EPA 600/R-14/088 I May 2015 I www.epa.gov/hfstudy
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Retrospective Case Study in
Northeastern 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 Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern 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-14/088
in
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern 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 Northeastern 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 9
3. Study Area Background 13
3.1. Geology 13
3.2. Hydrogeology 17
3.3. Oil and Gas Production 19
3.4. Land Use 20
3.5. Potential Contaminant Sources 24
4. Study Methods 26
4.1. Sampling Locations 26
4.2. Water Collection from Homeowner Wells 29
4.3. Sampling at Springs and Surface Water Locations 30
4.4. Water Analysis 30
4.4.1. Field Parameters 30
4.4.2. Analytical Methods for Ground Water and Surface Water 31
4.5. QA/QC 33
4.6. Data Handling and Analysis 33
5. Historic Water Quality Data 36
5.1. Major Ion Chemistry 36
5.2. Gas 42
6. Water Quality Data from This Study 49
6.1. Geochemical Parameters 49
6.2. Inorganics 54
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
6.2.1. Iron and Manganese 54
6.2.2. Chloride, Sodium, IDS, and Bromide 55
6.2.3. Barium and Strontium 63
6.2.4. Radionuclides 67
6.2.5. Strontium Isotopes 69
6.2.6. Evaluation of Homeowner Wells with Na-CI Type Water 71
6.2.7. Evaluation of Homeowner Well with Ca-SO4 Type Water 78
6.2.8. Evaluation of Pond Location on NEPAGW03 Property 78
6.3. Organic Compounds 80
6.4. Water Isotopes 85
6.5. Dissolved Gases 87
6.5.1. Methane and Ethane Isotopes 88
6.5.2. Inorganic Carbon Isotopes 88
6.6. Homeowner Well Dissolved Gas Scenarios 94
6.6.1. Scenario 1: Valley wells with Na-CI type water and elevated methane levels 94
6.6.2. Scenario 2: Homeowner well with pre- and post-hydraulic fracturing data collected
in the study 95
6.6.3. Scenario 3: Homeowner well with multiple rounds of pre-hydraulic fracturing data 96
6.6.4. Scenario 4: Homeowner locations exhibiting the highest levels of methane in the
study 98
6.6.5. Scenario 5: Location requiring temporary evacuation of home due to gas build-up 100
6.6.6. Scenario 6: Homeowner well showing sudden discoloration and high turbidity 103
7. Summary of Case Study Results 106
References Ill
Appendix A QA/QC Summary A-l
Appendix B Sample Results B-l
Appendix C Background Data C-l
Appendix D PA DEP Investigations for Study Area D-l
Appendix E Supplementary Reference Data/Maps E-l
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania F-l
VI
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
List of Tables
Table la. Land use in Bradford County in 1992 and 2006 23
Table Ib. Land use in Susquehanna County in 1992 and 2006 23
Table 2. Area potentially affected by gas development in Bradford and Susquehanna Counties 24
Table 3. Wells, springs, and surface waters sampled in this study 28
Table 4. Ground water data from this study compared to 1977 NURE and pre-2007 NWIS data 37
Table 5. Mud log gas sample data from 234 gas wells drilled in five-county region of
northeastern PA, including Bradford and Susquehanna counties (from Baldassare et al.
2014) 46
Table 6. Gas isotope data from PA DEP and Molofsky et al. (2013) for gas wells in study area 47
Table 7. Valley locations with Na-CI type water from this study compared to nearby valley
locations from NWIS database exhibiting Na-CI type water 68
Table 8. Organic compounds detected in samples from wells and springs in this study 82
Table 9. Locations in this study sampled for gas isotope data where methane concentrations
were greater than 1 mg/L 89
Table 10. Gas isotope data from homeowner wells in this study compared to data for private
wells sampled in five-county region of northeastern Pennsylvania (Tioga, Bradford,
Susquehanna, Wyoming, and Sullivan) reported by Baldassare et al. (2014) 93
Table 11. Parameter-specific observations of note from the case study conducted in
northeastern Pennsylvania 107
VI1
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
List of Figures
Figure 1. Location map of study area in northeastern Pennsylvania 7
Figure 2. Drilled gas and oil wells in Bradford County since January 2000 showing totals
beginning as of July 2008. Approximately 98% of drilled wells are unconventional
wells and over 99% are gas wells. Approximately 94% of wells as of July 2013 were
classified as active by the PA DEP (PA DEP, 2015) 8
Figure 3. Case study sample location map, Bradford County, Pennsylvania, showing study
sampling locations relative to locations of gas and oil wells 11
Figure 4. Case study sample location map, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania, showing study
sampling locations relative to locations of gas and oil wells 12
Figure 5. Maps showing geology and Marcellus Shale gas well distribution by year in Bradford
County, Pennsylvania 14
Figure 6. Maps showing geology and Marcellus Shale gas well distribution by year in
Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania 15
Figure 7. Generalized geologic cross-section of study area in Bradford and Susquehanna
Counties, Pennsylvania 16
Figure 8. Map showing north-northwest and south-southeast orientation of gas well laterals in
Towanda area of Bradford County as of February 2012 18
Figure 9. Bradford County, Pennsylvania - land use in 1992 and 2006 21
Figure 10. Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania - land use in 1992 and 2006 22
Figure 11. NURE (1977) and NWIS historical (pre-2007) ground water sampling locations in
Bradford County relative to ground water sampling locations in this study 40
Figure 12. Piper diagram showing water-type distribution (based on AqQA) for homeowner wells
and springs sampled in this study 51
Figure 13. Durov diagram showing the generally higher pH and IDS levels associated with Na-CI
and Na-HCO3 type waters sampled from homeowner wells in this study 52
Figure 14. Breakdown of water types from this study (based on AqQA criteria) and percentage of
methane detections >lmg/L per water type 53
Figure 15. Box and whisker plots showing the dissolved iron and manganese distribution (5th,
25th, median, 75th, and 95th percentiles) for wells and springs sampled in this study
relative to pre-2007 NWIS and NURE 1977 ground water data 54
Figure 16. Box and whisker plots comparing dissolved iron and manganese distributions with
total iron and manganese distributions for this study (5th, 25th, median, 75th, and 95th
percentiles). Also shown is a plot of turbidity from this study 56
Vlll
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Figure 17. Box and whisker plots showing chloride, sodium, and specific conductance distribution
(5th, 25th, median, 75th, and 95th percentiles) for ground water locations sampled in
this study relative to pre-2007 NWIS and NURE 1977 ground water data 57
Figure 18. Chloride concentration histogram comparing data from ground water locations in this
study with pre-2007 NWIS and NURE 1977 ground water data 58
Figure 19. Time trends for chloride in homeowner wells from this study with concentrations
>8 mg/L measured in one or more sampling rounds 59
Figure 20. Specific conductance histogram comparing data from ground water locations in this
study with pre-2007 NWIS and NURE 1977 ground water data 61
Figure 21. Time trends for total dissolved solids (TDS) in homeowner wells shown in Figure 19
over the course of this study 62
Figure 22. Theoretical mixing curve with end members based on NURE (1977) and Haluszczak et
al. (2013) flowback median Cl and Br concentrations 64
Figure 23. Box and whisker plots comparing total and dissolved barium and strontium
distributions (5th, 25th, median, 75th, and 95th percentiles) from this study with
recoverable barium and strontium distributions from the pre-2007 NWIS datasetfor
Bradford County 65
Figure 24. Strontium isotope data versus strontium concentrations for locations sampled in this
study 70
Figure 25. Piper diagram showing overlap of ground water locations with Na-CI type water from
this study with ground water locations with Na-CI type water from the pre-2007 NWIS
datasetfor Bradford County 72
Figure 26. Schoeller diagram showing the chemical composition of ground water locations with
Na-CI type water in this study relative to pre-2007 NWIS locations with Na-CI type
water and spring water from Salt Spring State Park in Susquehanna County 73
Figure 27. Location of Bradford County homeowner well NEPAGW17 where reported gas
intrusion occurred on August 4, 2010 75
Figure 28. Bradford County homeowner well located in valley setting with pre- and post-
hydraulic fracturing data 77
Figure 29. Time trends for selected constituents in homeowner well NEPAGW03 from this study
indicating relative consistency over 1.5-year time span of study 79
Figure 30. Water isotope plots for samples collected in this study during second and third
sampling rounds relative to global meteoric water line and local meteoric water line 86
Figure 31. Bernard plot showing 613CCH4 values for homeowner wells sampled in this study with
detectable ethane concentrations and methane concentrations >1 mg/L relative to
IX
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
available gas well data from study area. Only one location (NEPAGW11) plots
distinctly as biogenic gas 90
Figure 32a. Schoell plot showing 613CCH4 versus 62HCH4 values for homeowner wells sampled in this
study with methane concentrations >1 mg/L relative to different formation means
and medians, and the one and two standard deviation (lo and 2o) range about the
mean for over 1500 Marcellus Shale mud log gas samples analyzed from 234 gas wells
in northeastern Pennsylvania 91
Figure 32b. Schoell plot close-up showing 613CCH4 versus 62HCH4 values for homeowner wells from
this study within one standard deviation (lo) of the mean 613CCH4 and 62HCH4 values
reported by Baldasarre et al. (2014) for mud log gas samples collected from the
Marcellus Shale 92
Figure 33. Location of Susquehanna County homeowner well NEPAGW23 with several rounds of
pre-drill sampling data collected 97
Figure 34. Locations of homeowner wells NEPAGW01 and NEPAGW02 with highest measured
methane concentrations in this study and where gas data suggest delayed arrival of
gas in homeowner wells following gas drilling activities 99
Figure 35. Location of homeowner wells where one homeowner evacuated home due to
reported gas buildup 101
Figure 36. Isotope reversal presence/absence for samples in this study (with sufficient ethane
present for isotopic analysis) relative to isotope reversals for Marcellus gas wells on
the Strom pad in central Bradford County (PA DEP 8/10/2010) and for Marcellus gas
wells in Dimock Township in Susquehanna County reported by Molofsky et al. (2013) 102
Figure 37. Location of homeowner well NEPAGW06 where well water is reported to have turned
reddish-brown on March 22, 2010, appearing to coincide with the temporary entry of
gas into the homeowner well 104
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADQ
ATSDR
CH4
C2H6
C2H6+
CLP
CO2
CRDS
DIG
DOC
DOI
DRO
5180
H20
o HH2o
O CcH4
5 HCH4
O CC2H6
513CD,c
EPA
EDR
GC/MS
GPS
gal/min
gal/min ft
GRO
GWERD
H2SO4
HPLC
IRMS
LC-MS-MS
MCL
MDL
audit of data quality
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
methane
ethane
combined ethane + propane + butane
Contract Laboratory Program
carbon dioxide
cavity ring-down spectrometry
dissolved inorganic carbon
dissolved organic carbon
Department of 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 (= 513Ci)
deuterium/hydrogen isotopic ratio in methane (= 5CDJ
carbon-13/carbon-12 isotopic ratio in ethane (= 513C2)
carbon-13/carbon-12 isotopic ratio in DIG
(U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Data Resources, Inc.
gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
global positioning system
gallons per minute
gallons per minute per foot
gasoline-range organics
Ground Water and Ecosystems Restoration Division
sulfuric acid
high-performance liquid chromatography
isotope ratio mass spectrometry
liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry
maximum contaminant level
method detection limit
XI
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
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
n.d. not dated
NEPA northeastern Pennsylvania
NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
NLCD National Land Cover Database
NOV Notice of Violation
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 DEP Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
pCi/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
SC specific conductance (conductivity)
SMCL secondary maximum contaminant level
SVOC semivolatile organic compound
IDS total dissolved solids
TIC tentatively identified compound
ISA technical systems audit
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
VOC volatile organic compound
xn
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
VPDB Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite
VSMOW Vienna Standard Mean Ocean Water
Xlll
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern 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 Northeastern 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 Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Authors
Ralph D. Ludwig, US EPA/ORD/NRMRL
Douglas G. Beak, US EPA/ORD/NRMRL
Richard T. Wilkin, US EPA/ORD/NRMRL
Christopher J. Ruybal, Student Services Contractor for US EPA (contract EP-13-C-000135)
David J. Rectenwald, US EPA/Region 3
xv
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Acknowledgements
EPA would like to acknowledge the homeowners who participated in this study. We would also like to
acknowledge the following organizations for their efforts in supporting this project: Ecology and
Environment, Inc. (contract EP-S7-13-07) for providing assistance in the field and in the preparation of
the report; the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry for their support in addressing health-
based concerns raised by homeowners; EPA Region 3 for field assistance; and Dynamac Corporation
(contract EP-W-12-026) for contributions to the geology discussions. EPA acknowledges EPA student
contractors Ms. Ashley McElmurry (contract EP-12-C-000025), Ms. Ranjani Ravi (contract EP-13-C-
000134), Mr. Casten Karr (contract EP-12-C-000036), and Ms. Alexandra Kirkpatrick (contract EP-10-C-
000239) 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's Office of Research and Development 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 analysis
(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 Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Executive Summary
In December 2009, Congress urged the US 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 a component of EPA's national study on the
potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources (US EPA, 2012). The retrospective
case studies focused on investigating reported instances of drinking water contamination in areas where
hydraulic fracturing has already occurred. This report describes the retrospective case study conducted
in northeastern Pennsylvania, in Bradford and Susquehanna counties.
Approximately 37% of the population of Pennsylvania, or 4.5 million people, obtain water from ground
water wells, with private wells being abundant in both Bradford and Susquehanna counties. In recent
years, northeastern Pennsylvania has experienced some of the most intensive hydraulic fracturing
activity in the U.S., as reflected by the high density of gas wells currently dotting the landscape in this
part of the state. Bradford County alone reportedly had over 1,000 drilled unconventional gas wells by
mid-2013, more than any other county in Pennsylvania. The significant increase in hydraulic fracturing
activity in northeastern Pennsylvania has led to increasing concerns regarding potential impacts on
homeowner wells. The retrospective case study conducted in northeastern Pennsylvania focused on
establishing whether anomalies in ground water quality or water quality impairments exist in the vicinity
of gas wells in the study area and, if so, whether such anomalies or water quality impairments may be
attributable to hydraulic fracturing activities. The study involved three rounds of water sampling and
analyses conducted over a span of 1.5 years at 36 homeowner (domestic) wells, two springs, and two
surface water locations. Sampling was conducted primarily in Bradford County, mainly across the
southern half of the county, while sampling in Susquehanna County was limited to three homeowner
properties. Sampling locations were selected largely on the basis of homeowner-specific complaints or
concerns regarding potential impacts on homeowner drinking water wells and springs (e.g., increased
turbidity, effervescing, discoloration, staining, odor, etc.) from nearby hydraulic fracturing activities.
With one exception, all sampling locations were within 1 mile of one or more drilled gas wells and, with
three exceptions, all sampling locations were within 1 mile of one or more gas wells that had been
hydraulically fractured (stimulated) prior to water sampling in this study. Collectively, a total of
approximately 100 drilled gas wells, most of which were fractured, were within 1 mile of sampling
locations in the study.
A multiple-lines-of-evidence approach was used in evaluating the data from the study and establishing
potential cause and effect relationships. The results of analysis of a broad suite of inorganic and organic
constituents/compounds potentially linked to hydraulic fracturing activities indicated no evidence of
impacts on ground water other than stray gas in the form of methane and ethane. The presence of low
levels of trimethylbenzenes near or below method quantitation limits at two homeowner locations and
toluene below the method quantitation limit in a sample from another homeowner well are attributed
to other anthropogenic sources due to the absence of corroborating lines of evidence implicating
hydraulic fracturing activities as the source. The presence of total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride,
sodium, barium, strontium, and combined radium-226 and radium-228 in a few homeowner wells at
concentrations above those more commonly found in the study area is attributed to localized natural
background conditions known to occur in the study area in certain valley settings. Manganese and/or
iron concentrations were found to exceed secondary MCLs at over 40% of the ground water locations
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
sampled in the study, consistent with historical pre-2007 data for the study area. The source of high
sulfate concentrations (>1,000 milligrams per liter [mg/L]) measured in one homeowner well is unclear,
although geochemical modeling indicates the sulfate concentrations would be consistent with the
presence and dissolution of the mineral gypsum. High sulfate concentrations are not expected to
originate from Marcellus Shale flowback/produced waters, which generally exhibit sulfate
concentrations less than 100 mg/L. A nearby pond (not used as a drinking water source) sampled to
determine potential links to the elevated sulfate concentrations in the homeowner well indicated the
pond was not the source of the sulfate. The pond did have elevated levels of chloride and total
dissolved solids that may be due to past reported fluid and/or solid releases that occurred on an
adjacent well pad where hydraulic fracturing had taken place.
The recent highly accelerated pace of gas exploration and production in the study area has coincided
with an increase in the number of reported incidents of stray gas migration. Based on operator and
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) data—and data from this study—there
is evidence of stray gas migration associated with the increased gas development activities in the study
area. This evidence comes from pre-drill and post-drill gas data that show changes in gas concentrations
and/or methane-to-ethane ratios before and after gas drilling, and also from gas isotope data (including
isotope reversal differences) that appear to indicate gas in some homeowner wells is consistent with gas
originating from deeper formations, including Middle Devonian strata (where the Marcellus Shale is
located). Stray gas, however, would not be unique to current hydraulic fracturing activities and has
been an issue with past oil and gas exploration in northeastern Pennsylvania before the advent of
modern-day hydraulic fracturing. Oil and gas exploration in the study area has shown that gas is
encountered at almost all depths down to the Marcellus Shale. Methane gas occurs naturally as
background gas in many homeowner wells in northeastern Pennsylvania and surrounding area
occasionally at concentrations above both PA DEP's action level of 7 mg/L and the Department of
Interior (Office of Surface Mining) recommended action level of 10 mg/L, particularly in Na-CI and
Na-HCO3 type ground water.
The potential impact of stray gas migration, regardless of depth of origin, can be a concern. In addition
to posing an explosion risk (if allowed to accumulate in confined spaces), the sudden influx of stray gas
into a well may cause suspension of well sediments and dislodging of naturally occurring mineral
deposits (precipitates) on the surfaces of the well and wellbore, resulting in increased turbidity and
discoloration of the well water. The sudden or increased presence of methane in wells, if sustained,
may also promote more reducing conditions, potentially leading to reductive dissolution of iron and
manganese and the possible liberation of naturally occurring contaminants such as arsenic potentially
associated with iron and manganese. Arsenic concentrations measured in this study, however, were
consistently below the MCL of 10 u.g/L and generally less than 5 u.g/L indicating arsenic mobilization was
not a significant issue.
One homeowner well located in a river valley setting in Bradford County was of particular interest in this
study because hydraulic fracturing was conducted at a nearby gas well during the course of the study
following the first round of sampling. Stream and river valleys in the study area are believed to exhibit a
higher natural fracture density in the underlying bedrock, resulting in a potentially greater abundance of
preferential pathways for the flow of natural gas from depth to the surface. It has been hypothesized
that the similarity in geochemistry of ground water in these settings with fluid geochemistry in deeper
formations is evidence of a pre-existing network of cross-formational pathways that has enhanced
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
hydraulic connectivity to the deeper formations. As such, this type of setting may be more vulnerable to
impacts from hydraulic fracturing of the Marcellus Shale. Based on the multiple-lines-of-evidence
approach employed in this study, pre- and post-hydraulic fracturing data—coupled with pre-drill
operator data from the homeowner location—did not show evidence of impacts on the homeowner
well from Marcellus Shale-derived brine or gas within the timeframe of this study.
Stray gas appears to be primarily—if not entirely—originating from shallower formations above the
Marcellus Shale. Evaluation of methane and ethane isotope data and methane-to-ethane ratios
indicated gas detected at elevated concentrations in homeowner wells in this study, whether stray gas
from hydraulic fracturing activities or not, was generally thermogenic in origin. However, the evaluation
could not determine with certainty the specific formation(s) from which the thermogenic gas was
originating. This is largely due to the range of gas isotopic signatures and isotope reversal differences
that appear to be characteristic of given formations and the significant overlap that apparently occurs
with respect to isotopic signatures and isotope reversal differences amongst the different formations.
Isotopic signatures and isotope reversal differences for one cluster of homeowner wells in the study
indicated the gas in the homeowner wells was likely originating from deeper Middle Devonian strata and
possibly the Marcellus Shale itself. If originating from the Marcellus Shale, it would still be unknown
whether the gas were originating from the hydraulic fracturing (stimulation) process or from other
sources (e.g., well construction issues).
Key observations/findings from this study are summarized below.
• No evidence of impacts on homeowner wells and springs from flowback water, produced water,
or injected hydraulic fracturing fluids was found in the study. Detections of inorganic and
organic constituents (other than methane and ethane) in ground water samples could not be
attributed to hydraulic fracturing activities.
• One or more homeowner wells evaluated in the study have been impacted by stray gas
associated with nearby hydraulic fracturing activities. Stray gas (in the form of methane and
ethane) entering homeowner wells can account for observed changes to well water appearance
and quality (e.g., effervescing, increased turbidity, discoloration) reported by some
homeowners.
• The specific formation(s) from which stray gas is originating could not be determined with
certainty although stray gas appeared to be primarily—if not entirely—originating from
formations above the Marcellus Shale.
• Gas isotope data for one cluster of homeowner wells sampled in the study indicated gas in the
homeowner wells likely originated from deeper Middle Devonian strata and possibly from the
Marcellus Shale itself.
• Iron and/or manganese concentrations exceeded secondary MCLs at over 40% of ground water
locations sampled in the study consistent with historical data for the study area.
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
• The presence of total dissolved solids (IDS), chloride, sodium, barium, strontium, and combined
radium-226 and radium-228 in a few homeowner wells at concentrations above those more
commonly found in the study area is attributed to localized natural background conditions
known to occur in the study area in certain valley settings.
• Elevated levels of chloride and total dissolved solids were observed in a homeowner pond (not
used as a drinking water source) and may be due to past reported fluid and/or solid releases
that occurred on an adjacent well pad where hydraulic fracturing activities had taken place.
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern 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, large 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 drinking water resources. Concerns include the potential
for contamination of shallow ground water by stray gases (methane), formation waters (brines), and
fracturing chemicals associated with unconventional gas development.
In December 2009, Congress urged EPA to study the relationship between hydraulic fracturing and
drinking water. The study was to be conducted using a credible 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, 2010). 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 at 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?
Before release of the study plan, EPA invited the public to nominate specific regions of the United States
for inclusion as potential sites for case studies. The plan identified 41 potential retrospective case study
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
sites. The retrospective case studies were to investigate 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 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. EPA's plan for the retrospective case studies was to make a determination on the presence
and extent of drinking water resource contamination and 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 could be associated with drinking water contamination (US
EPA, 2011b).
In 2011, EPA began conducting investigations at the five selected retrospective case study locations in
Washington County, Pennsylvania (southwestern Pennsylvania); Bradford and Susquehanna Counties,
Pennsylvania (northeastern Pennsylvania); Wise County, Texas; Las Animas and Huerfano counties,
Colorado (Raton Basin); and Dunn County, North Dakota (Killdeer). This report presents the findings of
the retrospective study conducted in Bradford and Susquehanna counties in northeastern Pennsylvania
(Figure 1). Hydraulic fracturing in Bradford and Susquehanna counties focuses on recovering natural gas
from the Marcellus Shale, a prodigious reservoir of natural gas in the Appalachian Basin.
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania relies heavily on ground water as a drinking water source and has
historically been second only to Michigan in size of population served by private wells (Swistock et al.,
2009). Ground water wells supply drinking water to approximately 37% of Pennsylvania's population, or
4.5 million people (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection [PA DEP], 2012), with private
wells being abundant in both Bradford and Susquehanna counties. In recent years, northeastern
Pennsylvania has seen some of the most intensive gas drilling activity in the U.S., as reflected by the high
density of gas wells currently dotting the landscape in this part of the country. Based on PA DEP data
(PA DEP, 2015), Bradford County alone had over 1,000 drilled unconventional oil and gas wells by mid-
2013, the most of any county in Pennsylvania. Figure 2 illustrates the rate of increase of oil and gas
drilling activity (primarily unconventional gas drilling) in Bradford County over a five-year period from
July 2008 to July 2013. The significant increase in gas drilling activity has led to increasing concerns
regarding potential impacts on homeowner wells.
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
)
r
*
BRADFORD
« COUN™
53
-y- -- f
SUSQUEHANNA (
COUNTY
*
so
Pittsburgh
555
^.
53 ,-
- *'
- v \ Philadelphia
' \
* EPA Sampling Locations
G3
Source Basemap ESRI Sample Locations EPA ORD.20J3
/ ^'X.
~~~
' [B] '
Figure 1. Location map of study area in northeastern Pennsylvania.
