSWPAGW04
3.5 mi. EofSWPAGW04
4.4 mi. NEofSWPAGW04
2.7 mi. NofSWPAGW04
>20mi. SEofSWPAGW04
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Facility reported emergency releases to soil.
Caller stated that PADEP came out to the location and stated that the pond needed to be treated.
Caller reported an odor suspected to be from a frac pond.
NPDES permit to Tributary to Raccoon Creek. Not a likely source of contaminations due to no violations cited.
Used motor oil AST. Site in environmental clean-up, brownfields and waste handing DEP programs. Site included due to
potential for contamination.
Shipped drums of benzene. Not a likely source of contamination due to no spills or violations recorded.
Facility is a known or suspected abandoned, inactive, or uncontrolled hazardous waste site, but does not qualify for the
NPL based on existing information. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Leaking UST containing petroleum and AST containing diesel. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Inactive site. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Ireland Oil has been cited for TSCA 16 action for penalty multiple times for unknown reason. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Facility has permit for stationary sources for air pollution. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Vermiculite plant. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
10 Federal USGS
Wells
0 Federal FRDS
Public Water Supply
System
10 State Wells
Primary Source: Environmental records search report by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR)
Notes:
ORPHAN SITE: A site of potential environmental interest that appear in the records search but due to incomplete location information (i.e., address and coordinates) is unmappable and not included in the records search report provided by EDR Inc.
Search Area E
EDR Inquiry Number:3602489.13s
EDR Search Radius: 1 mi.
Search Center: Lat. 40.3241000 (40° 19' 26.76"), Long. 80.2972000 (-80° 17' 49.92")
Key:
AST = Above ground storage tank.
DEP = Department of Environmental Protection
E = East.
FRDS = Federal Reporting Data System.
mi= Mile.
N = North.
Nl = No information.
NPDES = National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
Databases:
ARCHIVE AST: Local list of Archived Above Ground Storage Tank Sites
AST: Listing of Pennsylvania Regulated Aboveground Storage Tanks
CERC-NFRAP: Federal CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System) NFRAP (No Further Remedial Action Planned) site list
ERNS: Emergency Reponse Notification System
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
ICIS: Compliance Information System
LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites
MANIFEST: Hazardous waste manifest information
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Listing
RCRA NonGen /NLR: RCRA: Non Generators List
US AIRS: Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem
US MINES: Mines Master Index File. The source of this database is the Dept. of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
NPL = National Priorities List.
PA= Pennsylvania.
RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
USGS= United States Geological Survey.
UST= Underground storage tank.
W= West.
S = South.
TSCA = Toxic Substances Control Act.
-------
C-32
Table C22
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area F
Database
ERNS
Name of Facility
Private residence
Site Location Address
151 Avella Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
Distance from Nearest
Sample Point
0.04 N mi. W of
SWPAGW03
Potential Candidate Cause
Justification
Yes
9/25/2012 - Medium affected: Air - Caller stated that there was a strong odor of rubber in the air with no signs
of smoke. Caller also stated that there are multiple businesses behind their house that could possibly be the
source of the odor. Site included due to proximity to sample point.
Groundwater Wells
59 Federal USGS
Wells
1 Federal FRDS Public
Water System
114 State Wells
ERNS
Stewart Compressor
Station
Avella Rd. & Caldwell Rd.
Hickory, PA
0.8 mi. WofSWPAGWOS
Yes
4/16/10 - Caller stated that a gas plant is leaking gas. A natural gas line at the facility (Williams Gas) appeared to
have ruptured. Site included due to potential for contamination.
ERNS
FINDS
VCP
185 Avella Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
0.21 mi. WofSWPAGWOS
Yes
(ERNS) 3/1/11 - Caller reported an empty condensate AST exploded due to an unknown cause. Caller stated
the incident probably involved over $50,000 worth of damage. Caller also stated the storage tank was with a
compressor station associated with a non-regulated gathering pipeline.
(FINDS) EPA determined that MarkWest violated the general duty clause by failing to (a) provide proper storage
of the flammable liquids in the tanks because the tanks lacked sufficiently sized venting capability and (b)
maintain the thief hatches. EPA Region III issued an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on
Consent, where MarkWest agreed to install appropriately sized emergency vents on the tanks and adopt an
approved maintenance schedule at 10 inspected facilities and 4 additional compressor stations in Pennsylvania.
(VCP) A Pittsburgh Post-Gazette October 11, 2011, article reported to the PADEP that an accidental spill of 100 -
200 gallons of methanol occurred near an AST at the Stewart compressor station on 1/23/11. According to the
article, MarkWest removed about 10 yards of soil from the site and drilled seven monitoring wells within 1 day
of the spill. Four wells drilled at the perimeter of the compressor site did not detect methanol migrating off
site. Of the three wells drilled at the source of the release, two detected methanol at levels below the drinking
water supply aquifer standard, while one well sampling detected methanol above the standard.
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/marcellusshale/firm-continues-cleanup-of-methanol-spill-
318563/#ixzz2VMJc4pKp
ERNS
Private residence
179 Avella Rd.
Hickory, PA
0.16 mi. WofSWPAGWOS
Yes
03/17/10 Medium affected: Air - Caller reported a strong chemical smell, possibly sulfur or burning rubber, in
the air from an unknown source. Caller states there are two companies in the area that could be the
responsible party, William's Gas and MarkWest.
6/8/10 - Medium affected: Air - Caller reported that they got a sore throat from chemical fumes in the air when
going for a walk that morning. This has been an ongoing problem for about a year. There are three natural gas
companies in the immediate area (Williams Gas/Mark West/Range Resources).
1/6/11-Medium affected: Air - Caller reported they are surrounded by three chemical facilities that may be
releasing harmful odors into the air.
ERNS
Private residence
240 County Park Rd.
Avella, PA 15312
0.03 mi. SE ofSWPAGW07
Yes
3/15/2011 - Medium affected: Air - Caller stated that they smelled a strong natural gas odor and could see a
blue fog entering the valley. She stated that an unknown amount of natural gas has been released by a nearby
well (Atlas). Site included due to proximity to sample point.
ERNS
NA
1043 Burgettstown Road
Hickory, PA 15340
1.67 mi. NofSWPAGWOS
No
10/23/08 Caller reported that a pickup truck crossed the center line and struck a school bus. No environmental
releases.
US Hist Auto Stat
Bongiorni Auto Wrecking
1043 Burgettstown Road
Hickory, PA 15340
1.67 mi. NofSWPAGWOS
Yes
Site in historical directory as a potential gas station/filling station/service station sites. Site included due to
potential for contamination.
LUST, UST
Hickory BP
Route 18 & 50
Hickory, PA 15340
0.6miENEofSWPAGW03
Yes
The site contains a leaking UST containing gasoline. No VOCs were detected in the EPA samples. Site included
due to potential for contamination.
US MINES
Avella Mining Inc.
Nl
0.44 mi. SSWof
SWPAGW09
Yes
Mining activities in proximity to sampling location. Site included due to potential for contamination.
-------
C-33
Table C22
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area F
Potential Candidate Cause
Distance from Nearest Yes/
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Groundwater Wells
FINDS
RCRA-CESQG
ERNS
US Hist Auto Stat
FINDS
NPDES, FINDS, MANIFEST,
US Hist Auto Stat
FINDS
FINDS
3 FINDS, US AIRS, RMP
FINDS, NPDES, US AIRS
NPDES
FINDS
FINDS
FINDS
Orphan AST
C&J Metals
Private residence
Hoppers Car Care
Ruff Creek BP
Hickory Amoco
Hickory United Presb
Church
Cr Pastries
Laurel Mountain
Midstream Stewart
Plant/Stewart Compressor
Station
Avella Area School
District/Avella El
Lindley&RaberSftf
Cornerstone Care Dental
Renz Comp Station
Goodwins Village Green
Breezy Heights Farm
4481 Henderson Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
Avella Road
Hickory, PA 15340
4481 Henderson Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
221 Main St.
Hickory, PA 15340
221 Main St.
Hickory, PA 15340
210 Main St.
Hickory, PA 15340
65 Ihnat Ln.
Avella, PA 15312
70 Caldwell Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
1000 Avella Rd.
Avella, PA 15312
4141 Henderson Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
1227 Smith Twp State Rd.
Burgettstown, PA 15021
4050 Henderson Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
4051 Henderson Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
Route 844
Avella, PA 15312
0.58 mi. ENEof
SWPAGW03
approx. 0.5 mi ENE of
SWPAGW03
approx. 0.58 mi ENE of
SWPAGW03
0.63 mi. ENEof
SWPAGW03
0.63 mi. ENEof
SWPAGW03
0.7 mi. ENEofSWPAGWOS
0.26 mi. SSW of
SWPAGW09
0.7 mi. SofSWPAGWOS
0.95 mi. WSW of
SWPAGW09
l.Omi. SSEofSWPAGWOS
2.52 mi. NW of SWPAGW03
1.06 mi. EofSWPAGWOS
and 1.33 mi. W of
SWPAGW02
1.06 mi. EofSWPAGWOS
and 1.33 mi. W of
SWPAGW02
2.9 mi. SWofSWPAGW09
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Conditionally exempt small-quantity generator. No violations recorded.
2/7/11 - Medium affected: Air - Caller reported that it was calm outside and they smelled a very strong odor of
sulfur and burning tires. They stated that she had a metal taste in her mouth and her nose was burning. The
caller stated that there are three gas companies in the area [and] that they had to have released some sort of
chemical. Site included due to proximity to sample point.
Site in historical directory as a potential gas station/filling station/service station sites. Site included due to
potential for contamination.
Gas station with NPDES permit. Petroleum contaminants not found in the EPA study samples. Site included
due to potential for contamination.
Site in historical directory as a potential gas station/filling station/service station sites. The FINDS record points
to the NPDES permit. No violations of the NPDES permit were found. The MANIFEST records indicate several
shipments of ignitable and benzene wastes. Site included due to potential for contamination.
Record indicates that the site is included in the PA eFACTS but could not be found in this database to
understand the nature of the record. Not a likely source of impacts to ground water quality.
Record indicates that the site is included in the PA eFACTS but could not be found in this database to
understand the nature of the record. Not a likely source of impacts to ground water quality.
The facility is a natural gas compressor station. The three FINDS records are associated with a violation of
health and safety related to an air pollution incident. The RMP details a risk management plan that is put in
place for the facility. Not a likely source of contaminants or issues found in nearby EPA sample points.
Records are for air permit and stormwater discharge permit (NPDES). Facility is a school and not a likely source
for impacts to ground water quality.
In NPDES database, no violations cited.
Site participates in Radiation Protection Program and Safe Drinking Program (Noncommunity Water System
Plan Approval). A fluoride violation was found for permit PWSID-5630838. Not a likely source of contamination
due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site participates in PADEP Air Quality Program.
Site participates in PADEP Safe Drinking Water and Water Planning and Conservation programs - no other
information was found.
Record is for a 2,000-gallon tank of diesel fuel. No violations recorded. Not a likely source of contamination
due to distance from nearest sampling point.
-------
C-34
Table C22
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area F
Potential Candidate Cause
Distance from Nearest Yes/
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Groundwater Wells
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan NPDES
Orphan MANIFEST
Orphan ARCHIVE UST, LUST
Orphan ARCHIVE AST
Orphan BROWNFIELDS
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan ARCHIVE AST
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan CERCLIS-NFRAP
Orphan NPDES
Orphan NPDES
Orphan ICIS
Orphan Archive AST
Orphan Archive AST
Orphan Archive AST
Royale Helicopter Service,
Inc.
Live Nation - Post Gazette
Pavilio
Union Electric Steel Corp
Harmon C
Harrys
Bologna Coal
Starpointe Business Park
Cloverleaf Oil Co
Ford Garage
M&M Equip Sales Co
Route 18 Office
Chemical LeamanTank
Lines, Inc
Hanover TwpSa -
Bavington Stp
Beech Hollow Power
Project
R&W Oil Products, LLC
Five Points Trucking Inc
lannetti Garden Ctr
Herbert Grubbs
Route 18
Burgettstown, PA 15021
Route 18
Burgettstown, PA 15022
Route 18
Burgettstown, PA 15023
Route 18
Burgettstown, PA 15024
Route 18
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Route 18 and 22
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Route 18 N&E22ND
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Route 18
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Route 18
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Route 18
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Route 22
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Bavington Rd.
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Beech Hollow Rd. Robinson,
PA 15025
67 Old Steubenville Pike
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Old Route 18
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Old Route 22
Burgettstown, PA 15025
NPA18
Burgettstown, PA 15025
>6.0mi. NofSWPAGWOS
10.2 mi. NofSWPAGWOS
8.8 mi. NNEofSWPAGWOS
13.6 mi. NE of the
SWPAGW03
>6.0mi. NofSWPAGWOS
6.8 mi. NofSWPAGWOS
6.8 mi. NofSWPAGWOS
>6.0mi. NofSWPAGWOS
>6.0mi. NofSWPAGWOS
>6.0mi. NofSWPAGWOS
>9.2mi. NofSWPAGWOS
>7.3mi. NofSWPAGWOS
8 mi. NEofSWPAGWOS
11.5 mi. NW of SWPAGW03
>6.0mi. NofSWPAGWOS
>9.2mi. NofSWPAGWOS
>6.0mi. NofSWPAGWOS
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Record is for a 10,000-gallon tank holding aviation fluid. Related contaminants not detected in nearby EPA
samples. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
In NPDES database, no violations cited.
Records document several large shipments (over 10,000 Ibs) of emission control dust/sludge generated from
the furnace during steel making process. No records of release. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
LUST record is for a vehicular overfill. ARCHIVE UST record is for an inspection of USTs on property. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a 1,000-gallon tank with substance listed as "other". Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
Site is listed as vacant land. Brownfields are abandoned or underutilized industrial or commercial properties
with perceived or actual environmental contamination. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Record is for three 6,000-gallon tanks, two containing gasoline and one diesel. Although contamination was
detected, not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sample point.
Record is for a 7,000-gallon heating oil tank. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest
sampling point.
Record is for a 400-gallon diesel tank. Although contamination was detected in the EPA samples, not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for 10,000-gallon diesel tank and 6,000-gallon gasoline tank. No petroleum compounds detected in
EPA samples. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site was evaluated as an uncontrolled release site of hazardous waste for inclusion into the Superfund program,
but did not qualify. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Permit is for treated sewage discharge. No violations noted.
Permit is for industrial discharge, which can impact ground water quality if not properly done. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record for enforcement action against company for violation of Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures
Program. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a 8,000-gallon diesel fuel tank. Although contamination was detected in EPA samples, not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a 2,000-gallon heating oil tank. Although contamination was detected in EPA samples, not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a 1,000-gallon diesel fuel tank. Although contamination was detected in EPA samples, not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
-------
C-35
Table C22
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area F
Potential Candidate Cause
Distance from Nearest Yes/
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Groundwater Wells
Orphan CERCLIS-NFRAP
Orphan ARCHIVE AST
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan CERCLIS, FINDS
Orphan CERCLIS-NFRAP
Orphan AST
Orphan RCRA NonGen /
NLR, FINDS
Orphan ICIS
Orphan RCRA-TSDF, RCRA
NonGen/NLR, FINDS
Orphan UST
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan RCRA-CESQG,
FINDS, MANIFEST
Orphan UST
Orphan CERCLIS-NFRAP
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan RCRA NonGen /
NLR, FINDS
Starvaggi Ind Inc Hanover
Twp Land
Corwin Jeep Sales & Svc
Franks Excavating
Mays/Bologna
Washington County Drum
Dump
Cecil Twp Washington Cnty
SUNOCO SERVICE STATION-
MCDONALD
Ireland Oil, Incorporated
Chemical LeamanTank
Lines Inc
State Line Sales II
Washington East
Washington Junct
Cessna Auto Body
PITT Ohio Term
Falconi Rte 18
Karluk Supply
Courtney Contracting Corp
USHY22
Burgettstown, PA 15025
Route 50
Hickory, PA 15340
49 Elm Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
TWHY 336
Jefferson TWP, PA 15312
Route 22
McDonald, PA 15057
HC50& TRL662
McDonald, PA 15057
Route 980
McDonald, PA 15057
Laurel Hill South FayetteTwp.
McDonald, PA 15057
Route 22
Paris, PA 15021
35 Old Steubenville Pike
Paris, PA 15021
RR1
1515 Route 136
Route 136 N
Route 18
Route 18N
Corporation is currently listed
at 320 Springdale Road,
Venetia, PA
>9.2mi. NofSWPAGWOS
1.5 mi. EofSWPAGWOS
1.5 mi. ESEofSWPAGWOS
Nl
9.0 mi. NofSWPAGWOS
7.7 mi. EofSWPAGWOS
8.6 mi. NEofSWPAGWOS
8.4 mi. NEofSWPAGWOS
>11.6mi. NWof
SWPAGW05
8.9 mi. NofSWPAGWOS
Nl
ll.Omi. SEofSWPAGWOS
>10.5 mi. SE of SWPAGW05
>0.6 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
>0.6mi. EofSWPAGWOS
>14.0mi. EofSWPAGWOS
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Facility is a former landfill that is being addressed under the state Environmental and Brownfields Cleanup
Program. Landfills can impact water quality over large areas, but not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
Used motor oil AST. Site in environmental cleanup, brownfields and waste handing DEP programs. Site
included due to potential for contamination.
Record is for a 2,000-gallon tank containing diesel fuel. Site included due to potential for contamination.
Facility is a known or suspected abandoned, inactive, or uncontrolled hazardous waste site, but does not
qualify for the NPL based on existing information. Waste site location could not be determined. Site included
due to potential for contamination.
Facility is a known or suspected abandoned, inactive, or uncontrolled hazardous waste site, but does not
quality for the NPL based on existing information. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Leaking UST containing petroleum and AST containing diesel. Although contamination was detected in EPA
samples, not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Inactive site. No records of violations.
Ireland Oil has been cited forTSCA 16 action for penalty multiple times for unknown reasons. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a licensed waste transporter. No violations cited.
Record is for two 12,000-gallon tanks, one containing gasoline and the other diesel. No recorded releases.
Although contamination was detected in EPA samples, not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a 1,000-gallon gasoline tank. Site included due to potential for contamination.
Small-quantity generator of ignitable, lead, benzene, methyl ethyl keytone, and volatile compounds. No record
of release. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Diesel UST. Although contamination was detected in EPA samples, not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
Site is no longer under consideration for inclusion on EPA NPL. No contaminants found in nearby EPA samples.
Record is for a 1,500-gallon tank containing kerosene. Site included due to potential for contamination.
Record is for a transporter of hazardous waste; no violations reported.
-------
C-36
Table C22
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area F
Potential Candidate Cause
Distance from Nearest Yes/
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Groundwater Wells
Orphan NPDES
Orphan FINDS, RCRA-
CESQG, MANIFEST
Orphan ICIS
Orphan RMP
Orphan NPDES
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan FINDS
Orphan MANIFEST
Orphan MANIFEST
Orphan FINDS
Orphan DRYCLEANERS
Orphan MANIFEST
Orphan LUST
Orphan NPDES
Orphan MANIFEST
Orphan RCRA-CESQG, FINDS
Orphan NPDES
Orphan ARCHIVE AST
Trinity South Elem Sch
WWTP
Kenny's Body Shop
Wheeling Pittsburgh Steel
Corp
Washington-East
Washington Joint A
SGT Patrick McMullen
Washington Co Jail
Courthouse
Washington ENGR&
CONSTR
BP Oil Co 07607 /New Site
25972
Washington County
Housing Authority
Multi Chem Group LLC
Washington FA
Imperial Clnr &
Tailors/Washington
Doud Bts
Washington Bp 964
United Refining Co of PA
Columbia Gas Transmission
LLC LOWR
Washington Armory
Victory Storage Field -
Pipeline 1
Washington Opr Ctr
2500 South Main Street
3445 Route 40 West
Allenport Plant - Allenport
Boro
98 Arden Station Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
PA Army National Guard
Beau St.
PO Box 1203, Washington, PA
Cameron & Route 19
100 N Franklin St.
200 Detroit St.
Hemlock St.
241 McAleer Rd., Sewickley
2433 W Jefferson St.
Washington, PA 15301
KWIKFillS-85
4301 Infirmary Rd., West
Carroll, OH
78 Maiden St.
Address not properly entered
into EDR database. Locations
are in West Virginia
2 Manifold Rd.
11.4mi.SEofSWPAGW05
9.2mi.SofSWPAGW05
>27mi.SEofSWPAGW08
7.2mi.SEofSWPAGW05
10.7 mi. SSE of SWPAGW05
9.7mi.SEofSWPAGW03
>20 mi. ENE of SWPAGW03
9.6mi.SEofSWPAGW05
9.4mi.SEofSWPAGW05
10.5mi.SEofSWPAGW05
9.8mi.SEofSWPAGW05
22.1 mi. NEofSWPAGWOS
6.7mi.SSEofSWPAGW05
>16mi. EofSWPAGWOS
>200 mi. W of SWPAGW09
9.9mi.SEofSWPAGW09
>6.5mi. WofSWPAGW09
8.9 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Elementary school, no violations cited.
No violations, typical contaminants associated with auto body shops not found in study samples. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for a civil judicial action against this company. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Liquid waste treatment plant with no reported violations. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
In database for NPDES program, no violations cited.
Record is for a 10,000-gallon heating oil tank. Although contamination was detected in EPA samples, not a
likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site had a permit (PAG-056182) for discharge from gasoline-contaminated-ground water remediation systems
(ceased in Nov. 2011), with only an administration violation for incomplete DMR. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for transport of 150 gallons of ignitable waste and 150 gallons of benzene. |\|o records of a release.
Record is for transportation of 90 pounds of ignitable waste and 8 gallons of an unreported waste. No record
of a release.
Site is in the state Environmental Cleanup and Brownfields Program. Not a likely source of contamination due
to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for drycleaning operations. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest
sampling point.
Manifest is for transportation of ignitable and benzene wastes. No record of a release.
Record is for leaking tank containing petroleum compounds. Remediation completed. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for NPDES monitoring point, no violation cited.
Record is for transportation and disposal of ignitable waste. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
Small-quantity generator of ignitable and volatile wastes. No violations cited. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
NPDES site located in West Virginia.