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
1200
1000 I"
10
re
(3
-a
E 600
•a
_a>
^ 400
a
200
timeframeof this study
874
917
938
973
1008
1039
831
653
733
A
583
497
421
355 -4
268
199
Time
Figure 2. Drilled gas and oil wells in Bradford County since January 2000 showing totals beginning as of July 2008. Approximately 98% of drilled wells are
unconventional wells and over 99% are gas wells. Approximately 94% of wells as of July 2013 were classified as active by the PA DEP (PA DEP, 2015).
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern 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 and describes general water quality,
geochemistry, and isotopic parameters of shallow ground water in Bradford County and Susquehanna
County, Pennsylvania. Water quality results are used to evaluate the potential impacts on shallow
ground water drinking water resources, if any, from various land use activities, including but not limited
to shale-gas drilling and production. The evaluation of potential impacts included 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 Bradford and Susquehanna counties, and time-dependent geochemical trends.
Potential causes of water quality impairment, if any, that were considered include: industrial/
commercial land use; historical land use (e.g., farming and mining); current drilling processes and
practices; historical drilling practices; and naturally occurring sources.
This report presents analytical data for water samples from 42 locations representing homeowner
(domestic) wells, springs, and surface water bodies that were sampled at least once during three rounds
spanning a period of 19 months (October/November 2011, April/May 2012, and May 2013). Although
the study was conducted in both Bradford and Susquehanna counties, the majority of sampling was
conducted in Bradford County. Sampling locations were selected primarily on the basis of individual
homeowner complaints/concerns regarding potential impacts on homeowner well water from nearby
hydraulic fracturing activities (e.g., increased turbidity, effervescing, staining, odors, etc.). Sampling in
Bradford County was conducted mainly across the southern half of the county (see Figure 3), while
sampling in Susquehanna County was conducted in the Dimock area and at one location in the northern
portion of the county, near the New York State border (see Figure 4).
The water samples were analyzed for over 225 constituents, including organic compounds, nutrients,
major ions, metals and trace elements, radioactivity, dissolved gases, and selected isotopes. Ground
water quality data and summary statistics are presented for analyzed constituents/parameters. In
addition to chemical data collected specifically for this study, the report includes analysis of historical
data from the US Geological Survey (USGS) National Water Information System (NWIS) database (USGS,
2013), the USGS National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) database (USGS, 2012c), and other
sources of water quality data for northeastern Pennsylvania.
The retrospective case study sites differ with respect to 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 potential water quality impacts. The
approach for Tier 2 efforts included: literature review of background geology and hydrology; selection of
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
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 results from this study against the historical 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.
10
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
4-'
A
A
A
*_ A
.
A
A A
1 A A . A .
A * A * » A A
A A *
' '
A A * A A .
'' '
- AA . ;' ....*• - *'•**••:
' > ' A ^ A . SW29GW28
. » A 220 * * •
A . t . *GW30
. A . . A A Towi.nda
A . A . ' GW03
SW03 ' ' . A GWOS' AA
SW04 A
GW02 : SW05SW06 ' ,-lW12
V GW17 SW01 A" A. A GW!>.--
* GW04 * A '~.' . A A * A5W09
A * . GW26 GW25 5W14
AGW36 t * . A . A ^ GW27'GW10
* •* '*GW07 ' GW06 GWOSjwiS
GW19. A -^W31
* A A * * " rw^n
A A
A
-\
A
A
' *
i
w
A
A
'
SW02
& 0
A
A A A
A
A
A
. «. " ' '
A
Bradford GwsAw"
County Gwp A A A •'
* *GW32 . A
A ' * A
A A * * * * 'A „ A' A ^ ^
A A
A * *
A .
Oil and Gas Well Locations
A Gas (Unconventional)
A Oil (Conventional)
A Gas&Oil (Unconventional)
Sources: Background, ESRI, Sample U
* A . A A
*
Dushore
• EPA Sampling Locations
cations, EPA ORD: Welts, Pennsylvania DEP
•
"Buffalo
,«,
WAchinntnn T>
0 2.5 5
^
u \
^
t
Figure 3. Case study sample location map, Bradford County, Pennsylvania, showing study sampling locations relative to locations of gas and oil
wells. No conventional gas wells are reported for area of Bradford County shown. Gas and oil well locations shown may include some locations
that were permitted but not yet drilled or fractured at completion of this study.
11
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Hmln>n* .Rochester
'Buffalo
0
Pittsburgh i
Salt Spring State Park
Susquehanna
County
A "Moritrose
S outh M ontros*'
Brooklyn
GW23
*GW21
GW24
•
Hop Bottom.
m*
•
Harford
' '
"Kmgsley
'.
'
StHith Gibson"
:
1.5
Oil and Gas Well Locations
A Gas (Unconventional) • EPA Sampling Locations
A Gas (Conventional)
A Gas&Oil (Unconventional)
Source: Background, ESRI: Sample Location, EPA ORD: Wells. Pennsylvania DEP: State Parks, Pennsylvania DCNR
6
H Miles
Figure 4. Case study sample location map, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania, showing study sampling locations
relative to locations of gas and oil wells. Gas and oil well locations shown may include some locations that were
permitted but not yet drilled or fractured at completion of this study.
12
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
3. Study Area Background
3.1. Geology
The study area is part of the Glaciated Low Plateau Section of the Appalachians Plateau Province
(Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources [PA DCNR], n.d.). The Glaciated Low
Plateau Section is described as a diversified topography consisting of rounded hills and broad to narrow
valleys modified by glacial erosion and deposition reflecting the interplay between bedrock of various
types, mainly sandstones and siltstones, and glacial erosion and deposition. More erosion-resistant
rocks form the hills, while less erosion-resistant rocks occur in the valleys. Glacial deposits, mainly
glacial till or sand and gravel, occur primarily in the valley bottoms and margins (PA DCNR, n.d.).
Geologic maps for Bradford and Susquehanna counties are shown in Figures 5 and 6. The geology of the
study area has been extensively described (Williams et al., 1998; Carter and Harper, 2002; Taylor, 1984;
Milici and Swezey, 2006). The study area is underlain by unconsolidated deposits of glacial and post-
glacial origin and nearly flat-lying sedimentary bedrock. The surficial cover comprises glacial and post-
glacial deposits (till, stratified drift, alluvium, and swamp deposits) and tends to be thickest in the
valleys. The glacial sediments and Quaternary alluvium found in the valleys along rivers and major
streams form extensive unconfined or confined aquifers (Williams et al., 1998). The bedrock consists
primarily of shale, siltstone, and sandstone of Devonian to Pennsylvanian age. A generalized geologic
cross section of the bedrock sequence beneath the study area is provided in Figure 7. The Devonian
bedrock includes the Lock Haven and Catskill formations, both of which are important sources of
drinking water in the study area. According to Williams et al. (1998), lacustrine deposits of silt, clay, and
very fine sand form areally extensive confining units that can exceed 100 feet in thickness in the major
valleys. These lacustrine deposits are less extensive in the upland valleys. The Marcellus Shale, also
known as the Marcellus Formation, is a Middle Devonian-age shale (about 390 million years), with a
black color, low density, and high organic carbon content. It occurs in the subsurface beneath much of
Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and New York, as well as smaller areas of Maryland, Kentucky,
Tennessee, and Virginia. In Bradford and Susquehanna counties, the Marcellus Shale lies 4,000 to 8,000
feet below the surface and ranges in thickness from 150 to 300 feet. The Marcellus Shale is part of a
transgressive sedimentary package formed by the deposition of terrestrial and marine material in a
shallow, inland sea. It is underlain by the sandstones and siltstones of the Onondaga Formation and
overlain by laminated shales, siltstones, and fine-grained sandstones of the Mahantango Formation.
Both lithostratigraphy and sequence stratigraphy have been used to define the bedrock stratigraphic
units in northeastern Pennsylvania. Definition using lithostratigraphy implies a more homogeneous and
simplified stratigraphy (and character of the rock units), whereas sequence stratigraphy identifies the
heterogeneity in the stratigraphic units that "more faithfully records the variations in rock types and
structure" (Woodrow and Fletcher, 2002). At the exposure at Wayalusing Rocks, in southeastern
Bradford County along the Susquehanna River, Elick (2002) describes interfingered marine and non-
marine continental facies at the lower part of the Catskill Formation and the top of the Lock Haven
Formation. Numerous interbedded units of silty mudrock, platy shale, shaley siltstone, and medium-
grained sandstone occur at this outcrop. Although this particular exposure is at a topographic high
13
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
B
C3
Geologic Formations
Allegheny and
Pottsville
Formations,
undivided
Burgeon Sandstone
Catskill Formation
Huntley Mountain
Formation
Lock Maven
Formation
Pottsville Formation
EPA Sampling
Locations
May 2014 Active Marcellus Locations
up to 2008
2009
2010
• 2011
2012
• 2013
• 2014
• EPA Sampling Locations
Sources: Geology: PASDA, Well Locations: Pennsylvania DEP {Oil and Gas Locations - Conventional/Unconventional Layer)
• id
riton*
.Rochester
Buffalo
PENNSYLVANIA
0
.Pittsburgh ^
Map Panels
A: Geologic Formations
B:Marcellus Shale Wells
(Unconventional Wells
with Active Status May
2014)
0 5 10
• • • 1 Miles
Figure 5. Maps showing geology and Marcellus Shale gas well distribution, by year, in Bradford County, Pennsylvania.
14
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Geologic Formation
Catskill Formation
Llewellyn Formation
Lock Haven Formation
Pottsville Formation
• EPA Sampling Locations
B
May 2014 Active Marcellus Locations
up to 2008
2009
2010
• 2011
2012
• 2013
• 2014
• EPA Sampling Locations
Sources: Geology: PA5DA, Well Locations: Pennsylvania DEP (Oil and Gas Locations - Conventional/Unconventional Layer)
.Roch«st»r
Map Panels
A: Geologic Formations
B: Marcellus Shale Wells
(Unconventional Wells
with Active Status
May 2014)
Figure 6. Maps showing geology and Marcellus Shale gas well distribution, by year, in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania.
15
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
West
East
Typical Production
Well
Ground Surface <2Jr=Tl
Figure is not to scale.
Figure 7. Generalized geologic cross-section of study area in Bradford and Susquehanna Counties, Pennsylvania. Unconsolidated glacial and
post-glacial sediments shown are thickest in valley settings and are generally thin or absent in upland settings. (Data sources: Baldassare et
al., 2014; Taylor, 1984; USGS: http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology).
16
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
above the adjoining valley, it illustrates the complexity that occurs in portions of these formations. The
Lock Haven Formation in the study area is described by Baldassare et al. (2014) as consisting of
interbedded thick, multicolored, primarily marine, silty, micaceous mudrocks and fine- to coarse-
grained, thin- to thick-bedded siltstones, sandstone, and conglomerates, while the Catskill Formation is
described as consisting of red, gray, or mottled red and green, mixed continental, fluvial-deltaic, and
marginal-marine strata. Strata older than the Lock Haven in the study area, as described by Baldassare
et al. (2014), include the Upper Devonian Brallier Formation consisting of interbedded siltstones and
shales, with some rare, fine-grained sandstones and shales of the Upper Devonian Harrell Formation
(Genesee of New York), with basal black shales of the Burket Member (Geneseo of New York). The
numerous sequences and variations in lithology illustrate that the bedrock overlying the Marcellus Shale
cannot be considered as a massive and monolithic unit. The lithology, stratigraphy, and structural
geology of the bedrock (and its thickness) have an impact on the potential migration of ground water
and/or gas through the bedrock. The thicknesses (and depths) of each formation can vary laterally.
Structural traps can be due to anticlines or faulting (in association with a specific lithology), while
fractures can potentially form preferential flow paths for fluids.
Within the Marcellus Shale, natural gas occurs within the pore spaces and vertical fractures, or joints, of
the shale and is adsorbed onto mineral grains and organic material. In order to recover gas in the study
area most efficiently, the horizontal legs (laterals) of gas wells are generally oriented north-northwest or
south-southeast (see Figure 8), perpendicular to a naturally occurring, older (Ji) joint set and parallel to
a less well developed naturally occurring, younger (J2) joint set. Well stimulation via hydraulic fracturing
is outward from the horizontal well perpendicular to the J2 fractures so that the J2 fractures are
intersected and drained as the stimulated fractures move outward (Engelder et al., 2009).
3.2. Hydrogeology
Surface water in the study area is part of the Upper Susquehanna River basin. The main branches of the
Susquehanna River flow south, while the smaller tributaries are constrained by the northeast-southwest
orientation of the Appalachian Mountains. Summer storms produce about half of the average
precipitation of approximately 40 inches per year (SRBC 2006), while the remainder of the precipitation,
and much of the ground water recharge, occurs during winter and the spring melt (PA DEP, 2012).
Williams et al. (1998) estimate an average recharge rate from precipitation in the valleys of
approximately 1.8 inches per year. These resources provide water for domestic use, municipal water,
manufacturing, irrigation, and hydraulic fracturing.
The ground water flow regime in the study area has been extensively described by Williams et al. (1998).
The glaciated valleys are classified into two major zones: (1) zones of unrestricted ground water flow
containing water of the calcium carbonate type, and (2) zones of restricted ground water flow
containing water of the sodium chloride type. Williams et al. (1998) state that unrestricted ground
water flow occurs in the unconfined and confined stratified-drift aquifers and in many of the till and
shallow bedrock systems, whereas restricted flow occurs in the bedrock of the major valleys and, in
some areas, in the overlying till and confined stratified-drift aquifers. Stratified drift aquifers (confined
17
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
• Drill Locations
O Past Frac Locations
»• As Drilled Borepath
• EPA Sampling Locations
V R
\ M.iii.lin •
\ ~—Stuutr.Iw ii
Run Backgrond: ESRI
Figure 8. Map showing north-northwest and south-southeast orientation of gas well laterals in Towanda area of Bradford County as of February 2012 (Data
source: Chesapeake Energy 2/12/2012). Note: Some gas wells shown were drilled but not yet fractured as of 2/12/2012. Also shown are homeowner well
and spring locations within map extent that were sampled in this study.
18
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
and unconfined) and the Lock Haven and Catskill bedrock formations serve as primary ground water
drinking sources in the study area, with till also occasionally being tapped as a drinking water source in
some locations (Williams et al., 1998). The confined aquifers in the study area are composed of sand
and gravel deposits of glacial, ice-contact origin and are typically buried by pro-glacial lake deposits; the
unconfined aquifers are composed of sand and gravel deposited by glacial outwash or melt-waters.
Depth to ground water (potentiometric surface) varies throughout the study area, ranging from 1 foot to
300 feet for the wells sampled in this study. Wells completed in stratified-drift aquifers generally have
specific capacities an order of magnitude greater than those completed in the till or bedrock. The
median specific capacity in confined stratified-drift aquifers is about 11 gallons per minute per foot
(gal/min ft) of drawdown, and in unconfined stratified-drift aquifers is about 24 gal/min ft (Williams et
al., 1998). Most wells in the Catskill Formation have higher yields than those in the Lock Haven
Formation due to the generally more coarse grained properties of the Catskill Formation.
The primary ground water type found in the study area is calcium bicarbonate (Ca-HCO3) water with
sodium bicarbonate (Na-HCO3) and sodium chloride (Na-CI) type water being found to a lesser extent
(Williams et al., 1998; Molofsky et al., 2013). According to Williams et al. (1998), sodium chloride type
water, which tends to occur in zones of more restricted flow, generally contains higher levels of total
dissolved solids (TDS) and higher concentrations of dissolved barium (Ba), dissolved sodium (Na), and
dissolved chloride (Cl). In their evaluation of ground water in Bradford, Tioga, and Potter counties in
northeastern Pennsylvania, Williams et al. (1998) identified 44 wells with Na-CI type water almost all of
which are located in stream and river valleys. According to Williams et al (1998), 23 of these wells were
completed in the Lock Haven formation, 15 in the Catskill formation, four in the confined stratified drift,
and two in the till. The natural presence of TDS, Ba, Na, and Cl at often elevated concentrations in the
study area relative to applicable secondary or primary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) complicates
their use as indicators of potential impacts. Naturally occurring iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn)
concentrations in ground water in the study area can also be elevated and frequently exceed the
secondary MCLs of 0.3 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and 0.05 mg/L, respectively (Williams et al., 1998).
3.3. Oil and Gas Production
Oil and gas exploration and production are not new to northeastern Pennsylvania and began as early as
the 1860s. However, as of 2002, much of the region remained unexplored or underexplored, as
evidenced by the sparse presence of both dry holes and established oil and gas fields (Carter and
Harper, 2002). The limited exploration in this part of Pennsylvania was at least partially attributable to
adherence to the carbon-ratio theory, which predicted the absence of hydrocarbons in northeastern
Pennsylvania due to the low percentage of fixed carbon present in coals in the area (Carter and
Harper, 2002). Zampogna et al. (2012) describe the history of oil and gas activities in northeastern
Pennsylvania (Bradford, Susquehanna, and Wyoming counties), identifying 33 oil or gas wells in Bradford
County and 11 in Susquehanna County from the 1860s to the 1980s. Historical oil and gas production in
northeastern Pennsylvania was essentially limited to Devonian strata, with the Lock Haven Formation
producing oil and gas, and the Oriskany Sandstone below the Marcellus Formation producing gas only.
In Bradford County in the 1990s, there were 11 wells producing gas in three gas fields in the Oriskany
Sandstone (Carter and Harper, 2002). The use of hydraulic fracturing to enhance the extraction of oil
and gas from subsurface formations began in the early 1950s, with hydraulic fracturing being limited to
vertical well systems. However, with the advent of horizontal directional drilling and improved hydraulic
fracturing techniques, as well as the increased price of gas, the extraction of gas from low-permeability
19
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
(unconventional) deposits such as the Marcellus Shale became economically viable. The advances in
hydraulic fracturing and horizontal directional drilling technologies have made the Marcellus Shale one
of the most important natural gas resources in the United States, with the capacity to possibly produce
several hundred trillion cubic feet of gas (Milici and Swezey, 2006; Engelder et al., 2009). The sudden
economic viability of gas production from the Marcellus Shale resulted in a significant acceleration in
drilling activities and production in the region after 2008. By mid-2013, as noted earlier, there were
more than 1,000 drilled unconventional oil and gas wells in Bradford County (primarily Marcellus gas
wells) compared to only one unconventional well prior to 2008 (PA DEP, 2015). Locations of Marcellus
Shale gas wells by year in Bradford and Susquehanna Counties are shown in Figures 5 and 6.
3.4. Land Use
According to Bradford County's 2004 Comprehensive Plan, "Residents today still enjoy a predominantly
rural landscape of forested hills and mountains, agricultural valleys, and small towns and villages at rural
cross roads." Historically, timber production was a major industry, and agriculture was and remains a
major industry, with Bradford County being one of the leading agricultural counties in Pennsylvania. The
largest population centers and industrial areas in the county are located along the Susquehanna River
(Bradford County Office of Community Planning and Grants, 2010). In recent years, the county has
become a center of natural gas production, and in the first half of 2012 was the leading natural gas
producing county in Pennsylvania, accounting for 26% of the state's natural gas production (Marcellus
Drilling News 2012).
Susquehanna County is largely undeveloped, with agricultural and forested land predominating (Michael
Baker, Inc., 2012). Dairy farming is a major industry in the county, and livestock production accounts for
94% of the value of the county's agricultural products (City Data, 2013). In the first half of 2012,
Susquehanna was the second largest natural gas producing county in Pennsylvania, accounting for 21%
of the state's natural gas production (Marcellus Drilling News, 2012).
Maps comparing land use in Bradford and Susquehanna counties in 1992 and 2006, based on data from
the National Land Cover Database (NLCD), are provided in Figures 9 and 10. Tables la and Ib, also
based on the NLCD, present data on land use in the counties in 1992 and 2006. The NLCD is based on
30-meter-resolution data from the Landsat satellite (USGS, 2012a). The 2006 dataset was the most
recent land use information available.
Although the data for land use in the two years (1992 and 1996) are not comparable due to changes in
input data and mapping methodologies (Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, 2013), the
NLCD data indicate that, in both years, forest cover was the largest land use in the counties, followed by
cultivated land, and that these two land use categories accounted for an overwhelming majority of the
land use in the counties. The data also indicate land use patterns did not significantly change between
1992 and 2006. Additional land use analysis, with particular focus on the areas adjacent to the sampling
points of this study, is presented in Appendix C.
20
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
1992
2006
0 2.5 5
10
I Miles
TT
Land Use Types
Open Water
Developed
Barren
Forest
Shrubland
Grass/Herbaceous • EPA Sampling Locations
Agricultural tjJ Townships
Wetlands £J_p Boroughs
Search Areas
Source: Land use. USGS National Land CorerDalaOase (J992.2006;. Mun/e/pa'f.ws. PASDJ1. Sampflftg LDCafjons £R4 ORD
Figure9. Bradford County, Pennsylvania - land use in 1992 and 2006 (Source. USGS National Land Cover Database [1992, 2006]). Buffer areas around the
sampling locations of this study were used for the analysis of land use and environmental record searches (see Appendix C).
21
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
2006
Land Use Types
Open Water
Developed
Barren Grass/Herbaceous
Forest Agricultural
Shrubland 0£ Wetlands
Search Areas
• EPA Sampling Locations
Source: Land use, USGS national Land cover Database 11SS1.20061 Municipalities PASDA Samohng Locations EPA ORB
Townships
Boroughs
Figure 10. Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania - land use in 1992 and 2006 (Source: USGS National Land Cover Database [1992, 2006]). Buffer areas around
the sampling locations of this study were used for the analysis of land use and environmental record searches (see Appendix C).
22
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table la. Land use in Bradford County in 1992 and 2006.
Land Use
Deciduous Forest
Pasture/Hay
Mixed Forest
Evergreen Forest
Row/Cultivated Crops
Open Water
Other
Total
1992
Square Miles
523
369
103
85
62
12
12
1,164
% of Total
45%
32%
9%
7%
5%
1%
1%
100%
2006
Square Miles
417
278
172
66
135
11
86
1,164
% of Total
36%
24%
15%
6%
12%
1%
7%
100%
Note. Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding. Data source. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2012
Table Ib. Land use in Susquehanna County in 1992 and 2006.
Land Use
Deciduous Forest
Pasture/Hay
Mixed Forest
Evergreen Forest
Row/Cultivated Crops
Open Water
Other
Total
1992
Square Miles
436
176
107
65
32
11
9
835
% of Total
52%
21%
13%
8%
4%
1%
1%
100%
2006
Square Miles
341
136
140
55
99
10
54
835
% of Total
41%
16%
17%
7%
12%
1%
7%
100%
Note. Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding. Data source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2012
Table 2 provides an estimate of the areas affected by natural gas development in Bradford and
Susquehanna counties. The website of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA
DEP) provided the number of permitted well pads in each of the counties as of May 19, 2014. (PA DEP,
2014a). Most wells at these pads are "unconventional" (PA DEP, 2014b)1, suggesting they are
completed in the Marcellus Shale and have been stimulated using hydraulic fracturing. A USGS study of
the landscape impacts of natural gas extraction in Pennsylvania provided the estimate of the area
disturbed (i.e., affected) by well pads associated with the extraction of shale gas through hydraulic
1 The online database from which these data were drawn provides an option for selecting records relating to unconventional
wells only or all wells. Selecting either option results in identical lists that include only unconventional wells.
23
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
fracturing (USGS, 2012b). In both counties, less than 1% of the county land area is potentially affected
by gas development.
Table 2. Area potentially affected by gas development in Bradford and Susquehanna Counties.
Item
Number of Well Pads (1)
Affected Acres per Well Pad (2), (i)
Affected Area in Square Miles (ii)
Total Area of County in Square Miles (3)
Percentage of County Area Potentially Affected by Well Pads
County
Bradford
644
Susquehanna
414
10.1
10.2
1,147
0.9%
6.6
823
0.8%
Sources:
(1) PADEP(2014a)
(2) US Geological Survey (2012b)
(3) US Census Bureau (2012)
Notes:
(i) Original source in hectares, converted to acres (2.471 acres per hectare).
(ii) 640 acres per square mile.
3.5. Potential Contaminant Sources
In order to help determine whether hydraulic fracturing was the cause or one of the causes of potential
impacts on water quality assessed in this study, a consistent and rigorous 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.
An exhaustive list of candidate causes, i.e., hypothesized causes of environmental impairment that are
sufficiently credible to be analyzed (EPA, 2000a), was developed for the Bradford and Susquehanna
county areas of this retrospective case study. Each environmental stressor was evaluated by examining
potential causes and effects. Candidate causes included all potential sources that could stress the
environment and thereby 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 determine whether there are potential sources of contamination unrelated to drilling and
hydraulic fracturing activities, a detailed background assessment was conducted as described below.
The background assessment is presented in detail in Appendix C.
Detailed background assessments included searches of the following databases:
• Environmental records search: Environmental record searches were performed by
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). EDR's service includes searching publicly available
databases and also providing data from their own proprietary databases.
24
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
• 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: PA DEP's Environment Facility Application Compliance Tracking System
(eFACTS; hfiyjL^Aw^ was used to find up-to-
date well records for the study areas. This database provides information on inspection and
pollution prevention visits, including lists 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.
The issues concerning ground water in Bradford County and Susquehanna County include complaints
about changes in water quality believed by homeowners to be associated with gas drilling (e.g.,
turbidity, effervescing, discoloration, staining, odor, etc.). Although numerous gas wells have been
recently drilled and continue to be drilled in these areas, no specific gas well was targeted as a potential
candidate cause at the initiation of the study, since changes in water quality could also be due to
historical land use, historical drilling practices, and naturally occurring sources.
Williams et al. (1998) identified sewage, animal wastes, chemical fertilizers, industrial chemicals and
wastes, and petroleum products as sources of contamination to ground water locally in the study area.
Battelle (2013) concluded the main causes of historical (pre-2007) water quality impairments in
Bradford and Susquehanna counties have been agriculture and road runoff, with additional
contributions from habitation modification, septic systems, non-point sources, point sources, and
resource extraction from coal and non-coal mineral mining. They state that agricultural runoff can
include insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, fertilizers, metals, and other constituents (dissolved solids,
bromide, selenium), and road runoff can include chloride, sodium, and bromide.
25
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
4. Study Methods
This section describes the methods used in this study for the collection of water samples, sample
analysis, quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC), data reduction, and data analysis. A more detailed
description of the sampling methods, analytical methods, and QA/QC is provided in the Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) (EPA 2013) [MtBl/ZHlMiiL^^
bradfoixJj^yjew^asestujJyjadf]. The analytical methods and field measurements employed in the study
are discussed in Sections 2.2 and 2.4, respectively, of the QAPP. A list of the analytes, parameters, and
sample results are provided in Appendix B. Water analyses were conducted for over 225 analytes
covering a large range of organic and inorganic constituents, including gasoline-range organics (GRO),
diesel-range organics (DRO), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-volatile organic compounds
(SVOCs), glycol ethers (2-butoxyethanol, diethylene, triethylene, and tetraethylene glycol), low-
molecular-weight acids (lactate, formate, acetate, proprionate, isobutyrate, and butyrate), dissolved
gases (methane, ethane, propane, n-butane), major and trace cations and anions, dissolved organic
carbon (DOC), dissolved inorganic carbon (DIG), stable isotopes (613CCH4, 62HCH4, 613CC2H6, 613CD|C, 618OH2o,
62HH20, and 87Sr/86Sr), and radioactivity (radium-226, radium-228, gross alpha activity, and gross beta
activity). Field parameters measured included temperature, specific conductance, pH, dissolved oxygen,
oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), alkalinity, turbidity, ferrous iron, and hydrogen sulfide. These
analyses cover a broad spectrum of compounds and indicators that are potentially linked to hydraulic
fracturing activities and/or that aid in providing a conceptual framework for evaluating potential
impacts. Of the analyses noted above, those that are considered critical analyses supporting the
primary objective of the project—i.e., to determine whether drinking water (ground water) resources in
the selected areas of Bradford and Susquehanna counties have been impacted by hydraulic fracturing
activities—include GRO, DRO, VOCs (ethanol, isopropyl alcohol, tert-butyl alcohol, naphthalene,
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes), SVOCs, dissolved gases (methane, ethane, propane, n-
butane), major cations (Ca, Mg, Na, K), major anions (Cl, SO4), and trace elements (As, Se, Sr, Ba).
4.1. Sampling Locations
Three rounds of sampling were conducted as part of this study at a total of 36 homeowner wells, two
springs, one pond, and one stream in northeastern Pennsylvania. Samples were collected from 33
homeowner wells and two springs in the first round; 22 homeowner wells, one spring, the stream, and
the pond in the second round; and 21 homeowner wells and one spring in the third round. An iterative
approach was employed in the sampling program whereby the results from a preceding sampling event
were used to refine the focus of subsequent sampling events. Most homeowners who had come
forward to lodge complaints or express concerns regarding potential impacts of nearby hydraulic
fracturing activities on their well water were accommodated in the first round of sampling. The second
and third sampling rounds generally focused on those locations that in the first round of sampling were
observed to exhibit more elevated concentrations of one or more constituents of interest possibly linked
to hydraulic fracturing activities (e.g., methane, chloride, sodium, TDS, barium, radium, bromide,
strontium, manganese, iron, etc.).
Most sampling locations in the study were in Bradford County; the exceptions were three homeowner
locations (four wells) in Susquehanna County, which were sampled in the first round only (see Figures 3
and 4). With one exception, all sampling locations were within 1 mile of one or more drilled gas wells
and, with three exceptions, all sampling locations were within 1 mile of one or more drilled gas wells
26
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
that had been hydraulically fractured prior to water sampling in this study. With three exceptions, one
or more fractured laterals were present areally within 3,000 feet of each of the sampling locations prior
to water sampling. Collectively, there were a total of approximately 100 drilled gas wells within 1 mile
of sampling locations in the study (see Appendix C, Table C-27), with most wells having been fractured
prior to water sampling. The two springs sampled in the study had originally served as drinking water
sources for homeowners but were eventually replaced by drilled drinking water wells. The pond
sampled in the study was located immediately adjacent to and downhill of a well pad (Vannoy pad)
where fluid releases were reported to have occurred in 2009 (see Appendix C). The primary focus of the
pond sampling was to determine whether links, if any, existed between potential pond impacts and
potential impacts on the nearby homeowner well. The stream sampled in the study was close to a
homeowner well observed to exhibit more elevated levels of barium, TDS, and combined radium-226
and radium-228. As in the case of the pond, the stream was sampled to establish links, if any, between
potential stream impacts and potential well impacts.
The completion depths of homeowner wells sampled in the study were, in most cases, uncertain and
were based primarily on homeowner knowledge of their wells. Well depths could not be determined in
the field due to the homeowner pumps in the wells posing an obstruction to the use of well depth
measuring devices. Temporary removal of homeowner pumps from the wells to allow for depth
measurements was not feasible, since it would have required specialized equipment and services and
may have caused a significant interruption in the availability of water to the homeowner. A search of
state records, including a visit to state offices, yielded only limited information on the construction and
depth of the homeowner wells that were sampled.
Although the first round of sampling was conducted in both Bradford County and Susquehanna County,
sampling in the two subsequent rounds was limited to Bradford County only. This is due to EPA
Region 3 becoming actively involved in evaluating drinking water quality in Susquehanna County
(Dimock) in early 2012, soon after completion of the first round of sampling in this study. Three of four
homeowner wells sampled in this study in Susquehanna County were located in Dimock; therefore, in
order to avoid redundancy in efforts by Region 3 and EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD),
it was decided to focus on Bradford County for this study. The fourth homeowner well sampled in
Susquehanna County was not located in Dimock but was also not sampled in rounds 2 and 3 because of
liability concerns associated with very high turbidity generated in the well during purging. As will be
addressed later in the report, there is no basis for linking the high turbidity in this homeowner well to
hydraulic fracturing since the nearest hydraulically fractured gas well was more than two miles from the
homeowner well at the time of sampling.
Some locations in the study were sampled once, some twice, and some in all three rounds. In addition
to the second and third sampling rounds generally focusing on those locations that in the first round of
sampling were observed to exhibit more elevated concentrations of one or more constituents of interest
possibly linked to hydraulic fracturing activities, other reasons for sampling some locations only once
included accessibility issues and homeowner well functionality problems. Also, most of the locations
sampled only once in this study had been previously sampled by others (e.g., by PA DEP or operators) so
that data from past sampling events could be compared with data from this study to evaluate the need
for additional sampling. Table 3 lists the wells and springs sampled during each round in this study. Also
shown in Table 3 are presumed well depths (based on homeowner knowledge) and the formation(s) into
which the homeowner wells are likely completed.
27
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 3. Wells, springs, and surface waters sampled in this study.
Sample Id
NEPAGW01
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW03
NEPAGW04
NEPAGW05
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW07
NEPAGW08
NEPAGW09
NEPAGW10
NEPAGW11
NEPAGW12
NEPAGW13
NEPAGW14
NEPAGW15
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW17
NEPAGW18
NEPAGW19
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW24
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW26
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW29
NEPAGW30
NEPAGW31
NEPAGW32
Rounds
Sampled
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2
1
1,2,3
1
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,3
1,2
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2
1,2
1
1,2
1
1
1
1
1
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,3
1,2,3
1
1
1,2,3
Presumed Well
Depth (ft)
206
245
178
37
280
119
unknown
260
150
175
250
440
200
340
220
86
100
203
142
160
unknown
unknown
120
unknown
unknown
unknown
220
225
unknown
390
300
179
Water Type*
Na-HCO3
Na-HCO3
Ca-SO4
Na-CI
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Na-CI
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Na-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Na-HCO3
Na-CI
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
**
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Na-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Na-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Likely Formation(s) of Completion
Lock Haven
Lock Haven
Lock Haven
Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Stratified Drift and/or Lock Haven
Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Lock Haven
Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Stratified Drift
Stratified Drift
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Stratified Drift and/or Catskill
Stratified Drift and/or Catskill
Stratified Drift and/or Catskill
Stratified Drift and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Lock Haven
Lock Haven
Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
28
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 3. Wells, springs, and surface waters sampled in this study.
Sample Id
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW36
NEPAGW37
NEPAGW38
NEPASW01
NEPASW02
NEPASW03
NEPASW04
NEPASW05
NEPASW06
Rounds
Sampled
1,2,3
2,3
3
3
1,2,3
1
2
2
2
2
Presumed Well
Depth (ft)
115
unknown
200-240
130
spring
spring
pond
pond
stream
stream
Water Type*
Na-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
Ca-HCO3
—
—
—
—
Likely Formation(s) of Completion
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
Catskill and/or Lock Haven
—
—
—
—
—
—
*based on AqQA criteria; **ion balance >15%.
4.2. Water Collection from Homeowner Wells
The methods for collecting samples from wells, springs, and surface waters are described in the QAPP
prepared for this study (EPA, 2013). In the case of wells, samples were collected either from a
homeowner tap located upstream of any home water treatment systems, where applicable, or directly
from the well in cases where a separate submersible pump (Proactive Monsoon) was used. Where
possible, samples were also collected upstream of pressure tanks. For wells that could be accessed
directly, depth to ground water (potentiometric surface) was measured and recorded using a Solinst
Model 101 electronic water level indicator or a Ravensgate 200LJ sonic water level measuring device.
The existing homeowner well pump, where possible, was used to purge the well and subsequently
sample the well. In cases where a homeowner pump was not present, a separate submersible pump
(Proactive Monsoon) was introduced into the well to allow for sample collection. The rate of purging
was determined by measuring the volume of water collected after a unit of time into a large metered
pail or equivalent container. During purging, water level measurements were recorded regularly to
monitor drawdown in the well. If drawdown was initially observed to be substantial, purge rates were
decreased accordingly to minimize drawdown while still ensuring an adequate purge rate. In general,
wells were purged for at least one hour prior to sample collection at rates of up to 10 gallons (=38 liters)
per minute. Following completion of well purging, a metal (brass) adaptor with attached polyethylene
tubing was connected to the homeowner tap. In cases where split sampling was conducted with the
operator, a Y-shaped metal (brass) adaptor was employed instead, allowing for the attachment of two
separate lines of polyethylene tubing. Water flow at a rate of 1 to 2 liters per minute was then directed
through a flow-through cell attached to a YSI 556 multi-parameter probe unit. Sample collection
commenced once stabilization of geochemical parameters occurred (pH, temperature, conductivity,
dissolved oxygen [DO], and, if possible, ORP). Unfiltered samples for the analyses of dissolved gases,
VOCs, SVOCs, DRO, GRO, glycol ethers, low-molecular-weight acids, total metals, gross alpha activity,
gross beta activity, Ra-226, Ra-228, 613CCH4, 613CC2H6, and 62HCH4were collected first. Next, a high-
capacity filter (0.45-micron pore size Millipore brand) was attached to the end of the tubing and a series
of filtered samples were collected for dissolved metals, anions, nutrients, DIG, 613CD|C, 618OH2o; 62HH2o,
29
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
and 87Sr/86Sr analyses. Prior to filling sample bottles, at least 100 milliliters (ml) of ground water was
passed through the filter to waste. Sample preservation and holding time requirements for each sample
type are described in Table Al (Appendix A). All samples were placed on ice in a cooler following
collection and kept on ice until arrival at the designated analytical laboratory. Smaller plastic bottles
were placed in sealed plastic bags; glass bottles and vials were wrapped in bubble wrap; and large
plastic bottles (with the exception of samples to be analyzed for 613CCH4, 613CC2H6, and 62HCH4) were
placed in the cooler in an upright position. Sample bottles for 613CCH4, 613CC2H6, and 62HCH4 analyses were
placed in an inverted position in coolers and maintained in the inverted position throughout shipment to
the designated analytical laboratory. Coolers were taped shut, affixed with a custody seal, and shipped
to designated analytical laboratories, generally within 24 hours to 48 hours of collection, depending on
sample holding time requirements.
4.3. Sampling at Springs and Surface Water Locations
The two springs sampled in the study were either sampled directly at their location or from a
homeowner tap connected to the spring. If sampled at their location, a peristaltic pump (Pegasus Pump
Company Alexis ) or bladder pump (QED Sample Pro) was used, as appropriate. The bladder pump was
employed for collection of VOC and GRO samples to minimize loss by volatilization; otherwise, the
peristaltic pump was used. Samples from the pond and stream were similarly collected employing a
peristaltic pump (Pegasus Pump Company Alexis*) or bladder pump (QED Sample Pro), as appropriate,
for the type of sample being collected. Samples obtained directly from springs, and surface water
samples obtained from the pond and stream, were collected by extracting water from beneath the
surface using dedicated polyethylene tubing affixed to a long aluminum pole and connected to a
peristaltic pump or bladder pump, as appropriate. (Samples collected from springs via a homeowner tap
were collected by the method used for domestic well sampling.) Sampling of surface waters and springs
was, in all cases, performed to minimize any capture of sediment. Samples obtained directly from
springs, and samples collected from the pond and stream for analysis of dissolved metals, stable
isotopes (except isotopes of methane and ethane), anions, nutrients, and inorganic/organic carbon,
were collected using a peristaltic pump and filtered in-line using a high-capacity (0.45 micron) capsule
filter. YSI readings were recorded prior to sampling by inserting the probe unit directly into the surface
water body and allowing readings to stabilize, or by directing surface water through the peristaltic pump
and the YSI flow cell until stabilization of readings had occurred.
4.4. Water Analysis
4.4.1. Field Parameters
As noted earlier, temperature, specific conductance, pH, ORP, and dissolved oxygen in wells were
continuously monitored prior to sample collection using the YSI 556 multi-parameter probe and flow-
through cell assembly. YSI electrodes were calibrated each morning prior to sampling. Performance
checks were conducted in the morning following calibration, at midday when possible, 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
YSI 5580 Confidence Solution was used for continuing performance checks. YSI ORP standard was used
for calibration of ORP measurements and a conductivity standard (Oakton) was used for calibration of
specific conductance measurements. Table A27 (Appendix A) provides the results of the performance
checks for these parameters. Performance check criteria were consistently met without exception for
30
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
these parameters during all three rounds of sampling. Dissolved oxygen sensors were calibrated with
water-saturated air according to manufacturer recommendations each morning and checked with zero-
oxygen solutions to ensure good performance at low oxygen levels. Prior to field deployment, the
electrode assembly and meter were checked to confirm good working order.
Following stabilization of parameters, an approximately 500-mL unfiltered sample was collected and
immediately analyzed for field determinations of turbidity, dissolved sulfide, ferrous iron, and alkalinity.
Turbidity measurements (EPA Method 180.1) were conducted using a HACH 2100Q Portable
Turbidimeter, which was calibrated with a HACH 2100Q StablCal Calibration Set consisting of
20 nephelometric unit (NTU), 100 NTU, and 800 NTU standards, and a 10 NTU calibration verification
standard. Iron concentrations were determined using the 1,10-phenanthroline colorimetric method
(HACH DR/890 colorimeter, Standard Method 3500-FeB for Wastewater). Dissolved sulfide
measurements were made using the methylene blue colorimetric method (HACH DR/890 colorimeter,
Standard Method 4500-S2"D for Wastewater). Alkalinity measurements were made by titrating water
samples with 1.6N sulfuric acid (H2SO4) to the bromcresol green-methyl red endpoint using a HACH
Model AL-DT Digital Titrator (EPA Method 310.1).
The HACH DR/890 colorimeter (for ferrous iron and sulfide) and the HACH 2100Q Portable Turbidimeter
(for turbidity) were inspected prior to going into the field. The ferrous iron accuracy was checked by
making triplicate measurements of a 1-mg Fe/L standard solution (HACH Iron Standard solution, using
Ferrover® pillows); the results were between 0.90 -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 following calibration against the 10 NTU StablCal Calibration Set verification standard supplied
by HACH. Titrators used for alkalinity measurements were checked using a 100-mg/L standard prepared
from sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3). In the field, ferrous iron and sulfide blanks (distilled water) were
measured at the beginning and end of each day to ensure the HACH DR/890 colorimeter remained in
working order and was not returning false positives. The turbidimeter was checked against the 20 NTU,
100 NTU, 800 NTU, and/or 10 NTU turbidity calibration standards at the end of each day to ensure it
remained in working order. Performance checks of the HACH DR/890 colorimeter and HACH 2100Q
Portable Turbidimeter were consistently met throughout the study.
4.4.2. Analytical Methods for Ground Water and Surface Water
Over 2,000 water samples were collected and analyzed over the three rounds of sampling. The
laboratories that performed the analyses in each sampling round, and the methods used, are described
in Appendix A (Table Al). Anions, nutrients, DIG, and DOC samples from all three sampling events
(rounds 1, 2, and 3) were analyzed in-house (GWERD General Parameters Lab, Ada, Oklahoma).
Quantitative analyses of the major anions bromide (Br~), chloride (Cl~), fluoride (F~), and sulfate (SO42~)
were performed by capillary ion electrophoresis (EPA Method 6500) with a Waters Quanta 4000
Capillary Ion Analyzer. Nutrients (NO3+ NO2, NH3) were measured by flow injection analysis (EPA
Method 350.1 and 353.1) on a Lachat QuickChem 8000 Series flow injection analyzer. The concentration
of carbon in DIG and DOC in aqueous samples was determined by acidification and combustion followed
by infrared detection (EPA Method 9060A) on a Shimadzu TOC-VCPH Analyzer.
31
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Samples for dissolved gases, low-molecular-weight acids, and stable isotopes of water (52HH20, 518OH20)
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). Samples for gas analysis were collected by
submerging sample vials in a continuously overflowing bucket filled with water pumped from the
sampling location. 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 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 notation (%o) with respect to the Vienna Standard Mean Ocean
Water (VSMOW) standard.
The analysis of DRO, GRO, and SVOCs in water samples collected during rounds 1, 2, and 3 was
completed by EPA's Region 8 Laboratory. DRO and GRO were determined 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 using
automated headspace GC/MS (EPA Methods 5021A and 8260C; Agilent 6890/5973 Quadrupole GC/MS).
In round 3, the 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 glycol, triethylene glycol, and tetraethylene glycol) were measured
by EPA's Region 3 Laboratory for samples collected during all three rounds. The samples were analyzed
by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) coupled with positive electrospray ionization (ESI+)
tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS; Waters HPLC/MS/MS with a Waters Atlantis dC18 3u.m, 2.1 x
150mm column) (Schumacher and Zintek, 2014).
Major cation and trace metals were determined for 0.45 u.m filtered (dissolved metals) and unfiltered
(total metals) samples by Shaw Environmental in round 1. Major cations were analyzed using
inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES; EPA Methods 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 prior to analysis by
microwave digestion (EPA Method 3015A). Total and dissolved trace metals were analyzed through
EPA's Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) in round 2. The samples were prepared and analyzed
following CLP methodology (Method ISM01.3). Total and dissolved metal analyses for samples collected
during 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).
In all sampling rounds, selected samples were submitted to Isotech Laboratories, Inc., for analysis of
stable isotope ratios of DIG (513CD|C), methane (513CCH4, 62HCH4), and where applicable, ethane (613CC2H6)-
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 and ethane
32
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
(513CCH4, 62HCH4, 613CC2H6) isotope ratios. The carbon isotope ratio values are reported in terms of permil
notation (%o) with respect to the Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite (VPDB) standard. The hydrogen isotope
ratio value (62HCH4) is reported in terms of permil notation (%o) with respect to the Vienna Standard
Mean Ocean Water (VSMOW) standard.
Strontium isotopes (87Sr/86Sr) and rubidium (Rb) and strontium (Sr) concentrations in filtered samples
were measured by the USGS for samples collected during all sampling events (rounds 1, 2, and 3). 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). Gross alpha
and gross beta activity concentrations were determined by ALS Environmental using a gas proportional
counter following EPA Method 900.0. Isotopes of radium (radium-226 and radium-228) were also
determined by ALS Environmental using EPA Methods 903.1 and 904.0.
4.5. QA/QC
Field QC samples included trip blanks, field blanks, equipment blanks, duplicate samples, and field
samples with adequate volumes for preparation of matrix spike samples in the laboratory. Field QC
sample types, summarized in Appendix A (Table A2), were collected, preserved, and analyzed using
identical methodologies as used for the ground water and surface water samples collected in the field.
Appendix A presents detailed QA practices and the results for QC samples, including discussions of chain
of custody, holding times, blank results, field duplicate results, laboratory QA narratives, 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 reported (see
Appendix A).
4.6. Data Handling and Analysis
For each sampling location in 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 overall
data analysis; however, a shortcoming of this method is that potential temporal variability in
concentration data at a single location is not captured. This issue is addressed in the study by evaluating
location-specific, time-dependent concentration trends at selected well locations for selected analytes
of interest. For parameters of interest, summary statistics were calculated (mean, median, standard
deviation, minimum and maximum values, and 25th, 75th, and 90th percentile values). Non-detect values
for parameters, where applicable, were set at half the minimum detection limit; summary statistics
determined for parameters that showed mixed results, both greater than the quantitation limit (QL) and
less than the QL, were generally determined only when more than 50% of the data were above the QL
(US EPA, 2000b). Samples from the two springs sampled as part of this study were combined in the
analyses with ground water samples collected from the homeowner wells.
Historical water quality data from the study area were collected online from the USGS National Water
Information System (NWIS) database (USGS, 2013) and the USGS National Uranium Resource Evaluation
(NURE) database (USGS, 2012c). Data from these sources were considered based upon various
evaluation criteria, such as: (1) did the organization that collected the data have a quality system in
33
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
place; (2) were the data collected under an approved QAPP or other similar planning document; (3)
were the analytical methods used comparable to those used for the primary data; (4) did the analytical
laboratories have demonstrated competency (such as through accreditation) for the analysis they
performed; (5) were the data accuracy and precision control limits similar to the primary data; (6) were
the secondary data source MDLs and QLs comparable to those associated with the primary data, or at
least adequate to allow for comparisons; and (7) were sampling methods comparable to those used for
the primary water quality data collected for this study? In general, the necessary metadata to fully
evaluate secondary data by these criteria were unavailable for these secondary water quality data
sources; 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; US EPA, 2013). As with the data
collected in this study, historical data from locations with multiple sampling events were averaged and
summary statistics were calculated. The EPA STORE! (Storage and Retrieval) data warehouse was not
used as a source of historical water quality data in this study because these data may have included
environmental impact monitoring data that would potentially skew background concentration data.
Also, the majority, if not all, of the Bradford County data reported and evaluated by Williams et al.
(1998) in their study of ground water quality in Bradford, Tioga, and Potter counties appear to be data
common to the NWIS database, thus precluding the need to evaluate their data separately in this study.
The software package AqQA (version 1.1.1) was used to evaluate internal consistency of water
compositions by calculating cation/anion balances and by comparing measured and calculated electrical
conductivity values. Ion balances were calculated by comparing the summed milliequivalents of major
cations (calcium, magnesium, sodium, and potassium), major anions (chloride, sulfate, fluoride,
bicarbonate), and minor cations and anions (Sr, Ba, Li, Mn, Fe, and F) using the equation:
Charge Balance (%) = | (Zcat-Zan)/(Zcat+Zan)*1001
Bicarbonate concentrations used in the ion balance determinations were calculated (in AqQA) from
field-measured alkalinity values. The calculated charge balance error over the three sampling rounds
ranged from 0.01 to 15.6% (see Appendix A); 86% of the samples collected for this study had a charge
balance error <5%. Only samples with a charge balance <15% were used for water-type analysis and to
construct geochemical plots such as Piper, Durov, or Schoeller diagrams.