Leaking UST containing petroleum, cleanup completed. Not a |ike|y source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
-------
C-37
Table C22
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area F
Potential Candidate Cause
Distance from Nearest Yes/
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Groundwater Wells
Orphan NPDES
Orphan NPDES
Orphan NPDES
Orphan NPDES
Orphan NPDES
Orphan CERCLIS
Orphan ARCHIVE AST
Orphan FINDS, US AIRS
Orphan FINDS, US AIRS
Orphan FINDS, US AIRS
Orphan FINDS, US AIRS
Orphan ARCHIVE UST
Orphan NPDES
Orphan AST
Orphan NPDES, FINDS
Orphan DRYCLEANERS
Orphan FINDS
Orphan RCRA-CESQG
Lines 1758 & 10100 -
Longwall Mini
Line 1754 - Longwall
Mining- Stri
Line 8243 - Cathodic
Protection Pr
Line 1528 - Replacement
Project
Lines 1758 10100 -
Longwall Mining
Yeager Impoundment Site
Bell of PA
MARKWEST LIBERTY
MIDSTREAM &
RESOURCES/N
MARKWEST LIBERTY
MIDSTREAM &
RESOURCES/L
MARKWEST LIBERTY
MIDSTREAM &
RESOURCES/G
MARKWEST LIBERTY
MIDSTREAM &
RESOURCES/F
South Franklin Township
Garage
Washington KOA
Campground
Lowes of Washington PA
0671
Washington Penn Plastic
Co Inc
Checkers one hour
Clnr/Washington
Waste Management of PA
Inc.
Multi Chem Group LLC
Washington FA
Address not properly entered
into EDR database. Locations
are in West Virginia
400 McAdams Rd.
Meadowland Blvd.
Hwy 231
Mount Pleasant, PA 15666
Lowry Ln. off Willow Rd.
HopewellTwp, PA 15312
Route 18, Henderson Ave.
Mt. Pleasant Twp, PA
Between Washington Ave.
and McCarrell Rd.
Hickory, PA 15340
2 Old Scales Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
7 KOA Rd.
Strabane Sq.
1500 Weirich, Washington,
PA
Washington Plz
Washington Hauling
200 W Wyley Ave.
>6.5 mi. west of
SWPAGW09
14.6 mi. SSE of SWPAGW05
8.3 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
>7.5 mi. SW of SWPAGW09
>1.5 mi. NW of SWPAGW08
>5.1 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
>0.3mi. ENEof
SWPAGW02
12.8mi.SSEofSWPAGW05
11.7 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
9.3 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
8.3mi.SWofSWPAGW03
Nl
6.8 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
8.4 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Record is for a wastewater discharge permit, which can impact ground water quality. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site is listed in CERCLIS database as a removal only site (no assessment needed). Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Record is for two 450-gallon storage tanks containing motor oil. Not a likely source of ground water impacts
due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site has permit for stationary sources of air pollution. No violations found in PA eFACTS.
Site has permit for stationary sources of air pollution. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point and no violations found.
Site has permit for stationary sources of air pollution. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point and no violations found.
Site has permit for stationary sources of air pollution. Not a likely source of contamination due to no violations
found.
Record is for two 1,000-gallon tanks, one containing gasoline and the other diesel. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
In database for NPDES program, no violations cited.
Record is for an active 1,500-gallon AST used to store diesel. No records of release. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Manufacturer of polypropylene and polyethylene compounds. In database for NPDES program, no violations
cited.
Record is for drycleaning operations. Not a likely source of contaminants due to no releases or incidents found.
In database for NPDES program, no violations cited.
Small-quantity generator of ignitable, corrosive, barium, silver, chloroform, and volatile wastes. No records of a
release or violations.
-------
C-38
Table C22
Environmental Database Review Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Northern Area - Search Area F
Database
Orphan FINDS, RMP
Name of Facility
Allegheny Ludlum
Cor/Washington FL
Site Location Address
Woodland Ave.
Distance from Nearest
Sample Point
7.7mi.SEofSWPAGW05
No
Potential Candidate Cause
Justification
Facility is enlisted in the emission inventory system. One accident reported a release of one pound of 70%
hydrogen fluoride/hydrofluoric acid in gaseous form. No other violations noted. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Groundwater Wells
Orphan ARCHIVE UST, RMP
Washington Steel Corp
Woodland Ave.
7.9 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
No
Record is for a 2,000-gallon tank containing gasoline. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Orphan US MINES
Therm-O-Rock East Inc
THERM-O-ROCK PA PLANT
Washington, PA 15301
>21 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
No
Facility is listed as a vermiculite plant. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest
sampling point.
Orphan FINDS
Washington E Wash Stp
102 Arden Station Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
7.25 mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
No
Site is listed as a groundwater quality monitoring point. Not a source of ground water quality impacts.
Primary Source: Environmental records search report by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR)
Notes:
ORPHAN SITE: A site of potential environmental interest that appear in the records search but due to incomplete location information (i.e., address and coordinates) is unmappable and not included in the records search report provided by EDR Inc.
Search Area C
EDR Inquiry Number:3602489.16s
EDR Search Radius: 3 mi.
Search Center: Lat. 40.2890000 (40.17' 20.40"), Long. 80.3782000 (-80. 22' 41.52")
Key:
AST= Above ground storage tank.
DEP = Department of Environmental Protection
DMR = Discharge Monitoring Report
E = East.
EPA = Environmental Protection Agency
FRDS= Federal Reporting Data System.
mi = Mile.
N = North.
Nl = No information.
NPDES = National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
NPL = National Priorities List.
PA= Pennsylvania.
RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
USGS = United States Geological Survey.
UST= Underground storage tank.
W= West.
S= South.
TSCA = Toxic Substances Control Act.
Databases:
ARCHIVE AST: Local list of Archived Above Ground Storage Tank Sites
ARCHIVE UST: Local list of Archived Underground Storage Tank Sites
AST: Listing of Pennsylvania Regulated Aboveground Storage Tanks
BROWNFIELDS: Listing of abandoned or underused industrial or commercial properties where redevelopmentis complicated by actual or perceived environmental contamination.
CERC-NFRAP: Federal CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System) NFRAP (No Further Remedial Action Planned) site list
DRYCLEANERS: Listing of drycleaner facility locations.
ERNS: Emergency Reponse Notification System
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
ICIS: Compliance Information System
LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites
MANIFEST: Hazardous waste manifest information
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Listing
PAeFACTS = Pennsylvania Environmental Facility Application Compliance Tracking System
RCRA-CESQG: Federal RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator List
RCRA NonGen / NLR: RCRA: Non Generators List
RCRA-TSDF: Listing of RCRA hazardous waste treament, storage, and disposal facilities.
RMP: Risk Management Plans Records
US AIRS: Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem
US HIST AUTO STATION: EDR exclusive database of listings of potential gas station, filling station, or service station sites .
US MINES: Mines Master Index File. The source of this database is the Dept. of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
UST: Listing of Pennsylvania Regulated Underground Storage Tanks
VCP: Voluntary Cleanup Sites
-------
C-39
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Organization
JM BESTING
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
JM BESTING
JM BESTING
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
Farm Name
ANNA B JOHNSON 1
BEST UNIT 1H
BEST UNIT 2H
BEST UNIT 3H
BEST UNIT 4H
BEST UNIT 5H
BEST UNIT 6H
BEST UNIT 7H-A
HAROLD L WARD 1
HUNTER 1
LBROSUNIT1H
LBROSUNIT2H
LBROSUNIT2H
LBROSUNIT3H
LBROSUNIT4H
LBROSUNIT5H
Site ID
230981
710282
710282
710282
710282
710282
710282
710282
230980
230971
710872
706655
710872
710872
710872
710872
Primary
ID
232958
710073
710194
710200
710203
712206
712198
712200
232957
232948
710556
707104
712196
717564
717567
718284
Sub
Facility ID
189351
975132
975425
975443
975446
979010
979001
979004
189350
189341
976056
970121
978999
988063
988066
989357
API
Number
125-21461
125-23277
125-23283
125-23282
125-23284
125-23370
125-23368
125-23369
125-21460
125-21446
125-23308
125-23199
125-23367
125-23696
125-23695
125-23705
Site Status
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active/Regulatory
Inactive Status
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active/Regulatory
Inactive Status
Active
Sub
Facility #
4
4
4
4
523
4
4
4
4
4
4
401
4
4
523
4
Search Area
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Latitude
40.233825
40.232829
40.232801
40.232801
40.232801
40.232774
40.232774
40.232774
40.228881
40.230808
40.244162
40.246273
40.244440
40.244162
40.244135
40.244135
Longitude
-80.358182
-80.338027
-80.337972
-80.337916
-80.337860
-80.337777
-80.337694
-80.337638
-80.326898
-80.341348
-80.341694
-80.338888
-80.341638
-80.341583
-80.341694
-80.341638
-------
C-40
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT3H
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT4H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT
1H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT
1H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT
2H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT
2H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT
3H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT
3H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT
4H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT
4H
WARD HAROLD UNIT 3H
WARD HAROLD UNIT 4H
WARD HAROLD UNIT 5H
WARD HAROLD UNIT 6H
705262
705262
747809
747809
747809
747809
747809
747809
747809
747809
729196
729196
729196
729196
705998
711104
758767
743219
758766
743221
758768
743224
758769
743227
729314
726348
735516
726350
968192
977035
1092275
1046029
1092274
1046033
1092276
1046038
1092277
1046048
1011354
1005899
1022979
1005904
125-23169
125-23326
125-24939
125-24483
125-24940
125-24484
125-24941
125-24485
125-24942
125-24486
125-24119
125-23975
125-24329
125-23974
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
4
401
4
401
4
401
4
401
4
401
4
4
4
4
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-C
40.243801
40.243773
40.232117
40.232117
40.232194
40.232194
40.232225
40.232225
40.232150
40.232150
40.229500
40.229278
40.229447
40.229389
-80.347111
-80.347083
-80.351511
-80.351511
-80.351467
-80.351467
-80.351292
-80.351292
-80.351336
-80.351336
-80.323278
-80.323278
-80.323281
-80.323278
-------
C-41
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
UNKNOWN OPR
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
WARD HAROLD UNIT 7H
WARD HAROLD UNIT 8H
ALEXANDER 1
ALEXANDER UNIT 1H
ALEXANDER UNIT 2
BEAUMARIAGE UNIT1H
BEAUMARIAGEUNIT2H
DEISEROTH 1
DEISEROTH 2
DEISEROTH 3
GULLAUNIT1
GULLAUNIT10H
GULLAUNIT2
GULLAUNIT3
GULLAUNIT4
729196
729196
694188
671310
677900
710306
710306
617889
658182
685807
654660
696176
663024
662874
663028
726352
728858
697275
679750
684689
710099
715586
638693
669855
690741
667163
698722
673686
673558
673690
1005908
1010571
952453
1059485/9
19746
929500
975241
984681
773283
900012
940391
894128/
1059467
955525
907935
907735
907940
125-23976
125-24070
125-02162
125-22366
125-22447
125-23280
125-23591
125-22088
125-22238
125-22629
125-22212
125-22941
125-22262
125-22261
125-22263
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Active
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
4
4
361
361
4
4
4
4
4
4
361
4
6
4
6
Northern-C
Northern-C
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
40.229333
40.229278
40.282995
40.287944
40.283301
40.270301
40.270329
40.280023
40.284467
40.278912
40.275861
40.274000
40.275967
40.272722
40.277801
-80.323306
-80.323306
-80.313054
-80.314167
-80.310137
-80.308332
-80.308387
-80.291998
-80.291859
-80.296942
-80.307889
-80.318361
-80.307804
-80.314389
-80.313804
-------
C-42
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
DORSO LP
DORSO LP
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
GULLAUNIT5H
GULLAUNIT6
GULLAUNIT9
MCBURNEY2
MCBURNEY3
MITCHELL JAMES UNIT 1
MITCHELL JAMES UNIT 2H
MITCHELL JAMES UNIT 3
MITCHELL JAMES UNIT 4H
MITCHELL JAMES UNIT 5
PEACOCK 1
PEACOCK 1
PEACOCK 3
662794
667184
686044
683232
683234
690617
690619
690622
690625
699404
665389
692042
685810
673492
676703
690903
688784
688785
694422
694424
694426
694427
701291
675451
695605
690744
907638
913790
940705
936815
936818
947123
947127
947132
947133
959980
911372
949496
940396
125-22259
125-22300
125-22639
125-22563
125-22562
125-22798
125-22799
125-22800
125-22801
125-23024
125-22282
125-22856
125-22630
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
361
4
4
4
4
401
4
401
4
401
401
401
401
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
40.283134
40.272440
40.272412
40.288328
40.285606
40.276495
40.271829
40.272829
40.269606
40.268051
40.285523
40.285773
40.288967
-80.302943
-80.313193
-80.308637
-80.305637
-80.307554
-80.301331
-80.298220
-80.303943
-80.301776
-80.297637
-80.298331
-80.298359
-80.298803
-------
C-43
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
PEACOCK 3
PEACOCK UNIT 1H
RENZ2
COWDEN UNIT1H
COWDEN UNIT2H
COWDEN UNIT2H
COWDEN UNIT 3
COWDEN UNIT3H
COWDEN UNIT4H
COWDEN UNIT5H
COWDEN UNIT6H
DRUGMAND UNIT1H
DRUGMANDUNIT2H
DRUGMAND UNIT 3H
DRUGMAND UNIT 4H
692708
694522
652177
699408
699408
699497
699409
718740
718740
718740
718740
725295
725295
725295
725295
696117
697536
665248
701294
710403
701354
701297
717353
719624
719628
719631
723862
723864
723219
723870
950407
952949
890481
959984
975786
960094
959987
987674
992092
992097
992103
1001096
1001098
999756
1001104
125-22864
125-22900
125-22205
125-23023
125-23304
125-23031
125-23022
125-23693
125-23780
125-23781
125-23782
125-23888
125-23889
125-23853
125-23890
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
4
4
4
4
4
401
401
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-D
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
40.289717
40.283801
40.276912
40.330106
40.330106
40.327022
40.333467
40.328133
40.328083
40.328083
40.328083
40.320306
40.320361
40.320389
40.320444
-80.298081
-80.297748
-80.286303
-80.281747
-80.281692
-80.283636
-80.283942
-80.295887
-80.295944
-80.296056
-80.296000
-80.302333
-80.302306
-80.302278
-80.302222
-------
C-44
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
DRUGMANDUNIT5H
DRUGMANDUNIT6H
DRUGMANDUNIT7H
DRUGMANDUNIT8H
PARRY UNIT 1H
PARRY UNIT 2H
PETRICCAUNIT1H
CARNS DONALD B UNIT
3H
CARNS DONALD B UNIT
4H
CARNS DONALD UNIT
11H
CARNS DONALD UNIT
12H
CARNS DONALD UNIT
13H
CARNS DONALD UNIT
19H
CARNS DONALD UNIT
20H
CARNS DONALD UNIT
21H
725295
725295
725295
725295
710284
710284
701857
775482
775482
756325
756325
756325
756325
756325
756325
723873
723876
723879
723884
711701
710076
703251
768692
768704
749535
748292
748293
750145
750147
750149
1001108
1001114
1001124
1001131
978139
975137
963675
1115244
1115259
1070786
1063808/1
063809
1063810
1071990
1071997
1071999
125-23891
125-23892
125-23893
125-23894
125-23345
125-23276
125-23085
125-27109
125-27110
125-24686
125-24657
125-24658
125-24698
125-24699
125-24700
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
4
4
4
4
401
401
6
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-E
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.320389
40.320472
40.320278
40.320333
40.314495
40.314523
40.314773
40.328981
40.328911
40.325378
40.325453
40.325528
40.325425
40.325500
40.325572
-80.302222
-80.302167
-80.302306
-80.302278
-80.282942
-80.282886
-80.286275
-80.359236
-80.359178
-80.372906
-80.372861
-80.372814
-80.373036
-80.372989
-80.372944
-------
C-45
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
CARNSUNIT1
CARNSUNIT2
CARNSUNIT3
CARNSUNIT4
CARNSUNIT7H
CARTER UN IT 3
CHECHUCK GEORGE
UNIT1H
CHECHUCK GEORGE
UNIT2H
CHECHUCK GEORGE
UNIT3H
CHECHUCK GEORGE
UNIT4H
CHRISTMAN UNIT 1
CHRISTMAN UNIT 2
CHRISTMAN UNIT 3
CHRISTMAN UNIT4
687544
687545
687546
687548
687545
681094
762436
762436
762436
762436
660999
663030
663193
676912
692090
692091
692093
692095
711107
687277
755861
755862
755864
755866
672160
673692
673800
683957
942827
942828
942830
942833
977038
934028
1085535/1
085538
1085539
1085541
1085544
904847
907946
908148
928188
125-22708
125-22709
125-22710
125-22711
125-23327
125-22499
125-24858
125-24859
125-24860
125-24861
125-22252
125-22264
125-22265
125-22440
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
401
4
401
401
401
361
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.275801
40.280579
40.276995
40.281745
40.280523
40.305500
40.309478
40.309325
40.309519
40.309367
40.268912
40.265389
40.270245
40.260662
-80.379306
-80.379973
-80.385390
-80.386029
-80.379973
-80.326306
-80.406956
-80.406878
-80.406822
-80.406744
-80.371139
-80.366222
-80.377306
-80.375973
-------
C-46
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
CHRISTMAN UNITS
CHRISTMAN UNIT 6
CHRISTMAN UNIT?