Summary statistics for historical data were determined on a countywide basis (Bradford County only) for
comparison with the data collected in this study. For the historical datasets, as for the samples from this
study, only samples with a charge balance error <15% were used for water-type analysis and for
constructing geochemical plots. Again, the historical data from locations with multiple sampling events
were averaged and summary statistics were determined. Charge balance criteria were not used to
screen historical data for use in summary statistic calculations or for plotting box-and-whisker diagrams.
Various issues relating to data quality and applicability of historical data have been previously discussed
(Battelle, 2013; US EPA, 2013), including 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, historic data are used as the best points of reference
available to compare with the water quality data collected in this study.
All statistical evaluations except post-hoc tests were performed using EPA's ProUCL program,
version 5.0. Post-hoc tests were performed, where applicable, using Statistica, version 12. Since
34
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
comparisons of either two or three datasets were required, a one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), a
parametric procedure, and the nonparametric one-way ANOVA (Kruskal-Wallis Test), the nonparametric
equivalent, were selected as the most appropriate statistical test procedures. A preliminary review of
the data was performed to determine the statistical distributions of the data using ProUCL's goodness-
of-fit tests. This was done to determine the most appropriate group-wise comparison tests—parametric
or nonparametric. One of the assumptions underlying parametric statistical procedures is that the data
are normally distributed or can be transformed to a normally distributed form. Post-hoc tests were
performed in cases where analyte-specific significant differences were indicated among three datasets.
The post-hoc tests were conducted using parametric Scheffe multiple comparison tests and Kruskal-
Wallis nonparametric multiple comparison tests. A p-value <0.05 was, in all cases, 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 that encompass numerous
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
were not incorporated (e.g., Bonferroni or Sidak correction factors) and the traditional significance
threshold of 0.05 was applied for the data comparisons.
35
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
5. Historic Water Quality Data
5.1. Major Ion Chemistry
Ground water quality in the study area is variable and can range from good to poor depending on
location and depth. Many natural exceedances of EPA secondary MCLs and occasionally primary MCLs
are known to occur in private wells (Williams et al., 1998; Boyer et al., 2011). Boyer et al. (2011) state
that more than 40% of private water wells in Pennsylvania fail to meet federal drinking water standards.
Naturally occurring constituents frequently exceeding EPA secondary MCLs in the study area include
chloride, IDS, iron, and manganese (Williams et al., 1998). Williams et al. (1998), in their evaluation of
over 200 wells in Bradford, Tioga, and Potter counties in northeastern Pennsylvania, indicate about 50%
of the wells exceeded secondary MCLs for iron and manganese. Naturally occurring constituents
occasionally exceeding EPA primary MCLs in the study area include barium, combined radium-226 and
radium-228, and arsenic. According to Williams et al. (1998), higher concentrations of these
constituents tend to be associated with the sodium chloride (Na-CI) type ground water often found in
valleys in the study area in zones of more restricted ground water flow.
The USGS NWIS and NURE databases provide historical ground water quality data pre-dating modern-
day hydraulic fracturing activities in the study area (i.e., pre-2007). Summary statistics for Bradford
County from the NWIS and NURE databases for parameters and constituents of interest in this study are
presented in Table 4. Summary statistics were prepared for Bradford County only, since the majority of
sampling was conducted in Bradford County and three of the four wells sampled in Susquehanna County
were located in the western half of the county, within 15 miles of the Bradford County line (see
Figure 4). The pre-2007 NWIS dataset used in this study consists of 129 ground water sampling locations
in Bradford County and spans the period from 1935 to 2006. Water quality data in the NWIS database
include major cations, anions, general parameters (e.g., pH, specific conductance, and alkalinity), some
trace element data, and very limited entries for organic compounds and radiogenic constituents. Data
of particular interest to this study (e.g., chloride) were not necessarily collected at all 129 locations, as
reflected in the information presented in Table 4. The NURE database provides water quality data for
164 well locations in Bradford County, spanning the very short period from October 6 to October 23,
1977. Summary statistics for major cations (sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium), major anions
(sulfate, chloride), and other constituents (iron, manganese, arsenic, TDS, etc.) from the two datasets
are compared in Table 4 to data collected from the 38 ground water sampling locations in this study.
Sampling locations associated with the datasets are provided in Figure 11. It is important to note 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. Also, historical
water quality data do not provide information on the comprehensive set of analytes evaluated in this
study; thus meaningful comparisons between, for example, organic compound data collected for this
study and historical data available before unconventional gas development in Bradford County are not
possible.
36
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 4. Ground water data from this study compared to 1977 NURE and pre-2007 NWIS data.
Parameter
Alkalinity
Alkalinity
Arsenic
Arsenic
Arsenic
Barium
Barium
Barium
Calcium
Calcium
Chloride
Chloride
Chloride
Iron
Iron
Iron
Iron
Magnesium
Magnesium
Fraction
Total
Total
Total
Total
Dissolved
Recoverable
Total
Dissolved
Dissolved
Dissolved
Dissolved
Dissolved
Dissolved
Recoverable
Total
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
mg/L
Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
This Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
This Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NURE 1977
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
Earliest
Sample
Date
8/8/35
10/25/11
7/21/81
10/25/11
10/25/11
8/2/83
10/25/11
10/25/11
8/8/35
10/25/11
10/6/77
8/8/35
10/25/11
7/21/81
10/25/11
8/8/35
10/25/11
8/8/35
10/25/11
Latest
Sample
Date
5/28/03
5/15/13
6/15/06
5/15/13
5/15/13
4/29/86
5/15/13
5/15/13
7/27/82
5/15/13
10/23/77
4/29/86
5/15/13
4/29/86
5/15/13
5/28/03
5/15/13
7/27/82
5/15/13
Cou nt of
Sample
Locations
122
38
96
28
28
62
38
38
60
38
164
116
38
72
38
50
38
60
38
Count of
Total
Samples
127
80
100
45
45
62
80
80
61
80
164
121
80
75
80
51
80
61
80
Mean
157
166
30.1
2.04
1.50
2151
707
680
49.9
44.2
14.1
89.4
47.5
1658
811
1256
204
12.4
10.4
Std.
Dev.
65.2
76.0
104
2.26
1.73
12573
1176
1154
38.0
54.6
23.7
417
114
6731
1920
2927
572
9.32
20.4
Minimum
20
22
2.00
0.06
0.06
5.00
10.1
9.67
2.90
9.21
0.10
0.50
0.77
10.0
11.0
10.0
10.0
0.60
2.01
25th
110
123
2.00
0.41
0.20
30.0
151
148
27.5
26.0
5.30
4.00
3.65
118
57.9
92.5
37.1
5.45
4.19
Median
50th
153
152
2.50
1.05
0.71
50.0
269
238
42.0
34.9
8.05
10.0
8.59
335
272
310
48.7
10.3
6.08
75th
203
215
2.50
2.85
2.45
275
632
511
62.1
47.0
12.7
30.0
23.0
995
505
940
162
16.0
8.83
90th
247
255
24.5
5.18
3.90
990
1722
1656
86.1
57.8
25.3
150
82.5
2330
1628
2490
353
24.3
14.6
Maximum
350
380
500
9.0
5.75
98000
5280
5065
235
357
228
4275
510
56400
10700
15900
3533
46.0
130
NDs/n*
0/122
0/38
78/96
1/28
3/28
34/62
0/38
0/38
0/60
0/38
1/164
1/116
0/38
5/72
4/38
0/50
15/38
0/60
0/38
37
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 4. Ground water data from this study compared to 1977 NURE and pre-2007 NWIS data.
Parameter
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
Manganese
pH
pH
PH
Potassium
Potassium
Sodium
Sodium
Sodium
Fraction
Recoverable
Total
Dissolved
Dissolved
Dissolved
None
None
None
Dissolved
Dissolved
Dissolved
Dissolved
Dissolved
Units
Mg/l
Mg/l
Mg/l
Mg/l
Mg/l
std units
std units
std units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NURE 1977
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NURE 1977
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NURE 1977
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
Earliest
Sample
Date
7/21/81
10/25/11
10/6/77
1/16/75
10/25/11
10/6/77
3/9/70
10/25/11
8/9/35
10/25/11
10/6/77
8/9/35
10/25/11
Latest
Sample
Date
4/29/86
5/15/13
10/23/77
5/28/03
5/15/13
10/23/77
12/13/06
5/15/13
7/27/82
5/15/13
10/23/77
7/27/82
5/15/13
Cou nt of
Sample
Locations
71
38
161
37
38
164
54
38
45
38
163
45
38
Count of
Total
Samples
74
80
161
38
80
164
530
80
46
80
163
46
80
Mean
263
305
149
274
230
7.29
7.43
7.46
3.28
1.67
17.5
89.1
48.8
Std.
Dev.
878
642
117
557
505
0.58
0.64
0.60
3.52
0.90
21.3
300
70.9
Minimum
5.00
4.62
38.6
10.0
4.74
6.0
5.2
5.9
0.90
0.59
1.18
4.00
2.04
25th
25.0
15.4
85.5
30.0
7.0
7.0
7.1
7.1
2.00
1.02
6.58
11.0
13.0
Median
50th
80.0
45.4
110
90.0
27.8
7.3
7.4
7.5
3.00
1.43
9.06
22.0
23.2
75th
220
165
154
250
159
7.6
7.7
7.9
3.00
1.95
18.4
43.0
47.5
90th
530
990
289
440
739
7.9
8.1
8.1
4.00
3.18
42.8
131
104
Maximum
7370
2740
796
2600
2615
9.1
9.1
8.6
25.0
4.00
145
2000
291
NDs/n*
19/71
4/38
0/161
0/37
7/38
0/164
0/54
0/38
0/45
0/38
0/163
0/45
0/38
38
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 4. Ground water data from this study compared to 1977 NURE and pre-2007 NWIS data.
Parameter
Specific
Conductance
Specific
conductance
Specific
conductance
Strontium
Strontium
Strontium
Sulfate
Sulfate
Total
dissolved
solids**
Total
dissolved
solids**
Fraction
None
None
None
Recoverable
Total
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
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
This Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
NWIS
pre-2007
This Study
Earliest
Sample
Date
10/6/77
1/16/75
10/25/11
8/2/83
10/25/11
10/25/11
8/8/35
10/25/11
8/8/35
10/25/11
Latest
Sample
Date
10/23/77
12/13/06
5/15/13
4/29/86
5/15/13
5/15/13
4/29/86
5/15/13
4/29/86
5/15/13
Cou nt of
Sample
Locations
164
58
38
62
38
38
121
38
121
38
Count of
Total
Samples
164
58
80
62
80
80
125
80
170
80
Mean
318
634
526
1778
1591
1584
26.9
43.9
361
342
Std.
Dev.
208
1022
511
10252
2264
2238
32.1
198
666
332
Minimum
5.00
2.90
90.0
5.00
30.0
30.0
1.00
0.03
64.0
58.5
25th
210
331
304
82.5
339
332
10.0
7.30
176
198
Median
50th
280
417
348
160
837
819
20.0
11.3
231
227
75th
372
591
517
400
1767
1768
30.0
14.7
344
336
90th
468
738
896
807
3038
3033
50.0
22.9
538
582
Maximum
1580
6000
2521
80000
10867
10717
250
1230
7067
1639
NDs/n*
0/164
0/58
0/38
4/62
0/38
0/38
2/121
3/38
1/121
0/38
'• NDs/n = non-detects per total number of locations sampled; ** Calculated from specific conductivity measurements.
39
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
NORTH •
KMMEHMI •! TOWANDA JOWANDA
Groundwater Sampling Locations
• EPA O Boroughs
• NWIS
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Williams (2010), in a study of well logs for the neighboring counties of Chemung, Tioga, and Broome in
New York (to the immediate north of Bradford and Susquehanna counties), states that the base of
freshwater in upland areas tends to be about 800 feet below ground surface, whereas in valley settings,
the base of freshwater is only about 200 feet below ground surface. At depths greater than 200 feet in
the valley settings, ground water in the Upper Devonian bedrock and in a few areas in the glacial drift
tends to be salty. Based on well data reported by Williams et al. (1998) for Bradford County and
neighboring Tioga and Potter Counties to the west, median concentrations of IDS, barium, and chloride
in restricted flow zones with Na-CI type ground water are 830 mg/L, 2.0 mg/L, and 349 mg/L,
respectively. The authors state that only wells completed in the unconfined stratified drift and the
Catskill Formation have median iron and manganese concentrations lower than EPA secondary MCLs of
0.3 mg/L and 0.05 mg/L, respectively.
A good example of the poor quality ground water that can occur naturally in the study area is reflected
in the composition of natural spring water found at Salt Spring State Park, in Susquehanna County
(Figure 4). Data reported by Warner et al. (2012) for spring water collected from the park show chloride
concentrations of 4,014 mg/L, IDS concentrations of 7,067 mg/L, barium concentrations of 84.4 mg/L,
and combined radium-226 + radium-228 concentrations of 27.7 pCi/L. The concentrations of barium
and combined radium-226 + radium-228 in the spring water far exceed the primary drinking water MCLs
of 2.0 mg/L and 5 pCi/L, respectively. A similar example of poor quality ground water is reported in the
NWIS database for a valley well location in east-central Bradford County completed in the Lock Haven
Formation. The pre-2007 (1982 and 1986) data for this well with a reported depth of 110 ft indicated an
average chloride concentration of 4,275 mg/L, average TDS concentrations of 7,650 mg/L, and a
recoverable barium concentration in 1986 of 98.0 mg/L. (No barium analysis was conducted in 1982 at
this location.) Warner et al. (2012) have suggested that the naturally occurring Na-CI or Na-Ca-CI type
waters, such as those found at Salt Spring State Park and some valley locations in northeastern
Pennsylvania, reflect a mixing of shallow, modern water with water from deeper Appalachian
formations. According to Llewellyn (2014), the spring water from Salt Spring State Park represents
Appalachian Basin brine that has migrated vertically over geologic time to mix with locally recharged
ground water at a concentration of approximately 2 percent.
One of the most important indicators of potential impacts from hydraulic fracturing activities in
northeastern Pennsylvania is chloride, which can be found at concentrations greater than 40,000 mg/L
in flowback/produced water from the Marcellus Shale (Hayes, 2009; Haluszczak et al., 2013). Chloride is
a key indicator of potential impacts on ground water not only because of its high concentrations in
Marcellus Shale flowback/produced water but also because of its highly conservative nature (i.e., limited
physical, chemical, and biological attenuation in the subsurface). As such, any impact associated with
flowback/produced water from the Marcellus Shale should, at a minimum, manifest itself as an increase
in chloride concentrations in impacted ground water in the study area. Assuming a chloride
concentration of at least 20,000 mg/L in flowback/produced waters from the Marcellus Shale, mixing at
a volume-to-volume ratio of only 1%, for example, would still yield a chloride concentration of at least
200 mg/L, while mixing at a volume-to-volume ratio of 0.1% would still yield a concentration of at least
20 mg/L. It is reasonable to assume that locations in this study showing chloride concentrations near or
below the median pre-2007 concentrations shown in Table 4 (10.0 mg/L for the NWIS dataset and
8.05 mg/L for the NURE dataset) are locations not likely being impacted by flowback/produced waters
associated with hydraulic fracturing activities, at least within the timeframe of this study. Locations
41
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
showing chloride concentrations above these median concentrations require further evaluation,
although high naturally occurring chloride concentrations (e.g., >100 mg/L) are not uncommon in the
study area. This is evidenced by the 90th percentile concentration of 150 mg/L for the 116 samples in
the Bradford County NWIS dataset for which chloride concentrations are reported (Table 4). Williams et
al. (1998) report a median chloride concentration of 350 mg/L for 22 well locations completed in
restricted flow zones with Na-CI type water in their three-county study area of northeastern
Pennsylvania (Bradford, Tioga, and Potter counties).
5.2. Gas
Methane occurs naturally in the strata underlying northeastern Pennsylvania at almost all depths down
to the Marcellus Shale, often at significant concentrations (Baldassare et al., 2014; Carter and Harper,
2002; Williams 2010). Gas shows (i.e., evidence of gas) during drilling in the Upper Devonian formations
(e.g., Lock Haven and Catskill formations) have been regularly observed over the many years preceding
modern-day hydraulic fracturing activities (Carter and Harper, 2002; Baldassare et al., 2014). Williams
(2010) states the frequency of gas zones generally increases with depth in the Upper Devonian, with
pockets of gas locally also present above the base of the freshwater. Baldassare et al. (2014) provide
evidence of gas presence in the Middle and Upper Devonian formations above the Marcellus Shale
based on analyses of mud log samples collected during drilling of 234 gas wells in a five-county area of
northeastern Pennsylvania including Bradford and Susquehanna Counties.
At Salt Spring State Park in Susquehanna County (Figure 4), flammable gas bubbling up from a spring
was observed by European settlers in the early 1800s (Inners and Fleeger, 2002). A natural gas well was
drilled to a depth of 2,000 feet approximately 800 feet away from the salt spring in 1901-1902.
Although the well was ultimately abandoned and plugged, a volume of natural gas sufficient for a single
household migrated around the plug for over 20 years thereafter (Inners and Fleeger, 2002). A relatively
recent spring water sample collected from Salt Spring State Park showed a methane concentration of
26.0 mg/L (Warner et al., 2012) which is near the solubility limit for methane in water at atmospheric
pressure. Methane and ethane isotope data for spring water collected in the park indicate a
predominantly thermogenic signature with origins from depths above the Marcellus Formation
(Molofsky et al., 2013). Another well known (but more distant) naturally occurring thermogenic gas
seep is the Eternal Flame in Chestnut Ridge Park, New York, north of the study area. This natural gas
seep reportedly emits approximately 1 kilogram of methane per day and contains approximately 35%
(by volume) ethane and propane (Etiope et al., 2013).
Methane occurs naturally as background gas in many homeowner wells in northeastern Pennsylvania
and surrounding area. Although no pre-2007 gas data could be found for Bradford County, limited
background gas data have been reported from neighboring counties and states where the Marcellus
Shale is found. Breen et al. (2007) reported numerous well locations in Tioga County (abutting Bradford
County to the west), particularly in the Tioga River valley and along its tributaries, where methane
concentrations exceeded 25 mg/L. In a study by White and Mathes (2006) in neighboring West Virginia,
methane was detected in 131 of 170 wells sampled between 1997 and 2005, with concentrations
greater than 28 mg/L observed in 13 of these wells. The highest methane concentration detected in
their study was 68.5 mg/L. Vidic et al. (2013) report background methane concentrations in domestic
wells as high as 45 mg/L for 239 sites to the north of the study area, in neighboring New York State.
Molofsky et al. (2011, 2013) state that background methane is ubiquitous in ground water in
42
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
northeastern Pennsylvania, with higher concentrations observed in valleys than in upland areas. They
report that of 1,701 post-2006 pre-drill samples evaluated in Susquehanna County, 78% exhibited
detectable levels of methane and 3.4% exhibited methane concentrations greater than 7 mg/L. Weston
Solutions (2012) report that 1,187 of 3,773 post-2006 pre-drill samples collected in Bradford County
(31.4%) showed detectable levels of methane, with 7.9% of the samples exhibiting methane
concentrations greater than 3 mg/L, 5.0% exhibiting concentrations greater than 7 mg/L, and 1.75%
exhibiting concentrations greater than 20 mg/L. A suggested explanation for the significant presence of
natural gas in wells in northeastern Pennsylvania is isostatic rebound following glacial retreat that could
have re-opened ancient tectonic fracture systems (Brantley et al., 2013). This, according to the authors,
could have resulted in enhanced permeability allowing for gas and fluid migration to be more prevalent
than in settings located beyond the front of glacial advance.
The occurrence of methane in homeowner wells has been a highly debated issue in northeastern
Pennsylvania (Osborn et al., 2011; Molofsky et al., 2013; Baldasarre et al., 2014). According to
Baldassare et al. (2014), the PA DEP investigated 17 statewide reported stray gas incidents in 2009, 35 in
2010, and 37 in 2011, with a majority of these reported incidents occurring in the northeastern counties
of the state. Osborn et al. (2011) and Jackson et al. (2013a) have suggested a relationship exists
between thermogenic methane concentrations in ground water and proximity to active gas wells in
northeastern Pennsylvania. Their claims are based largely on gas isotope data and methane-to-ethane
ratios obtained from water wells in active and inactive drilling areas. They claim gas sampled near gas
wells tends to be less fractionated (i.e., more 13C-enriched) with a lower methane-to-ethane ratio than
gas from inactive areas, consistent with thermogenic gas originating from deeper formations where the
Marcellus Shale is found. The claim of increased methane concentrations in proximity to active drilling
sites is disputed by others (Schon, 2011; Saba and Orzechowski, 2011; Molofsky et al., 2013; Boyer et al.,
2011; Siegel et al., 2015). Molofsky et al. (2013), for example, argue that methane concentrations in the
study area are best correlated to topographic and hydrogeologic features, rather than shale-gas
extraction. Siegel et al. (2015), using a June 2009 to November 2011 Chesapeake Energy pre-drill
dataset comprising over 11,000 methane analyses from domestic wells in Bradford and nearby counties,
found no statistically significant relationship between dissolved methane concentrations in ground
water from domestic water wells and proximity to pre-existing oil or gas wells. Nevertheless, a number
of Notices of Violations (NOVs) related to stray gas migration have been levied against oil and gas
operators by the PA DEP in Bradford and Susquehanna counties over the past several years (see
Appendix C and Appendix D). Vidic et al. (2013) estimate that up to 3.4% (219 of 6,466) of gas wells in
Pennsylvania were cited by the PA DEP for issues related to gas migration, based on data available
between 2008 and March 2013. Vidic et al. (2013) further state that the most common cause of stray
gas migration is a faulty seal (i.e., inadequate cementing) in the annular space around well casings.
Ingraffea et al. (2014) claim that 9.18% of unconventional wells completed in northeastern Pennsylvania
since 2009 (2714 wells) have shown a loss of integrity (i.e., cement and/or casing impairment) with
unconventional wells having a four-fold higher risk of impairment compared to conventional wells. The
authors state cement integrity problems can arise from hydrostatic imbalances caused by inappropriate
cement density, inadequately cleaned bore holes, premature gelation of the cement, excessive fluid loss
in the cement, high permeability in the cement slurry, cement shrinkage, radial cracking due to pressure
fluctuations in the casings, poor interfacial bonding, and normal deterioration with age. Ingraffea et al.
(2014) state that casing problems may arise from failed casing joints, casing collapse, and corrosion.
Baldassare et al. (2014) state that both ineffective cement bonds and casing thread leaks can be sources
43
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
of stray gas. Molofsky et al. (2013) acknowledge that instances of stray gas migration resulting from
accumulation of gas pressures within and around the sides of the annular spaces of gas well casing have
occurred in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and New York, but dispute that stray gas migration is a systemic
problem as implied by some researchers (Osborn et al., 2011; Jackson et al., 2013a).
Whether the hydraulic fracturing (stimulation) process itself might be responsible for stray gas is also a
highly debated issue. The probability of stray gas migrating upward from induced fractures in the
Marcellus Shale as a result of the hydraulic fracturing (stimulation) process itself is claimed to be low
given the reported limited vertical extent of induced fractures (Davies et al., 2012; Fisher and Warpinski,
2012) and the relatively low reported permeability of the Mahantango Formation (of the Hamilton
Group) that lies immediately above the Marcellus Shale (Flewelling and Sharma, 2014; Molofsky et al.,
2013). Davies et al. (2012) report that the maximum height of an upward propagating hydraulic fracture
from several thousand fracturing operations in the Marcellus Shale and other shale plays is 588 meters
(1,929 feet), with the maximum height in the Marcellus Shale being reported at 536 meters (1,758 feet).
This maximum height of 1,758 feet far exceeds the maximum thickness of the Marcellus Shale
(<400 feet) in Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania State University n.d.), indicating that vertical fractures in the
Marcellus Shale may not necessarily be confined to the Marcellus and may potentially extend into
overlying formations. Molofsky et al. (2013) state that the over-pressured Mahantango Formation (of
the Hamilton Group) in Susquehanna County—consisting of laminated shale, siltstone, and fine-grained
sandstone—overlying the Marcellus Shale acts as a "restrictive barrier" to the upward movement of
deep formation fluids and methane from the Marcellus Shale. Flewelling and Sharma (2014) argue that
vertical permeabilities are dominated by the least permeable layer and that the stratigraphy above black
shales is typically dominated by layers of other shales, siltstones, and mudstones. Many of these layers
have inherently low permeability, which is further reduced by high effective stress at depth,
cementation, and partial saturation. Warner et al. (2012), however, state that some shallower ground
water systems in northeastern Pennsylvania have geochemical signatures similar to produced water
from the Marcellus Shale, thereby providing evidence of a pre-existing network of cross-formational
pathways that has enhanced hydraulic connectivity to deeper formations. This is supported by the work
of others (Llewellyn, 2014; Lautz et al., 2014). Baldassare et al. (2014) evaluated three-dimensional
seismic data for Marcellus Shale gas wells, and report that high-angle reverse faults and deep-seated
thrust faults cut the Tully Limestone above the Marcellus Shale and that these faults provide evidence of
geologic pathways for post-metagenic thermogenic gases to mix with shallow, early thermogenic gases.
They suggest that thrust faults may possibly propagate to the surface and cite evidence of two such
thrust faults in Bradford County exposed at or near the surface in Towanda (Bridge Street fault) and
Wysox (Wysox fault). Myers (2012) claims, through interpretative modeling, that advective transport
could require up to tens of thousands of years to move contaminants to the surface but that fracturing
the shale could reduce that transport time to tens or hundreds of years. This has been disputed by
others (Saiers and Barth, 2012; Cohen et al., 2013).
Baldassare et al. (2014) have compiled an extensive gas isotope dataset from mud log gas samples
collected during the completion of 234 gas wells in a five-county area of northeastern Pennsylvania
(Tioga, Bradford, Susquehanna, Sullivan, and Wyoming counties). Mean and median values from their
study, including standard deviations for 613C of methane (613CCH4 or 613Ci), 62H of methane (62HCH4 or
6CDi), and 613C of ethane (613CC2H6 or 613C2), for more than 1,400 samples collected from the Marcellus
Shale and over 500 samples collected from formations above the Marcellus Shale are presented in
44
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Table 5. The data in Table 5 are also presented by depth of collection from 0 to more than 5,000 feet
deep—as reported by Baldassare et al. (2014). The authors report that thermogenic gases are
predominant in the regional Neogene and Upper Devonian rocks that comprise the upper 1,000 feet of
their study area, with average 613CCH4, 613CC2H6, and 62HCH4 values of -43.53%o, -40.95%o, and -232.50%o,
respectively. The isotopic signatures are in contrast to observed average isotopic signatures for
Marcellus Shale gas, which were more positive (i.e., less fractionated) with values of -32.37%o, -38.48%o,
and -162.34%o for 613CCH4, 613CC2H6, and 62HCH4, respectively. The data presented in Table 5 show not
only the variation in isotopic signatures amongst the different formations in the study area but, based
on standard deviation values, also reveal the variation in isotopic signatures within the different
formations, including the Marcellus Shale. The standard deviation data shown in Table 5 indicate
methane and ethane isotopic signatures from the Marcellus Shale may not necessarily be unique and
that gas from formations above the Marcellus Shale could exhibit signatures similar to that of the
Marcellus Shale.
Molofsky et al. (2013) have suggested that the magnitude of isotope reversals (613CC2H6 - 613CCH4)
characteristic of gases from deeper formations such as the Marcellus Shale could possibly be used as a
means to differentiate gases from different formations, including the Marcellus Shale. The topic of
isotope reversal in deep basin gases in the study area has been extensively addressed by Burruss and
Laughrey (2010). Consistent with the pattern of isotope reversal, gas from the Marcellus Shale appears
to be generally characterized by an ethane (C2H6) fraction that is more fractionated than the methane
(CH4) fraction (i.e., 613CCH4 > 613CC2H6). The magnitude of this isotope reversal appears to show some
consistency in Marcellus Shale gas within the study area. Molofsky et al. (2013) have reported isotope
reversal differences of -5%o to -7%o from Marcellus Shale gas wells in the Dimock area of Susquehanna
County. Isotope data provided by PA DEP from production casings and tubing from a Marcellus Shale
gas well pad location in central Bradford County show isotope reversal differences ranging from -6.66%o
to -6.97%o (Table 6). The mean isotope reversal difference calculated from the difference of overall
613CCH4 and 613CC2H6 means reported by Baldassare et al. (2014) for the Marcellus Shale in their five-
county study in northeast Pennsylvania is -6.11%o (Table 5). In contrast, the mean calculated isotope
reversal difference for mud gas samples from the Middle Devonian Hamilton Group above the Marcellus
Shale based on the Baldassare et al. (2014) data is -4.49%o (Table 5). For formations above the Hamilton
Group, isotope reversal differences were less, ranging from -4.18%o to +1.87%o (Table 6). Thus, it would
appear that isotope reversal differences could potentially aid in differentiating between Marcellus Shale
gas and gas originating from formations above the Marcellus Shale.
Baldassare et al. (2014) also compiled pre-drill gas isotope data for 67 private wells sampled in their five-
county study in northeastern Pennsylvania, including Bradford and Susquehanna counties. The highest
(most positive) 613CCH4 value measured was -34.47%o for a sample collected in Tioga County. The
calculated mean and median 613CCH4 values for their five-county dataset were -45.33%o and -43.19%o,
respectively, while the calculated mean and median 62HCH4 values were -212.l%o and -212.3%o,
respectively. Sufficient ethane was available for analysis in 13 of the 67 wells sampled, and the data
indicated respective mean and median 613CC2H6 values of -35.03%o and -34.60%o. The differences in
mean and median isotope values between the gases from the 67 private wells and the Marcellus Shale
gas indicate that the gas from the private wells is, on average, considerably more fractionated (i.e., more
613C-depleted) than Marcellus Shale gas. Also of significance is that none of the 13 gas samples with
sufficient ethane present for isotopic analysis was observed to exhibit any isotope reversal.
45
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 5. Mud log gas sample data from 234 gas wells drilled in five-county region of northeastern PA, including Bradford and Susquehanna counties (from
Baldassare et al. 2014).
Formation or Depth
Marcellus Shale
Hamilton Group
Tully Limestone
Geneseo Shale
Brallier Formation
Catskill/Lock Haven
>5000 ft bgs
4000 - 5000 ft bgs
2000 - 5000 ft bgs
1000 - 3000 ft bgs
0 - 2000 ft bgs
0 - 1000 ft bgs
Mean
*13r
0 UCH4
(%o)
-32.37
-33.33
-34.10
-34.59
-37.19
-42.12
-32.46
-35.94
-37.97
-41.60
-41.93
-43.53
n
1592
254
51
38
101
238
1844
143
269
157
161
71
Std Dev
*13r
0 ^CH4
(%o)
3.75
3.44
5.30
3.33
4.27
6.29
3.84
3.56
4.85
5.66
6.76
6.84
Mean
*13r
0 ^C2H6
(%o)
-38.48
-37.82
-38.28
-38.29
-38.58
-40.25
-38.30
-39.19
-39.60
-40.13
-40.38
-40.95
n
1569
245
42
37
87
215
1811
132
240
139
144
63
Std Dev
*13r
0 ^C2H6
(%o)
3.15
3.42
2.91
2.84
2.98
2.77
3.21
2.69
2.69
2.54
2.58
2.56
Mean
5 HCH4
(%o)
-162.34
-167.88
-173.82
-180.42
-208.08
-229.00
-163.41
-180.28
-195.80
-228.91
-226.60
-226.88
n
1502
214
33
24
65
129
1706
95
163
93
98
40
Std Dev
5 HCH4
(%o)
5.69
10.54
20.78
22.18
33.86
35.78
8.54
29.93
36.55
33.93
37.02
39.85
Mean513CC2H6-
Mean 613CCH4
(%»)
-6.11
-4.49
-4.18
-3.70
-1.39
1.87
-5.84
-3.25
-1.63
1.47
1.55
2.58
46
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 6. Gas isotope data from PA DEP and Molofsky et al. (2013) for gas wells in study area.
Marcellus Gas Wells in Study Area
Strom 2H / Production Casing
Strom 2H / Production Tubing
Strom 1H / Production Casing
Strom 1H / Production Tubing
Vannoy 2H / Production Casing
Vargson Production Casing
Gas Well 1: 4-1/2" Production Casing
Gas Well 2H: 5-1/2" Production Casing
Gas Well 4H: 5-1/2" Production Casing
Gas Well IV: 4-1/2" Production Casing
Gas Well 5H: 5-1/2" Production Casing
Location
Monroe Township, Bradford Co.
Monroe Township, Bradford Co.
Monroe Township, Bradford Co.
Monroe Township, Bradford Co.
Granville Township, Bradford Co.
Granville Township, Bradford Co.
Dimock Township, Susquehanna Co.
Dimock Township, Susquehanna Co.
Dimock Township, Susquehanna Co.
Dimock Township, Susquehanna Co.
Dimock Township, Susquehanna Co.
Date
8/14/2010
8/14/2010
8/14/2010
8/14/2010
12/10/2010
12/10/2010
1/7/2009
11/4/2011
11/4/2011
11/4/2011
11/4/2011
Source
PA DEP
PA DEP
PA DEP
PA DEP
PA DEP
PA DEP
PA DEP*
Operator*
Operator*
Operator*
Operator*
*13r
0 ^CH4
(%o)
-31.96
-32.44
-32.15
-32.60
-37.25
-36.94
-29.91
-29.7
-29.0
-28.7
-29.5
*13r
0 ^C2H6
(%o)
-38.93
-39.11
-39.05
-39.26
-
-
-35.92
-35.6
-35.2
-35.3
-35.3
8"HCH4
(%o)
-158.6
-158.9
-158.4
-157.7
-163.2
-163.5
-161.1
-160
-160
-157
-161
*13r
0 ^C2H6 -
Ri3f*
0 l^CH4
(%o)
-6.97
-6.67
-6.90
-6.66
-
-
-6.01
-5.9
-6.2
-6.6
-5.8
As reported by Molofsky et al. (2013)
47
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Molofsky et al. (2013) in their study of methane distribution in ground water in Susquehanna County
observed that no ground water sampling locations with Ca-HCO3 type water (n=281) per the criteria of
Deutsch (1997) exhibited methane concentrations greater than 1 mg/L In contrast, 75% of Na-CI and
Na-HCO3-CI type ground water samples (n=34), 30% of Na-HCO3type ground water samples (n=20), and
11% of Ca-Na-HCO3 type ground water samples (n=46) in their study exhibited methane concentrations
greater than 1 mg/L. A similar observation was made by McPhillips et al. (2014) for a study conducted in
central New York State to the north of the study area. They found only one of 81 samples with Ca-HCO3
type water exhibited a methane concentration greater than 1 mg/L (per the criteria of Deutsch, 1997)
whereas 58% (n=19) of Na-CI, Na-HCO3-CI, and Na-HCO3 type ground water samples exhibited methane
concentrations greater than 1 mg/L. The one Ca-HCO3 type water sample exhibiting a methane
concentration greater than 1 mg/L (reportedly between 1 and 5 mg/L) in the McPhillips et al. (2014)
study was a borderline Ca-HCO3 type water very close to being classified as a Ca-Na-HCO3 type water.
Methane, regardless of its source, can be a concern because it can accumulate to cause an explosive
environment in which an ignition source or even a well pump can trigger an explosion (Mathes and
White, 2006). Reported incidents of stray gas migration specific to Bradford and Susquehanna
counties—as previously noted—are provided in Appendices C and D. However, it is important to note
that stray gas migration from oil and gas exploration activities is not a new phenomenon and has been
an on-going issue in northeastern Pennsylvania for many years preceding modern-day hydraulic
fracturing. Harrison (1983, 1985), for example, discussed stray gas migration associated with historical
oil and gas drilling activities in northeastern Pennsylvania and proposed possible mechanisms for the
occurrence of the stray gas. One mechanism postulated was lateral migration of gas through highly
permeable strata into the open (non-cemented) annuli of gas wells followed by upward movement of
the gas into shallower zones.
In Pennsylvania, an action level of 7 mg/L for dissolved methane in ground water has been established
(Pennsylvania Code, 2011). In cases where sustained concentrations in domestic 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. Dissolved methane concentrations at depth can be much
greater than 28 mg/L (due to the effects of hydrostatic pressure) such that dissolved methane in water
pumped from depth may undergo significant exsolvation (outgassing) to yield free methane once at the
surface. The US Department of Interior, Office of Surface Mining (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." The
Office of Surface Mining publication further states concentrations greater than 28 mg/L indicate
"potentially explosive or flammable quantities of gas are being liberated in the well and/or may be
liberated in confined areas of the home."
48
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
6. Water Quality Data from This Study
6.1. Geochemical Parameters
Water temperature, specific conductance, pH, dissolved oxygen, and ORP were measured in the field
prior to collection of all samples from the 36 homeowner wells, two springs, one pond, and one stream.
The temperatures of water collected from wells and springs over the three rounds of sampling ranged
from 9.22°Cto 15.8°C, with a median temperature of 11.0°C. pH measurements ranged from 5.85 at
spring location NEPASW02 to 8.72 at homeowner well location NEPAGW11, with a median value of 7.47.
Dissolved oxygen concentrations ranged from 0.02 mg/L at NEPAGW01 to 8.8 mg/L at NEPAGW14, with
a median value for the three rounds of 0.28 mg/L. The low median value for dissolved oxygen indicates
samples from more than half of the ground water sampling locations were likely in an anoxic or
significantly reduced state, reflecting conditions more conducive to the reductive dissolution of iron and
manganese. Ferrous (reduced) iron was detected at or above 0.03 mg/L at 19 of the 38 well and spring
locations, with a maximum concentration of 0.95 mg/L detected in NEPAGW03 in the third round of
sampling. Sulfide concentrations were detected at or above 0.02 mg/L at 14 of the 38 well and spring
sampling locations, with a measured high concentration of 0.80 mg/L at homeowner well location
NEPAGW31. Alkalinity ranged from 22.0 mg/L (as CaCO3) at spring location NEPASW02 to 382 mg/L (as
CaCO3) at homeowner well location NEPAGW03, with a median value of 152 mg/L. Similarly, total
dissolved solids (calculated from specific conductance measurements) ranged from a low of 58.5 mg/L
at spring location NEPASW02 to a high of 1,673 mg/L at homeowner well NEPAGW03, with an overall
median concentration of 227 mg/L. All median concentrations/values reported above are derived from
averaged data for those locations sampled in more than one round.
Turbidity in samples collected over the three rounds ranged from <1.0 NTU to 78 NTU, with a median
value of 1.7 NTU. This excludes the results for two well locations (NEPAGW24 and NEPAGW31) sampled
in the first round only that exhibited turbidity values greater than 800 NTU. Excessive turbidity in one
well (>800 NTU in NEPAGW31) is attributed to the well having been in disuse for an extended period of
time coupled with difficulty in controlling water flow rates during sampling with the existing homeowner
well pump assembly. Excessive turbidity in the other well (NEPAGW24) may have been due to the well
having been stressed far beyond its normal use due to the approximately one hour of pre-sampling
purge time applied to all wells in the study. No significant turbidity was observed in this well when
purging began; however, as purging proceeded, turbidity gradually increased until becoming excessive
(more than 800 NTU). Both homeowner wells exhibiting excessive turbidity were coincidentally also
wells sampled in this study located more than 1 mile from a well pad where hydraulic fracturing had
occurred at the time of sampling. In fact, both homeowner wells were located more than 2 miles from
the nearest well pad with fractured wells and areally more than 2 miles from the nearest fractured
lateral at the time of sampling. It is conceivable that the turbidity in these homeowner wells may have
been influenced by activities at one or more nearer well pads where drilling only had occurred at the
time of sampling. A well pad with drilled but not yet fractured wells was located within approximately
2500 feet of NEPAGW31—although drilling at the well pad had been completed more than six months
prior to the sampling event in this study. In the case of NEPAGW24, a well pad with drilled but not yet
fractured wells at the time of sampling was approximately 6200 feet to the west. Neither NEPAGW24
nor NEPAGW31 were sampled after the first round. In the case of NEPAGW24, although the turbidity
problem arising from the sampling event eventually resolved itself the following day, there was concern
49
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
that future sampling rounds at this location—using the methodology employed in this study—might
cause a similar and potentially more sustained turbidity problem. In the case of NEPAGW31, the
homeowner pump seized up during purging raising concerns of potential damage to the homeowner
pump if future sampling events were conducted at this location.
The calculated charge balance error for water samples collected during the three sampling rounds in this
study ranged from 0.01% to 15.6%, with 86% of samples showing a charge balance of <5%. Only one
sample (NEPAGW22), with a charge balance error of 15.6%, did not meet the 15% criteria required for
inclusion in water typing and development of Piper, Durov, and Schoeller diagrams. The Piper diagram
in Figure 12 shows the variation in ground water chemistry of samples collected in the study with
respect to major ion distribution. A majority of ground water samples are observed to plot to the left
within the diamond as Ca-HCO3 type water. However, seven samples (NEPAGW01, NEPAGW02,
NEPAGW11, NEPAGW16, NEPAGW25, NEPAGW27, and NEPAGW33) plot as Na-HCO3 type water, three
samples (NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW17) plot as Na-CI type water, and one sample
(NEPAGW03) distinctly plots as Ca-SO4 type water. The Durov diagram in Figure 13 shows the
correlation of the cation-anion distribution with sample pH and TDS indicating that Na-CI and Na-HCO3
type water samples generally exhibit more elevated pH values and TDS concentrations than other
samples in the study.
Figure 14 shows the frequency distribution of water types for wells and springs sampled in this study.
Also shown in Figure 14 are associated frequencies of methane detections greater than 1 mg/L per
water type. The data indicate Na-HCO3 and Na-CI type waters exhibited the greatest frequency of
methane detections >1 mg/L in this study. This correlation between water types and methane
concentrations is consistent with the observations of Molofsky et al. (2013) for their study in
Susquehanna County and McPhillips et al. (2014) for their study in neighboring New York State. The
water type distribution shown in Figure 14 for this study is based on AqQA criteria whereas Molofsky et
al. (2013) and McPhillips et al. (2014) used the more detailed criteria of Deutsch (1997). Direct
comparison of the water types with methane concentrations greater than 1 mg/L from this study with
those of Molofsky et al. (2013) using the criteria of Deutsch (1997) is provided in Appendix E. Four
homeowner well locations in this study with Ca-HCO3type water per the criteria of Deutsch
(NEPAGW13, NEPAGW23, NEPAGW32, and NEPAGW37) exhibited methane concentrations greater than
1 mg/L. This represents 23.5% of homeowners with Ca-HCO3 type water in this study (per the criteria of
Deutsch) and contrasts with the findings of Molofsky et al. (2013) where zero (0%) of 281 ground water
sampling locations with Ca-HCO3 type water exhibited methane concentrations >1 mg/L, and the
McPhillips et al. (2014) study where one (1.2%) of 81 ground water sampling locations with Ca-HCO3
type water exhibited methane concentrations >1 mg/L. As shown in Figure 14, 26 ground water
sampling locations in this study exhibited Ca-HCO3 type water per the broader criteria of AqQA with
eight (30.8%) of these locations exhibiting methane concentrations >1 mg/L.
50
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Ca-SO4 water
Ca-HCO3 water
Na-HCO3 water
Na-CI water
Cl
• NEPAGW01
• NEPAGW02
• NEPAGW03
NEPAGW04
NEPAGW05
NEPAGW06
• NEPAGW07
• NEPAGW08
• NEPAGW09
• NEPAGW10
• NEPAGW11
NEPAGW12
NEPAGW13
NEPAGW14
• NEPAGW15
ANEPAGW16
ANEPAGW17
NEPAGW18
NEPAGW19
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW21
• NEPAGW23
• NEPAGW24
• NEPAGW25
NEPAGW26
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW28
• NEPAGW29
*NEPAGW30
* NEPAGW31
* NEPAGW32
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW36
NEPAGW37
* NEPAGW38
I NEPASW01
I NEPASW02
Figure 12. Piper diagram showing water-type distribution (based on AqQA) for homeowner wells and springs sampled in this study.
(Data for NEPAGW22 not included due to ion balance not meeting <15% criteria.)
51
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
TDS (mg/kg)
Na-CI water
o
o
o
o
o
o
!-•
•
Na-HCO3 water
TDS > 1000 mg/L
• NEPAGW01
• NEPAGW02
• NEPAGW03
NEPAGW04
NEPAGW05
NEPAGW06
• NEPAGW07
• NEPAGW08
• NEPAGW09
• NEPAGW10
• NEPAGW11
NEPAGW12
NEPAGW13
NEPAGW14
• NEPAGW15
A NEPAGW16
A NEPAGW17
A NEPAGW18
NEPAGW19
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW21
* NEPAGW23
* NEPAGW24
• NEPAGW25
NEPAGW26
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW28
• NEPAGW29
* NEPAGW30
* NEPAGW31
* NEPAGW32
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW36
NEPAGW37
* NEPAGW38
I NEPASW01
I NEPASW02
Note: TDS values for NEPAGW03, NEPAGW04,
NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW17 exceed 1000 mg/L
and are therefore not shown.
Figure 13. Durov diagram showing the generally higher pH and TDS levels associated with Na-CI and Na-HCO3 type waters sampled from
homeowner wells in this study.
52
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
30 -
25 -
20 -
01
3 15 -
n-
10 -
5 -
Na-HCOq
Ca-SCL
Na-CI
Water Type
30.8% > 1 mg/L
Ca-HCO,
Figure 14. Breakdown of water types from this study (based on AqQA criteria) and percentage of methane detections >lmg/L per water type. (8 of 10
locations with Na-HCO3 or Na-CI type water exhibited methane concentrations >1 mg/L)
53
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
6.2. Inorganics
6.2.1. Iron and Manganese
Box-and-whisker plots presented in Figure 15 show the dissolved iron distribution in this study relative
to that of the NWIS dataset, and the dissolved manganese distribution relative to both the NWIS and
NURE datasets. (Iron data are not available in the NURE database.) The plots in Figure 15 and data
presented in Table 4 show that the median, mean, 25th, and 75th percentile dissolved iron and
manganese concentrations from this study are less than those of the NWIS dataset. However, the plots
also indicate the mean and maximum dissolved manganese concentrations from this study and the
NWIS dataset are higher than those of the NURE dataset.
100000 -i
10000
D)
800 NTU] measured in samples; Data
for locations sampled in more than one round are averaged.)
54
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Goodness-of-fit testing at the 0.05 significance level indicates the dissolved iron data from this study is
not normally, log-normally, or gamma-normally distributed. Nonparametric (Kruskal-Wallis) analysis of
variance conducted on the dissolved iron NWIS dataset and the dataset from this study indicate
significant differences between the two datasets, with a calculated p-value of 6.75E-06 (Appendix F).
The p-value of <0.05 is reflective of the dissolved iron data from this study representing a population of
samples with significantly lower dissolved iron concentrations than the population represented by the
NWIS dataset.
Goodness-of-fit testing at the 0.05 significance level for dissolved manganese for the three datasets
indicate the dissolved manganese data from this study and the NWIS dataset are log-normally
distributed, while the NURE dataset is not normally, log-normally, or gamma-normally distributed.
Nonparametric (Kruskal-Wallis) analysis indicated significant differences amongst the three datasets for
dissolved manganese (Appendix F). A subsequent post-hoc Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric multiple
comparison analysis indicated a significant difference between the NURE dataset and the data from this
study but not between the NURE dataset and the NWIS dataset. A post-hoc parametric (Scheffe)
multiple comparison analysis on the data from this study and the NWIS dataset—since these datasets
are both log-normally distributed—also indicated a significant difference (Appendix F). The results
indicate the dissolved manganese data from this study represent a population of samples with
significantly lower dissolved manganese concentrations than the populations represented by the NURE
and NWIS datasets.
Box-and-whisker plots in Figure 16 compare dissolved iron and manganese concentrations with total
concentrations of these metals in this study. Figure 16 also shows the distribution of turbidity in this
study since turbidity can have a significant influence on measured concentrations of total metals.
Figure 16 and Table 4 show, as might be expected, that median total concentrations of iron and
manganese are higher than median dissolved concentrations, although more so for iron than for
manganese. Figure 16 further shows that many locations sampled in this study (more than 40%)
exceeded the secondary MCLs for manganese (50 u.g/L) and/or iron (300 u.g/L). Total iron MCL
exceedances—as inferred from Figure 16—appear to be primarily linked to turbidity in wells whereas
manganese exceedances appear to be largely independent of turbidity.
6.2.2. Chloride, Sodium, TDS, and Bromide
Concentrations of chloride, a key indicator of potential impacts, were measured above 15 mg/L at 14 of
the 38 ground water sampling locations in this study, above 25 mg/L at 9 locations, above 50 mg/L at 6
locations, and above 100 mg/L at 4 locations. The highest average chloride concentration detected was
509.8 mg/L at NEPAGW17. Summary statistics for chloride concentrations in this study relative to the
NWIS and NURE pre-2007 datasets are provided in Table 4 and are presented graphically in Figure 17
using box-and-whisker plots. The data indicate the median, mean, and maximum chloride
concentrations for this study are below those of the NWIS dataset but higher than those of the NURE
dataset.