CHRISTMAN UNITS
COOPER CHARLES 2
COOPER CHARLES 3
COSTANZO UNIT1H
COSTANZOUNIT2H
COWDEN 40
COWDEN 41
COWDEN 41
COWDEN 42
COWDEN 46
676049
676264
681990
686043
685053
685805
722452
722452
704773
715957
705314
705317
696345
683326
683486
687924
690901
690097
690739
720649
720652
705610
714881
706036
706038
698847
927022
927320
935212
940703
939325
940388
994291
994298
967535
983561
968247
968249
955722
125-22431
125-22434
125-22522
125-22638
125-22602
125-22628
125-23803
125-23804
125-23161
125-23537
125-23171
125-23172
125-22957
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active/Regulatory
Inactive Status
361
361
401
361
401
401
4
4
4
4
401
401
523
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.270940
40.266051
40.255857
40.261995
40.313189
40.310106
40.266778
40.266833
40.280467
40.281134
40.279412
40.276940
40.272134
-80.363722
-80.358833
-80.370278
-80.371778
-80.332943
-80.330471
-80.354778
-80.354778
-80.361167
-80.365945
-80.368695
-80.366556
-80.384195
-------
C-47
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
CHEVRON APPALACHIA LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
COWDEN 47
COWDEN 47H
COWDEN 48
COWDEN 48
COWDEN 48H
COWDEN 50
COWDEN 51
COWDEN 53
COWDEN 75
COWDEN 76
COWDEN 76
CROSS CREEK CNTY PARK
10
CROSS CREEK CNTY PARK
12
696349
696349
696376
696376
696376
701286
696353
696397
696349
696376
696376
692562
689602
698849
709984
698863
709985
713189
702762
698851
698881
712440
714608
712439
696001
693636
955724
975006
955743
975007
980728
962630
955726
955768
979387
983162
979385
950130
945732
125-22958
125-23271
125-22959
125-23270
125-23429
125-23070
125-22960
125-22961
125-23376
125-23515
125-23377
125-22860
125-22763
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Regulatory
Inactive Status
Active/Regulatory
Inactive Status
Active/Regulatory
Inactive Status
Active/Regulatory
Inactive Status
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
401
4
401
4
523
523
523
523
4
4
401
401
401
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.269384
40.269384
40.268968
40.268968
40.268968
40.270412
40.274745
40.270079
40.269412
40.269134
40.268968
40.262996
40.257579
-80.385195
-80.385195
-80.390473
-80.390473
-80.390473
-80.398168
-80.391279
-80.402085
-80.385001
-80.390390
-80.390279
-80.395918
-80.374084
-------
C-48
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
CROSS CREEK CNTY PARK
3
CROSS CREEK CNTY PARK
4
CROSS CREEK CNTY PARK
7H
CROSS CREEK CNTY PARK
8-H
CROSS CREEK CNTY PARK
9H-A
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK1
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK 11
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK 14H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK 15H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK 16H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK 17H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK 18H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK 19H
686953
686955
686894
690273
686894
687960
687962
704936
704936
704936
747426
747426
747426
691615
691616
696015
694153
691570
692389
692391
705743
706489
710371
751011
751012
728779
942027
942028
950154
946680
941934
943322
943324
967785
968947
975719
1074565
1074566
1010469
125-22673
125-22674
125-22861
125-22793
125-22668
125-22728
125-22729
125-23165
125-23182
125-23300
125-24743
125-24744
125-24054
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
401
401
4
4
4
401
401
4
4
4
4
4
401
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.255579
40.253523
40.260912
40.262829
40.261023
40.263246
40.261221
40.246662
40.246662
40.246690
40.263508
40.263567
40.263586
-80.377695
-80.381556
-80.390612
-80.388001
-80.390668
-80.383251
-80.383380
-80.381251
-80.381306
-80.381334
-80.408856
-80.408778
-80.408753
-------
C-49
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK 19H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK 19H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK20H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK20H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK21H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK21H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK22H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK22H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK25H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK41H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK42H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK43H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK44H
747426
747426
747426
732122
747426
747426
747426
747426
686894
752479
752479
752479
752479
716265
751078
716263
728785
728767
716262
716259
728754
723353
761869
759270
761871
761872
985783
1074720
985781
1010478
1010448
985780
985776
1010434
1000031
1099859
1093691
1099865/1
111620
1099871
125-23631
125-24754
125-23630
125-24055
125-24056
125-23629
125-23628
125-24057
125-23859
125-26980
125-26928
125-26981
125-26982
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
401
4
401
401
401
401
401
401
4
4
4
4
4
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.263496
40.263625
40.263523
40.263489
40.263528
40.263551
40.263607
40.263567
40.261056
40.254722
40.254772
40.254847
40.254919
-80.408613
-80.408703
-80.408585
-80.408828
-80.408778
-80.408529
-80.408502
-80.408728
-80.390972
-80.378031
-80.377906
-80.377956
-80.378003
-------
C-50
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK45H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK45H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK46H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK46H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK47H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK47H
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARKS
CROSS CREEK COUNTY
PARK6H
HELSELUNIT1
HELSELUNIT3
HELSELUNIT4
HELSELUNIT6
747426
747426
747426
747426
747426
747426
685522
690273
686384
688457
688460
687100
751013
745682
751014
745704
751015
745711
690478
695323
691127
692762
692765
691735
1074567
1051121
1074568
1051166
1074569
1051175
939958
948937
941150
944109
944113
942251
125-24745
125-24568
125-24746
125-24569
125-24747
125-24570
125-22618
125-22830
125-22651
125-22735
125-22736
125-22682
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
4
401
4
401
4
401
4
4
401
401
401
401
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.263433
40.263508
40.263489
40.263567
40.263547
40.263625
40.250718
40.262829
40.248885
40.246607
40.245912
40.252607
-80.408753
-80.408856
-80.408678
-80.408778
-80.408600
-80.408703
-80.378584
-80.388056
-80.373528
-80.378001
-80.383306
-80.371556
-------
C-51
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
JM BESTING
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
HELSELUNIT7
KANCELUNIT2H
KANCELUNIT3H
KANCELUNIT4H
KANCELUNIT7H
KANCELUNIT8H
KOVALICK 1
LEHMAN UNIT1
LEHMAN UNIT10H
LEHMAN UNIT11H
LEHMAN UNIT2H
LEHMAN UNIT2H
LEHMAN UNIT3H
LEHMAN UNIT4H
687101
755544
755544
755544
755544
755544
230972
740688
740688
740688
740688
740688
740688
740688
691736
753627
758565
753628
753629
753630
232949
690899
735504
735486
717260
713191
714740
714741
942252
1082664/1
080190
1091863
1082665/1
080191
1080195/1
082666
1080197/1
082667
189342
940701
1022933
1022907
987534
980733
983337
983338
125-22683
125-24805
125-24934
125-24806
125-24807
125-24808
125-21448
125-22637
125-24328
125-24326
125-23686
125-23432
125-23519
125-23520
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
401
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
401
401
401
401
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.252496
40.287303
40.287139
40.287219
40.287217
40.287136
40.259431
40.298717
40.299150
40.299133
40.298884
40.298745
40.298690
40.298801
-80.372028
-80.415611
-80.415606
-80.415608
-80.415753
-80.415750
-80.366611
-80.378639
-80.379569
-80.379597
-80.378500
-80.378612
-80.378667
-80.378556
-------
C-52
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
LEHMAN UNIT5H
LEHMAN UNIT6H
LEHMAN UNIT7H
LEHMAN UNIT8H
LEHMAN UNIT9H
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT 1
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT
10H
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT
2H-A
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT5H
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT6H
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT7H
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT8H
740688
740688
740688
740688
740688
685034
725420
685045
725420
725420
725420
725420
717257
719455
735479
735482
735485
690086
723341
690088
723332
723342
723340
723337
987531
991758
1022893
1022896
1022906
939309
999980
939313
999963
999989
999972
999969
125-23688
125-23776
125-24323
125-24324
125-24325
125-22599
125-23858
125-22600
125-23854
125-23855
125-23856
125-23857
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
401
401
4
4
4
401
401
4
401
401
401
401
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.298773
40.298889
40.299219
40.299194
40.299108
40.251690
40.251222
40.250996
40.251361
40.251417
40.251306
40.251333
-80.378584
-80.378694
-80.379689
-80.379617
-80.379525
-80.360389
-80.370250
-80.367778
-80.370361
-80.370389
-80.370306
-80.370333
-------
C-53
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
MACINTYRE UNIT1H
MACINTYREUNIT2H
MACINTYRE UNIT 3H
MACINTYRE UNIT 4H
MACINTYRE UNIT 5H
MACINTYRE UNIT 6H
MARGARIA RAYMOND
UNIT1H
MARGARIA RAYMOND
UNIT2H
MARGARIA RAYMOND
UNIT3H
MARGARIA RAYMOND
UNIT4H
MENICHI UNIT10H
MENICHI UNIT2H
MENICHI UNIT3H
MENICHI UNIT5H
MENICHI UNIT8H
MIDLER/FROEBEAUNIT
1H
754150
754150
754150
754150
754150
754150
732213
732213
732213
732213
737780
737780
737780
737780
737780
758016
757692
757492
757493
763227
763289
764492
743393
742310
742318
742321
733263
733206
733232
733238
733252
750623
1089541/1
107656
1089068/1
107663
1089069/1
107668
1102671
1102799
1105440
1046445
1043899
1044226/1
043918
1043923
1018615
1018535
1018563
1018570
1018603
1073600
125-24897
125-24894
125-24895
125-26996
125-26998
125-27017
125-24488
125-24450
125-24451
125-24452
125-24282
125-24283
125-24284
125-24279
125-24281
125-24736
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.293275
40.293194
40.293383
40.293306
40.293225
40.293353
40.284842
40.284953
40.284956
40.284958
40.304456
40.304381
40.304428
40.304517
40.304322
40.296611
-80.390961
-80.390931
-80.390850
-80.390822
-80.390792
-80.390989
-80.431503
-80.431508
-80.431400
-80.431294
-80.327297
-80.327408
-80.327367
-80.327286
-80.327419
-80.411825
-------
C-54
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
MIDLER/FROEBEAUNIT
2H
MIDLER/FROEBEAUNIT
3H
MIDLER/FROEBEAUNIT
4H
MIDLER/FROEBEBUNIT
5H
MIDLER/FROEBEBUNIT
6H
MIDLER/FROEBEBUNIT
7H
MIDLER/FROEBEBUNIT
8H
MILVET1
NISHNICKUNIT2
NISHNICKUNIT3
NISHNICKUNIT4
NISHNICKUNIT4
NISHNICKUNIT5H
758016
758016
758016
752758
752758
752758
752758
681616
685593
685594
688826
686047
711890
750625
749762
749763
745433
745432
748900
745434
687626
690525
690526
693054
690905
711417
1073601
1071238
1071239
1050695/1
076860/10
76861
1050693
1065002
1050696
934720
940043
940046
944637
940712
977593
125-24737
125-24689
125-24690
125-24545
125-24546
125-24670
125-24547
125-22507
125-22620
125-22621
125-22746
125-22640
125-23338
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
401
4
401
401
401
401
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.296656
40.296519
40.296564
40.299369
40.299342
40.299183
40.299261
40.265884
40.292356
40.286412
40.292690
40.290578
40.284773
-80.411733
-80.411747
-80.411656
-80.407500
-80.407361
-80.407411
-80.407386
-80.389529
-80.324388
-80.328388
-80.329499
-80.328666
-80.324915
-------
C-55
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
NISHNICKUNIT6H
NISHNICKUNIT6H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 1
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
10H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
11H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
12H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
13H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
14H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
15H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
16H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
2A
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 3
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 4
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 6
717523
717523
675146
710286
710286
710286
710286
710286
710286
710286
674954
674953
676263
680845
728798
716268
682645
718663
729940
729951
718661
729954
729950
729945
682500
682497
683485
687068
1010495
985789
925807
990057
1012417
1012435
990056
1012439
1012432
1012423
925581
925579
927319
933685
125-24059
125-23632
125-22420
125-23714
125-24148
125-24147
125-23715
125-24146
125-24149
125-24144
125-22414
125-22415
125-22433
125-22495
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
401
401
361
401
4
4
401
4
4
4
361
361
361
361
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.292206
40.292245
40.268051
40.277134
40.277083
40.277131
40.277194
40.277047
40.277181
40.277033
40.275134
40.276690
40.271218
40.274356
-80.329953
-80.329693
-80.347638
-80.349555
-80.349764
-80.349797
-80.349833
-80.349697
-80.349831
-80.349731
-80.342944
-80.354306
-80.353500
-80.348861
-------
C-56
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 7
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 7
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 8
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
8H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
8H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT
8H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 9
ORTON 1
ORTON 2
ORTON 4
ORTON 4
ORTON 5
689161
686900
686902
710286
710286
710286
686699
682436
682439
691945
682444
682449
693313
691578
691581
718671
729928
710078
691394
688254
688256
695539
688260
688262
945108
941943
941947
990071
1012400
975141
941659
935869
935870
949401
935874
935878
125-22751
125-22670
125-22671
125-23716
125-24145
125-23278
125-22662
125-22532
125-22533
125-22854
125-22535
125-22536
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Well
401
401
401
401
4
401
401
4
4
401
401
361
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.271329
40.271968
40.277579
40.277245
40.277228
40.277190
40.279940
40.270495
40.270523
40.266412
40.265607
40.261190
-80.347000
-80.345277
-80.346027
-80.349638
-80.349864
-80.349583
-80.351389
-80.339027
-80.332805
-80.339166
-80.340527
-80.345278
-------
C-57
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACHIA
LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACHIA
LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
ORTON 6
ORTON 8H
ORTON 9H
POLLANAUNIT1H
POLLANAUNIT2H
POLLANAUNIT3H
POLLANAUNIT4H
POLLANAUNIT5H
POLLANAUNIT6H
RAYMONDMARGARIA1H
RAYMOND MARGARIA3H
ROMANETTI UNIT?
ROMANETTI UNIT1
ROMANETTI UNIT 2
682453
712474
712474
746684
746684
746684
746684
746684
746684
732213
732213
686688
664792
665394
688269
711888
711889
750408
740398
750395
740402
750397
740406
728868
728876
691383
675020
675453
935890
978485
978486
1073038
1039667/1
039779
1073017
1039683/1
039778
1073020
1039697
1010584
1010594
941589
910396
911374
125-22537
125-23357
125-23358
125-24715
125-24415
125-24711
125-24416
125-24712
125-24417
125-24072
125-24074
125-22659
125-22277
125-22283
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
401
401
401
361
361
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.260079
40.260051
40.260023
40.305250
40.305203
40.305325
40.305275
40.305397
40.305350
40.284944
40.284944
40.262440
40.258773
40.252329
-80.338722
-80.337499
-80.337527
-80.360975
-80.360844
-80.360925
-80.360797
-80.360878
-80.360750
-80.431611
-80.431667
-80.358528
-80.359889
-80.353278
-------
C-58
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
ROMANETTI UNIT 3
ROMANETTI UNIT 4
ROMANETTI UNIT 4
ROMANETTI UNITS
ROMANETTI UNIT 6
RUKAVINAUNIT1H
RUKAVINAUNIT2H
RUKAVINAUNIT3H
RUKAVINAUNIT4H
RUKAVINAUNIT5H
STEWART NANCY UN IT 1
STEWART NANCY UNIT 10
STEWART NANCY UN IT 2
676287
676261
679343
682617
687098
726803
726803
726803
726803
726803
685591
686784
686689
683503
683484
685807
688379
691734
724434
724481
724471
724479
724472
690523
691472
691384
927355
927318
931369
936058
942250
1002307
1002376
1002359
1002374
1002360
940042
941756
941599
125-22435
125-22432
125-22453
125-22548
125-22681
125-23925
125-23928
125-23929
125-23930
125-23931
125-22619
125-22665
125-22660
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
401
401
401
361
401
4
4
4
4
4
4
401
401
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
40.252107
40.257829
40.257523
40.256194
40.254996
40.265528
40.265472
40.265333
40.265444
40.265389
40.284884
40.290662
40.290940
-80.352611
-80.352833
-80.354778
-80.348444
-80.357028
-80.362750
-80.362722
-80.362611
-80.362694
-80.362667
-80.351527
-80.357528
-80.352889
-------
C-59
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
EQUITABLE RESOURCES
EXPLORATION
EOT PRODUCTION CO
PRESTON OIL CO
PRESTON OIL CO
PRESTON OIL CO
PRESTON OIL CO
PRESTON OIL CO
STEWART NANCY UN IT 3
STEWART NANCY UN IT 4
STEWART NANCY UN IT 5
STEWART NANCY UN IT 6
STEWART NANCY UNIT 7
STEWART NANCY UN IT 8
STEWART NANCY UN IT 9
W KENNETH SMITH 510
A BURNS 779
AOVANKIRK761
AOVANKIRK789
AOVANKIRK797
AOVANKIRK800
AOVANKIRKU790
686690
686049
687097
687241
686904
686899
687242
230506
229460
230573
230574
230577
230580
230586
691386
690907
691732
691833
691583
691577
691834
232483
231437
232550
232551
232554
232557
232563
941606
940713
942248
942418
941949
941942
942419
188876
187830
188943
188944
188947
188950
188956
125-22661
125-22641
125-22680
125-22688
125-22672
125-22669
125-22689
125-20109
125-01031
125-20668
125-20669
125-20672
125-20692
125-20705
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
401
4
401
4
401
4
401
361
4
361
361
361
361
361
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Northern-F
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.287634
40.284690
40.287745
40.283301
40.287106
40.288273
40.294495
40.279222
40.0665
40.11673
40.11503
40.11528
40.11393
40.10971
-80.354889
-80.346527
-80.350027
-80.343305
-80.341416
-80.345444
-80.357833
-80.387389
-80.199861
-80.230572
-80.232903
-80.231031
-80.234814
-80.235472
-------
C-60
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
PRESTON OIL CO
PRESTON OIL CO
CARNEGIE NATURAL GAS
CO
CARNEGIE NATURAL GAS
CO
T & F EXPLORATION LP
T & F EXPLORATION LP
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
AOVANKIRKU799
AOVANKIRKU810
ADDISON HUPP 682
ANNAM HALLAM652
BAKER 1
BAKER 2
BAKER R&M 1A
BASH-SALTZER UNIT1H
BEDILLION-DAYUNIT1H
BEDILLION-DAYUNIT1H
BEDILLION-DAYUNIT2H
BEDILLION-DAYUNIT4H
BEDILLION-DAYUNIT5H
BEDILLION-DAYUNIT6H
230587
230588
228934
228838
713556
713551
714826
765526
704393
704396
704396
704396
704396
704396
232564
232565
230911
230815
712797
712792
713893
768682
705320
716014
705322
705399
722947
722946
188957
188958
187304
187208
980074
980061
981907
1115207
967102
985344
967104
967227
999093
999077
125-20706
125-20707
125-00281
125-00077
125-23403
125-23402
125-23471
125-27106
125-23152
125-23609
125-23153
125-23156
125-23843
125-23844
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Active
Plugged Well
Active
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
361
361
361
361
4
4
361
4
401
4
4
4
401
401
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.11185
40.11097
40.06487
40.05432
40.07721
40.08033
40.0803
40.13397
40.11666
40.11666
40.11672
40.11675
40.11697
40.11692
-80.236183
-80.234072
-80.217786
-80.234886
-80.216285
-80.218871
-80.222329
-80.240342
-80.228135
-80.228135
-80.228135
-80.228135
-80.228361
-80.228306
-------
C-61
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
AMWELL ENTERPRISES INC
CNX GAS CO LLC
EOT PRODUCTION CO
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
BEDILLION-DAYUNIT7H
BEDILLION-DAYUNIT8H
BLACKERT 1
BURTNV11
C B FRAZEE 636
CAPTAIN PLANET 1H
CAPTAIN PLANET 2H
CAPTAIN PLANET3H
CAPTAIN PLANET4H
CAPTAIN PLANET Gl
CAPTAIN PLANETG2
CAPTAIN PLANETG3
704396
704396
697023
720688
229450
743245
743245
743245
743245
743245
743245
743245
722945
722944
699405
719110
231427
737643
743385
743388
743593
746707
746708
744924
999074
999073
956751
990916
187820
1033356
1046428
1046436
1046788
1060122
1060125
1049714 &
1049715
125-23845
125-23842
125-22982
125-23758
125-01021
125-24366
125-24489
125-24490
125-24494
125-24611
125-24612
125-24525
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
401
401
4
401
4
4
401
401
4
401
401
401
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.11692
40.11697
40.07291
40.12976
40.05803
40.07752
40.07746
40.07741
40.07736
40.07747
40.07742
40.07737
-80.228361
-80.228333
-80.211024
-80.204629
-80.209444
-80.184042
-80.184022
-80.184
-80.183981
-80.184097
-80.184075
-80.18405
-------
C-62
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
COLLINS NV31
COLLINS NV31
CONRHEIN NV35
CONSOL NV36
CONSOL NV42
CONSOL NV43
DAY L&L UNIT 1H
DAYL&LUNIT3H
DAY L&L UNIT 2H
DAY L&L UNIT 4H
DAY NV17
DAY NV17
DAY NV21
721738
718827
707126
708159
708194
708165
731848
731848
731848
731848
716063
732257
716095
720057
717427
707468
708298
708327
708303
731116
730634
728559
728568
714959
728912
714988
992978
987795
970761
972220
972256
972226
1014677
1013743
1010137
1010147
983680
1010668
983739
125-23790
125-23694
125-23207
125-23236
125-23235
125-23237
125-24207
125-24175
125-24046
125-24045
125-23547
125-24085
125-23548
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
401
401
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
401
6
401
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.08856
40.08847
40.08749
40.09936
40.07723
40.07672
40.07581
40.07577
40.07586
40.07589
40.1168
40.11668
40.11596
-80.198567
-80.199973
-80.260367
-80.269725
-80.259597
-80.257547
-80.2457
-80.245747
-80.245667
-80.245611
-80.222277
-80.222503
-80.221068
-------
C-63
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
CNX GAS CO LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
PHILIP R&ROBERTGENE
CONKLIN
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
DAY NV21
DAY UN IT 1H
DAY UNIT 1H
DAY UNIT 2H
DAY UNIT 2H
DAY UNIT 3H
DAYUNIT4H
DAY UNIT 5H
DAY UNIT 6H
DAYUNIT7H-A
DAY UN IT 8H
DEBLASIO 1
ECKELS NV44
EIGHTY FOUR MINING
COMPANYNV20
732293
705981
699870
705981
699871
705981
705981
705981
705981
705981
705981
230374
720694
735447
728952
706608
701633
707386
701634
720391
722343
720390
722333
720388
720392
232351
719114
731471
1010726
969156 &
1059522
960538
970629 &
1059524
960539
993654
997853
993653
997836
993651
993655
188744
990924
1015426
125-24086
125-23185
125-23038
125-23205
125-23039
125-23796
125-23828
125-23795
125-23829
125-23794
125-23797
125-01947
125-23756
125-24218
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/DEP
Plugged
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
6
4
401
4
401
4
4
4
4
4
4
522
401
6
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.11594
40.12261
40.11433
40.12264
40.11919
40.12272
40.12275
40.12269
40.12267
40.12264
40.12269
40.09291
40.07463
40.10723
-80.221294
-80.216111
-80.213051
-80.216083
-80.212579
-80.215917
-80.215917
-80.215944
-80.216028
-80.216
-80.215972
-80.278378
-80.2314
-80.198703
-------
C-64
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
CNX GAS CO LLC
EQT PRODUCTION CO
EOT PRODUCTION CO
EQT PRODUCTION CO
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
PHILIP R& ROBERT GENE
CONKLIN
PHILIP R& ROBERT GENE
CONKLIN
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
EIGHTY-FOUR NV20
Fl MONINGER 590034
Fl MONINGER 772
F WILEY 556
FARABEE MATTHEW
UNIT1H
FARABEE MATTHEW
UNIT2H
FARRABEE 13
FARRABEE 2
FOLLY HOLLOW FARM
UNIT1H
FOLLY HOLLOW FARM
UNIT2H
FOLLY HOLLOW FARM
UNIT3H
FOLLY HOLLOW FARM
UNIT4H
FOLLY HOLLOW FARM
UNIT6H
FOLLY HOLLOW FARM
UNIT8H
714690
706137
229459
229446
734028
734028
230372
230371
738059
738059
738059
738059
738059
746489
713778
706740
231436
231423
730389
730391
232349
232348
733469
733627
740204
740212
740215
740222
981748
969410
187829
187816
1013284
1013289
188742
188741
1018943
1019168
1039231 &
1050692
1039245 &
1050690
1050689 &
1039248
1061407 &
1050688
125-23462
125-23192
125-01030
125-01017
125-24165
125-24164
125-01945
125-01944
125-24286
125-24287
125-24409
125-24410
125-24411
125-24412
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Abandoned/DEP
Orphan List
Abandoned/DEP
Orphan List
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
401
4
4
4
4
4
521
521
401
401
4
4
4
4
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.10726
40.07269
40.07197
40.05636
40.06336
40.06334
40.13279
40.13334
40.11371
40.11375
40.11379
40.11384
40.11392
40.09721
-80.198476
-80.197551
-80.198556
-80.207194
-80.204303
-80.204236
-80.215262
-80.215798
-80.267822
-80.267767
-80.267758
-80.267675
-80.267761
-80.267847
-------
C-65
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
EOT PRODUCTION CO
EIGHTY FOUR MINING CO
EOT PRODUCTION CO
LEATHERWOOD INC
DUNN MAROIL&GASCO
CARNEGIE NATURAL GAS
CO
Unavailable
CNX GAS CO LLC
FOLLY HOLLOW FARM
UNIT9H
FOLLY NV27
FOLLY NV27
FOLLY NV28
FOLLY NV28
GB SARGENT 723
GFANDN KTIBBENS
5051
G 1 GLOSSER 743
GL WALKER (FMLY
NASER ROY AND BETTY)!