Goodness-of-fit testing at the 0.05 significance level for dissolved chloride for the three datasets indicate
the chloride data from this study are log-normally distributed, while the NURE and NWIS datasets are
not normally, log-normally, or gamma-normally distributed. Nonparametric (Kruskal-Wallis) analysis of
variance conducted on the three datasets for chloride (Appendix F) indicated no significant differences
amongst the three datasets (p-values >0.05). A histogram comparing the chloride data from this study
55
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
with those of the NWIS and NURE datasets is presented in Figure 18. Nineteen of 116 samples (16.4%)
from the NWIS dataset and 7 of 164 samples (4.3%) from the NURE dataset exhibited chloride
concentrations >100 mg/L, compared to the 4 of 38 samples (10.5%) from this study. The pre-2007
NWIS dataset, in particular, confirms that elevated chloride concentrations >100 mg/L are not
uncommon in the study area.
Time trend data presented in Figure 19 for locations with chloride concentrations greater than 8 mg/L
indicate that chloride concentrations generally remain relatively constant over the 1.5-year span of the
study. This observation would be more consistent with aquifer equilibrium conditions than a transient
chloride plume migration scenario, where an increasing or decreasing concentration trend would be
more likely. One exception is NEPAGW08, where chloride concentrations were observed to increase
31% over the course of three sampling rounds, from 335 mg/L to 440 mg/L. However, an earlier pre-
drill sample collected by the operator at this location on April 29, 2011, approximately six months prior
to commencement of this study, showed a chloride concentration of 413 mg/L—thus bringing into
question the presence of an actual increasing concentration trend. The observed increases over the
three rounds of sampling in this study may well be within the margin of variability for high TDS Na-CI
type waters in valley settings in the study area. The average lithium to chloride (Li/CI) ratios of less than
0.002 and boron to chloride (B/CI) ratios of less than 0.001 observed at NEPAGW08 would not be
consistent with impacts from Marcellus Shale flowback or produced water in accordance with Warner et
al. (2014).
10000
1000^
O)
CD
D)
C
CO
a: 100
C
C
nj
OJ
10-
1
n = 36
= 36
VSMCL
*»*
n = 36 * n = 36
-
**
5~~T •:•;'
n = 36
1000
r1
0.1
Dissolved Fe Total Fe Dissolved Mn Total Mn Turbidity
Figure 16. Box and whisker plots comparing dissolved iron and manganese distributions with total iron and manganese
distributions for this study (5th, 25th, median, 75th, and 95th percentiles). Also shown is a plot of turbidity from this
study. (Data for NEPAGW24 and NEPAGW31 not shown due to excessive turbidity [>800 NTU] measured in samples.
Data for locations sampled in more than one round are averaged.)
56
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Chloride
1000 -
~5) 1 no -
CD
0)
c 10
o:
1 -
OH _
10000 -
1000 -
_J
~O)
E
1 nn
D5
c
cn
cr
•) .
10000 -
1000 -
E
o
1 00 -
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
c
o>
2
0
Q_
85
80
75
70
0
This Study (n = 38)
NURE(n = 164)
NWIS(n =
100 200 300 400 500 600
/ H // H
1100 4240
Chloride, mg/L
Figure 18. Chloride concentration histogram comparing data from ground water locations in this study with pre-2007 NWIS and NURE 1977
ground water data. (Data for locations sampled in more than one round are averaged.)
58
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
550 r
500
450
£ 400
c
•E 350
§
§
O
0
;g
o
Z
O
300
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
\
\^
*0
.
cf
-•-NEPAGW01 —*-NEPAGW02 -*-NEPAGW03
—I—NEPAGW04 -*-NEPAGW06 -X-NEPAGW08
-A-NEPAGW11 -V-NEPAGW13 NEPAGW16
^K-NEPAGW17 -^-NEPAGW18 -^-NEPAGW20
-•- NEPAGW32 -•- NEPAGW33
Figure 19. Time trends for chloride in homeowner wells from this study with concentrations >8 mg/L measured in
one or more sampling rounds. Not shown are data for NEPAGW19, NEPAGW22, NEPAGW23, and NEPAGW37,
which were sampled only once with measured concentrations of 24.7 mg/L, 132 mg/L, 18.2 mg/L, and 28.1 mg/L,
respectively. All other locations not shown exhibited chloride concentrations <8 mg/L.
59
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
A comparison of the summary statistics for dissolved sodium from this study to the NWIS and NURE pre-
2007 datasets is provided in Table 4 and presented graphically in Figure 17 using box-and-whisker plots.
Goodness-of-fit testing at the 0.05 significance level for the three datasets indicate the dissolved sodium
from this study and the NWIS dataset are log-normally distributed, while the NURE dataset is not
normally, log-normally, or gamma-normally distributed (Appendix F). Nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis
analysis of variance conducted on the three datasets indicated significant differences amongst the three
datasets for dissolved sodium (p-value <0.05). Subsequent post-hoc nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis
multiple comparison analysis indicated a significant difference between the NURE dataset and the data
from this study, but also, between the NURE dataset and the NWIS dataset. Post-hoc parametric
Scheffe multiple comparison analysis conducted on the log-transformed data from this study and the
NWIS dataset—since these two dissolved sodium datasets are log-normally distributed—indicated no
significant difference between the two datasets (p-value of 0.821). The results indicate the dissolved
sodium data from this study represent a population of samples with significantly higher dissolved
sodium concentrations than the population represented by the NURE dataset, but not the NWIS dataset.
A comparison of the summary statistics for specific conductance measurements from this study with the
NWIS and NURE pre-2007 datasets is provided in Table 4 and presented graphically in Figure 17 using
box-and-whisker plots. Goodness-of-fit testing at the 0.05 significance level for specific conductance
indicated none of the three datasets was normally, log-normally, or gamma-normally distributed.
Nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance conducted on the three datasets indicated significant
differences amongst the three datasets (p-value <0.05). Subsequent post-hoc nonparametric Kruskal-
Wallis multiple comparison tests indicated significant differences between the NURE dataset and the
data from this study, but also, between the NURE dataset and the NWIS dataset (Appendix F). No
significant difference was indicated between the NWIS dataset and the data from this study (p-value of
0.977). A histogram comparing specific conductance data from this study with the NWIS and NURE
datasets are shown in Figure 20.
Time trend data for TDS (Figure 21) for the same locations shown in Figure 19 for chloride indicate TDS
concentrations remained relatively constant over the three sampling rounds, with the exception, again,
of NEPAGW08. Increased TDS concentrations (calculated from specific conductance values) were
measured at NEPAGW08 with each sampling round in this study with estimated concentrations ranging
from 956 mg/L in the first round to 1126 mg/L in the third round. In contrast to the chloride data, pre-
drill TDS data reported by the operator for April 29, 2011 indicated a lower value of 842 mg/L at this
location than measured in the three rounds of sampling conducted in this study, thus appearing to more
strongly suggest evidence of a potential impact at this well location. However, the operator pre-drill
sodium, barium, and specific conductance data, relative to the sodium, barium, and specific
conductance data from this study, also showed a pattern similar to that of chloride. That is, the
operator-reported pre-drill concentrations/values for sodium, barium, and specific conductance were
higher than concentrations/values measured in the first two rounds of sampling in this study. This
suggests a discrepancy in TDS measurement/calculation methodologies between the operator and this
study as apparently reflected in specific conductance and TDS values reported for split samples collected
at NEPAGW08 during the first round of sampling in this study. Specific conductance and TDS values for
this study in the first round of sampling were 1471 u.S/cm and 956 mg/L, respectively, while operator
reported data for a split sample were 1270 u.S/cm and 726 mg/L, respectively (Weston Solutions, 2012).
60
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
This Study (n = 38)
NURE(n = 164)
NWIS (n = 58)
o
I I I I
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 5500 6000 6500
Specific Conductance, |uS/cm
Figure 20. Specific conductance histogram comparing data from ground water locations in this study with pre-2007 NWIS and NURE 1977
ground water data. (Data for locations sampled in more than one round are averaged.)
61
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
1700
1600
1500
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
900
_
^—— —-~*
-*-"
-
-
XIX
-
-+~~~~^^===-^==^?
"Xr~
—
C/)
Q
400
350
300
250
200
150-
v
-•-NEPAGW01 -+-NEPAGW02 -*-NEPAGW03
—I—NEPAGW04 -*-NEPAGW06 -X-NEPAGW08
-A-NEPAGW11 -T-NEPAGW13 NEPAGW16
^K-NEPAGW17 —<-NEPAGW18 -*-NEPAGW20
-•- NEPAGW32 -i - NEPAGW33
Figure 21. Time trends for total dissolved solids (IDS) in homeowner wells shown in Figure 19 over the course of
this study. (IDS values are calculated from specific conductance values measured in the field.)
62
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
The operator specific conductance and IDS values were also lower than their reported pre-drill (April 29,
2011) values of 1780 u.S/cm and 842 mg/L. Appendix A (Table A-27) of this report indicates that
performance checks conducted in this study for specific conductance at the beginning of the day, mid-
day, and at the end of the day on October 27, 2011—when split samples were collected from
NEPAGW08—consistently met performance check criteria.
Bromide, another potential indicator of hydraulic fracturing activity impacts, was detected above the
method quantitation limit (1.0 mg/L) at three of the 38 ground water locations sampled in this study and
at none of the surface water locations. These three ground water locations (NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08,
and NEPAGW17) were also the only locations in the study that exhibited Na-CI type water. Bromide
concentrations in these three wells ranged from 1.88 mg/L in NEPAGW04 to 4.70 mg/L in NEPAGW17.
The NWIS database provides no data for bromide while the NURE database provides data for total
bromine only (based on neutron activation analysis). Davis et al. (1998) report that total bromine
concentrations in ground water (as measured by neutron activation analysis) can essentially be
considered equivalent to bromide concentrations—since virtually all bromine in ground water can be
expected to exist as the monovalent anion (i.e., bromide). A theoretical mixing curve with one end
member based on the median chloride and bromine (bromide) concentrations from the Bradford
County NURE dataset and the other end member based on the median chloride and bromide
concentrations for Marcellus Shale flowback water from Haluszczak et al. (2013) is provided in Figure 22.
NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW17 all fall near the mixing curve but, as can be observed, so does
the naturally occurring spring water from Salt Spring State Park. This indicates—consistent with the
findings of Llewellyn (2014) and Lautz et al. (2014)—that use of CI/Br ratio data to evaluate potential
impacts on ground water has limitations in this particular study area since it cannot alone be used to
distinguish between naturally occurring water and potentially impacted water.
6.2.3. Barium and Strontium
Hayes (2009) reports median barium and strontium concentrations of 686 mg/L and 1,080 mg/L,
respectively, for 5-day flowback water from 19 Marcellus Shale gas wells in Pennsylvania and West
Virginia. This compares to median recoverable barium and strontium concentrations of 0.050 mg/L and
0.160 mg/L, respectively, reported for 62 Bradford County ground water locations in the NWIS database
(see Table 4). Barbot et al. (2013) report mean barium and strontium concentrations of 2,224 mg/L and
1,695 mg/L, respectively for over 150 Marcellus Shale produced water samples in Pennsylvania. This
compares to calculated mean recoverable barium and strontium concentrations for the Bradford County
NWIS dataset of 2.15 mg/L and 1.78 mg/L, respectively (Table 4). Figure 23 shows box-and-whisker
plots comparing the distribution of barium (total and dissolved) and strontium (total and dissolved) from
this study with the distribution of recoverable barium and strontium from the NWIS dataset. (The NWIS
database does not contain dissolved or total barium and strontium data for Bradford County.) The plots
(and Table 4) indicate the 25th percentile, median, and 75th percentile dissolved and total barium and
strontium concentrations from this study are higher than those for recoverable barium and recoverable
strontium concentrations from the NWIS dataset. In contrast, the mean dissolved and total barium and
strontium concentrations from this study are lower than those of the NWIS dataset, although for
strontium, only slightly lower. The contrasting differences between the medians and means for the
datasets are attributed to very high strontium and barium concentrations reported at two Bradford
County locations in the NWIS dataset.
63
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
1000
.0
S.
•5? 100 H
CO
o
10
I 1 II 1 ' 1
\
\
0.01%
• Ground WE
i i H , ! H 1
.001%
mixing with
\Marcellusflowba
V.
0.1%
iter
• Salt Spring
• Marcellus flowback
(Haluszczaketal.,2013)
i ' i ' : : 1 1
ck
I r 1 • i f . '.
GW04«a
GW08
10% 1
1% *GW.1./
i i iiiiiij i i 1111111 i i 111111
* • '-
Salt Spring
.
1 1 IIIIII
'! i II 1 1 1 1
•
,.( 'f
"
-
1 1 IIIIII
10
100
1000
10000
Chloride, mg/L
100000
Figure 22. Theoretical mixing curve with end members based on NURE (1977) and Haluszczak et al. (2013) flowback median Cl and Br concentrations.
Bradford County NURE Cl and Br medians are 8.05 mg/L (n=164) and 0.0231 mg/L (n=112), respectively. (NURE Br data are for bromine analyzed by
neutron activation analysis.) Sample locations shown from this study are only those with bromide concentrations detected above the quantitation limit.
64
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Strontium
luuuuu -
mnnn -
mnn
mn
:
m
4
* :
n = 38 n = 38 n = 62
- - * ~r * •
* * ".
* * » *
* * * * *
v
*'. * . • » V« ;
i * + •
w'
• rv r*
* * * * •**
. .
* *
*
This Study NWIS
Dissolved Total Recoverable
Barium
o
?
re
1UUUUU -
•innnn -
mnn -
100 -
•
10 -
1
*
n = 38 n = 38 n = 62
~r * * ~r * * '
* •
-- - - ..;. -PMCL- - - ....- - -I1- ,» - - -
• ^ « »• * :
• .•** • .»~ *. :
. • i* •* i — ' — i • *
•&A %*-. •
• •. •• ^.4-.
* * :
* » :
* •
»
This Study NWIS
Dissolved | Total Recoverable
Figure 23. Box and whisker plots comparing total and dissolved barium and strontium distributions (5 , 25 ,
median, 75th, and 95th percentiles) from this study with recoverable barium and strontium distributions from the
pre-2007 NWIS dataset for Bradford County. (Note: No dissolved or total barium or strontium data are reported in
the NWIS database; data for locations sampled in more than one round are averaged.)
65
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Goodness-of-fit testing at the 0.05 significance level for recoverable barium from the NWIS dataset and
total barium from this study indicate data from this study are log normally distributed, while the data
from the NWIS dataset are not normally, log-normally, or gamma-normally distributed. Nonparametric
Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance conducted on the data from this study and the NWIS dataset
indicated a significant difference (p-value of 5.53E-04) between the datasets (Appendix F). The results
indicate the total barium data from locations sampled in this study represent a population of samples
with significantly higher total barium concentrations than that of the recoverable barium sample
population represented by the NWIS dataset.
Since Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water types in this study were generally observed to exhibit the higher barium
and strontium concentrations relative to the other water types, and since there was a larger proportion
of Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water types in this study (10/38) than in the NWIS dataset (12/62), it was possible
that uneven representation of these water types in the two datasets could have accounted for the
observed difference. To test this possibility, barium concentrations in only the Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water
types for the two datasets were compared. Goodness-of-fit testing at the 0.05 significance level for
recoverable barium from Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water types in the NWIS dataset and total barium from
Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water types in this study indicated the log-transformed data from both reduced
datasets were normally distributed. Subsequent parametric analysis of variance returned a p-value of
0.358 (Appendix F), indicating no significant difference between the datasets when evaluated on the
basis of the two water types.
Goodness-of-fit testing at the 0.05 significance level for recoverable strontium from the NWIS dataset
and total strontium from this study indicated both the log-transformed NWIS dataset and the log-
transformed data from this study are normally distributed. Parametric analysis of variance on the log-
transformed data indicated significant differences (p-value of 7.32E-06) between the two datasets. The
results indicate the total strontium data from this study represent a population of samples with
significantly higher total strontium concentrations than that of the recoverable strontium sample
population represented by the NWIS dataset.
As in the case of barium, Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water types in this study were observed to exhibit generally
higher strontium concentrations than the other water types, and it was possible that uneven
representation of these water types in the two datasets could have accounted for the observed
difference. To test this possibility, strontium concentrations in only the Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water types
for the two datasets were compared. Goodness-of-fit testing at the 0.05 significance level for
recoverable strontium from Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water types in the NWIS dataset and total strontium
from Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water types in this study indicated the log-transformed data from both reduced
datasets were normally distributed. Subsequent parametric analysis of variance on the log-transformed
data returned a p-value of 0.063 indicating no significant difference at the 0.05 significance level
(Appendix F).
Increases in strontium and barium concentrations in ground water impacted by hydraulic fracturing
fluids (e.g., flowback or produced waters) should coincide with increases in chloride, sodium, and TDS
concentrations, since strontium and barium concentrations tend to be positively correlated with salinity
in Marcellus wastewaters (Vengosh et al., 2014). There is no basis for barium and strontium
preferentially reaching a homeowner well relative to more mobile constituents such as chloride and
sodium which are also present at much higher concentrations in hydraulic fracturing wastewaters. As
66
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
noted earlier, statistical analyses did not indicate any significant differences between the data from this
study and the NWIS dataset with respect to chloride, sodium, and specific conductance. The very high
concentrations of barium and strontium that can occur naturally in the study area are evidenced in
Table 7. Table 7 shows data from a domestic well in a valley setting located within 1500 ft of
NEPAGW08 (see Appendix E, Figure E-2) with reported pre-2007 barium and strontium concentrations
of 98.0 mg/L and 80.0 mg/L, respectively and spring water from Salt Spring State Park exhibiting barium
and strontium concentrations of 84.4 mg/L and 48.5 mg/L, respectively. These concentrations are much
higher than any barium and strontium concentrations detected in this study. Dissolved barium and
strontium concentrations in ground water in the study area are likely controlled by minerals including
barite (BaSO4) and celestite [SrSOJ (Williams et al., 1998).
6.2.4. Radionuclides
Concentrations of radionuclides, including radium-226 and radium-228, can be high in Marcellus
wastewaters and have been reported as high as 6,540 pCi/Lfor combined radium-226 and radium-228
in Marcellus Shale flowback water (Haluszczak et al., 2013). Barbot et al. (2013) report mean
radium-226 and radium-228 concentrations for 46 Marcellus Shale-produced water samples in
Pennsylvania of 623 pCi/L and 120 pCi/L, respectively with a maximum reported radium-226
concentration of 9,280 pCi/L and maximum reported radium-228 concentration of 1,360 pCi/L. Water
samples collected in this study were analyzed for radium-226, radium-228, gross alpha activity, and
gross beta activity in the second and third rounds of sampling. The results indicated radium-226,
radium-228, gross alpha activity, and/or gross beta activity were detected above the study reporting
limits at 7 of the 27 locations sampled for these parameters. The highest radium-226 and radium-228
concentrations were detected at NEPAGW04 at concentrations of 4.40 ± 1.3 pCi/L and 2.88 ± 0.73 pCi/L,
respectively (combined = 7.28 pCi/L). For comparison, the combined radium-226 and radium-228
concentration in spring water from Salt Spring State Park (Table 7) has been measured at 27.7 pCi/L
(Warner et al., 2012). Williams et al. (1998) reported radium-226 and radium-228 concentrations of
17 pCi/L and 13 pCi/L (combined = 30 pCi/L) measured in a domestic well sampled in neighboring Tioga
County in 1986. The highest gross alpha activity in this study was also measured at NEPAGW04 at a
concentration of 6.1 ± 2.2 pCi/L, while the highest gross beta activity was detected at NEPAGW17 at a
concentration of 7.4 ± 2.8 pCi/L. Barbot et al. (2013) report mean gross alpha and gross beta
concentrations for 32 Marcellus Shale-produced water samples from northeastern Pennsylvania of
1,509 pCi/L and 43,415 pCi/L, respectively.
The results from this study indicate primary MCLs were exceeded at two locations—NEPAGW04 and
NEPAGW17—where combined radium-226 and radium-228 exceeded the primary MCL of 5 pCi/L (see
Table 7). As in the case of Salt Spring State Park, both of these wells are located in valley settings
characterized by Na-CI type water and high TDS. Also, as in the case of strontium and barium, radium
concentrations are known to correlate positively with salinity in ground water in the study area
(Williams et al., 1998). Spring water collected at Salt Spring State Park (Table 7), for example, showed
chloride and sodium concentrations of 4,014 mg/L and 1,800 mg/L, respectively while the well in
neighboring Tioga County with the combined radium-226 and radium-228 concentration of 30 pCi/L
showed dissolved chloride and sodium concentrations of 4,600 mg/L and 2,500 mg/L, respectively
(Williams et al., 1998). The highest radium-226 concentration detected in a non-Na-CI type water in this
study was 2.70 ± 0.89 pCi/L at NEPAGW26 which exhibits Ca-HCO3 type water. Radium-226 was also
67
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 7. Valley locations with Na-CI type water from this study compared to nearby valley locations from NWIS database exhibiting Na-CI type water.
" USGS wells shown are reported to be completed at depths of 110 feet and 117 feet (http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov).
The two I
NEPAGW08
USGS-414451076182001*
(1,464 ft from NEPAGW08)
NEPAGW17
USGS-414330076280501*
(7,885 ft from NEPAGW17)
NEPAGW04
Williams etal. (1998)
identified Na-CI wells in
Bradford County
[median/mean]
Salt Spring State Park (Warner
etal. 2012)
TDS
(mg/L)
1037
7650
1259
580
1013
803/1,555
(n=9)
6418
Cl
(mg/L)
383
4275
510
168
362
348/714
(n=10)
4014
Br
(mg/L)
2.20
-
4.70
-
1.88
-
37.9
CI/Br
(w/w)
174
-
108
-
192
-
106
Na
(mg/L)
286
2255
289
210
227
249/431
(n=10)
1800
Sr
(mg/L)
1.90
80.0
5.74
-
8.46
1.10/12.6
(n=8)
48.5
Ba
(mg/L)
1.62
98.0
5.03
-
5.06
1.32/15.0
(n=7)
84.4
Li
(mg/L)
0.440
-
0.444
-
0.557
-
4.34
B
(mg/L)
0.319
-
0.242
-
0.257
-
-
226Ra+228Ra
(pCi/L)
<2.00
-
6.38
-
7.28
-
27.7
* For sample location, see Figure E-2, Appendix E. Values are averaged for locations sampled more than once.
68
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
detected above the study reporting limit of 1 pCi/L at NEPAGW16 (high of 1.31 ± 0.50 pCi/L) and at
NEPAGW33 (high of 2.07 ± 0.66 pCi/L), both of which exhibit Na-HCO3type water. Radium-228 was not
detected above the study reporting limit of 1 pCi/L at any non-Na-CI well location. There is no evidence
to indicate that radium-226, radium-228, and/or alpha and beta activity detected at locations in the
study are inconsistent with location-specific natural background conditions.
6.2.5. Strontium Isotopes
Strontium (Sr) isotope analyses were also conducted on all samples collected in the study. 87Sr/86Sr
ratios fall within a unique range in Marcellus Shale flowback and produced water and thus can be
sensitive indicators of potential impacts (Chapman et al., 2012). Chapman et al. (2012) indicate mixing
of as little as 1% Marcellus Shale-produced water with a receiving water would result in a 87Sr/86Sr
signature dominated by the produced water. 87Sr/86Sr ratios for Marcellus Shale-produced water are
reported to fall between 0.71000 and 0.71212, in contrast to the higher 87Sr/86Sr ratios associated with
water produced from formations above the Marcellus Shale (Warner et al., 2012). Chapman et al.
(2012) evaluated five Marcellus Shale-produced waters from Bradford County and observed they
exhibited 87Sr/86Sr ratios in a narrower range between 0.71000 and 0.71080. Samples from five
homeowner wells (NEPAGW01, NEPAGW02, NEPAGW03, NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW30) and one spring
(NEPASW01) in the study exhibited 87Sr/86Sr ratios within the 0.71000 to 0.71212 range identified by
Warner et al. (2012) and three homeowner wells (NEPAGW01, NEPAGW02, and NEPAGW03) exhibited
87Sr/86Sr ratios within the more narrow 0.71000 to 0.71080 range reported by Chapman et al. (2012) for
Marcellus Shale-produced water in Bradford County (see Figure 24). Each of the samples, with the
exception of spring sample NEPASW01, also exhibited Sr/Ca ratios above 0.03, which Warner et al.
(2012) have indicated is also characteristic of Marcellus Shale-produced water. However, Warner et al.
(2012) also show that background shallow ground water in northeastern Pennsylvania (designated in
their study as "Type D" water) at locations far removed from hydraulic fracturing activities can, in
certain settings (e.g., valley settings), also exhibit the same low 87Sr/86Sr ratios with Sr/Ca ratios above
0.03. Data reported by Warner et al. (2012) for spring water collected from Salt Spring State Park, for
example, indicated a 87Sr/86Sr ratio of 0.71115 (Figure 24) and Sr/Ca ratio of 0.13. 87Sr/86Sr ratio data
provided by Warner et al. (2012) for over 100 drinking water wells in northeastern Pennsylvania also
show some wells with 87Sr/86Sr ratios in the more narrow range (0.71000 to 0.71080) reported by
Chapman et al. (2012) for Bradford County produced water. Thus, the usefulness of 87Sr/86Sr ratios for
evaluating potential impacts on ground water in this particular study area appears to be somewhat
limited. However, as will be noted in a later section of this report, 87Sr/86Sr ratios (for surface water
samples NEPASW03 and NEPASW04) were used as a potential line of evidence for evaluating impacts to
the homeowner pond investigated in this study.
Well locations NEPAGW01, NEPAGW02, and NEPAGW03 that fall within the 87Sr/86Sr range reported by
Chapman et al. (2012) for the five Marcellus Shale-produced waters in Bradford County also exhibited
chloride concentrations above the median values for the NURE dataset (8.05 mg/L), the NWIS dataset
(10.0 mg/L), and this study (8.59 mg/L) at concentrations ranging from 14.0 mg/L to 53.1 mg/L.
Although these chloride concentrations coupled with the 87Sr/86Sr ratios might suggest impacts to the
homeowner wells, the chloride and TDS trend plots shown in Figures 19 and 21 for these well locations
indicate chloride and TDS concentrations were relatively stable over the 1.5 year span of the study—a
pattern that would generally be more consistent with a natural background condition. Both NEPAGW01
and NEPAGW02 are Na-HCO3 type waters and exhibited average chloride concentrations over the three
69
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
0.
0.714000
0.713000
0.712000
i/l
r-
oo
0.711000
0.710000
0.709000
(N
O
OJ
00
03
OJ
03
10
100
1000
10000
100000
Sr (ng/L)
Figure 24. Strontium isotope data versus strontium concentrations for locations sampled in this study. Data for locations sampled in more than one round are
averaged. (Salt Spring State Park data from Warner et al., 2012)
70
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
sampling rounds of 50.4 mg/L and 23.0 mg/L, respectively. An operator sample collected from
NEPAGW01 approximately 7 months prior to initiation of this study indicated a chloride concentration of
45 mg/L. The median and 75th percentile values for chloride for the 15 Na-HCO3 type ground water
locations in the pre-2007 NWIS Bradford County dataset are 28.0 mg/L and 42.5 mg/L, respectively with
two of the Na-HCO3 locations in the dataset showing chloride concentrations above 120 mg/L. Thus,
elevated chloride concentrations in Na-HCO3 type waters would not be anomalous for the study area.
NEPAGW16 and NEPAGW33, two other homeowner wells with Na-HCO3 type water in this study, were
observed to exhibit average chloride concentrations of 61.2 mg/L and 28.1 mg/L, respectively over the
three rounds of sampling. It is also noteworthy that radium-226 and radium-228 were not detected
above the study reporting limits of 1 pCi/L in any of the three wells nor were any indicator organic
compounds associated with hydraulic fracturing detected. The 87Sr/86Sr ratios at each of the three well
locations also did not vary significantly over the three rounds of sampling with values ranging from
0.710334 (in round 2) to 0.710362 (in round 1) at NEPAGW01; from 0.710364 (in round 1) to 0.710394
(in round 2) at NEPAGW02; and from 0.710451 (in round 3) to 0.710498 (in round 2) at NEPAGW03.
Given the aforementioned observations, there is no basis for concluding that NEPAGW01 or NEPAGW02
have been impacted by Marcellus Shale flowback/produced water. The third location—NEPAGW03—
the only Ca-SO4type ground water location in this study, showed an average chloride concentration of
19.4 mg/L over the three rounds of sampling. Only two of the more than 100 water locations in the
NWIS dataset for Bradford County exhibited Ca-SO4 type water with chloride concentrations at these
two locations ranging from 4 mg/L to 8 mg/L. NEPAGW03 is further addressed in a subsequent section
of this report.
There was no observed relationship between low 87Sr/86Sr ratios and water type in this study. Two of
the wells with 87Sr/86Sr <0.71212 and Sr/Ca >0.03 exhibited Na-HCO3 type water (NEPAGW01,
NEPAGW02), one well exhibited Ca-SO4 type water (NEPAGW03), one well exhibited Ca-HCO3 type water
(NEPAGW30), and one well exhibited Na-CI type water (NEPAGW08).
6.2.6. Evaluation of Homeowner Wells with Na-CI Type Water
Homeowner wells with Na-CI type water in this study were of interest since any well significantly
impacted by flowback/produced water, if not already exhibiting naturally occurring Na-CI type water,
could acquire a Na-CI type water signature due to the very high Na and Cl content of Marcellus
flowback/produced waters. Thus, homeowner wells exhibiting Na-CI type water could potentially signify
impacts from hydraulic fracturing activities. The homeowner wells in this study exhibiting Na-CI type
water (NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW17) were each located in stream/river valleys, consistent
with the observations of Williams et al. (1998) for locations where Na-CI type ground water tends to be
naturally found in the study area. Chloride and TDS concentrations in the three wells were measured at
greater than 300 mg/L and 1,000 mg/L, respectively. A plot of NWIS locations exhibiting Na-CI-type
water, as well as the naturally occurring spring water from Salt Spring State Park, on the Piper diagram
in Figure 25 shows the overlap with the three Na-CI type water locations identified in this study. This is
consistent with the Na-CI type waters observed at the three homeowner locations (NEPAGW04,
NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW17) not being anomalous for the study area. Comparison of the cation-anion
distribution of the Na-CI type water locations in this study with Na-CI type water locations from the
NWIS dataset—and the spring water from Salt Spring State Park—in the Shoeller diagram in Figure 26,
also does not provide any indication that the geochemistry in wells NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08, and
NEPAGW17 is anomalous for the study area.
71
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
\
20%
9 This Study
Na-CI type ground water
samples from NWIS (pre-2007)
.JL. Spring water-Salt Spring
State Park (Warner et al. 2012)
\
20%
Cl
Figure 25. Piper diagram showing overlap of ground water locations with Na-CI type water from this study with ground water locations with Na-CI type water
from the pre-2007 NWIS dataset for Bradford County. Data is also shown for natural spring water collected at Salt Spring State Park in Susquehanna County
(Warner etal., 2012).
72
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
This Study - NaCI locations
(GW04, GW08, GW17)
NWIS (pre-2007) - NaCI locations
Spring water-Salt Spring
State Park (Warner et al. 2012)
HCO3 + CO3
0.05 -
0.02 -
Ca
Na + K
Figure 26. Schoeller diagram showing the chemical composition of ground water locations with Na-CI type water in this study relative to pre-2007 NWIS
locations with Na-CI type water and spring water from Salt Spring State Park in Susquehanna County (Warner et al., 2012).
73
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
At homeowner well locations NEPAGW04 and NEPAGW17, barium and combined radium-226 and
radium-228 concentrations exceeded EPA's primary MCL drinking water criteria of 2.0 mg/L and 5 pCi/L,
respectively. At homeowner well location NEPAGW08, the mean barium concentration (1.78 mg/L) was
slightly below the MCL of 2.0 mg/L, while combined radium-226 and radium-228 concentrations were
below the study reporting limits of 1 pCi/L. These three wells also exhibited more elevated methane
concentrations (ranging from 14.8 mg/L to 27.6 mg/L) relative to most other sampling locations in this
study, as well as reducing conditions as indicated by low ORP values, low DO concentrations, and
detectable ferrous iron and/or hydrogen sulfide concentrations. Table 7 provides data for two pre-2007
NWIS database sampling locations with elevated TDS and chloride concentrations that are located in
close proximity to NEPAGW08 and NEPAGW17. (The locations of these two wells are shown in
Appendix E, Figure E-2.) Also shown in Table 7 are data for Na-CI type ground water locations in
Bradford County as reported by Williams et al. (1998) and data for Salt Spring State Park spring water as
reported by Warner et al. (2012). As noted earlier, it has been hypothesized that stream valleys
represent zones of weakness, or increased bedrock fracturing, that allowed glacial and weathering
processes to down cut preferentially into the bedrock (Breen et al., 2007). The increased fracture
density in the stream valleys could thus result in a greater abundance of preferential pathways for the
flow of natural gas from depth to the surface. Warner et al. (2012) have speculated that some shallow
ground water systems near valley centers in northeastern Pennsylvania with geochemical signatures
similar to produced water from the Marcellus Formation (Cl >20 mg/L, CI/Br <1000, CI/Na >0.2) are
indicative of a pre-existing network of cross-formational pathways that has enhanced hydraulic
connectivity to deeper formations. The three homeowner wells in Bradford County with Na-CI type
water in this study (NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW17) exhibit these geochemical signatures
with respect to Cl, CI/Br, and CI/Na. CI/Br ratios in the three wells ranged from 105 to 182, CI/Na ratios
from 1.38 to 1.71, and chloride concentrations from 335 mg/L to 525 mg/L. The lower CI/Br ratios
relative to the CI/Br ratios of >1000 (generally characteristic of road salt [halite] impacts) are consistent
with the Na-CI in the three homeowner wells having originated from highly evaporated seawater
beyond the point of halite precipitation, as has been postulated for formation brines in Pennsylvania,
including those originating from the Marcellus Formation (Haluszczak et al., 2013). For comparison, the
median CI/Br ratio of flowback water reported by Haluszczak et al. (2013) for Marcellus Formation gas
wells in the Dimock area of Susquehanna County was 125.2 and the CI/Br ratio for the naturally
occurring spring water at Salt Spring State Park (Susquehanna County) is reported to be 106 (Warner et.
al., 2012). The low CI/Br ratio (<1000) as observed in the naturally occurring spring water at Salt Spring
State Park indicate CI/Br ratios need to be used with caution as potential indicators of hydraulic
fracturing impacts in the study area—as supported by the findings of others (Llewellyn, 2014; Lautz et
al., 2014).
In the case of NEPAGW17, hydraulic fracturing had been conducted on a well pad within approximately
4,000 feet of the homeowner well about 20 months prior to the first round of sampling, and three gas
wells had also been drilled (but not yet fractured) on another pad located within approximately 3,500
feet of the homeowner well 14 to 16 months prior to the first round of sampling (see Figure 27).
Although the elevated concentrations of barium, chloride, TDS, and radium in NEPAGW17 could suggest
an impact, gas isotope data and methane-to-ethane ratio data from this well are not consistent with
that of Marcellus Shale gas, as will be addressed later in this report. This is of significance because if a
pathway for hydraulic fracturing fluids and produced water to the homeowner well had, in fact, been
74
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
NEPAGW17(Spring2012)
me1hane(CH4)
CH4/C2H6
6 Up
km
52HC(M
2 tubing!
(PA OCP 8/14/2010)
NEPAGW16 (Spring 2012]
IDS
Ra-226/228
Li
Br
melhane (CH4)
CH4/C2H6
3 Surface Casings
IPADCP 8/12/2010)
Units mg/L unless otherwise
noted: CrU/CjHe no units
EPA Sample Location
lOOftContour — — « Well Lateral (Drilled)
10 ft Contour Well Lateral (Drilled and Fractured)
Lsleral'lowtionsoi? approximate.
4/rows depict continuation ollatent beyond map extent.
Figure 27. Location of Bradford County homeowner well NEPAGW17 where reported gas intrusion occurred on August 4, 2010. Data show PA DEP gas isotope
signatures for surface casings and production tubings on well pads near homeowner wells NEPAGW17 and NEPAGW16 relative to signatures observed in
homeowner wells. Data also show differences in water chemistry between the two homeowner wells reportedly completed at similar depths (85 ft vs 100 ft)
and located only a few hundred feet from one another. Drill/fracture dates from Chesapeake Energy (2/12/2012).
75
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
created as a result of the hydraulic fracturing (stimulation) process, then this pathway would likely also
have readily allowed for the migration of methane from the Marcellus Shale into the homeowner well.
Another homeowner well sampled in the study (NEPAGW16) is located within 300 feet of NEPAGW17
(see Figure 27) and, according to the homeowner, differs in depth by only 14 feet (100 ft depth for
NEPAGW17 versus 86 ft depth for NEPAGW16). However, data obtained from these two wells show
significant differences in water chemistry. NEPAGW16 exhibits significantly lower average
concentrations of IDS (326 mg/L vs. 1,260 mg/Lfor NEPAGW17) and chloride (61.2 mg/L vs. 510 mg/L
for NEPAGW17) and no primary MCL exceedances for barium and combined radium. In addition,
NEPAGW16 plots as a Na-HCO3 type water rather than a Na-CI type water (see Figure 12). This would
appear to attest to the significant differences in water quality that can occur over short increments of
distance and depth within the study area. It is possible that NEPAGW17, with its reported greater
depth, accesses shallow saline waters to a greater extent in this valley setting than does NEPAGW16.
The significant differences in geochemistry between the two locations were observed in the two rounds
they were both sampled (see Figures 19 and 21).
Gas wells on well pads located within 1 mile of homeowner locations NEPAGW04 and NEPAGW08 had
only been drilled but not yet hydraulically fractured when the first round of sampling was conducted in
fall 2011. Thus, the saline conditions observed in these two homeowner wells cannot be attributed to
the hydraulic fracturing (stimulation) process. Operator data collected from NEPAGW08 prior to
initiation of drilling on the nearby well pad indicated that ground water in this homeowner well was
already in a saline condition—thus also precluding drilling as the cause of the saline conditions at this
particular well location (see Figure 28). Pre-drill data were not available for NEPAGW04.
Approximately two months after the first round of sampling, hydraulic fracturing (stimulation) was
conducted on a well pad located approximately 4,000 feet from homeowner well NEPAGW08
(Figure 28). The lateral from this gas well passes areally within a radius of approximately 1,200 feet
from the homeowner well. NEPAGW08, with a homeowner-reported depth of 260 feet, would thus
appear to serve as a well-specific case study for pre- and post-hydraulic fracturing effects on ground
water in this river valley location. Data collected from NEPAGW08 over the three rounds of sampling do
appear to show a potentially increasing trend with respect to concentrations of some selected inorganic
constituents following hydraulic fracturing (see Figure 28). However, when this location was sampled by
the operator in April 2011 (i.e., approximately six months prior to the first round of sampling conducted
in this study), chloride, sodium, and barium concentrations were measured at concentrations between
those observed in the second and third rounds of this study (see Figure 28). As noted earlier, this calls
into question the presence of actual increasing trends at this location and suggests the data may fall
within the range of variability for high TDS waters in the study area. Warner et al. (2014) report that
lithium to chloride (Li/CI) ratios <0.002 and boron to chloride (B/CI) ratios <0.001—as observed for
samples collected from NEPAGW08 in the second and third rounds of this study (see data table in
Figure 28)—would be inconsistent with impacts from Marcellus Shale flowback/produced water. As
discussed in a subsequent section of this report, methane isotope signatures (613CCH4) and methane-to-
ethane ratios for this homeowner well (as in the case of NEPAGW17) are also not consistent with a
pathway for migration of Marcellus Shale gas and fluids to the well having been created.
76
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
NEPAGW08 (operator data]
4/29/2011
NEPAGW08 (This Study)
10/27/2011 4/27/2012
ORP (mV)
S.C. (MS/cm)
Cl
Units in mg/L except pH, ORP, S.C.
CH4/C2H6 and 513CcH4
nd = no data reported
methane (CH4) 14.8
CH4/C2H6 1873
6"CCH4(%0 na
Units in mg/L except pH. ORP, S.C.,
and 6"CCH4
na = not analyzed
I EPA Sample Location
1100 ft Contour
110 ft Contour
Well Lateral (Drilled and Fractured)
0
500
1,000
2,000
3,000
Literal locations are approximate;
Arrows depict continuation of lateral beyond map extent.
Figure 28. Bradford County homeowner well located in valley setting with pre- and post-hydraulic fracturing data. Pre-drill operator data show already
elevated concentrations of methane and inorganic parameters at this location. Post-drill and post-fracturing data (this study) show CH4/C2H6 ratios >1800 and
613CCH4 values <-48.0%o inconsistent with Marcellus Shale gas characteristics. Data from sampling conducted on 10/27/2011 in this study and by operator (with
exception of methane data) are from split samples. Drill/fracture dates from Chesapeake Energy (2/12/2012).
77
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
6.2.7. Evaluation of Homeowner Well with Ca-SO4 Type Water
One homeowner well (NEPAGW03) was observed to exhibit a seemingly anomalous high sulfate
concentration (>1,200 mg/L) and correspondingly high IDS concentration (average 1,639 mg/L). The
sulfate concentration measured in this well is significantly higher than the maximum sulfate
concentration of 250 mg/L reported in the NWIS dataset for 121 ground water locations sampled for
sulfate in Bradford County (Table 4). This well is not located in a stream valley, nor does it exhibit Na-CI-
type water or elevated methane concentrations. The well exhibits Ca-SO4 type water and is located
within a few hundred feet of a well pad (Vannoy) where one or more fluid and/or solid releases,
including 420 gallons of hydrochloric acid, reportedly occurred in spring 2009 (see Appendix C).
Geochemical equilibrium modeling suggests the water from the homeowner well is at or near saturation
with respect to gypsum (CaSO4). The relatively consistent concentrations of sulfate (1,200 mg/L,
1,260 mg/L, and 1,230 mg/L) measured in the three rounds of sampling conducted at the homeowner
well over the 1.5-year span of the study (Figure 29) appear to be more consistent with a mineral
dissolution/equilibrium scenario in the subsurface rather than a transient plume migration scenario. In
addition, high sulfate concentrations would normally not be expected to originate from hydraulic
fracturing activities. Hayes (2009) reported a sulfate concentration range in 5-day Marcellus Shale
flowback water of only 2.4 to 106 mg/L at 19 gas well locations in Pennsylvania and West Virginia and
<10 mg/L to 89.3 mg/L in 14-day flowback water at 17 locations—although sulfate concentrations in
injection fluids were reported to range from 2.9 mg/L to 2,920 mg/L. A possible alternative source of
sulfate in the well water at NEPAGW03 could be natural oxidation of sulfide minerals occurring at depth
around the well.
NEPAGW03 also exhibited the highest strontium concentrations (mean = 10.7 mg/L), the highest
alkalinity (mean = 380 mg/L as CaCO3), and the highest average ferrous iron content (mean = 0.68 mg/L)
of all homeowner wells and springs sampled in this study. The pH in the well was consistently between
6.8 and 6.9 over the three sampling rounds. The chloride concentrations in the three rounds of
sampling conducted at this location were 14.0 mg/L, 23.5 mg/L, and 20.7 mg/L (Figure 29). The average
chloride concentration in the well (19.4 mg/L) was above the median concentrations for this study and
the NWIS and NURE datasets (Table 4), but below the 75th percentile values for both this study and the
NWIS dataset, and below the 90th percentile value for the NURE dataset. As noted earlier, this well also
exhibited 87Sr/86Sr ratios consistent with 87Sr/86Sr ratios for Bradford County Marcellus Shale-produced
water as observed by Chapman et al. (2012); however, because the chloride concentrations, 87Sr/86Sr
ratios, and high strontium concentrations observed can also be consistent with naturally occurring
ground water conditions in the study area, it cannot be concluded that the well has been impacted by
hydraulic fracturing activities. If the high strontium concentrations were originating from hydraulic
fracturing flowback/produced water, the chloride concentrations would be expected to be roughly 40
times greater than the strontium concentrations based on median concentrations reported for these
two constituents in typical Marcellus wastewater by Boyer et al. (2011). The average chloride
concentration at NEPAGW03 was instead less than twice that of the average strontium concentration.
6.2.8. Evaluation of Pond Location on NEPAGW03 Property
Samples were collected at two locations (NEPASW03 and NEPASW04) from the homeowner pond
located approximately 300 feet from NEPAGW03 during the second round to evaluate potential links
between the pond and the high sulfate concentrations measured at NEPAGW03. The sample results
78
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
1 UUUVJ
^ 1000
_l
O)
•*^
0
'•§ 10°
1
§
<3 m
1U
1
I
N
- -
- -
. 1611 1673 1633 .
• A A
W V
^ V ^
f 1200 126° 1230-
•
•
• •
- 73.7 76.6 81-6 -
23.5 20.7 *
14.0 ^ ' •
T 975 T1
: 11.3 :
• -
• -
• -
• • i . i I i i I i i I i i I i i I i i
[b
C\
/^.x
IDS
804
Figure 29. Time trends for selected constituents in homeowner well NEPAGW03 from this study indicating relative consistency over 1.5-year time span of study.
(pH values ranged from 6.81 to 6.89 in the three rounds of sampling conducted at this location.)
79
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
showed low sulfate concentrations (<20 mg/L) but elevated concentrations of chloride (from 224 mg/L
to 230 mg/L), IDS (from 529 mg/L to 563 mg/L), bromide (estimated from 0.61 mg/L to 0.97 mg/L),
dissolved strontium (from 1.28 mg/L to 1.30 mg/L), and dissolved barium (from 0.656 mg/L to
0.677 mg/L). The very low alkalinity of the pond samples (< 25 mg/L as CaCO3) suggests the pond water
is not fed by a subsurface source. The chloride, TDS, and bromide concentrations detected in the pond
are higher than normally found in surface waters in northeastern Pennsylvania (Battelle, 2013). For
surface water locations sampled in Bradford and Susquehanna counties prior to 2007, Battelle (2013)
report mean and median chloride concentrations for 309 sampling locations of 9.6 mg/L and 8.2 mg/L,
respectively; mean and median TDS concentrations for 39 sampling locations of 108 mg/L and
99.6 mg/L, respectively; and mean and median bromide concentrations for 203 sampling locations of
0.045 mg/L and 0.013 mg/L, respectively. The chloride concentrations measured in the pond are also
approximately 10 times greater than the chloride concentrations measured in the homeowner well
(NEPAGW03). Historical surface water data for barium and strontium are not available for comparison
with the concentrations measured in the pond. The presence of the elevated levels of TDS, chloride,
and bromide in the pond water relative to other surface waters in the study area as reported by Battelle
(2013) may reflect impacts from well pad fluid and/or solid releases reported in 2009 (see Appendix C).
The two samples collected from the homeowner pond were also analyzed for strontium isotopes and
showed 87Sr/86Sr ratios of 0.710026 (for NEPASW03) and 0.710105 and 0.710045 (for NEPASW04 field
duplicates). These values fall within the Bradford County Marcellus Shale-produced water range (see
Figure 24) as reported by Chapman et al. (2012) and may possibly provide a further line of evidence for
impacts on the pond. For comparison, 87Sr/86Sr ratios for the other surface waters (two stream samples)
collected in this study in Bradford County were >0.713300. These values are much higher than the pond
87Sr/86Sr ratios and well outside the Marcellus Shale-produced water range as reported by Chapman et
al. (2012) and Warner et al. (2012).
6.3. Organic Compounds
Several organic compounds were detected in water samples collected during the three rounds of
sampling. The results are presented in Table 8. 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene was detected in two of the
three sampling rounds atone of two springs sampled (NEPASW01). At this location, 1,2,4-
trimethylbenzene was detected below the quantitation limit (0.5 u.g/L) at an estimated concentration of
0.38 u.g/L during the first sampling round (October 2011), and at a concentration of 1.6 u.g/L during the
third sampling round (May 2013). In addition, 1,2,3-trimethylbenzene was detected at a concentration
of 1.1 u.g/L at this location during the third sampling event. DROs were also detected at this location at
concentrations above the quantitation limit (20 u.g/L) in the first sampling round (23.1 u.g/L and
25.1 u.g/L for field duplicates) while GROs were detected at this location at a concentration of 24.2 u.g/L
above the quantitation limit (20 u.g/L) during the third round of sampling (see Table 8). The samples
showing detectable levels of 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, 1,2,3-trimethylbenzene, DROs, and GROs were
collected from a tap in the homeowner's basement connected to the spring. 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene,
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene, DROs, and GROs were not detected in the second round of sampling when
samples were collected directly from the cistern at this location. Field measurements indicate the water
collected directly from the cistern (using a bladder pump) was considerably more oxidized than the
samples obtained from the tap, suggesting greater exposure of the water to the atmosphere prior to
sampling—and therefore also a greater potential for volatilization and/or oxidation of any hydrocarbons
possibly present. Although trimethylbenzenes can be constituents of hydraulic fracturing fluids and are
80
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
included on PA DEP's list of chemicals found in hydraulic fracturing fluids used in Pennsylvania
(PA DEP, 2010), the absence of elevated concentrations of other potential indicators (e.g., chloride, IDS,
barium, strontium), in conjunction with 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene and 1,2,3-trimethylbenzene, is
inconsistent with the trimethylbenzenes (and DROs and GROs) originating from hydraulic fracturing
activities. Spring location NEPASW01, in fact, exhibited some of the lowest chloride, strontium, and
barium concentrations of any samples collected in the study. Chloride concentrations in the spring were
measured at <1 mg/L during all three rounds of sampling (average 0.79 mg/L) and were significantly
below the pre-2007 NURE and NWIS dataset median concentrations of 8.05 mg/L and 10.0 mg/L,
respectively. In addition, trimethylbenzenes (and GROs and DROs) were not detected in the
homeowner well located within 100 feet of the spring on the same property (which was also sampled in
all three rounds); nor were trimethylbenzenes detected in two wells on neighboring properties that
were located within 600 feet and 900 feet of the spring collectively sampled a total of five times. In
addition to being found in gasoline, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene is also used in cleaners, pesticides, printing
inks, and solvents in coatings (EPA, 1994). Off-road motorized vehicles (ATVs) were observed to be used
on the property and the spring is likely more vulnerable than wells to surface release impacts.