GL WALKER 5
GEORGE C POWELL &
AGNES Y POWELL 1008
GRAY1
GUY NV25
738059
731630
715843
715851
732088
229456
663779
229457
465863
228880
229022
230320
723781
740232
728384
714786
714796
728756
231433
674267
231434
495090
230857
230999
232297
721800
1063302 &
1050686
1009823
983416
983431
1010436
187826
908997
187827
373602
187250
187392
188690
996752
125-24413
125-24037
125-23528
125-23527
125-24052
125-01027
125-22272
125-01028
125-01986
125-00171
125-00440
125-01893
125-23826
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/DEP
Plugged
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
4
4
401
401
6
4
361
4
4
361
361
522
401
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.11379
40.1046
40.10463
40.10638
40.10636
40.07536
40.10934
40.08056
40.12294
40.12088
40.08892
40.11734
40.12118
-80.267994
-80.271011
-80.270786
-80.257175
-80.2574
-80.203806
-80.188323
-80.207528
-80.227333
-80.228119
-80.193575
-80.262472
-80.269231
-------
C-66
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
1H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
2H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
2H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
3H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
3H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
3H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
4H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
4H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
4H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
5H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
5H
738844
738844
738844
738844
738844
738844
738844
738844
738844
738844
738844
751330
751331
739339
751333
739343
734078
734083
751339
739345
734089
740882
1075399
1075400
1037038
1075405 &
1075403
1037042
1020122
1020128
1075413
1037046
1020141
1040708 &
1042059
125-24763
125-24764
125-24392
125-24765
125-24393
125-24294
125-24295
125-24766
125-24394
125-24296
125-24428
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
401
401
401
401
401
401
401
401
401
401
401
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.05925
40.05936
40.05936
40.05938
40.05938
40.05935
40.05934
40.05939
40.05939
40.05933
40.05929
-80.255833
-80.255864
-80.255864
-80.255758
-80.255758
-80.255669
-80.2556
-80.255653
-80.255653
-80.255531
-80.255622
-------
C-67
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
LEATHERWOOD INC
LEATHERWOOD INC
CNX GAS CO LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
5H
HAINESGAYLORDUNIT
6H
HAINES NV51
HARTLEY NV33
HAZLETT 1
HAZLETT 2
HORENCYNV16
HULK1H
HULK IV
HULK2H
HULK3H
HULK3H
HULK4H
738844
738844
712512
711452
229801
229802
721736
734164
734164
734164
734164
734164
734164
751366
735195
711921
711068
231778
231779
720056
731322
731134
731323
744363
731325
743613
1075492
1022311
978536
976953
188171
188172
992976
1015103
1014720
1015107
1048259
1015109
1046836
125-24767
125-24321
125-23354
125-23324
125-01373
125-01374
125-23788
125-24214
125-24210
125-24212
125-24509
125-24213
125-24495
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Active
Regulatory
Inactive Status
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Regulatory
Inactive Status
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
401
6
4
523
4
4
401
4
523
4
401
401
401
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.05929
40.0593
40.05986
40.07754
40.12778
40.12664
40.12216
40.08831
40.08811
40.08824
40.08826
40.08826
40.0882
-80.255622
-80.255539
-80.256436
-80.214054
-80.220361
-80.222833
-80.240283
-80.185894
-80.186139
-80.185858
-80.185953
-80.185953
-80.185903
-------
C-68
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
HULK4H
HULK5H
HULK6H
HULK7H
HULK8H
HULK9H
HULKG1
HULKG3
HULKG4
HULKG5
HUTCHINSON NV50
HUTCHINSON NV50
734164
734164
734164
734164
734164
734164
734164
734164
734164
734164
732075
716079
762115
748879
762116
748888
762118
748890
747693
747695
747697
747699
728746
714974
1100432
1064965
1100435
1064986
1100436
1064990
1062419
1062428
1062430
1062435
1010422
983718
125-26985
125-24667
125-26986
125-24668
125-26987
125-24669
125-24634
125-24635
125-24636
125-24637
125-24053
125-23544
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
4
401
4
401
4
401
401
401
401
401
401
401
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.08841
40.08822
40.08849
40.08812
40.08853
40.08852
40.08848
40.08844
40.08816
40.08839
40.05457
40.0546
-80.185667
-80.186
-80.185572
-80.186
-80.185525
-80.185658
-80.185706
-80.185753
-80.185953
-80.1858
-80.236961
-80.236736
-------
C-69
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
LEATHERWOOD INC
EQT PRODUCTION CO
LEATHERWOOD INC
EQT PRODUCTION CO
EQT PRODUCTION CO
CARNEGIE NATURAL GAS
CO
EIGHTY FOUR MINING CO
EQT PRODUCTION CO
PETROTHERM IND CORP
MANUFACTURERS LIGHTS
HE AT CO
COLUMBIA GAS TRANS LLC
DEVON PETRO CORP
DUNN MAR OIL & GAS CO
ONEXXXPROD&
EXPLORATION CORP
EIGHTY FOUR MINING CO
IAMSFMLY1 KENNETH
MANKEY10
J C BAYNE 665
J C CRAFT 603510
J DBEDDOW 590033
J DBEDDOW 590035
J L PHILLIPS 2
J WMONINGER4079
JAMES COX 543
JAMES WAYNE (DUANE)
HINERMAN 1
JESSE MCAFEE 3409
JESSE MCATEE 2
JESSE MCATTEE 1
JOHN HUPP1
KENIMOND#2W-87
KENNETH E & ARMANDA
E HULL 4076
230370
229452
229770
717108
713375
228894
653432
229445
230547
228991
669271
669206
228882
230177
618554
232347
231429
231747
715890
712607
230871
666251
231422
232524
230968
678210
678190
230859
232154
639177
188740
187822
188140
985127
979643
187264
892439
187815
188917
187361
916955
916931
187252
188547
774401
125-01943
125-01023
125-01341
125-23600
125-23396
125-00196
125-22208
125-01016
125-20150
125-00382
125-02140
125-02139
125-00182
125-01750
125-22089
Inactive/DEP
PluRRed
Active
Active
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Abandoned/DEP
Abandoned List
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
522
4
4
6
6
361
361
4
4
361
524
4
361
4
361
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.09291
40.06119
40.13343
40.06794
40.06928
40.06547
40.11225
40.05213
40.11008
40.11218
40.11196
40.11362
40.06821
40.0735
40.11764
-80.278378
-80.224528
-80.227444
-80.193467
-80.198995
-80.192675
-80.18255
-80.208881
-80.244611
-80.186506
-80.186123
-80.187553
-80.2178
-80.207583
-80.183078
-------
C-70
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
PRESTON OIL CO
CNX GAS CO LLC
EIGHTY FOUR MINING CO
UNKNOWN OPR
COLUMBIA GAS TRANS LLC
DUNN MAR OIL & GAS CO
LEATHERWOOD INC
EQUITABLE RESOURCES
EXPLORATION
DJW ENTERPRISES INC
DJW ENTERPRISES INC
DJW ENTERPRISES INC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
LSNYDERU443
LEECH NV45
LEWIS ARMSTRONG 4082
M&HONAPIUK5252
M FWHITEHILL4
M M HUPP & PEARL
HUPP1
MANKEY(FMLY ERNEST
ALEXAS) 1
MARION C JOHNSON 769
MARYJSIMS1
MARY JANE SIMS 2
MERLE &ANNABELLE
HULL1
MOJO 1H
MOJO 2H-A
MOJO 3H
MOJO4H
229064
718329
688296
712295
693636
230434
484354
229074
230660
230719
230713
738553
738553
738553
738553
231041
716994
692624
711740
696848
232411
513140
231051
232637
232696
232690
745401
736611
745633
745631
187434
987077
943861
978216
951579
188804
392861
187444
189030
189089
189083
1050634
1078498
1051011
1051009
125-00580
125-23670
125-22734
125-02225
125-02160
125-20037
125-01994
125-00619
125-20942
125-21067
125-21061
125-24542
125-24348
125-24565
125-24566
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Abandoned
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Inactive/DEP
Plugged
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
361
401
361
525
4
361
522
361
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.13348
40.06797
40.10996
40.1028
40.10701
40.06817
40.08577
40.11751
40.09056
40.09514
40.11356
40.08853
40.08875
40.08878
40.08881
-80.242539
-80.222794
-80.182586
-80.181156
-80.190442
-80.219658
-80.255628
-80.228508
-80.180806
-80.185264
-80.187861
-80.212194
-80.212667
-80.212725
-80.212786
-------
C-71
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
UNKNOWN OPR
EQT PRODUCTION CO
ELMS BROS & CO LTD
DJW ENTERPRISES INC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
MOJO G2
MOJO G3
MOJO G4
MOJO IV
MOWL1
N MCCOLLOUGH 615
NO NAME OG WELL
PEARL MILES 1
PHELAN UNIT10H
PHELAN UNIT1H
PHELAN UNIT2H
PHELAN UNIT4H
PHELAN UNIT5H
PHELAN UNIT6H
738553
738553
738553
738553
553386
229449
230052
230711
737718
720356
720356
737730
737718
737718
747479
747477
747475
733855
569821
231426
232029
232688
733150
718802
719774
733157
733156
733154
1061785
1061781
1061776
1019689
565912
187819
188422
189081
1018464
990429
992408
1018471 &
1059580
1018469
1018468
125-24629
125-24630
125-24631
125-24289
125-02058
125-01020
125-01624
125-21059
125-24273
125-23729
125-23784
125-24274
125-24275
125-24276
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active/Regulatory
Inactive Status
Inactive/DEP
Plugged
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Well
401
401
4
523
522
4
4
4
361
401
401
4
401
361
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.08863
40.08866
40.08869
40.08847
40.11748
40.06711
40.06258
40.10278
40.09084
40.08964
40.08958
40.09088
40.09102
40.09085
-80.212425
-80.212486
-80.212544
-80.2125
-80.195948
-80.197472
-80.214472
-80.181361
-80.245631
-80.24333
-80.2435
-80.245839
-80.246253
-80.2457
-------
C-72
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
LEATHERWOOD INC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
EOT PRODUCTION CO
EOT PRODUCTION CO
EOT PRODUCTION CO
EOT PRODUCTION CO
EOT PRODUCTION CO
CNX GAS CO LLC
PHELAN UNIT7H
PHELAN UNIT7H
PIEDMONT 4
POST NV15
RESERVE NV22
RESERVE NV30
SDEUNN528
S E REESE 1007
S E REESE 1009
SE REESE 787
S G MCCOLLOUGH 577
SEIRSDALE NV34
737718
737718
687630
720335
718464
718463
229444
229470
229471
229461
229448
720501
733151
734178
692163
718790
717105
717104
231421
231447
231448
231438
231425
718934
1018465
1020330
942932
990386
987276
1036568 &
987274 &
1036567 &
1036569 &
1036566
187814
187840
187841
187831
187818
990620
125-24272
125-24298
125-02157
125-23725
125-23675
125-23674
125-01015
125-01041
125-01042
125-01032
125-01019
125-23737
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
401
361
4
401
4
401
4
4
4
4
4
401
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.09081
40.09081
40.08254
40.12736
40.1037
40.10306
40.05159
40.08175
40.08368
40.08664
40.06328
40.08504
-80.245639
-80.245639
-80.262065
-80.253217
-80.235769
-80.234631
-80.211
-80.202661
-80.18775
-80.190417
-80.201253
-80.223383
-------
C-73
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
SHANKS NV12
SHANKS NV12
SHANKS NV18
SHANKS NV18
SHRADER NV52
SHRADER NV52
SIERZEGAUNIT11H
SIERZEGAUNIT12H
SIERZEGAUNIT13H
SIERZEGAUNIT14H
SIERZEGAUNIT2H
SIERZEGAUNIT3H
SIERZEGAUNIT4H
SIERZEGAUNIT5H
716068
731628
732261
715846
715962
732263
725270
725270
725270
725270
725270
725270
725270
725270
714963
728378
728918
714790
714887
728920
725419
725432
725444
725421
723203
723209
723208
723206
983690
1009813
1010675
983423
983566
1010677
1004138
1004154
1004169
1004140
999708
999721
999715
999712
125-23545
125-24038
125-24084
125-23526
125-23536
125-24081
125-23958
125-23959
125-23960
125-23961
125-23852
125-23851
125-23850
125-23849
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Plugged Well
Plugged Well
Active
Active
Plugged Well
Active
401
4
4
401
401
401
4
4
361
361
4
4
361
4
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.12687
40.12685
40.12606
40.12609
40.06505
40.06502
40.07847
40.07844
40.0785
40.07853
40.07839
40.07836
40.07839
40.07842
-80.213015
-80.213242
-80.212122
-80.211896
-80.263748
-80.263972
-80.224472
-80.224444
-80.224389
-80.224417
-80.224583
-80.224556
-80.224528
-80.224556
-------
C-74
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
EIGHTY FOUR MINING CO
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
EOT PRODUCTION CO
PRESTON OIL CO
BETTY & THOMAS
MCCOMBS
BETTY & THOMAS
MCCOMBS
PHILIP R&ROBERTGENE
CONKLIN
CARNEGIE NATURAL GAS
CO
EOT PRODUCTION CO
SIERZEGAUNIT6H
SIERZEGAUNIT7H
SIERZEGAUNIT8H
SIERZEGAUNIT9H
SOL MILES 15065
SPINNENWEBERNV49
SPINNENWEBERNV49
STEIN NV41
TJ HORN 902
TM BEBOUT768
THOMAS & BETTY
MCCOMBS 1
THOMAS & BETTY
MCCOMBS 2
TREXEL/MENTZER 11
WC&AH HORN 923
WC HORN 901
725270
725270
725270
725270
680227
715143
732259
719184
229465
230575
662224
662226
230373
228893
229464
727994
728011
724829
724841
686469
714176
728916
717733
231442
232552
673066
674041
232350
230870
231441
1009089
1009112
1003026
1003045
932731
982420
1010673
988316
187835
188945
906872
908580
188743
187263
187834
125-24024
125-24023
125-23937
125-23938
125-22476
125-23488
125-24083
125-23698
125-01036
125-20670
125-02134
125-02135
125-01946
125-00195
125-01035
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Active
Abandoned/DEP
Orphan List
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
4
4
4
4
361
401
401
401
4
361
4
4
521
361
4
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.07853
40.07856
40.07825
40.07831
40.10489
40.05212
40.05209
40.08362
40.07397
40.11825
40.11432
40.11114
40.13114
40.07568
40.08017
-80.224333
-80.224361
-80.22475
-80.224694
-80.185714
-80.22663
-80.226856
-80.275037
-80.200164
-80.231408
-80.185752
-80.186972
-80.219376
-80.212867
-80.209964
-------
C-75
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
EQT PRODUCTION CO
PETROTHERM IND CORP
LEATHERWOOD INC
EQUITABLE RESOURCES
EXPLORATION
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
WSBOOTHE759
WTZIMMERMAN-NOW
R VANCE ANDREW ET 2
WALKER FARM 2
WILLIAM B BAKER 518
X-MAN 1
X-MAN 10H
X-MAN 1H
X-MAN 2
X-MAN 2H
X-MAN 2H
X-MAN 3H
X-MAN 5H
X-MAN 7H
X-MAN Gl
X-MAN G5
229458
230540
465866
230559
746922
746922
746922
723726
746922
746922
746922
746922
746922
746922
746922
231435
232517
495092
232536
721706
754800
725917
721757
754953
736615
749075
749077
749081
749073
749140
187828
188910
373603
188929
996577
1082686
1005060
996663
1083044
1025010
1065521
1065534
1065542
1065518
1065663
125-01029
125-20143
125-01987
125-20162
125-23823
125-24825
125-23967
125-23825
125-24832
125-24347
125-24674
125-24675
125-24676
125-24673
125-24677
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
4
361
4
361
4
4
4
401
4
401
4
4
4
401
4
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.07714
40.11021
40.11967
40.09281
40.09936
40.09934
40.09939
40.08169
40.09938
40.09939
40.09939
40.09944
40.09935
40.09943
40.09939
-80.203806
-80.239069
-80.2265
-80.223911
-80.179578
-80.179408
-80.179634
-80.186717
-80.179325
-80.179667
-80.179394
-80.179672
-80.179481
-80.179603
-80.179689
-------
C-76
Table C23 Well Inventory Summary
Southwestern Pennsylvania (Washington County)
Primary Sub API Sub
Organization Farm Name Site ID ID Facility ID Number Site Status Facility # Search Area Latitude Longitude
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
PETROTHERM IND CORP
YEAGERUNIT1H
YEAGERUNIT1H
YEAGERUNIT1H
YEAGERUNIT2H
YEAGERUNIT2H
YEAGERUNIT2H
YEAGERUNIT7H
YOST NV32
ZIMMERMAN (NOW A E
LOWERY&R VANCE 1
718618
718618
718618
718618
718618
718618
718618
719392
230533
735027
717258
724197
719764
732097
735031
721768
717930
232510
1021966 &
1071810 &
1105140
987532
1001839
992380
1016535
1021986 &
1105141
996685
988682
188903
125-24314
125-23687
125-23911
125-23783
125-24240
125-24315
125-23824
125-23700
125-20136
Active
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Operator
Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Well
523
401
401
401
401
523
4
4
361
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
Southern
40.09133
40.09139
40.09136
40.09128
40.09129
40.09129
40.09153
40.07362
40.11104
-80.227842
-80.227607
-80.227833
-80.227806
-80.227797
-80.227797
-80.228111
-80.199279
-80.238311
Source:
Key:
http://www.pasda.psu.edu/uci/MetadataDisplav.aspx?entrv=PASDA&file=OilGasLocations2014 Ol.xml&dataset=283
Last accessed in September 2013.
API = American Petroleum Industry.
DEP = Department of Environmental Protection.
ID= Identification.
-------
C-77
Table C24 Number of Permitted Oil and Gas Wells in Southwestern
Pennsylvania, Northern Area
Search Area
Search Area EPA HF Study Total Number of
Radius (miles) Samples Oil and Gas Wells
Oil and Gas Wells
within 1 Mile of
EPA HF Study
Sampling Points
c
D
E
F
1
1
1
3
SWPAGW08
SWPAGW01
SWPAGW02
SWPASW01
SWPAGW04
SWPASW02
SWPAGW03
SWPAGW05
SWPAGW06
SWPAGW07
SWPAGW09
26
27
16
119
26
27
16
39
Source: PADEP database, filtered to SPUD date before 5/20/13 and populated fields only
-------
C-78
Table C25 Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area, Locations of Impoundments and Reserve Pits
EPA Sample Operator
Nearest Well Pad to Impoundment/Reserve Pit
Approximate Distance Visible in
from Sampling Point Google Earth Aerial Imagery
to Impoundment or
Reserve Pit Impoundment Reserve Pit
SWPAGW01
SWPAGW02
SWPAGW03
SWPAGW04
SWPAGW05
Range
Range
Range
Range
Range
Clingerman-Thomas Unit
Painter Unit
Paxton Isaac/Johnson Charles/ A&D Ferguson Dev Units
Best Unit
Ward Unit (reserve pit only)
Durkacs Unit
Engel Unit
Clingerman-Thomas Unit
Painter Unit (reserve pit only)
Paxton Isaac/Johnson Charles/ A&D Ferguson Dev Units
Ward Unit (reserve pit only)
Best Unit
Durkacs Unit
Engel Unit
Stewart Nancy Unit
Lehman Unit
Cams Donald (unnamed pad 0.5 mi to N)
Best Unit
Ward Unit
Cowden Unit (3H, 4H, 5H, 6H (Carter Impoundment)
Cowden Unit(lH, 2H)
Engel Unit
Durkacs Unit
Stewart Nancy Unit
Lehman Unit
Best Unit
Ward Unit
Cams Donald
2miSW
2.4 mi E
3miENE
3.4miSW
3.8miSW
4miENE
4.25 mi NE
2miSW
2.5 mi E
3miENE
3.4miSW
3.6miSW
4miENE
4.25 mi NE
0.5 mi SW
2miW
3.4miNW
4 mi S
4.4miSSE
0.3 mi N
0.75 mi NE
4miSE
4.25 SE
0.75 mi to NE
1.75 mi NW
3.3miSE
3.8miSE
3.9miNNW
10/08 - 8/12
10/08 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 8/12
10/08 - 8/12
10/08 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 8/12
10/08 - 8/12
10/08 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
10/8 - 8/12
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 8/12
10/08 - 8/12
10/08 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10-9/12
7/10-9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10-9/10
7/10-9/10
7/10-9/10
5/12-8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10-9/10
7/10-9/10
5/12-8/132
-------
C-79
Table C25 Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area, Locations of Impoundments and Reserve Pits
EPA Sample Operator
Nearest Well Pad to Impoundment/Reserve Pit
Approximate Distance Visible in
from Sampling Point Google Earth Aerial Imagery
to Impoundment or
Reserve Pit Impoundment Reserve Pit
SWPAGW06
SWPAGW07
SWPAGW08
Range
Range
Range
Lehman Unit
Margaria Raymond Unit
Margaria Paul Unit (2 impoundments)
Guy Avolio (3 impoundments and one reserve pit)
Black William
Rush John Unit
Bon-De Inc. Unit
Kearns Unit
Best Unit
Ward Unit
Lehman Unit
Margaria Raymond Unit
Margaria Paul Unit (2 impoundments)
Guy Avolio (3 impoundments and one reserve pit)
Black William
Rush John Unit
Bon-De Inc. Unit
Kearns Unit
Best Unit
Ward Unit
Best Unit Lowery William Unit
Ward Unit
Clingerman-Thomas
Bednarski Unit
Black William
l.SmiNE
2miWNW
2.75 mi W
3.5 mi WSW
3.8miSE
4miS
4miSW
4.3 mi SSW
4.4miSE
5.2miSE
l.SmiNE
2miWNW
2.75 W
3.5miSW
3.8miSE
4 mi S
4miSW
4.3 mi SSW
4.4miSE
5.2miSE
0.1 miS
0.9miNW1.0miSE
l.SmiNE
2miSW
2.1 WSW
10/08 - 8/12
5/12 - 8/12
5/12 - 8/12
9/10 - 8/12
5/12 - 8/12
9/10 - 8/12
9/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
10/08 - 8/12
5/12 - 8/12
5/12 - 8/12
9/10 - 8/12
5/12 - 8/12
9/10 - 8/12
9/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
10/08 - 8/12
7/10 - 8/12
9/10
7/10 - 9/10
9/10
7/10 - 9/10
9/10
7/10 - 9/10
9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
-------
C-80
Table C25 Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area, Locations of Impoundments and Reserve Pits
EPA Sample Operator
Nearest Well Pad to Impoundment/Reserve Pit
Approximate Distance Visible in
from Sampling Point Google Earth Aerial Imagery
to Impoundment or
Reserve Pit Impoundment Reserve Pit
SWPAGW09
SWPASW01
SWPASW02
Range
Range
Range
Lehman Unit
Margaria Raymond Unit
Margaria Paul Unit (2 impoundments)
Guy Avolio (3 impoundments and one reserve pit)
Rush John Unit
Bon-De Inc. Unit
Kearns Unit
Best Unit
Ward Unit
Clingerman-Thomas
Painter Unit
Paxton Isaac/Johnson Charles/ A&D Ferguson Dev Units
Ward Unit
Best
Durkacs Unit
Engel Unit (impoundment and reserve pit)
Cowden Unit (3H, 4H, 5H, 6H (Carter Impoundment)
(impoundment and reserve pit)
Cowden Unit(lH, 2H)
Engel Unit (impoundment and reserve pit)
Durkacs Unit
l.SmiNE
2miWNW
2.75 mi W
3.5miSW
4miS
4miSW
4.3 mi SSW
4.4miSE
5.2miSE
2miNW
2.5 mi E
3miENE
3.4miSW
3.6miSW
4miENE
4.25 mi NE
0.3 mi N
0.75 mi NE
4miSE
4.25 mi SE
10/08 - 8/12
5/12 - 8/12
5/12 - 8/12
9/10 - 8/12
5/12 - 8/12
9/10 - 8/12
9/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
10/08 - 8/12
10/08 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 8/12
10/8 - 8/12
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 8/12
9/10
9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
Source: Well Units and EPA sample locations from EPA ORD Database
-------
C-81
Table C26 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area
Number of Date of Location Search
Well Name3 API Number Inspections Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected Comment (Township) Latitude Longitude Operator Area
ANNA B JOHNSON 1
BEST UNIT 1H
BEST UNIT 2H
BEST UNIT 3H
BEST UNIT 4H
BEST UNIT 5H
BEST UNIT 6H
BEST UNIT 7H-A
HAROLD L WARD 1
HUNTER 1
LBROSUNIT1H
LBROSUNIT2H
LBROSUNIT3H
LBROSUNIT4H
LBROSUNIT5H
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT3H
LOWRY WILLIAM UNIT4H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT 1H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT2H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT3H
ODONNELL JOSEPH UNIT4H
WARD HAROLD UNIT 3H
WARD HAROLD UNIT4H
WARD HAROLD UNIT 5H
WARD HAROLD UNIT 6H
125-21461
125-23277
125-23283
125-23282
125-23284
125-23370
125-23368
125-23369
125-21460
125-21446
125-23308
125-23367
125-23696
125-23695
125-23705
125-23169
125-23326
125-24939
125-24940
125-24941
125-24942
125-24119
125-23975
125-24329
125-23974
2
6
5
6
5
5
3
2
3
1
2
2
1
1
1
6
1
5
5
2
3
10
4
4
3
01/05/90
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
02/25/10
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
02/25/10
NA
NA
NA
1. Failure to bond well, replace or maintain bond.
2. Failure to install, in a permanent manner, the permit number on a completed
well.
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
1. There is a potential for polluting substance(s) reaching Waters of the
Commonwealth and may require a permit.
2. Stream discharge of industrial waste, includes drill cuttings, oil, brine, and/or silt.
None
None
None
None
None
Compliance database record:
1. Stream discharge of industrial waste, includes drill cuttings, oil, brine, and/or salt.
2. Discharge of pollutional material to waters of Commonwealth.
None
None
None
Resolution not
recorded
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes ($49,500)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes ($49,500)
NA
NA
NA
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active/Regulatory Inactive
Status
Active
Active
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Hopewell
Hopewell
Hopewell
Hopewell
Hopewell
Hopewell
Hopewell
Hopewell
Canton
Hopewell
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Hopewell
Hopewell
Hopewell
Hopewell
Hopewell
Hopewell
Canton
Canton
Canton
Canton
40.2338250
40.2328290
40.2328010
40.2328010
40.2328010
40.2327740
40.2327740
40.2327740
40.2288810
40.2308080
40.2441620
40.2444400
40.2441620
40.2441350
40.2441350
40.2438010
40.2437730
40.2321170
40.2321940
40.2322250
40.2321500
40.2295000
40.2292780
40.2294470
40.2293890
-80.3581820
-80.3380270
-80.3379720
-80.3379160
-80.3378600
-80.3377770
-80.3376940
-80.3376380
-80.3268980
-80.3413480
-80.3416940
-80.3416380
-80.3415830
-80.3416940
-80.3416380
-80.3471110
-80.3470830
-80.3515110
-80.3514670
-80.3512920
-80.3513360
-80.3232780
-80.3232780
-80.3232810
-80.3232780
JM BEST INC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
JM BEST INC
JM BEST INC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
-------
C-82
Table C26 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area
Number of Date of Location Search
Well Name3 API Number Inspections Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected Comment (Township) Latitude Longitude Operator Area
WARD HAROLD UNIT 7H
WARD HAROLD UNIT 8H
ALEXANDER 1
ALEXANDER UNIT 1H
ALEXANDER UNIT 2
BEAUMARIAGEUNIT1H
BEAUMARIAGEUNIT2H
DEISEROTH 1
DEISEROTH 2
DEISEROTH 3
GULLAUNIT1
GULLAUNIT10H
GULLAUNIT3
GULLAUNIT5H
GULLAUNIT6
GULLAUNIT9
MCBURNEY2
MCBURNEY3
MITCHELL JAMES UNIT 1
125-23976
125-24070
125-02162
125-22366
125-22447
125-23280
125-23591
125-22088
125-22238
125-22629
125-22212
125-22941
125-22261
125-22259
125-22300
125-22639
125-22563
125-22562
125-22798
4
8
28
11
9
2
2
12
5
2
16
2
12
11
6
2
1
1
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
03/03/08
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
05/25/10
08/10/06
NA
01/10/08
10/19/07
08/10/06
03/24/08
01/10/08
10/19/07
NA
NA
NA
NA
None
None
None
No violations noted; however, two complaint inspections are still pending (dated
6/3/2009 and 6/9/2009).
1. Stream discharge of industrial waste, includes drill cuttings, oil, brine, and/or salt.
2. Discharge of pollutional material to waters of Commonwealth.
None
None
None
None
None
O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code cannot be used.
1. Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging.
2. Inadequate containment of oil tank.
None
1. Failure to implement Encroachment Plan.
2. Failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement E&S plan, maintain E&S
controls. Failure to stabilize site until total site restoration under O&G Act Section
206(c)(d).
Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging
Failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement E&S plan, maintain E&S controls.
Failure to stabilize site until total site restoration under O&G Act Section 206(c)(d).
1. Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging.
2. Failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement E&S plan, maintain E&S
controls. Failure to stabilize site until total site restoration under O&G Act Section
206(c)(d).
1. Failure to implement Encroachment Plan.
2. Failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement E&S plan, maintain E&S
controls. Failure to stabilize site until total site restoration under O&G Act Section
206(c)(d).
Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging
None
None
None
None
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes ($21,200)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes
Yes
NA
Yes
Yes ($21,200)
Yes
Yes ($21,200)
Yes
Yes ($21,200)
NA
NA
NA
NA
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Shows up as Alexander Unit 1
on eFACTS (based on permit
#)/inactive, plugged
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Active
Active
Plugged
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Canton
Canton
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
40.2293330
40.2292780
40.2829950
40.2879440
40.2833010
40.2703010
40.2703290
40.2800230
40.2844670
40.2789120
40.2758610
40.2740000
40.2727220
40.2831340
40.2724400
40.2724120
40.2883280
40.2856060
40.2764950
-80.3233060
-80.3233060
-80.3130540
-80.3141670
-80.3101370
-80.3083320
-80.3083870
-80.2919980
-80.2918590
-80.2969420
-80.3078890
-80.3183610
-80.3143890
-80.3029430
-80.3131930
-80.3086370
-80.3056370
-80.3075540
-80.3013310
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
DORSO LP
DORSO LP
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
C
C
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
-------
C-83
Table C26 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area
Number of Date of Location Search
Well Name3 API Number Inspections Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected Comment (Township) Latitude Longitude Operator Area
MITCHELL JAMES UNIT 2H
MITCHELL JAMES UNIT 4H
PEACOCK 1
PEACOCK 3
PEACOCK UNIT1H
RENZ2
COWDEN UNIT1H
COWDENUNIT2H
COWDEN UNIT 2H
COWDEN UNITS
COWDEN UNIT3H
COWDEN UNIT 4H
COWDEN UNIT 5H
COWDEN UNIT6H
DRUGMAND UNIT1H
DRUGMANDUNIT2H
DRUGMAND UNIT 3H
DRUGMAND UNIT4H
DRUGMAND UNIT5H
DRUGMAND UNIT 6H
DRUGMAND UNIT 7H
DRUGMAND UNIT8H
CARNSUNIT2
CHRISTMANUNIT1
CHRISTMANUNIT2
CHRISTMAN UNITS
125-22799
125-22801
125-22856
125-22864
125-22900
125-22205
125-23023
125-23304
125-23031
125-23022
125-23693
125-23780
125-23781
125-23782
125-23888
125-23889
125-23853
125-23890
125-23891
125-23892
125-23893
125-23894
125-22709
125-22252
125-22264
125-22431
3
5
1
0
1
8
7
2
1
2
8
11
13
9
6
4
6
6
7
8
5
4
2
8
6
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
05/10/06
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
04/30/08
NA
None
None
None
None
None
1. Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging.
2. Failure to submit completion report within 30 days of completion of well.
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
1. Discharge of pollutional material to Waters of Commonwealth.
2. Failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement E&S controls. Failure to
stabilize site until total site restoration under O&G Act Section 206(c)(d).
None
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes ($21,200)
NA
Shows up as MITCHELL JAMES
UNIT 2 on eFACTS (based on
permit #)/inactive
Active
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
40.2718290
40.2696060
40.2857730
40.2897170
40.2838010
40.2769120
40.3301060
40.3301060
40.3270220
40.3334670
40.3281330
40.3280830
40.3280830
40.3280830
40.3203060
40.3203610
40.3203890
40.3204440
40.3203890
40.3204720
40.3202780
40.3203330
40.2805790
40.2689120
40.2653890
40.2709400
-80.2982200
-80.3017760
-80.2983590
-80.2980810
-80.2977480
-80.2863030
-80.2817470
-80.2816920
-80.2836360
-80.2839420
-80.2958870
-80.2959440
-80.2960560
-80.2960000
-80.3023330
-80.3023060
-80.3022780
-80.3022220
-80.3022220
-80.3021670
-80.3023060
-80.3022780
-80.3799730
-80.3711390
-80.3662220
-80.3637220
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
D
D
D
D
D
D
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
F
F
F
F
-------
C-84
Table C26 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area
Number of Date of Location Search
Well Name3 API Number Inspections Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected Comment (Township) Latitude Longitude Operator Area
CHRISTMANUNIT6
COSTANZOUNIT1H
COSTANZO UNIT2H
COWDEN 40
COWDEN 41
COWDEN 41
COWDEN 46
COWDEN 47
COWDEN 47H
COWDEN 48
COWDEN 48
COWDEN 48H
COWDEN 50
COWDEN 51
COWDEN 53
COWDEN 75
COWDEN 76
COWDEN 76
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 1
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 11H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 12H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 14H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 15H
125-22434
125-23803
125-23804
125-23161
125-23537
125-23171
125-22957
125-22958
125-23271
125-23270
125-22959
125-23429
125-23070
125-22960
125-22961
125-23376
125-23515
125-23377
125-22420
125-24148
125-24147
125-24146
125-24149
1
4
3
6
9
7
6
1
5
6
1
10
5
5
5
5
9
8
2
3
3
3
4
NA
NA
NA
03/24/10
06/02/10
06/02/10
03/30/09
NA
04/01/10
10/01/08
NA
11/12/09
NA
10/29/08
10/29/08
03/24/10
06/02/10
06/02/10
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
None
None
None
Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging.
Compliance database record:
Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging.
Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging.
There is a potential for polluting substance(s) reaching Waters of the
Commonwealth and may require a permit.
None
Discharge of pollutional material to Waters of Commonwealth.
1. There is a potential for polluting substance(s) reaching Waters of Commenwealth
and may require a permit.
2. Failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement E&S plan, maintain E&S
controls. Failure to stabilize site until total site restoaration under O&G Act Section
206(c)(d).
None
1. There is a potential for polluting substance(s) reaching Waters of Commenwealth
and may require a permit.
2. Failure to take all necessary measures to prevent spill. Inadequate diking,
potential pollution.
None
1. Failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement E&S plan, maintain E&S
controls. Failue to stablize site until total site restoration under O&G Act Section
206(c)(d).
2. Drilling within 100 feet of surface water or wetland without variance.
Failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement E&S plan, maintain E&S controls.
Failue to stablize site until total site restoration under O&G Act Section 206(c)(d).
Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging.
Compliance database record:
1. Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging.
2. Failure to achieve permanent stabilization of earth disturbance activity.
1. Failure to achieve permanent stabilization of earth disturbance activity.
2. Failure to restore site within 9 months of completion of drilling or plugging.
None
None
None
None
None
NA
NA
NA
Yes ($37,500)
Yes
($37,500)
Yes
($37,500)
Yes
NA
Yes ($17,500)
Yes ($58,000)
NA
Yes ($45,000)
NA
Yes ($58,000)
Yes ($58,000)
Yes ($37,500)
Yes
($37,500)
Yes
($37,500)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Inactive/Plugged
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Active/Regulatory Inactive
Status
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Active/Regulatory Inactive
Status
Active/Regulatory Inactive
Status
Active/Regulatory Inactive
Status
Active/Regulatory Inactive
Status
Active/Regulatory Inactive
Status
Active
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Inactive/Plugged
Active
Active
Active
Active
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
40.2660510
40.2667780
40.2668330
40.2804670
40.2811340
40.2794120
40.2721340
40.2693840
40.2693840
40.2689680
40.2689680
40.2689680
40.2704120
40.2747450
40.2700790
40.2694120
40.2691340
40.2689680
40.2680510
40.2770830
40.2771310
40.2770470
40.2771810
-80.3588330
-80.3547780
-80.3547780
-80.3611670
-80.3659450
-80.3686950
-80.3841950
-80.3851950
-80.3851950
-80.3904730
-80.3904730
-80.3904730
-80.3981680
-80.3912790
-80.4020850
-80.3850010
-80.3903900
-80.3902790
-80.3476380
-80.3497640
-80.3497970
-80.3496970
-80.3498310
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
CHEVRON APPALACHIA
LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
ATLAS RESOURCES LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
-------
C-85
Table C26 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area
Number of Date of Location Search
Well Name3 API Number Inspections Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected Comment (Township) Latitude Longitude Operator Area
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 16H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 2A
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 3
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 4
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 6
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 7
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 8
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 8H
OHIO VALLEY LBC UNIT 9
RUKAVINAUNIT1H
RUKAVINAUNIT2H
RUKAVINAUNIT3H
RUKAVINAUNIT4H
RUKAVINAUNIT5H
STEWART NANCY UNIT 1
STEWART NANCY UNIT 4
STEWART NANCY UNIT 6
STEWART NANCY UNIT 8
BEST IMPOUNDMENT DAM
CARTER IMPOUNDMENT DAM
125-24144
125-22414
125-22415
125-22433
125-22495
125-22670
125-22671
125-24145
125-22662
125-23925
125-23928
125-23929
125-23930
125-23931
125-22619
125-22641
125-22688
125-22669
95-7-60915-2°
95-7-60915-8°
5
5
3
4
3
2
3
6
2
4
5
5
5
5
2
3
4
7
8
16
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
06/20/11
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
06/28/11
NA
03/17/10
03/21/11
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
1. Failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of a residual waste.
2. Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent
pollution of the Waters of the Commonwealth.
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
eFACTS database record:
1. Unlawful management of residual solid waste.
Compliance database record:
1. Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial waste or residual waste to
prevent pollution of the waters of the Commonwealth.
None
1. Failure of storage operator to maintain and/or submit required information, such
as maps, well records, integrity testing information, pressure data.
2. Impoundment not structurally sound, impermeable, 3rd party protected, greater
than 20 inches of seasonal high ground water table.
1. Failur to properly store, transport, process or dispose of a residual waste.
2. Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent
pollution of the waters of the Commonwealth.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes
($59,000)
NA
Yes ($49,500)
Yes ($59,000)
Active
Inactive/Plugged
Inactive/Plugged
Inactive/Plugged
Inactive/Plugged
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Cross Creek
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Mount
Pleasant
Hopewell
Mount
Pleasant
40.2770330
40.2751340
40.2766900
40.2712180
40.2743560
40.2719680
40.2775790
40.2772280
40.2799400
40.2655280
40.2654720
40.2653330
40.2654440
40.2653890
40.2848840
40.2846900
40.2833010
40.2882730
40.2321410
40.3296430
-80.3497310
-80.3429440
-80.3543060
-80.3535000
-80.3488610
-80.3452770
-80.3460270
-80.3498640
-80.3513890
-80.3627500
-80.3627220
-80.3626110
-80.3626940
-80.3626670
-80.3515270
-80.3465270
-80.3433050
-80.3454440
-80.3411830
-80.2990320
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIALLC
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
C
E
-------
C-86
Table C26 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Northern Area
Well Name3
Number of Date of
API Number Inspections Violation
Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector
Corrected
Comment
(Township) Latitude
Source: Pennsylvania DEP website eFACTS at http://www.ahs.dep.pa.gov/eFACTSWeb/criteria_site.aspx (Last accessed: January 2014)
Notes:
3 - This table does not include wells that are reported as "proposed but never materialized" or "operator reported not drilled", if there were no inspections performed at the proposed well sites.
b- Dollar amount shown indicates fine assessed.
- Centralized impoundment dam permit number.
Key:
API = American Petroleum Institute
eFACTS = Pennsylvania Environmental Facility Application Compliance Tracking System
E&S = Erosion and Sedimentation
NA- Not applicable
O&G = Oil&Gas
PADEP = Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
SWPA = Southwest Pennsylvania
-------
C-87
Table C27 Notice of Violations. Identified Potential Candidate Causes and Distances from EPA Sampling Points
Southwest Pennsylvania, Northern Area
EPA Sampling Point EPA Sampling Point EPA Sampling Point EPA Sampling Point
Search Distance Distance Distance Distance
Well API Number Latitude Longitude Area ID (miles) ID (miles) ID (miles) ID (miles)
LOWRY WILLIAM
UNIT3H
ALEXANDER
UNIT 2
CHRISTMAN
UNIT 2
COWDEN 47H
Ohio Valley LBC
UnitSH
BEST
IMPOUNDMENT
DAM
CARTER
IMPOUNDMENT
DAM
125-23169
125-22447
125-22264
125-23271
125-24145
95-7-60915-2a
95-7-60915-8a
40.2438010
40.2833000
40.2653880
40.2693840
40.2772280
40.2321410
40.3296430
-80.3471100
-80.3101370
-80.3662220
-80.3851950
-80.3498640
-80.3411830
-80.2990320
C
D
F
F
F
C
E
SWPAGW08
SWPASW01
SWPAGW05
SWPAGW07
SWPAGW05
SWPAGW08
SWPAGW04
0.8
0.6
1.0
0.8
0.4
0.1
0.3
SWPAGW05
SWPAGW02
SWPAGW07
SWPAGW06
SWPAGW03
SWPASW02
2.4
0.6
1.8
0.9
0.9
0.4
SWPAGW01
SWPAGW01
SWPAGW06
SWPAGW09
3.1
0.8
1.9
0.9
SWPAGW02
SWPAGW03
SWPAGW09
SWPAGW05
3.2
1.8
1.9
1.6
Notes:
a - Centralized impoundment dam permit number.
-------
C-88
Table C28 Environmental Database Review Summary,
Southwestern Pensylvannia, Southern Area
Potential Candidate Cause
Database Name of Facility Site Location and Address Distance from Nearest Sampling Point Yes/No | Justification Groundwater Wells
RCRA-SQG, US HIST AUTO
STAT, FINDS, MANIFEST
RCRA-CESQG, FINDS
4ERNS
2 ERNS, SPILL
LUST, UST
UST
RCRA Non-Gen/NLR
TSCA
ICIS, FINDS
ICIS, FINDS
FINDS
FINDS, NPDES
FINDS, NPDES
FINDS
FINDS, NPDES
FINDS, NPDES
FINDS, NPDES
FINDS, NPDES
FINDS
NADALIN AUTO BODY
DEANS WATER SVC
Private Residence
Private Residence
AMWELLTWP ROAD DEPT
LONE PINE 1 STOP
MARKWESTTUPTA-DAY COMPRESSOR
SPARTECH POLYCOM
AMWELL TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY
AMWELL TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY
MARK WEST BAKER COMPRESSOR STATION
ROGERS SRSTP
LANESRSTP
TRINITY SOUTH ELSCH
DAY SR STP
HATFIELD SRSTP
MORRIS ELISABETH
WINTERS SRSTP
GLEN MEADOW MHP
1280 Banetown Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
1007 Amity Ridge Rd.
Amity, PA 15311
1085 McAdams Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
121HeadleyRd.
Washington, PA 15301
1473 Amity Ridge Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
1748 Amity Ridge Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
200 Johnson Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
470 Johnson Road
Washington, PA 15301
1172 Amity Ridge Rd.
Amity, PA 15311
885 Amity Ridge Rd.
Amity, PA 15311
151 Baker Station Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
3050 Bedillion Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
2925 Bedillion Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
2500 S. Main Street
Washington, PA 15301
39 Sturge Rd.
Amity, PA 15311
35 Sturge Hollow Rd.
Amity, PA 15311
559 Waynesburg Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
124 Mowl Rd.
Washington Boro, PA 15301
1 Laurie Lane
Washington, PA 15301
1.68 mi. NNW of SWPAGW13
1.84 mi. SEofSWPAGWll
0.6 mi. SofSWPAGWIO
0.69 mi. ESE of SWPASW03
1.17 mi. ENEofSWPAGW13
2.61 mi. ESEofSWPAGW12
1.48 mi. NNE of SWPAGW13
1.64 mi. NNE of SWPAGW13
1.54 mi. ESEofSWPAGWll
2.38 mi. SSEofSWPAGWll
0.68 mi. SEofSWPAGWll
1.13 mi. WSW of SWPAGW11
1.3 mi. WSW of SWPAGW11
1.62 mi. NEofSWPAGW13
1.34 mi. SSW of SWPAGW11
1.36 mi. SSW of SWPAGW11
2.58 mi. NNE of SWPAGW13
2.88 mi. NEofSWPAGW13
2.8 mi. NofSWPAGW13
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Site included due to potential for contamination.
Handled lead waste. Lead is generally not mobile in subsurface soils, therefore not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from the nearest sampling point.
ERNS - On 3/10/11 a caller stated that a retaining pond with frac water has overflowed,
releasing the water onto the ground, and it is flowing toward the private residence and a
drinking water well.
ERNS - On 3/10/11, a caller stated that there was a tanker in the street, and when the
caller came by the area there was some white cloth material in the road, a crew was trying
to contain the chemicals that were coming out of the truck, the material was running out
into the road and where the cattle are, and into the field nearby.
ERNS- On 4/29/11 Range Resources reportedly dumped 25 trucks of frac water in a pond
with a leaking liner. The site address is near the Yeager impoundment.
ERNS - On 10/13/11 a caller reported a strong odor from the nearby pond
ERNS - On 6/4/11 a caller reported that the frac pond was overflowing into the stream on
the property. The caller stated that there were rainbow, rusty, and black sheens, with
heavy sediments as well. It was also reported that there was a strong odor as well.
Discharge to the stream was also noted in May.
ERNS - On 6/4/11, a caller reported that there is a fracing pond with a runoff pond and it
has been trenched into a creek. Caller stated that top soil, silt, and some kind of foamy oil
material was going into the north fork of Bane Creek from the runoff pond. Caller also
stated there are gas pipelines below the fracing pond and they did not mitigate it.
Spilled material: unknown oil
Medium affected: Water - North Fork of Bane Creek (Tributary: Monongahela River)
Two leaking USTs, one gasoline and one diesel. Site included due to potential for
contamination.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Methanol waste handling. Site included due to potential for contamination.
Toxic material importer (Carbon Black, Cristobalite, and Kieselguhr); no releases recorded,
therefore not a likely source of contamination.
Administrative order violations from a government entity. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Administrative order violations from a government entity. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Compressor station; site included due to potential for contamination.
In database for NPDES program. No violations recorded.
In database for NPDES program. No violations recorded.
Elementary school; no violations cited. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
In database for NPDES program. No violations recorded.
In database for NPDES program. No violations recorded.
In database for NPDES program. No violations recorded. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
In database for NPDES program. No violations recorded. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Mobile home park that participates in the Safe Drinking Water Program. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
16 Federal USGS Wells
1 Federal FRDS Public
Water Supply System
173 State Wells
-------
Co
-G
Table C28 Environmental Database Review Summary,
Southwestern Pensylvannia, Southern Area
Potential Candidate Cause
Database Name of Facility Site Location and Address Distance from Nearest Sampling Point Yes/No | Justification Groundwater Wells
MANIFEST
US MINES
US MINES
US HIST AUTO STAT
US HIST AUTO STAT
US HIST AUTO STAT
US HIST AUTO STAT
US HIST CLEANERS
Orphan CERCLIS-NFRAP
Orphan CERCLIS-NFRAP
Orphan LUST
Orphan LUST
Orphan FINDS, RCRA-NLR
Orphan FINDS, RCRA-CESQG
MANIFEST
Orphan FINDS, RCRA-CESQG
Orphan FINDS, RCRA-CESQG,
MANIFEST
Orphan FINDS
Orphan FINDS
Orphan MANIFEST
Orphan FINDS
Orphan ICIS
Orphan RMP
Orphan RMP
Orphan FINDS, RMP
Orphan FINDS
Orphan UST
RANGE RESOURCES
LONE PINE
LONE PINE NORTH
NADALIN AUTO BODY
SUNOCO FLEET FUEL CARD
LONE PINE EXXON
RON SMITHS AUTO REPAIR
ALL PRO CARPET & UPHOLSTERY CLEANERS
FALCON 1 RTE 18
MARTIN, WILLIAM H LANDFILL
PPLELIMSPORTSUBSTA
WASHINGTONOPRCTR
COURTNEY CONTRACTING CORP
CESSNA AUTO BODY
WASHINGTON ARMORY
KENNY'S BODY SHOP
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF PA INC.
WASHINGTON ENGR & CONSTR
COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION
WASHINGTON PENN PLASTIC CO INC
WHEELING PITTSBURGH STEEL CORP
ALLEGHENY LUDLUM CORPORATION - WAS
WASHINGTON STEEL- WASHINGTON PLAN
WASHINGTON - EAST WASHINGOTN JOINT A
WASHINGTON COUNTY
PITT OHIO TERM
1153 McAdams Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
Brush Run Rd.
Amwell Twp., PA
Brush Run Rd.
Amwell Twp., PA
1260 Banetown Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
841 Amity Ridge Rd.
Amity, PA 15311
1748 Amity Ridge Rd.
Washington, PA 15301
20 Big Block Blvd.
Washington, PA 15301
660 Old Post Rd.
Prosperity, PA 15329
Route 18
Washington, PA 15301
North Main St. Ext
Washington, PA 15301
Route 54
Washington, PA
Route 19
Washington, PA
RD 2 Box 239 Route 136
Washington, PA 15301
1515 Route 136
78 Maiden St.
3445 Route 40 West
Washington Hauling
P.O. Box 1203
Route 40 Redd Farm M&R
Station
V-bat Plastics Div
Allenport Plant-Allenport Boro
Woodland and Griffith Avenues
Woodland and Griffith Avenues
102 Arden Station Road
Washington County Airport
Route 136 N
0.13 mi. SofSWPAGW13
>3.1mi. SEofSWPAGW12
>3.1mi. SEofSWPAGW12
1.7 mi. NNW of SWPAGW13
2.6 mi. SEofSWPAGWll
1.6 mi. NEofSWPAGW13
2.9 mi. NEofSWPAGW13
1.3 mi. SWofSWPAGWll
>3mi. WofSWPAGW13
Nl
Nl
>lmi. NEofSWPAGW13
>5.3mi. SEofSWPAGWOS
6.7 mi. NEofSWPAGW13
5.3 mi. NNW of SWPAGW-13
4 mi. NEofSWPAGW13
>7mi. NWofSWPAGW13
Nl
>5.9mi. SofSWPAGWOS
>6mi. EofSWPAGW13
>20mi. EofSWPAGW12
>6mi. NofSWPAGW13
>6mi. NofSWPAGW13
>8mi. NofSWPAGW13
>4.0 mi. NW of SWPAGW14
>6mi. NEofSWPAGW13
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Metal drums, barrels, and kegs reported. Site included due to potential for contamination.
Abandoned mine. Location determined from 1982 USGS topographic map. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Abandoned mine. Location determined from 1982 USGS topographic map. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site in historical directory as a potential gas station/filling station/service station site. Site
included due to potential for contamination.
Site in historical directory as a potential gas station/filling station/service station site. Not
a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site in historical directory as a potential gas station/filling station/service station site. Site
included due to potential for contamination.
Site in historical directory as a potential gas station/filling station/service station site. Not
a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Site included due to potential for contamination.
Brownfield site. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest
sampling point.
Site included due to potential for contamination.
Leaking UST, cleanup completed, stored media unknown. Site included due to potential
for contamination.
UST containing petroleum, cleanup completed. Site included due to potential for
contamination.
Hazardous waste transport; no violations recorded. Not a likely source of contamination
due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Violation for not submitting a discharge monitoring report for discharging gasoline-
contaminated water from a remediation system. Site included due to potential for
contamination.
Columbia Gas shipped or received a non-listed ignitable waste. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
In database for NPDES program. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Hydrogen fluoride/hydrofluoric acid gas release. Not a likely source of contamination due
to distance from nearest sampling point.
Hydrogen fluoride/hydrofluoric acid gas release. Not a likely source of contamination due
to distance from nearest sampling point.
Sewage Treatment Facility. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Listed on national emissions inventory database associated with airports and flying fields.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Diesel UST. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling
point.
-------
C-90
Table C28
Environmental Database Review Summary,
Southwestern Pensylvannia, Southern Area
Database
Name of Facility
Site Location and Address Distance from Nearest Sampling Point
Yes/No
Potential Candidate Caus
Justification
Groundwater Wells
Primary Source: Environmental records search report by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR)/EDR Inquiry Number: 3589255.2s
EDR Search Radius: 3 miles with EDR Center of Search: Latitude 40.0915000 - 40° 5' 29.40", Longitude 80.2281000 - 80° 13' 41.16"
Other Sources: Pennsylvania eFacts website, EPA envirofacts website, and http://mines.findthedata.Org/d/s/Pennsylvania. Last accessed in January 2014.
Notes:
ORPHAN SITE: A site of potential environmental interest that appear in the records search but due to incomplete location information (i.e., address and coordinates) is unmappable and not included in the records search report provided by EDR Inc.
Key:
ENE = East-northeast. NPDES = National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
ESE = East-southeast. PA = Pennsylvania.
FRDS= Federal Reporting Data System. S= South.
mi = Mile. SE= Southeast.
Nl = No information. SSE = South-southeast.
N= North. SSW= South-southwest.
NE= Northeast. USGS = United States Geological Survey.
NNE= North-northeast. LIST = Underground storage tank.
NNW= North-northwest. W= West.
NW= Northwest. WSW = West-southwest.
Databases:
AST: Aboveground Storage Tank Listing. The data come from the Department of Health & Consolidated Laboratories' AST Data (Facility & Owner Address of the Tanks Currently Recorded in North Dakota).
CERCLIS-NFRAP: Federal CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System) NFRAP (No Further Remedial Action Planned) site list
ERNS: The Emergency Response Notification System records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA.
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
I CIS: Integrated Compliance Information System. ICIS supports the information needs of the national enforcement and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program.
LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the Department of Environmental Resources' List of Confirmed Releases.
MANIFEST - Hazardous waste manifest information
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Listing
RCRA-CESQG - Federal RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator List. Conditionally exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs)generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month). RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data
supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
RCRA NonGen / NLR: RCRA) Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste.
RCRA SQG: RCRA small quantity generators (SQGs generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month.). RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
RMP = Risk Management Plans.
SPILLS: Records of Emergency Release Reports
TIER 2: Listing of Tier 2 information.
TSCA: Database of Toxic Substances Control Act manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant site. The United States Environmental Protection Agency has no current plan to update and/or re-issue this database.
Hist Auto Stat: EDR's database of listings of potential gas station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR researchers.
US HIST CLEANERS: EDR's database of listings of drycleaner facility locations that were available to EDR researchers.
US MINES: Mines Master Index File. The source of this database is the Dept. of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data come from the Department of Environmental Resources' Regulated Underground Storage Tank Listing.
-------
C-91
Table C29 Number of Permitted Oil and Gas Wells in Southwestern
Pennsylvania, Southern Area
Search Area
Search Area
Radius (miles)
Southern
EPA HF Study Total Number of
Samples Oil and Gas Wells
SWPAGW10
SWPAGW11
SWPAGW12
SWPAGW13
SWPAGW14
SWPAGW15
SWPAGW16
SWPAGW17
SWPASW03
152
Oil and Gas Wells
within 1 Mile of
EPA HF Study
Sampling Points
33
Source: PADEP database, filtered to SPUD date before 5/20/13 and populated fields only
-------
C-92
Table C30 Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern Area, Locations of Impoundments and
Reserve Pits
EPA Sample Operator
Approximate Distance
Nearest Well Pad to from Sampling Point to
Impoundment/Reserve Impoundment/Reserve
Pit Pit
Visible in
Google Earth Aerial Imagery
Impoundment
Reserve Pit
SWPAGW10
SWPAGW11
SWPAGW12
SWPAGW13
Range
Rice
Rice
Rice
Range
Range
Range
Rice
Rice
Rice
Range
Range
Range
Rice
Rice
Rice
Range
Range
Range
Rice
Rice
Rice
Range
Range
Yeager Unit
Mojo Unit
Hulk Unit
X-Man Unit
Day Unit
Bedillion-Day Unit
Yeager Unit
Mojo Unit
Hulk Unit
X-Man Unit
Day Unit
Bedillion-Day Unit
Yeager Unit
Mojo Unit
Hulk Unit
X-Man Unit
Day Unit
Bedillion-Day Unit
Yeager Unit
Mojo Unit
Hulk Unit
X-Man Unit
Day Unit
Bedillion-Day Unit
0.2 NE
ImiENE
2.5 mi ESE
2.8miNE
2.6miNE
1.9miNNE
0.3miNNE
ImiNE
2.5 mi E
2.8miNE
2.8miNE
2.1miNNE
0.1 miNNE
0.9miENE
2.4 mi ESE
2.9miNE
2.6miNE
1.9 miNNE
0.25 mi SSE
1 mi ESE
2.5 mi ESE
2.75 ENE
2.3miNE
1.6 miNNE
7/10 - 8/12
8/12
8/12
7/10-9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
8/12
8/12
7/10-9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
8/12
8/12
7/10-9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
8/12
8/12
7/10-9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
-------
C-93
Table C30 Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern Area, Locations of Impoundments and
Reserve Pits
EPA Sample Operator
Approximate Distance
Nearest Well Pad to from Sampling Point to
Impoundment/Reserve Impoundment/Reserve
Pit Pit
Visible in
Google Earth Aerial Imagery
Impoundment
Reserve Pit
SWPAGW14
SWPAGW15
SWPAGW16
SWPAGW17
Range
Rice
Rice
Rice
Range
Range
Range
Rice
Rice
Rice
Range
Range
Range
Rice
Rice
Rice
Range
Range
Range
Rice
Rice
Rice
Range
Range
Yeager Unit
Mojo Unit
Hulk Unit
X-Man Unit
Day Unit
Bedillion-Day Unit
Yeager Unit
Mojo Unit
Hulk Unit
X-Man Unit
Day Unit
Bedillion-Day Unit
Yeager Unit
Mojo Unit
Hulk Unit
X-Man Unit
Day Unit
Bedillion-Day Unit
Yeager Unit
Mojo Unit
Hulk Unit
X-Man Unit
Day Unit
Bedillion-Day Unit
0.27 mi SSE
0.96 mi ESE
2.52 mi ESE
2.77 ENE
2.3miNE
1.65miNNE
0.13 NE
0.91 mi ENE
2.43 mi ESE
2.79 mi NE
2.56 mi NE
1.93miNNE
0.21miNNE
.97miNE
2.45 mi E
2.84 mi NE
2.66 mi NE
2miNNE
0.58miNNE
1.27 mi NE
2.63 mi E
3.16miNE
3miNE
2.35miNNE
7/10 - 8/12
8/12
8/12
7/10-9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
8/12
8/12
7/10-9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
8/12
8/12
7/10-9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 8/12
8/12
8/12
7/10-9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
-------
C-94
Table C30 Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern Area, Locations of Impoundments and
Reserve Pits
EPA Sample Operator
Approximate Distance
Nearest Well Pad to from Sampling Point to
Impoundment/Reserve Impoundment/Reserve
Pit Pit
Visible in
Google Earth Aerial Imagery
Impoundment
Reserve Pit
SWPASW03
Range
Rice
Rice
Rice
Range
Range
Yeager Unit
Mojo Unit
Hulk Unit
X-Man Unit
Day Unit
Bedillion-Day Unit
0.1 miNE
ImiENE
2.5 mi ESE
2.8 miNE
2.6 miNE
1.9miNNE
7/10 - 8/12
8/12
8/12
7/10-9/10
7/10 - 8/12
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
7/10 - 9/10
Source: Well data and EPA sampling locations from EPA ORD database.
-------
C-95
Table C31 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern Area
Number of Date of Location
Farm Name3 API Number Inspections Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected1" Comment (Township) Longitude Latitude Operator
BAKER 1 OG
WELL1
BAKER 2 OG
WELL 2
BAKER R&M 1A
DAY L&L UNIT
1H
DAY L&L UNIT
3H
DAY L&L UNIT 2H
DAY L&L UNIT 4H
MOJO IV
MOJO 1H
MOJO 2H-A
MOJO3H
MOJO 4H
MOJO G2
MOJO G3
MOJO G4
MOJO
Freshwater Pit
PHELANUNIT4H
PHELANUNIT6H
PHELANUNIT7H
PHELAN UNIT
10H
RESERVE NV22
OG WELL 22
SIERZEGAUNIT
2H
125-23403
125-23402
125-23471
125-24207
125-24175
125-24046
125-24045
125-24289
125-24542
125-24348
125-24565
125-24566
125-24629
125-24630
125-24631
NA
125-24274
125-24276
125-24298
125-24273
125-23675
125-23852
0
0
1
6
6
5
3
3
3
8
2
3
1
1
3
Nl
8
1
1
1
0
11
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8/14/12
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
12/9/10
NA
NA
None
None
None
None
None
1. Failure to submit completion report within 30 days of completion of well.
2. Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
NA
None
Compliance record indicates that on 1/29/11: Responded to 7:30 pm call about a possible well control issue at
this Marcellus well.
While drilling with air an unexpected amount of gas was encountered at 7525 feet.
Range implemented a soft shut in.
Universal pumped 726 bbls of 12.9# to 14.5# mud and the well had 0# pressure at 10:30 pm. The well will be
monitored throughout the night.
None
None
None
NA
1. Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent pollution of the Waters of the
Commonwealth.
2. Failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of a residual waste.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Addressed
Through
Enforcement
($3,800)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes ($18,025)
Violations
immediately
corrected
Active
Active
Plugged
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator Reported
Not Drilled
Operator Reported
Not Drilled
Active
ESCGP expedited
Active
Inactive (plugged)
Inactive (plugged)
Inactive (plugged)
Active
Active
Amwell
Amwell _
Amwell _
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell _
Amwell _
Amwell
South Franklin
South Franklin
South Franklin
South Franklin
Amwell
Amwell _
80.2188710
80.2188710
-80.2223290
-80.2457
-80.245747
-80.245667
-80.245611
-80.2125000
-80.2121940
-80.2126670
-80.2127250
-80.2127860
80.2124250
80.2124860
-80.2125440
-80.2458390
-80.2457000
-80.2456390
-80.2456310
80.2357690
-80.2245830
40.0803340
40.0803340
40.0803030
40.075811
40.075769
40.075861
40.075889
40.0884720
40.0885280
40.0887500
40.0887810
40.0888110
40.0886330
40.0886640
40.0886920
40.0908750
40.0908470
40.0908080
40.0908360
40.1036970
40.0783890
T&F EXPLORATION LP
T&F EXPLORATION LP
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLINGS LLC
RICE DRILLINGS LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RICE DRILLING B LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
CNX GAS CO LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-96
Table C31 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern Area
Number of Date of Location
Farm Name3 API Number Inspections Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected1" Comment (Township) Longitude Latitude Operator
SIERZEGAUNIT
3H
SIERZEGAUNIT
4H
SIERZEGAUNIT
5H
SIERZEGAUNIT
6H
SIERZEGAUNIT
7H
SIERZEGAUNIT
8H
SIERZEGAUNIT
9H
SIERZEGAUNIT
11H
SIERZEGAUNIT
12H
SIERZEGAUNIT
13H
SIERZEGAUNIT
14H
WILLIAM B
BAKER 518 WELL
518
YEAGERUNIT1H
YEAGERUNIT1H
YEAGARUNIT2H
125-23851
125-23850
125-23849
125-24024
125-24023
125-23937
125-23938
125-23958
125-23959
125-23960
125-23961
125-20162
125-23911
125-24314
125-23783
7
5
7
9
5
3
5
5
5
4
5
0
3
3
2
12/29/10
1/3/11
1/13/11
8/30/11
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1. Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent pollution of the Waters of the
Commonwealth.
2. Failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of a residual waste.
Compliance database record indicates this was due to: Incident- Response to Accident or Event.
1. Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent pollution of the Waters of the
Commonwealth.
2. Failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of a residual waste.
1. Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent pollution of the Waters of the
Commonwealth.
2. Failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of a residual waste.
3. Stream discharge of industrial waste, includes drill cuttings, oil, brine and/or silt.
Violations outstanding linked to inspection 1963840, ENF#269290 on 1/13/11
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
NA
None
None
None
Yes ($59,000)
Yes ($26,250)
Noted &
Immediately
Corrected
Yes ($26,250)
Yes ($26,250)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Active
Inactive (plugged)
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive (plugged)
Inactive (plugged)
Inactive
Active/
Spudded on
12/23/10, but not
developed.
Active/
Spudded on
12/23/10, but not
developed.
Regulatory Inactive
Status/ Spudded on
12/23/10, but not
developed
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
-80.2245560
-80.2245280
-80.2245560
-80.2243330
-80.2243610
-80.2247500
-80.2246940
-80.2244720
-80.2244440
-80.2243890
-80.2244170
80.2188710
-80.2278330
-80.2278420
-80.2278060
40.0783610
40.0783890
40.0784170
40.0785280
40.0785560
40.0782500
40.0783060
40.0784720
40.0784440
40.0785000
40.0785280
40.0803340
40.0913610
40.0913280
40.0912780
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
EQUITABLE RESOURCES
EXPLORATION
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-97
Table C31 Notice of Violations Summary, Southwestern Pennsylvania, Southern Area
Number of Date of Location
Farm Name3 API Number Inspections Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected1" Comment (Township) Longitude Latitude Operator
YEAGARUNIT2H
YEAGARUNIT7H
Yeager
Centralized
Impoundment
Dam
125-24315
125-23824
NA
4
16
129
NA
3/25/10
2/8/11
7/14/11
8/30/10
None
Oil & Gas Act 223 - General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code cannot be used.
Compliance database: Failed to control and dispose waste (78.54) (not in eFacts)
1. Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent pollution of the Waters of the
Commonwealth.
2. Failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of a residual waste.
1. Stream discharge of industrial waste includes drill cuttings, oil, brine and/or silt.
Compliance database record:
Entered on 10/11/13 as an Admin/File Review inspection (there is no paper inspection report) for inspection
done on 7/14/11; there is no CEI for this as this incident was corrected and addressed through enforcement.
(CACP)
Observed Deans Water Service truck discharging water into abandoned well pit area; called Range and was
informed this was to determine communication possibilities. Observed second truck arrive on site.
1. Failure to properly store, transport, process or dispose of a residual waste.
2. Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent pollution of the waters of the
Commonwealth.
NA
Yes ($49,500)
Yes ($18,025)
Yes ($22,250),
addressed
through
enforcement
Resolution
not recorded
Active
Active
NA
Amwell
Amwell
Amwell
-80.2277970
-80.228111
-80.2609940
40.0912860
40.091528
40.0895360
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
RANGE RESOURCES
APPALACHIA LLC
Source: Pennsylvania DEP website eFACTS at http://www.ahs.dep.pa.gov/eFACTSWeb/criteria_site.aspx - last accessed in January 2014
http://www.depreportingservices.state.pa.us/ReportServer/Pages/ReportViewer.aspx?%2fOil_Gas%2fOG_Compliance&rs:Command=Render- Accessed January 2014.
Notes:
aThis table does not include wells that are reported as "proposed but never materialized" or "operator reported not drilled", if there were no inspections performed at the proposed well sites.
bDollar amount shown indicates fine assessed. Fine may apply to multiple sites/facilities.
Key:
API = American Petroleum Industry.
bbl= Barrel.
CACP = Consent Assessment of Civil Penalty.
CEI = Compliance Evaluation Inspection.
DEP = Department of Environmental Protection.
NA= Not applicable.
Nl = No information available.
O&G = Oil and Gas.
PA= Pennsylvania.
-------
C-98
Table C32
Notable Notice of Violations - Identified Potential
Candidate Causes and Distances (less than 2 Miles) to
EPA Sampling Points,
Southwestern Pennsylvania. Southern Area
EPA Sampling Point
Well Latitude Longitude ID Distance (miles)
YeagerUnit7H
Yeager Impoundment
Sierzega Unit 2H
40.091527
40.089536
40.078388
-80.228111
-80.260994
-80.224583
SWPAGW10
SWPAGW11
SWPAGW12
SWPAGW13
SWPASW03
SWPAGW10
SWPAGW11
SWPAGW12
SWPAGW13
SWPASW03
SWPAGW10
SWPAGW11
SWPAGW12
SWPAGW13
SWPASW03
0.3 SW
0.5 SW
0.3 SW
0.1 NW
0.3 SW
0.2 SW
0.3 SW
0.1 SW
0.3 NW
0.2 SW
0.7 NW
0.6 NW
0.7 NW
1.0 NW
0.8 NW
Key:
EPA = Environmental Protection Agency.
ID = Identification.
NW = Northwest.
SW = Southwest.
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix C Figures
C-99
-------
C-100
VWniet-Wktittotn
Source: Lsrtrf L/se. USDA Municipalities. PASDA: Sample Locations. EPA ORD
Figure C-l 2012 Crop Lands
2012 Crop Lands
Washington County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
-------
C-101
IKI.ill.Jll
4"
2001 - 2006
IM li I
.H'lUbwg!.
Changed Land Use
To Open Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest
To Grassland/Shrub
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
Search Areas
Municipal Boundaries
EPA HF Sampling Locations
Land Use Change
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C-2 Land Use Change, 1992-2001 and 2001-2006
-------
C-102
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
Figure C3: Population in Washington County,
Pennsylvania, 1950-2010
1950 1960 1970
1980
Census Year
1990 2000 2010
-------
C-103
2006
Pittsburgh
*fcDcn*fy "T • '•
^•v,,^
«,4^
XN ^9
PB
Land Use Types
Water
^^ Developed
Barren
Forest
Herbaceous
Planted/Cullivated
EPA HF Sampling Location
Municipal Boundaries
Search Area
Land Use/Land Cover
1992 and 2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Search Area C
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
'ASH INGTON CPU NTY | source: Landuse, USGS National Land Cover Database (1992,2006): Municipalities. PASDA: Sampling Locations, EPA PRO
Figure C-4 Land Use/Land Cover 1992 and 2006, Search Area C
-------
C-104
2006
Land Use Types
Water
0£ Developed
Barren
Forest
Herbaceous
Planted/Cultivated
<£>
EPAHF Sampling Locations
I Municipal Boundaries
Search Area
Land Use/Land Cover
1992 and 2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Search Area D
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
ASH IN GTO N CPU NTYj source: Landuse, USGS National Land Cover Database 11992,2006); Municipalities, PASDA: Sampling Locations, EPA PRO
Figure C-5 Land Use/Land Cover 1992 and 2006, Search Area D
-------
C-105
2006
Pittsburgh.
Minih/Jl '
Land Use Types " , Forest
Water
Developed
Barren
Herbaceous
Planted/Cultivated
rlj Mun
t^JlSean
EPAHF Sampling Locations
icipal Boundaries
ear ch Area
Land Use/Land Cover
1992 and 2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Search Area E
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
WASHINGTON COUNTY: Source: Landuse, USGS NationalLand Cover Database (1992,2006): Municipalities, PASDA; Sampling Locations, EPA ORD
Figure C-6 Land Use/Land Cover 1992 and 2006, Search Area E
-------
C-106
2006
Pittsburgh.
Land Use Types V% Forest
Water Shrubland
0^ Developed Herbaceous
Barren Planted/Cultivated
EPAHF Sampling Locations
Municipal Boundaries
'Search Area
Land Use/Land Cover
1992 and 2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Search Area F
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
'ASH INGTON CO U NTYj source: Landuse, USGS National Land Cover Database 11992,2006); Municipalities, PASO A: Sampling Locations, EPA PRO
Figure C-7 Land Use/Land Cover 1992 and 2006, Search Area F
-------
C-107
Land Use Types
Water
Developed
Barren
8, Forest
Shru bland
Herbaceous
Planted/Cultivated
Wetlands
EPA HF Sampling Locations
Municipal Boundaries
earch Area
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Land Use/Land Cover
1992 and 2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Yeager 7H Search Area
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: La.-xfuie. USOS Mxenai Land Cove: Dausase I (992.25061. /fe" .. -.•:••- f-i::1- :drnp«'!jLocaf.'ons £« ORP
Figure C-8 Land Use/Land Cover 1992 and 2006, Search Area 7H
-------
C-108
Crop Lands
Soybeans
Sweet Cam
Rye
Oats
Sprtz
A ltd If d
[^BUFFALO
Other Lands
Open Vtete,'
Developed
toren 2012 Crop Lands
Fmst Washington County, Pennsylvania
*""** Search Area C
source: Lanause, USDA:Muntopaiiyes,PASDf,;swjipungLocators.EPAOKD EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C-9 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area C
-------
C-109
"Mfc?
.P../ :
Atfatfa Qt M^^__ „
oft*H*ynanAlfalfa ^^ 2012 Crop Lands
w^wh^ I M"**o«pi«i to« Washington County, Pennsylvania
Grasi(af>d Search Area D
source: Land use, USDA; Uuniapaoaes, fwatM;SamplingLocaiKns: EPA OKD EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C-10 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area D
-------
C-110
&raisland
source: Lanaux, USCM;MuntctpaRKf,PASDA;SamplingLKaOcra:EPAQRD
Figure C-ll 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area E
2012 Crop Lands
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Search Area E
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
-------
C-lll
'
^
WASHINGTON CO
Crop Lands
CiSMI
SweetCem
Oats
:•-!.
Alfafa
Other Lands 9 EPKHF sampling Locations
D^toped
e: Lanause, USDA; Mumopames, F*.5DA. Damping Locxans. B* ORB
Figure C-12 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area F
2012 Crop Lands
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Search Area F
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
-------
C-112
Crop Lands
•4 Can
04 Soybeans
i Oati
SodGrasSwd
MM*.Wheat •* fafaw/ldte Copland
Other Lands
04 •;-.•.«!"
Earien
£M HF Sampling local iofts
Some: tana U», USD*. iniii(iani, fM9CM; Sampury LocaOons: BW ORO
Figure C-13 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area 7H
201 2 Crop Lands
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Yeager 7 H Search Area
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
-------
C-113
CROSS CREEK
1992-2001
MOUNT PLEASANT
15*
CSCISS CREEK
2001-2006
Miles
Pittsb
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Changed Land Use
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest
To Grassland/Shrub
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA HF Sampling Location
Search Area
Municipal Boundaries
Land Use Change
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Search Area C
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: LarKtuse, USGS National Land Cover Database.
PA5&5, Sanpling Loeafions, EFM PRO
Figure C-14Land Use Change, 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Search Area C
-------
C-114
s —
1992-2001
2001-2006
/he
Pittsb
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Changed Land Use
4 To Water
^ To Urban
C To Barren
To Forest
To Grassland/Shrub
To Agriculture
To Wet lands
EPA HF Sampling Locations
Search Area
Municipal Boundaries
Land Use Change
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Search Area D
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Landuse, USGS National Long Cover Database: Municipalities, PASDA Sampling Locations, EfHORD
Figure C-15 Land Use Change, 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Search Area D
-------
C-115
1992-2001
2001-2006
0.5
1
] Miles
•i
Pittsb
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Changed Land Use
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest
To Grassland/Shrub
To Agriculture
To Wet lands
EPA HF Sampling Locations
Search Area
Land Use Change
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Search Area E
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
L^j-l Municipal Boundaries
Source: LamitJse: USGS National Land Cover Pafabase; Municipalities.. PASDA: Sampling Locations, EPA ORD
Figure C-16 Land Use Change, 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Search Area E
-------
C-116
1992-2001
2001-2006
0 0.5 1 2 / 3
Miles
Pittsb
le »ling
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Changed Land Use
•£ To Water
0£ To Urban
AK To Barren
To Forest
To Grassland/Shrub
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA HF Sampling Locations
Search Area
Municipal Boundaries
Land Use Change
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Search Area F
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C-17 2012 Crop Lands, Search Area F
-------
C-117
CANTON
WASHINGTON
1992-2001
CANTON
WASHINGTON
'V'
2001-2006
Miles
Pittsb
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Changed Land Use
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest
To Grassland/Shrub
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA HF Sampling Locations
Search Area
Land Use Change
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Yeager 7H Search Area
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
t^j-l Municipal Boundaries
Source Larxtuse, USGS Nafona Lang Coot Database: Ktmopaites, PASDA. Saiytng LooTons. gfM PRO
Figure C-18 Land Use Change, 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Search Area 7H
-------
C-118
* 4. **
A
•ft
Burgettstowr\
Search Area F
(3-mile radius)
A McDonald
Search Area E
'Follansbee
Search Area C
A A
{1-mile radius)
WestLiberty
Mount Le
' * Search Area D
*
-mile radius)
Canonsburg
'M Southern Search Area
Sample Location Map
Washington County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Sasemap. ESRI. Sampfe Locations. EPA ORD, Wells: PA DEP: Sampling Locations. EPA ORD
Figure C-19 Sample Location Map
-------
C-119
O ERA HF Sampling Locations
Impoundment
_ Reserve Pit
Search Areas
Source: .imagery; R3S0,d; Sample Lccations, EPA ORD:
Impoundment and Reserve Pits, ecology and emnronmenf
Impoundments and Reserve Pits
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Northern Study Area
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C-20 Impoundments and Reserve Pits, Northern Area
-------
C-120
-j EPA HA sampling Locations Impoundm en ts and Reserve Pits
_ Impoundment . . .
Washington County, Pennsylvania
Southern Study Area
i-r-,* i- i- <-^
EPA Hyd FaullC Fracturing Study
Figure C-21 Impoundments and Reserve Pits, Southern Area
SearehArea
Source: Jmagay P^SC^ Samp/e Locaifores, ERA ORD:
(fnpounarwnb and Reserve P*5. «otogy and «,^onnUn(
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Attachment 1 EDR Record Search
C-121
-------
C-122
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency
on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required.
Number of Days to Update: Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days
from the date the government agency made the information available to the public.
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL: National Priority List
National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority
cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon
coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
(EPIC) and regional EPA offices.
Date of Government Version: 02/01/2013 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2013 Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/13/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/09/2013
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/22/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
NPL Site Boundaries
Sources:
EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)
Telephone: 202-564-7333
EPA Region 1 EPA Region 6
Telephone 617-918-1143 Telephone: 214-655-6659
EPA Region 3 EPA Region 7
Telephone 215-814-5418 Telephone: 913-551-7247
EPA Region 4 EPA Region 8
Telephone 404-562-8033 Telephone: 303-312-6774
EPA Region 5 EPA Region 9
Telephone 312-886-6686 Telephone: 415-947-4246
EPA Region 10
Telephone 206-553-8665
Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites
A site that has been proposed for listing on the National Priorities List through the issuance of a proposed rule
in the Federal Register. EPA then accepts public comments on the site, responds to the comments, and places on
the NPL those sites that continue to meet the requirements for listing.
Date of Government Version: 02/01/2013 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2013 Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/13/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/09/2013
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/22/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of 1980, the USEPA has the authority
to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner
received notification of potential liability. USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens.
Date of Government Version: 10/15/1991 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/02/1994 Telephone: 202-564-4267
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/1994 Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011
Number of Days to Update: 56 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11728/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
TC3602489.16S Page GR-1
-------
C-123
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Federal Delisted NPL site list
DELISTED NPL: National Priority List Deletions
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the
EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the
NPL where no further response is appropriate.
Date of Government Version: 02/01/2013 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2013 Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/13/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/09/2013
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/22/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Federal CERCLIS list
CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities,
private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities
List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL.
Date of Government Version: 02/04/2013 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2013 Telephone: 703-412-9810
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/13/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2013
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/10/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FEDERAL FACILITY: Federal Facility Site Information listing
A listing of National Priority List (NPL) and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) sites found in the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) Database where EPA Federal Facilities
Restoration and Reuse Office is involved in cleanup activities.
Date of Government Version: 07/31/2012 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/09/2012 Telephone: 703-603-8704
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/20/2012 Last EDR Contact: 04/10/2013
Number of Days to Update: 72 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/22/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List
CERCLIS-NFRAP: CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
Archived sites are sites that have been removed and archived from the inventory of CERCLIS sites. Archived status
indicates that, to the best of EPA's knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined
no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates
this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time.
This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that,
based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site.
Date of Government Version: 02/05/2013 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2013 Telephone: 703-412-9810
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/13/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2013
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/11/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report
CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity.
TC3602489.16S Page GR-2
-------
C-124
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 02/12/2013 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/21/2013 Telephone: 800-424-9346
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 6 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF: RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Transporters are individuals or entities that
move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the
waste. TSDFs treat, store, or dispose of the waste.
Date of Government Version: 02/12/2013 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2013 Telephone: 800-438-2474
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG: RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate
over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 02/12/2013 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2013 Telephone: 800-438-2474
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
RCRA-SQG: RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate
between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 02/12/2013 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2013 Telephone: 800-438-2474
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
RCRA-CESQG: RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators
(CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 02/12/2013 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2013 Telephone: 800-438-2474
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC3602489.16S Page GR-3
-------
C-125
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries
US ENG CONTROLS: Engineering Controls Sites List
A listing of sites with engineering controls in place. Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building
foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental
media or effect human health.
Date of Government Version: 12/19/2012 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/26/2012 Telephone: 703-603-0695
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 03/11/2013
Number of Days to Update: 63 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/24/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US INST CONTROL: Sites with Institutional Controls
A listing of sites with institutional controls in place. Institutional controls include administrative measures,
such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation
care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally
required as part of the institutional controls.
Date of Government Version: 12/19/2012 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/26/2012 Telephone: 703-603-0695
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 03/11/2013
Number of Days to Update: 63 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/24/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
LUCIS: Land Use Control Information System
LUCIS contains records of land use control information pertaining to the former Navy Base Realignment and Closure
properties.
Date of Government Version: 12/09/2005 Source: Department of the Navy
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/11/2006 Telephone: 843-820-7326
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Last EDR Contact: 02/18/2013
Number of Days to Update: 31 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/03/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Federal ERNS list
ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System
Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous
substances.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/17/2013 Telephone: 202-267-2180
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/15/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 29 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
SHWS: Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act Site List
The Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act Site List includes sites listed on PA Priority List, sites delisted from PA Priority
List, Interim Response Completed sites, and Sites Being Studied or Response Being Planned.
Date of Government Version: 01/08/2013 Source: Department Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/24/2013 Telephone: 717-783-7816
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/19/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/26/2013
Number of Days to Update: 26 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/05/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
TC3602489.16S Page GR-4
-------
C-126
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
HSCA: HSCA Remedial Sites Listing
A list of remedial sites on the PA Priority List. This is the PA state equivalent of the federal NPL superfund
list.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/2013 Telephone: 717-783-7816
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/19/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/24/2013
Number of Days to Update: 25 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/05/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists
SWF/LF: Operating Facilities
The listing includes Municipal Waste Landfills, Construction/Demolition Waste Landfills and Waste-to-Energy Facilities.
Date of Government Version: 02/26/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2013 Telephone: 717-787-7564
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/17/2013 Last EDR Contact: 02/26/2013
Number of Days to Update: 48 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/10/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LUST: Storage Tank Release Sites
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground
storage tank incidents. Not all states maintain these records, and the information stored varies by state.
Date of Government Version: 03/04/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/20/2013 Telephone: 717-783-7509
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/18/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 29 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/01/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
UNREG LTANKS: Unregulated Tank Cases
Leaking storage tank cases from unregulated storage tanks.
Date of Government Version: 04/12/2002 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/14/2003 Telephone: 717-783-7509
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/29/2003 Last EDR Contact: 08/14/2003
Number of Days to Update: 15 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LAST: Storage Tank Release Sites
Leaking Aboveground Storage Tank Incident Reports.
Date of Government Version: 03/04/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/20/2013 Telephone: 717-783-7509
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/18/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 29 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/01/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INDIAN LUST R8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming.
Date of Government Version: 08/27/2012 Source: EPA Region 8
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/28/2012 Telephone: 303-312-6271
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2012 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 49 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
TC3602489.16S Page GR-5
-------
C-127
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
INDIAN LUST R10: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington.
Date of Government Version: 02/05/2013 Source: EPA Region 10
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/06/2013 Telephone: 206-553-2857
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 65 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN LUST R1: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
A listing of leaking underground storage tank locations on Indian Land.
Date of Government Version: 09/28/2012 Source: EPA Region 1
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/01/2012 Telephone: 617-918-1313
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/01/2013
Number of Days to Update: 162 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R7: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Source: EPA Region 7
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2013 Telephone: 913-551-7003
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 43 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R6: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in New Mexico and Oklahoma.
Date of Government Version: 09/12/2011 Source: EPA Region 6
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/13/2011 Telephone: 214-665-6597
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/11/2011 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 59 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R4: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Florida, Mississippi and North Carolina.
Date of Government Version: 02/06/2013 Source: EPA Region 4
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/08/2013 Telephone: 404-562-8677
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 63 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INDIAN LUST R9: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Nevada
Date of Government Version: 03/01/2013 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2013 Telephone: 415-972-3372
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 42 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
UST: Listing of Pennsylvania Regulated Underground Storage Tanks
Registered Underground Storage Tanks. UST's are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) and must be registered with the state department responsible for administering the UST program. Available
information varies by state program.
TC3602489.16S Page GR-6
-------
C-128
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 03/01/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/21/2013 Telephone: 717-772-5599
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/17/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 27 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/01/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
AST: Listing of Pennsylvania Regulated Aboveground Storage Tanks
Registered Aboveground Storage Tanks.
Date of Government Version: 03/01/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/21/2013 Telephone: 717-772-5599
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/17/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 27 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/01/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN UST R4: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 4 (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee
and Tribal Nations)
Date of Government Version: 02/06/2013 Source: EPA Region 4
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/08/2013 Telephone: 404-562-9424
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 63 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INDIAN UST R7: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 7 (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and 9 Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Source: EPA Region 7
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2013 Telephone: 913-551-7003
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 43 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN UST R5: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 5 (Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 08/02/2012 Source: EPA Region 5
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/03/2012 Telephone: 312-886-6136
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/05/2012 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 94 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN UST R6: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 6 (Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas and 65 Tribes).
Date of Government Version: 05/10/2011 Source: EPA Region 6
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/11/2011 Telephone: 214-665-7591
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/14/2011 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 34 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INDIAN UST R1: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 1 (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont and ten Tribal
Nations).
TC3602489.16S Page GR-7
-------
C-129
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 09/28/2012 Source: EPA, Region 1
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/07/2012 Telephone: 617-918-1313
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 156 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN USTR10: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 10 (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 02/05/2013 Source: EPA Region 10
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/06/2013 Telephone: 206-553-2857
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 65 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN UST R9: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 9 (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, the Pacific Islands, and Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 02/21/2013 Source: EPA Region 9
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2013 Telephone: 415-972-3368
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 45 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN UST R8: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 8 (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and 27 Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 08/27/2012 Source: EPA Region 8
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/28/2012 Telephone: 303-312-6137
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2012 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 49 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FEMA UST: Underground Storage Tank Listing
A listing of all FEMA owned underground storage tanks.
Date of Government Version: 01/01/2010 Source: FEMA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/16/2010 Telephone: 202-646-5797
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Last EDR Contact: 04/18/2013
Number of Days to Update: 55 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/29/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries
ENG CONTROLS: Engineering Controls Site Listing
Under the Land Recycling Act (Act 2) persons who perform a site cleanup using the site-specific standard or
the special industrial area standard may use engineering or institutional controls as part of the response action.
Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create
pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental media or effect human health.
Date of Government Version: 05/15/2008 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/16/2008 Telephone: 717-783-9470
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/12/2008 Last EDR Contact: 04/24/2013
Number of Days to Update: 27 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/05/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC3602489.16S Page GR-8
-------
C-130
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
AUL: Environmental Covenants Listing
A listing of sites with environmental covenants.
Date of Government Version: 01/22/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/24/2013 Telephone: 717-783-7509
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/19/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/23/2013
Number of Days to Update: 26 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/05/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INST CONTROL: Institutional Controls Site Listing
Under the Land Recycling Act (Act 2) persons who perform a site cleanup using the site-specific standard or
the special industrial area standard may use engineering or institutional controls as part of the response action.
Institutional controls include administrative measures, such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions,
property use restrictions, and post remediation care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants
remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally required as part of the institutional controls.
Date of Government Version: 05/15/2008 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/16/2008 Telephone: 717-783-9470
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/12/2008 Last EDR Contact: 04/24/2013
Number of Days to Update: 27 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/05/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP R7: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Lisitng
A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 7.
Date of Government Version: 03/20/2008 Source: EPA, Region 7
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2008 Telephone: 913-551 -7365
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2008 Last EDR Contact: 04/20/2009
Number of Days to Update: 27 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/20/2009
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN VCP R1: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 1.
Date of Government Version: 09/28/2012 Source: EPA, Region 1
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/02/2012 Telephone: 617-918-1102
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/16/2012 Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2013
Number of Days to Update: 14 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
VCP: Voluntary Cleanup Program Sites
The VCP listings included Completed Sites, Sites in Progress and Act 2 Non-Use Aquifer Determinations Sites. Formerly
known as the Act 2, the Land Recycling Program encourages the voluntary cleanup and reuse of contaminated commercial
and industrial sites.
Date of Government Version: 01/15/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/16/2013 Telephone: 717-783-2388
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/19/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/17/2013
Number of Days to Update: 34 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/29/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS: Brownfields Sites
Brownfields are generally defined as abandoned or underused industrial or commercial properties where redevelopment
is complicated by actual or perceived environmental contamination. Brownfields vary in size, location, age and
past use. They can range from a small, abandoned corner gas station to a large, multi-acre former manufacturing
plant that has been closed for years.
TC3602489.16S Page GR-9
-------
C-131
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 02/19/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/21/2013 Telephone: 717-783-1566
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/17/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/24/2013
Number of Days to Update: 55 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/05/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence
or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these
properties takes development pressures off of undeveloped, open land, and both improves and protects the environment.
Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) stores information reported by EPA Brownfields
grant recipients on brownfields properties assessed or cleaned up with grant funding as well as information on
Targeted Brownfields Assessments performed by EPA Regions. A listing of ACRES Brownfield sites is obtained from
Cleanups in My Community. Cleanups in My Community provides information on Brownfields properties for which information
is reported back to EPA, as well as areas served by Brownfields grant programs.
Date of Government Version: 12/10/2012 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/11/2012 Telephone: 202-566-2777
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/20/2012 Last EDR Contact: 03/26/2013
Number of Days to Update: 9 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/08/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
ODI: Open Dump Inventory
An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or Part 258
Subtitle D Criteria.
Date of Government Version: 06/30/1985 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09/2004 Telephone: 800-424-9346
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/17/2004 Last EDR Contact: 06/09/2004
Number of Days to Update: 39 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
DEBRIS REGION 9: Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
A listing of illegal dump sites location on the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation located in eastern Riverside
County and northern Imperial County, California.
Date of Government Version: 01/12/2009 Source: EPA, Region 9
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2009 Telephone: 415-947-4219
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/21/2009 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 137 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
HIST LF INACTIVE: Inactive Facilities List
A listing of inactive non-hazardous facilities (10000 & 300000 series). This listing is no longer updated or
maintained by the Department of Environmental Protection. At the time the listing was available, the DEP?s name
was the Department of Environmental Resources.
Date of Government Version: 12/20/1994 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/12/2005 Telephone: 717-787-7381
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2005 Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2005
Number of Days to Update: 30 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/19/2005
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
TC3602489.16S Page GR-10
-------
C-132
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
HIST LF INVENTORY: Facility Inventory
A listing of solid waste facilities. This listing is no longer updated or maintained by the Department of Environmental
Protection. At the time the listing was available, the DEP?s name was the Department of Environmental Resources.
Date of Government Version: 06/02/1999 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/12/2005 Telephone: 717-787-7381
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2005 Last EDR Contact: 09/19/2005
Number of Days to Update: 30 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/19/2005
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
HIST LF ALI: Abandoned Landfill Inventory
The report provides facility information recorded in the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection ALI
database. Some of this information has been abstracted from old records and may not accurately reflect the current
conditions and status at these facilities
Date of Government Version: 01/04/2005 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/04/2005 Telephone: 717-787-7564
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/04/2005 Last EDR Contact: 11/26/2012
Number of Days to Update: 31 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/11/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN ODI: Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
Location of open dumps on Indian land.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/1998 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/03/2007 Telephone: 703-308-8245
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/24/2008 Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2013
Number of Days to Update: 52 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/19/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs
A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this
web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported
they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites.
In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry
and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example,
contacting local law enforcement and local health departments.
Date of Government Version: 11/14/2012 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/11/2012 Telephone: 202-307-1000
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/15/2013 Last EDR Contact: 03/04/2013
Number of Days to Update: 66 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/17/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
US HIST CDL: National Clandestine Laboratory Register
A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this
web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported
they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites.
In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry
and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example,
contacting local law enforcement and local health departments.
Date of Government Version: 09/01/2007 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/19/2008 Telephone: 202-307-1000
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/2009 Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2009
Number of Days to Update: 131 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/2009
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks
TC3602489.16s Page GR-11
-------
C-133
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
ARCHIVE UST: Archived Underground Storage Tank Sites
The list includes tanks storing highly hazardous substances that were removed from the DEP's Storage Tank Information
database because of the Department's policy on sensitive information. The list also may include tanks that are
removed or permanently closed.
Date of Government Version: 03/01/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/21/2013 Telephone: 717-772-5599
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/18/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 28 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/01/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
ARCHIVE AST: Archived Aboveground Storage Tank Sites
The list includes aboveground tanks with a capacity greater than 21,000 gallons that were removed from the DEP's
Storage Tank Information database because of the Department's policy on sensitive information. The list also may
include tanks that are removed or permanently closed.
Date of Government Version: 03/01/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/21/2013 Telephone: 717-772-5599
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/18/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 28 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/01/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Local Land Records
LIENS 2: CERCLA Lien Information
A Federal CERCLA ('Superfund') lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent
Superfund monies. These monies are spent to investigate and address releases and threatened releases of contamination.
CERCLIS provides information as to the identity of these sites and properties.
Date of Government Version: 02/16/2012 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/26/2012 Telephone: 202-564-6023
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/14/2012 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 80 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
ACT 2-DEED: Act 2-Deed Acknowledgment Sites
This listing pertains to sites where the Department has approved a cleanup requiring a deed acknowledgment under
Act 2. This list includes sites remediated to a non-residential Statewide health standard (Section 303(g));
all sites demonstrating attainment of a Site-specific standard (Section 304(m)); and sites being remediated
as a special industrial area (Section 305(g)). Persons who remediated a site to a standard that requires a
deed acknowledgment shall comply with the requirements of the Solid Waste Management Act or the Hazardous Sites
Cleanup Act, as referenced in Act 2. These statutes require a property description section in the deed concerning
the hazardous substance disposal on the site. The location of disposed hazardous substances and a description
of the type of hazardous substances disposed on the site shall be included in the deed acknowledgment. A deed
acknowledgment is required at the time of conveyance of the property.
Date of Government Version: 04/23/2010 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/28/2010 Telephone: 717-783-9470
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/30/2010 Last EDR Contact: 07/22/2011
Number of Days to Update: 2 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11707/2011
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012 Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2013 Telephone: 202-366-4555
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 55 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
TC3602489.16S Page GR-12
-------
C-134
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
SPILLS: State spills
A listing of hazardous material incidents.
Date of Government Version: 01/16/2013 Source: DEP, Emergency Response
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/24/2013 Telephone: 717-787-5715
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/19/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 26 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/29/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR: RCRA - Non Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous
waste.
Date of Government Version: 02/12/2013 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2013 Telephone: 800-438-2474
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
DOT OPS: Incident and Accident Data
Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Incident and Accident data.
Date of Government Version: 07/31/2012 Source: Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2012 Telephone: 202-366-4595
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/18/2012 Last EDR Contact: 05/07/2013
Number of Days to Update: 42 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/19/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
DOD: Department of Defense Sites
This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that
have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Source: USGS
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/10/2006 Telephone: 888-275-8747
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2013
Number of Days to Update: 62 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/29/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
FUDS: Formerly Used Defense Sites
The listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites properties where the US Army Corps of Engineers
is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011 Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2013 Telephone: 202-528-4285
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/13/2013 Last EDR Contact: 03/11/2013
Number of Days to Update: 15 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/24/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released
periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011 Source: Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2013 Telephone: Varies
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/13/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/01/2013
Number of Days to Update: 57 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC3602489.16S Page GR-13
-------
C-135
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
ROD: Records Of Decision
Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical
and health information to aid in the cleanup.
Date of Government Version: 12/18/2012 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/13/2013 Telephone: 703-416-0223
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 03/13/2013
Number of Days to Update: 30 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/24/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
UMTRA: Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
Uranium ore was mined by private companies for federal government use in national defense programs. When the mills
shut down, large piles of the sand-like material (mill tailings) remain after uranium has been extracted from
the ore. Levels of human exposure to radioactive materials from the piles are low; however, in some cases tailings
were used as construction materials before the potential health hazards of the tailings were recognized.
Date of Government Version: 09/14/2010 Source: Department of Energy
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/07/2011 Telephone: 505-845-0011
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/01/2012 Last EDR Contact: 02/25/2013
Number of Days to Update: 146 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/10/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US MINES: Mines Master Index File
Contains all mine identification numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971. The data also includes
violation information.
Date of Government Version: 08/18/2011 Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/08/2011 Telephone: 303-231 -5959
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/2011 Last EDR Contact: 03/06/2013
Number of Days to Update: 21 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/17/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and
land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/01/2011 Telephone: 202-566-0250
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/10/2012 Last EDR Contact: 02/26/2013
Number of Days to Update: 131 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/10/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the
TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant
site.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2006 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/29/2010 Telephone: 202-260-5521
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/02/2010 Last EDR Contact: 03/28/2013
Number of Days to Update: 64 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/08/2013
Data Release Frequency: Every 4 Years
FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA,
TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the
Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Telephone: 202-566-1667
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Last EDR Contact: 02/25/2013
Number of Days to Update: 25 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/10/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
TC3602489.16S Page GR-14
-------
C-136
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
A listing of FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) inspections and enforcements.
Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Telephone: 202-566-1667
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Last EDR Contact: 02/25/2013
Number of Days to Update: 25 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/10/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
HIST FTTS: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
A complete administrative case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The
information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA
(Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions
are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters
with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included
in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated.
Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007 Telephone: 202-564-2501
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007 Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2007
Number of Days to Update: 40 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
HIST FTTS INSP: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Inspection & Enforcement Case Listing
A complete inspection and enforcement case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA
regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation
of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some
EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing
EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that
may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated.
Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007 Telephone: 202-564-2501
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007 Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2008
Number of Days to Update: 40 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems
Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all
registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March
1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices
being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/10/2010 Telephone: 202-564-4203
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/25/2011 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Number of Days to Update: 77 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
ICIS: Integrated Compliance Information System
The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports the information needs of the national enforcement
and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
program.
Date of Government Version: 07/20/2011 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/10/2011 Telephone: 202-564-5088
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/10/2012 Last EDR Contact: 04/15/2013
Number of Days to Update: 61 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/29/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
TC3602489.16S Page GR-15
-------
C-137
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
PADS: PCB Activity Database System
PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers
of PCB's who are required to notify the EPA of such activities.
Date of Government Version: 11/01/2010 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/10/2010 Telephone: 202-566-0500
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/16/2011 Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2013
Number of Days to Update: 98 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/29/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System
MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which
possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency,
EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 06/21/2011 Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/15/2011 Telephone: 301-415-7169
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2011 Last EDR Contact: 03/11/2013
Number of Days to Update: 60 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/24/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
RADINFO: Radiation Information Database
The Radiation Information Database (RADINFO) contains information about facilities that are regulated by U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for radiation and radioactivity.
Date of Government Version: 01/08/2013 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/09/2013 Telephone: 202-343-9775
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/11/2013
Number of Days to Update: 93 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/22/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and 'pointers' to other sources that contain more
detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric
Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial
enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal
Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities
Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System).
Date of Government Version: 10/23/2011 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/13/2011 Telephone: (215) 814-5000
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/01/2012 Last EDR Contact: 03/12/2013
Number of Days to Update: 79 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/24/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA
pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration
actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of
the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources
made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database.
Date of Government Version: 04/17/1995 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/03/1995 Telephone: 202-564-4104
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/07/1995 Last EDR Contact: 06/02/2008
Number of Days to Update: 35 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/01/2008
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
RMP: Risk Management Plans
TC3602489.16S Page GR-16
-------
C-138
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
When Congress passed the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, it required EPA to publish regulations and guidance
for chemical accident prevention at facilities using extremely hazardous substances. The Risk Management Program
Rule (RMP Rule) was written to implement Section 112(r) of these amendments. The rule, which built upon existing
industry codes and standards, requires companies of all sizes that use certain flammable and toxic substances
to develop a Risk Management Program, which includes a(n): Hazard assessment that details the potential effects
of an accidental release, an accident history of the last five years, and an evaluation of worst-case and alternative
accidental releases; Prevention program that includes safety precautions and maintenance, monitoring, and employee
training measures; and Emergency response program that spells out emergency health care, employee training measures
and procedures for informing the public and response agencies (e.g the fire department) should an accident occur.
Date of Government Version: 05/08/2012
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/25/2012
Date Made Active in Reports: 07/10/2012
Number of Days to Update: 46
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: 202-564-8600
Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
BRS: Biennial Reporting System
The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation
and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LOG)
and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/19/2013
Number of Days to Update: 52
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 800-424-9346
Last EDR Contact: 02/26/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/10/2013
Data Release Frequency: Biennially
UIC: Underground Injection Wells
A listing of underground injection well locations.
Date of Government Version: 03/26/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/26/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/18/2013
Number of Days to Update: 23
NPDES: NPDES Permit Listing
A listing of facilities with an NPDES permit.
Date of Government Version: 12/26/2012
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/13/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/18/2013
Number of Days to Update: 36
PA MANIFEST: Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/23/2012
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/18/2012
Number of Days to Update: 57
DRYCLEANERS: Drycleaner Facility Locations
A listing of drycleaner facility locations.
Date of Government Version: 03/25/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/25/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/18/2013
Number of Days to Update: 24
Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Telephone: 717-783-7209
Last EDR Contact: 03/26/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/08/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Telephone: 717-787-9642
Last EDR Contact: 03/13/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/24/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Telephone: 717-783-8990
Last EDR Contact: 04/23/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/05/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Telephone: 717-787-9702
Last EDR Contact: 03/25/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/08/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC3602489.16S Page GR-17
-------
C-139
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
AIRS: Permit and Emissions Inventory Data
Permit and emissions inventory data.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/04/2013 Telephone: 717-787-9702
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/15/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/01/2013
Number of Days to Update: 42 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
INDIAN RESERV: Indian Reservations
This map layer portrays Indian administered lands of the United States that have any area equal to or greater
than 640 acres.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Source: USGS
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/08/2006 Telephone: 202-208-3710
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2013
Number of Days to Update: 34 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/29/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
SCRD DRYCLEANERS: State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing
The State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. EPA Office
of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. It is comprised of representatives of states with established
drycleaner remediation programs. Currently the member states are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas,
Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin.
Date of Government Version: 03/07/2011 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/09/2011 Telephone: 615-532-8599
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/02/2011 Last EDR Contact: 05/06/2013
Number of Days to Update: 54 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/05/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
PCB TRANSFORMER: PCB Transformer Registration Database
The database of PCB transformer registrations that includes all PCB registration submittals.
Date of Government Version: 02/01/2011 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/19/2011 Telephone: 202-566-0517
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/10/2012 Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2013
Number of Days to Update: 83 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US FIN ASSUR: Financial Assurance Information
All owners and operators of facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste are required to provide
proof that they will have sufficient funds to pay for the clean up, closure, and post-closure care of their facilities.
Date of Government Version: 11/20/2012 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/30/2012 Telephone: 202-566-1917
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 02/19/2013
Number of Days to Update: 89 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/03/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
EPA WATCH LIST: EPA WATCH LIST
EPA maintains a "Watch List" to facilitate dialogue between EPA, state and local environmental agencies on enforcement
matters relating to facilities with alleged violations identified as either significant or high priority. Being
on the Watch List does not mean that the facility has actually violated the law only that an investigation by
EPA or a state or local environmental agency has led those organizations to allege that an unproven violation
has in fact occurred. Being on the Watch List does not represent a higher level of concern regarding the alleged
violations that were detected, but instead indicates cases requiring additional dialogue between EPA, state and
local agencies - primarily because of the length of time the alleged violation has gone unaddressed or unresolved.
TC3602489.16S Page GR-18
-------
C-140
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 07/31/2012 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/13/2012 Telephone: 617-520-3000
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/18/2012 Last EDR Contact: 02/12/2013
Number of Days to Update: 36 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/27/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
US AIRS MINOR: Air Facility System Data
A listing of minor source facilities.
Date of Government Version: 11/15/2012 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/16/2012 Telephone: 202-564-5962
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/15/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/01/2013
Number of Days to Update: 91 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
US AIRS (AFS): Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem (AFS)
The database is a sub-system of Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). AFS contains compliance data
on air pollution point sources regulated by the U.S. EPA and/or state and local air regulatory agencies. This
information comes from source reports by various stationary sources of air pollution, such as electric power plants,
steel mills, factories, and universities, and provides information about the air pollutants they produce. Action,
air program, air program pollutant, and general level plant data. It is used to track emissions and compliance
data from industrial plants.
Date of Government Version: 11/15/2012 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/16/2012 Telephone: 202-564-5962
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/15/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/01/2013
Number of Days to Update: 91 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
MINES: Abandoned Mine Land Inventory
This data set portrays the approximate location of Abandoned Mine Land Problem Areas containing public health,
safety, and public welfare problems created by past coal mining.
Date of Government Version: 10/02/2012 Source: PASDA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/30/2013 Telephone: 814-863-0104
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/21/2013 Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2013
Number of Days to Update: 22 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/12/2013
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
FEDLAND: Federal and Indian Lands
Federally and Indian administrated lands of the United States. Lands included are administrated by: Army Corps
of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, National Wild and Scenic River, National Wildlife Refuge, Public Domain Land,
Wilderness, Wilderness Study Area, Wildlife Management Area, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management,
Department of Justice, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Source: U.S. Geological Survey
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/06/2006 Telephone: 888-275-8747
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2013
Number of Days to Update: 339 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/29/2013
Data Release Frequency: N/A
PRP: Potentially Responsible Parties
A listing of verified Potentially Responsible Parties
Date of Government Version: 12/02/2012 Source: EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2013 Telephone: 202-564-6023
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/13/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/04/2013
Number of Days to Update: 69 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/15/2013
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
TC3602489.16S Page GR-19
-------
C-141
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
2020 COR ACTION: 2020 Corrective Action Program List
The EPA has set ambitious goals for the RCRA Corrective Action program by creating the 2020 Corrective Action
Universe. This RCRA cleanup baseline includes facilities expected to need corrective action. The 2020 universe
contains a wide variety of sites. Some properties are heavily contaminated while others were contaminated but
have since been cleaned up. Still others have not been fully investigated yet, and may require little or no remediation.
Inclusion in the 2020 Universe does not necessarily imply failure on the part of a facility to meet its RCRA obligations.
Date of Government Version: 11/11/2011 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2012 Telephone: 703-308-4044
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/25/2012 Last EDR Contact: 02/15/2013
Number of Days to Update: 7 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/27/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
LEAD SMELTER 2: Lead Smelter Sites
A list of several hundred sites in the U.S. where secondary lead smelting was done from 1931 and 1964. These sites
may pose a threat to public health through ingestion or inhalation of contaminated soil or dust
Date of Government Version: 04/05/2001 Source: American Journal of Public Health
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/27/2010 Telephone: 703-305-6451
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/02/2010 Last EDR Contact: 12/02/2009
Number of Days to Update: 36 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LEAD SMELTER 1: Lead Smelter Sites
A listing of former lead smelter site locations.
Date of Government Version: 01/29/2013 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/14/2013 Telephone: 703-603-8787
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/27/2013 Last EDR Contact: 04/08/2013
Number of Days to Update: 13 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/22/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
COAL ASH EPA: Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List
A listing of coal combustion residues surface impoundments with high hazard potential ratings.
Date of Government Version: 08/17/2010 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2011 Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/21/2011 Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2013
Number of Days to Update: 77 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/24/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
COAL ASH DOE: Sleam-Electric Plan Operation Data
A listing of power plants that store ash in surface ponds.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Source: Department of Energy
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2009 Telephone: 202-586-8719
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/22/2009 Last EDR Contact: 04/18/2013
Number of Days to Update: 76 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/29/2013
Data Release Frequency: Varies
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP: EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
The EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plant Database includes records of coal gas plants (manufactured gas plants)
compiled by EDR's researchers. Manufactured gas sites were used in the United States from the 1800's to 1950's
to produce a gas that could be distributed and used as fuel. These plants used whale oil, rosin, coal, or a mixture
of coal, oil, and waterthat also produced a significant amount of waste. Many of the byproducts of the gas production,
such as coal tar (oily waste containing volatile and non-volatile chemicals), sludges, oils and other compounds
are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. The byproduct from this process was frequently
disposed of directly at the plant site and can remain or spread slowly, serving as a continuous source of soil
and groundwater contamination.
TC3602489.16S Page GR-20
-------
C-142
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A
Source: EDR, Inc.
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: N/A
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
EDR US Hist Auto Stat: EDR Exclusive Historic Gas Stations
EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential
gas station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR's review was limited
to those categories of sources that might, in EDR's opinion, include gas station/filling station/service station
establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to gas, gas station, gasoline station,
filling station, auto, automobile repair, auto service station, service station, etc. This database falls within
a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records", or HRHR. EDR's HRHR effort presents
unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental concerns,
but may not show up in current government records searches.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A
Source: EDR, Inc.
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: N/A
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
EDR US Hist Cleaners: EDR Exclusive Historic Dry Cleaners
EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential
dry cleaner sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR's review was limited to those categories of sources
that might, in EDR's opinion, include dry cleaning establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were
not limited to dry cleaners, cleaners, laundry, laundromat, cleaning/laundry, wash & dry etc. This database falls
within a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records", or HRHR. EDR's HRHR effort
presents unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental
concerns, but may not show up in current government records searches.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A
Source: EDR, Inc.
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: N/A
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
EDR US Hist Cleaners: EDR Proprietary Historic Dry Cleaners - Cole
Date of Government Version: N/A Source: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
EDR US Hist Auto Stat: EDR Proprietary Historic Gas Stations - Cole
Date of Government Version: N/A Source: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
OTHER DATABASE(S)
Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be
complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the
area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily
mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report.
TC3602489.16S Page GR-21
-------
C-143
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
CT MANIFEST: Hazardous Waste Manifest Data
Facility and manifest data. Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through
transporters to a tsd facility.
Date of Government Version: 02/18/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/18/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/21/2013
Number of Days to Update: 31
NJ MANIFEST: Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/19/2012
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/28/2012
Number of Days to Update: 40
Source: Department of Energy & Environmental Protection
Telephone: 860-424-3375
Last EDR Contact: 02/18/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/03/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/29/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
NY MANIFEST: Facility and Manifest Data
Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a TSD
facility.
Date of Government Version: 02/01/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/07/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/15/2013
Number of Days to Update: 36
Rl MANIFEST: Manifest information
Hazardous waste manifest information
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/22/2012
Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2012
Number of Days to Update: 39
VT MANIFEST: Hazardous Waste Manifest Data
Hazardous waste manifest information.
Date of Government Version: 02/15/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/21/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/15/2013
Number of Days to Update: 22
Wl MANIFEST: Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2011
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/19/2012
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/27/2012
Number of Days to Update: 70
Source: Department of Environmental Conservation
Telephone: 518-402-8651
Last EDR Contact: 05/09/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/19/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
Source: Department of Environmental Management
Telephone: 401-222-2797
Last EDR Contact: 02/25/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/10/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
Source: Department of Environmental Conservation
Telephone: 802-241-3443
Last EDR Contact: 01/21/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/06/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
Source: Department of Natural Resources
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 03/18/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/01/2013
Data Release Frequency: Annually
Oil/Gas Pipelines: This data was obtained by EDR from the USGS in 1994. It is referred to by USGS as GeoData Digital Line Graphs
from 1:100,000-Scale Maps. It was extracted from the transportation category including some oil, but primarily
gas pipelines.
Electric Power Transmission Line Data
Source: Rextag Strategies Corp.
Telephone: (281) 769-2247
U.S. Electric Transmission and Power Plants Systems Digital GIS Data
TC3602489.16S Page GR-22
-------
C-144
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity
to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all
sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers,
and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located.
AHA Hospitals:
Source: American Hospital Association, Inc.
Telephone: 312-280-5991
The database includes a listing of hospitals based on the American Hospital Association's annual survey of hospitals.
Medical Centers: Provider of Services Listing
Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Telephone: 410-786-3000
A listing of hospitals with Medicare provider number, produced by Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services,
a federal agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Nursing Homes
Source: National Institutes of Health
Telephone: 301-594-6248
Information on Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes in the United States.
Public Schools
Source: National Center for Education Statistics
Telephone: 202-502-7300
The National Center for Education Statistics' primary database on elementary
and secondary public education in the United States. It is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical
database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are
comparable across all states.
Private Schools
Source: National Center for Education Statistics
Telephone: 202-502-7300
The National Center for Education Statistics' primary database on private school locations in the United States.
Daycare Centers: Child Care Facility List
Source: Department of Public Welfare
Telephone: 717-783-3856
Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2003 & 2011 from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA.
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2002 and 2005 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Scanned Digital USGS 7.5' Topographic Map (DRG)
Source: United States Geologic Survey
A digital raster graphic (DRG) is a scanned image of a U.S. Geological Survey topographic map. The map images
are made by scanning published paper maps on high-resolution scanners. The raster image
is georeferenced and fit to the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) projection.
STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION
© 2010 Tele Atlas North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection
and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject
to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material.
TC3602489.16S Page GR-23
-------
Appendix D Analytical Data from Locations SWPAGW13 AND SWPAGW14,
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix D
Analytical Data from Locations SWPAGW13 and
SWPAGW14
Retrospective Case Study in Southwestern Pennsylvania
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/084
D-l
-------
D-2
"'.'V'^. •'•' ' •::.^''.--.. ""•'• '.
':;- :•..«;}..;,:";;•
'"£'--Jvf*-v:';.'~:
:.-<<': \h :;:ft: :!':
SS-^i^'U;
' '«jV;:'t*;U;
if-M^ '
;'Xr':;;k ;;;.<"•
"*"1 ffc^i;
.'•'V' ';"••;'*; '"> £",?'•''
August 20091
7.19
445
6.06
1.01
99.0
9.6
304
71
3.7
36
254
52
13
0.8
Method2
SM 4500H-B
SM 2510B
200.7/6010
200.7/6010
200.7/6010
200.7/6010
200.7/6010
200.7/6010
SM4500CIC
D516-02
SM2320B
200.7/6010
200.7/6010
July20113
7.02
2005
43.4
1.39
351
16.1
830
291
631
25.7
267
198
<67
<14
2.9
March 20123
6.95
1869
23.3
1.21
295
14.1
690
223
462
27.3
283
192
<67
<14
1.3
May20133
7.05
1530
20.6
1.36
288
13.0
595
172
390
31.3
272
225
27
1.7
3.0
_'-=vv *?!".''-' :if^-'\ vV" 'i.':,1'.
August 20091
7.29
446
4.2
0.90
109
6.4
232
66
2.5
38
254
42
<5
1.9
March 20123
7.10
1120
11.8
1.10
190
12.2
514
142
228
25.8
278
194
26
38
0.7
May 20133
6.74
1002
11.8
1.11
175
12.1
499
122
179
31.3
291
224
93
57
6.3
Data collected prior to this study. Results reported by Environmental Service Laboratories, Inc. (samples collected on 8/11/2009; water bailed from spring discharges).
2 Methods used to analyze samples collected in August 2009. BData from this study; all results are from field-filtered samples. 4 Charge balance calculated using the AqQA
software package (v. 1.1.1).
-------
vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
PRESORTED STANDARD
POSTAGES FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT NO. G-35
Office of Research and Development (8101R)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
------- |