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene appears to be quite frequently detected in ground water (USGS, 2006). In an
analysis of 95 domestic wells between 1996 and 1998 in the Allegheny and Monongahela River Basins of
Pennsylvania, West Virginia, New York, and Maryland, for example, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene was
detected in over 45% of the wells (Anderson et al., 2000). EPA has not set a drinking water criterion for
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene; however, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has
recommended a health-based action level of 330 u.g/L. No drinking water criterion is available for
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene.
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene was also detected in the third round of sampling at another homeowner
location (NEPAGW28) approximately 10 miles from the spring location (NEPASW01). The 1,2,3-
trimethylbenzene was detected in a duplicate sample from this location below the quantitation limit
(0.05 u.g/L) at an estimated concentration of 0.17 u.g/L; however, it was not detected in the primary
sample collected from this location nor was it detected in the same well in the one other round it was
sampled (round 1). As in the case of the 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene detection at spring location
NEPASW01, the absence of other potential indicators in the homeowner well (e.g., elevated chloride,
IDS, strontium, barium concentrations) is not consistent with the 1,2,3-trimethylbenzene originating
from hydraulic fracturing activities. Chloride concentrations in this well were similar in the two rounds it
was sampled at concentrations of 7.31 mg/L in the first round and 6.92 mg/L in the third round. These
concentrations are also below the pre-2007 NURE and NWIS dataset median chloride concentrations for
Bradford County (see Table 4).
During the first sampling round, toluene was detected in the sample from homeowner well
(NEPAGW13) below the quantitation limit (0.5 u.g/L) at an estimated concentration of 0.24 u.g/L.
Toluene was not detected at this location during the second round of sampling, nor was it detected in a
second well (NEPAGW37) sampled on the same property during the third round. (NEPAGW13 was not
sampled in the third round because it was no longer operational.) Toluene was also not detected in the
wells of two neighboring properties (NEPAGW18, NEPAGW19, NEPAGW20, and NEPAGW38) which were
collectively sampled a total of six times. Although toluene can be a component of hydraulic fracturing
fluids, it can originate from many other sources and is also a common laboratory contaminant (US EPA,
1992). Because toluene is a common laboratory contaminant, EPA's Guidance for Data Usability in Risk
81
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Assessment (www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/datause/parta.htm) Appendix VII states that a
toluene concentration is considered useable only if it is greater than 10 times the method blank
concentration or, if <10 times the method blank concentration, only when multiple aromatic or fuel
hydrocarbons are also detected when it is present. The analyte (toluene) is to be excluded from
consideration in all other situations. The absence of other indicators including other fuel hydrocarbons,
the inability to detect toluene in the well when sampled a second time, and the absence of toluene
detections in the five nearby wells—one of which was within 100 feet, two of which were located within
400 feet, and two of which were located within 700 feet of NEPAGW13—makes it improbable that the
toluene originated from hydraulic fracturing activities.
Table 8. Organic compounds detected in samples from wells and springs in this study.
Chemical
Well
Concentration
(ug/L)
Qualifier
Notes
October/November 2011
Volatile Organic Compounds
Toluene
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene
NEPAGW13
NEPASW01
0.24
0.38
J
J
MCL = 1000 ug/L
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate
NEPAGW01
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
NEPAGW03
NEPAGW04
NEPAGW05
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
NEPAGW07
NEPAGW08
NEPAGW09
NEPAGW10
NEPAGW11
NEPAGW12
NEPAGW13
NEPAGW14
3.06
3.57
2.76
2.99
3.10
3.47
2.89
3.92
3.59
3.35
3.54
3.88
3.15
3.39
4.04
2.34
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
MCL = 400 ug/L
Similar concentrations
detected in laboratory
blanks; data is
considered invalid and
unusable
82
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 8. Organic compounds detected in samples from wells and springs in this study.
Chemical
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Diesel Range Organics
Well
NEPAGW06 DUP
NEPAGW07
NEPAGW08
NEPAGW18
NEPAGW19
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW04
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
Concentration
(ug/L)
2.82
1.21
4.10
2.74
1.57
2.45
23.4
23.1
25.1
Qualifier
B
B
B
B
B
B
Notes
MCL = 6 u.g/L
Similar concentrations
detected in laboratory
blanks; data is
considered invalid and
unusable
April/May 2012
Volatile Organic Compounds
Carbon disulfide
Chloroform
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02
0.30
5.53
J
MCL = 80 ug/L
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Diesel Range Organics
NEPAGW09
NEPASW06
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW10
NEPAGW14
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW36
NEPASW03
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
NEPASW05
NEPASW06
36.7
3.02
21.1
28.1
23.1
21.1
21.1
243
273
267
48.2
46.0
J-
J-
J-
J-
J-
J-
J-
J-
J-
J-
MCL = 6 ug/L
Not detected in DRO
chromatogram; thus
invalid and unusable
83
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 8. Organic compounds detected in samples from wells and springs in this study.
Chemical
Well
Concentration
(ug/L)
Qualifier
Notes
May 2013
Volatile Organic Compounds
Acetone
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene
Chloroform
Carbon disulfide
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW37
NEPASW01
NEPASW01
NEPAGW28DUP
NEPAGW29
NEPAGW08
NEPAGW16
0.33
8.3
1.6
1.1
0.17
0.40
0.11
0.12
J
J
J
J
J
MCL = 80 u.g/L
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Diesel Range Organics
Gasoline Range Organics
NEPAGW01
NEPAGW03
NEPAGW14
NEPAGW36
NEPASW01
NEPASW01
5.38
18.3
5.75
3.82
27.7
24.2
B
B
MCL = 6 u.g/L
Detected in field and
equipment blank; thus
invalid and unusable
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.)
The common laboratory contaminants acetone, carbon disulfide, and chloroform were also reported in
one or more samples. Acetone was reported in two samples in the third round of sampling but was not
detected in any samples in the first and second rounds. (A different analytical laboratory was used in
the third round.) The highest acetone concentration (8.3 u.g/L) was reported for a sample from a well
sampled only in the third round (NEPAGW37). The other reported detection of acetone, estimated at
0.33 u.g/L (below the quantitation limit of 1.0 u.g/L), was from a well (NEPAGW16) where acetone was
not detected in the first or second rounds. Carbon disulfide was also reported at an estimated
concentration of 0.12 u.g/L (below the quantitation limit of 0.5 u.g/L) in round 3 at NEPAGW16, but was
not detected at this location during the first two rounds. Carbon disulfide also was reported in a sample
from NEPAGW02 at an estimated concentration of 0.30 u.g/L (below the quantitation limit) during the
second round of sampling (but not in the first or third round) and in a sample from NEPAGW08 at an
estimated concentration of 0.11 u.g/L (also below the quantitation limit) in the third round of sampling
(but not in the first or second round). Chloroform was reported in a sample from NEPAGW02 during the
second round at a concentration of 5.53 u.g/L and during the third round in a sample from NEPAGW29
84
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
(below the quantitation limit of 0.5 u.g/L) at an estimated concentration of 0.40 u.g/L; however,
chloroform was not detected at either of these locations during the other two rounds of sampling
conducted at each location. The sporadic and inconsistent reported detections of acetone, carbon
disulfide, and chloroform in samples are concluded to be most consistent with laboratory contamination
or alternative undetermined causes not related to hydraulic fracturing activities. Laboratory
contamination of samples and blanks is not uncommon and can occur under the most rigorous of
laboratory QA/QC protocols. The issue of laboratory contamination in water samples and blanks,
including those organic contaminants more susceptible to being introduced during laboratory sample
preparation and analysis, are addressed by Miller (2015) and Douglas (2012).
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate was reported above the quantitation limit in 16 samples in the first round of
sampling, but was also detected at similar levels in associated laboratory blanks during this round of
sampling, thereby rendering the data invalid. Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate was not reported in any
samples in the second or third rounds of sampling. Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate was detected in many
samples during all rounds of sampling, although data from the first round is concluded to be invalid due
to similar levels reported in associated laboratory blanks. Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate was reported in
four field samples, two field blanks, and one equipment blank in the third round and in two field
samples in the second round. The highest reported concentration was 36.7 u.g/L at NEPAGW09 in the
second round, which is significantly higher than EPA's primary drinking water MCL of 6.0 u.g/L. However,
bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate was not detected in the DRO chromatograms for the second round of
sampling, indicating its detection, at least in the second round, was due to laboratory contamination.
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate was also reported above the MCL, at 18.3 mg/L, at location NEPAGW03 in
the third round. The four locations at which bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate was reported in the third
round—including NEPAGW03—did not show any bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate detections in the second
round. Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate is a common laboratory contaminant (US EPA, 1992) and can
originate from the use of plastic equipment (e.g., tubing) that contains bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate as a
plasticizing agent (Griffiths et al., 1985). In sum, all reported data for bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate and
bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate are concluded to be highly questionable and therefore unusable.
6.4. Water Isotopes
Water (62HH2o and 618OH2o) isotope data were also obtained for samples collected in the study. As in the
case of 87Sr/86Sr ratios, Marcellus Shale-produced water also has a characteristic 62HH20 and 618OH20
isotope signature (Warner et al., 2012; Sharma et al., 2014). A water isotope signature in water samples
significantly deviating to the right of the Global Meteoric Water Line (Craig, 1961) shown in Figure 30
could signify a potential impact. A majority of the 62HH20 and 618OH20 data from the study, however, as
shown in Figure 30, plot to the left of the Global Meteoric Water Line and close to the Local Meteoric
Water Line for Pennsylvania as described by Kendall and Coplen (2001). The only exceptions were the
data from two samples collected from the homeowner pond, which plot to the right of the Global
Meteoric Water Line. Although the signatures for the pond samples could be an additional line of
evidence for impacts originating from the nearby well pad, the signatures may also be due to
evaporation of the pond water. 62HH20 and 618OH20 (unlike 87Sr/86Sr ratios) are less sensitive indicators of
impacts, and according to Warner et al. (2012), only a brine fraction of greater than 20% in receiving
waters would alter the 62HH20 and 618OH20 signatures sufficiently to observe a significant change.
85
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
-56.0
-58.0
-60.0
KJ
-68.0
-70.0
-72.0
= 6.81x + 1.64
R2 = 0.7501
NEPASW06 (stream)
NEPASW05 (stream)
y = 6.7x + 2
-10.40 -10.20 -10.00
-9.80 -9.60 -9.40 -9.20
6180 H20 (%o, VSMOW)
-9.00
NEPASW03 (pond)
NEPASW04(pond)
-8.80
-8.60
Figure 30. Water isotope plots for samples collected in this study during second and third sampling rounds relative to global meteoric water line and local
meteoric water line. Only pond water samples plot to right of global meteoric water line.
86
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
6.5. Dissolved Gases
All ground water and spring water samples collected in the study area were analyzed for dissolved
methane, ethane, propane, and butane. Seventeen of the 36 homeowner wells sampled over the
course of the study exhibited methane concentrations >1 mg/L during at least one sampling round, and
13 exhibited methane concentrations >5 mg/L during at least one sampling round. As previously noted,
Na-CI and Na-HCO3 type waters exhibited the greatest frequency of methane detections >lmg/L in this
study (Figure 14). The highest methane concentration measured over the course of the study
(56.1 mg/L) was measured in the third round of sampling at NEPAGW01, which exhibits Na-HCO3 type
water.
The presence of methane in wells does not, in itself, signify an association with hydraulic fracturing
activities, since methane occurs naturally in the study area. However, the presence of methane in wells
previously methane-free or any significant increase in methane concentrations observed relative to
previous levels could signify an impact. In addition, a change in isotopic signature of the methane or a
change in methane-to-ethane ratios could also indicate a potential impact. Although methane is
considered nontoxic, its presence in wells can be of potential concern if concentrations are sufficiently
high to pose an explosion risk. The influx of methane into wells may also cause suspension of well
sediments and dislodging of naturally occurring mineral deposits (precipitates) from the surfaces of the
well and wellbore. This can lead to increased turbidity and discoloration of well water (Gorody, 2012).
The increased presence of methane in wells, if sustained, could also promote more reducing conditions,
possibly leading to increased iron and manganese dissolution and subsequent liberation (dissolution) of
naturally occurring contaminants such as arsenic. Ultimately, the sustained presence of methane could
possibly also promote sulfate-reducing conditions, resulting in the production of hydrogen sulfide.
In cases where measured methane concentrations were >1 mg/L, isotope analyses for 613C of methane
(613CCH4 or 613Ci) relative to the Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite (VPDB) standard and 62H of methane (62HCH4
or SCDi) relative to Vienna Standard Mean Ocean Water (VSMOW) standard were generally conducted
to establish isotopic signatures for the gas. If sufficient ethane was present in samples, then 613C of
ethane (613CC2H6 or 613C2) was also measured to further refine the isotopic fingerprint of the gas. Revesz
et al. (2010) provide a summary of how stable isotope data can be used to distinguish between
thermogenic gases and biogenic gases. Thermogenic methane and ethane derived from deeper
formations, including where the Marcellus Shale is located, tend to be less isotopically fractionated (i.e.,
more 613C-enriched) than shallower, microbially produced (biogenic) gases. In addition, thermogenic
gases are generally wetter than biogenic gases in that they tend to have a much greater proportion of
higher chain hydrocarbons (i.e., ethane, propane, butane) than biogenic gases. 613C values for methane
(613CCH4) greater than (i.e., more positive than) about -50%o and a methane to combined ethane,
propane, and butane (CH4/C2H6+) ratio <1,000 are generally more indicative of a thermogenic gas. 613C
values for ethane (613CC2H6) more positive than about -45%o and a CH4/C2H6+ ratio <1,000 also tend to be
indicative of a thermogenic gas. Gas isotope signatures can potentially also be used to distinguish
thermogenic gases originating from different formations, as noted earlier. Data from mud log gas
samples collected by Baldassare et al. (2014) for 234 gas well locations in a five-county area of
northeastern Pennsylvania (including Bradford and Susquehanna Counties) indicate thermogenic
methane and ethane from deeper formations, where the Marcellus Shale is located, tend to be less
isotopically fractionated than thermogenic methane and ethane originating from shallower formations
(see Table 5).
87
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
6.5.1. Methane and Ethane Isotopes
Gas isotope data for this study are presented in Table 9. The 613CCH4, 62HCH4, 613CC2H6, and CH4/C2H6+
ratio data for locations with methane concentrations >1 mg/L provided in Table 9 are generally
consistent with gas of predominantly thermogenic origin. One exception was NEPAGW11, which
exhibited 613C values of -73.52%o and -73.90%o in the two rounds that gas isotope data were collected at
this location. This location also had one of the highest CH4/C2H6 ratios detected in the study (2,488 in
round 1). The gas isotope signature from this location is most consistent with gas of biogenic origin
(Figure 31, Figure 32a). The only other 613CCH4 value < -50%o observed in the study was -57.5%o in
homeowner well NEPAGW31. This signature is more consistent with a mixture of thermogenic and
biogenic methane, although the low CH4/C2H6 ratio of 206 is inconsistent with a significant biogenic
component. The highest (most positive) 613CCH4 value measured in the study was at homeowner
location NEPAGW06, where a value of -27.22%o was observed in the third round of sampling.
The mean and median 613CCH4 values of -40.86%o and -38.30%o, respectively, for gas samples collected
from well and springs in this study are higher (more positive) than the mean and median 613CCH4 values
of -45.33%o and -43.19%o, respectively, for gas isotope data reported by Baldassare et al. (2014) for 67
private wells sampled in their five-county study in northeastern Pennsylvania [including Bradford and
Susquehanna Counties] (see Table 10). The mean and median 62HCH4 values of -184.6%o and -170.3%o,
respectively, for this study are also more positive than the mean and median 62HCH4 values of -212.l%o
and -212.3%o, respectively, for the Baldassare et al. (2014) private well study. In contrast, the mean
513CC2H6 value for this study was very similar to that of the Baldassare et al. (2014) study (-35.03%o
and -35.67%o, respectively), while the median 613CC2H6 value of -37.1%o was considerably more negative
than the value of -34.6%o for the Baldassare et al. (2014) study (Table 10). In general, the data indicate
methane in gas samples from homeowner wells in this study was less fractionated than methane from
private wells in the Baldassare et al. (2014) study, whereas ethane was more fractionated. This could
indicate a greater contribution of gases from deeper formations (e.g., Middle Devonian strata) in
homeowner wells in this study relative to homeowner wells in the Baldassare et al. (2014) study.
6.5.2. Inorganic Carbon Isotopes
Samples were also analyzed for 613C of DIG (613CD,C) to further aid in interpretation of gas data. DIG in
ground water can originate from processes such as decaying organic matter, carbonate rock dissolution,
silicate mineral weathering, and microbial sulfate reduction (Warner et al., 2013; Sharma et al., 2014).
Production of carbon dioxide (CO2) associated with microbial methane production (methanogenesis)
from the degradation of organic compounds would tend to result in the enrichment of 613C of DIG (and
therefore more positive 613CD,C values) as well as increased alkalinity (Jackson et al., 2013a; Baldassare et
al., 2014). A system dominated by DIG production from microbial methanogenesis would be expected
to yield positive 613CD|C values (e.g., > +10%o).
613CD|C data provided in Table 9 for the locations where methane concentrations exceeded 1 mg/L
indicate 613CD,C values were less than -12%o at all sampling locations, with the exception of homeowner
location NEPAGW01. The negative values are not only inconsistent with a significant contribution from
microbial methanogenesis, but would also appear to be inconsistent with the DIG originating directly
from deeper formations like the Marcellus Shale. Sharma et al. (2014) report 613CD,C values greater than
+21%o in produced water from three Marcellus Shale gas wells in Greene County, in southwestern
Pennsylvania. The somewhat less negative 613CD|C values of -7.25%o and -6.30%o measured in
88
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 9. Locations in this study sampled for gas isotope data where methane concentrations were greater than
1 mg/L
Sampling
Location
NEPAGW01
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW04
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW08
NEPAGW11
NEPAGW13
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW17
NEPAGW18
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW31
NEPAGW32
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW37
NEPAGW38
Sampling
Round
R2
R3
Rl
R2
R3
R2
R2
R3
R2
R3
R2
R3
R2
R2
R2dup
R3
R2
R2
Rl
R2
R2dup
Rl
Rl
R2
R3
R2
R3
R3
R3
R3 dup
CH4
(mg/L)
40.4
56.1
40.7
39.4
44.7
27.6
1.10
0.740
17.3
20.0
3.06
2.44
21.7
8.19
7.67
7.53
24.6
7.90
7.55
18.4
18.0
1.95
0.729
2.42
1.23
37.2
41.5
15.5
17.5
16.9
C2H6
(mg/L)
0.0184
0.0267
0.0257
0.0265
0.0267
0.0165
0.0176
0.0097
0.0065
0.0088
0.0012
<0.0028
0.4970
0.1090
0.1040
0.0701
0.0291
0.2590
0.2160
0.4140
0.4010
0.0095
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
0.0616
0.0882
0.3840
0.4280
0.4150
CH4/
C2H6
2196
2101
1584
1487
1674
1673
63
76
2682
2275
2488
>871
44
75
74
107
845
31
35
44
45
206
>260
>864
>439
604
471
40
41
41
6 CCH4
(6uCd
(%o)
-39.42
-39.27
-38.43
-38.26
-38.20
-38.24
-29.95
-27.22
-49.96
-48.85
-73.52
-73.90
-33.01
-39.41
-39.36
-40.91
-46.46
-31.82
-32.32
-33.32
-33.30
-57.50
-27.70
-38.80
-32.34
-38.49
-38.30
-31.92
-32.22
-32.19
6 HCH4
(%o)
-203.9
-201.0
-206.7
-204.7
-204.0
-201.9
-136.2
-138.8
-228.7
-221.1
-252.8
-251.0
-166.0
-170.4
-171.5
-169.0
-202.3
-168.0
-165.4
-173.7
-171.0
-156.3
-79.0
-190.5
-145.1
-217.5
-215.2
-163.3
-163.9
-162.3
6l3r
MT2H6
(613C2)
(%o)
*
*
-32.0
-31.4
-31.3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
-37.2
-37.7
-37.7
-37.3
-38.2
-36.2
-36.3
-36.4
-37.0
*
*
*
*
-28.0
-30.6
-37.1
-37.4
-37.4
6l3r
CDIC
(%»)
-7.25
-6.30
-15.34
-13.86
-14.00
-12.30
-17.66
-17.20
-14.06
-13.40
-14.14
-13.50
-18.36
-16.26
-16.39
-15.80
-12.91
-17.48
-17.78
-17.62
-18.07
-24.38
-17.52
-17.71
-17.30
-15.76
-14.90
-19.00
-17.70
-17.80
6l3r
C2-
613d
(%o)
-
-
6.43
6.86
6.90
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-4.15
1.71
1.66
3.61
8.26
-4.38
-3.98
-3.08
-3.66
-
-
-
-
10.49
7.70
-5.18
-5.18
-5.21
* Insufficient ethane (C2H6) present to analyze.
89
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
10000
1000
Biogenic
NEPAGW08
NEPAGW11
NEPAGW01
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW04
10
U
1
U
NEPAGW17
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW31
100
Salt Spring State Park spring water
NEPAGW13, NEPAGW18, NEPAGW20,
NEPAGW37, NEPAGW38
\
NEPAGW16
Granville Township
gas wells (western
limit of study area)
NEPAGW06
Di mock Town ship
gas wells (eastern
limit of study area)
Thermogenic
10
-80.00
-70.00
-60.00
-40.00
-30.00
-20.00
-50.00
613CCH4(%o,VPDB)
Figure 31. Bernard plot showing 613CCH4 values for homeowner wells sampled in this study with detectable ethane concentrations and methane
concentrations >1 mg/L relative to available gas well data from study area. Only one location (NEPAGW11) plots distinctly as biogenic gas. Data for
locations sampled in more than one round are averaged. Dimock Township gas well data (collected 11/4/2011) and Salt Spring State Park data (collected
11/10/2010) from Molofsky et al. (2013); Granville Township gas well data (collected 12/10/2010) from PA DEP.
90
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
-120
-140
-160
-180
-200
-220
-240
-260
NEPAGW32
NEPAGW06
Marcellus median Marcellus mean
NEPAGW31
Geneseo shale median Tully Limestone mean
Geneseo shale mean
Brallier median
NEPAGW01
NEPAGW17 I
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW04
Brallier mean
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW08
X
Catskill/Lock Haven mean
Catskill/Lock Haven median
Salt Spring State Park
NEPAGW11
-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
613CCH4(%o)
Figure 32a. Schoell plot showing 613CCH4 versus 62HCH4 values for homeowner wells sampled in this study with methane concentrations >1 mg/L relative
to different formation means and medians, and the one and two standard deviation (la and 2o) range about the mean for over 1500 Marcellus Shale mud
log gas samples analyzed from 234 gas wells in northeastern Pennsylvania (Baldasarre et al., 2014). Data for homeowner locations sampled in more than
one round in this study are averaged. Salt Spring State Park data from Molofsky et al. (2013).
91
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
1 ^n
1 ^
-1 fin
sf
^
""« 1 fie;
0
I
1 7n
1 7^
1 8H
-3
G)
Granville Township gas
wells* (western limit
^
7
i
8 -37
Monroe Township gas wells*
_ Dimock Township
©gas wells (eastern limit
of study area)**
• •
Marcellus median Marcellus mean >• )
V ^^ ^^ I i-j
Tully Limestone median Welles 3-5H (9 5/8")*
D NEPAGW38 NEPAGW37
Hamilton Group median • NEPAGW13 Welles 3-2H (95/8")*
Hamilton Group NEPAGW18
(Mahantango) mean A
V
^1 NEPAGW20
• Tully Limestone mean
Geneseo shale median
1 i i i i I 7 i '
36 -35 -34 -33 -32 -31 -30 -29 -28
613CCH4(%o)
Figure 32b. Schoell plot close-up showing 613CCH4 versus 62HCH4 values for homeowner wells from this study within one standard deviation (la) of the mean
613CCH4 and 62HCH4 values reported by Baldasarre et al. (2014) for mud log gas samples collected from the Marcellus Shale. (* PA DEP data; ** Molofsky et al.
(2013) data).
92
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 10. Gas isotope data from homeowner wells in this study compared to data for private wells sampled in five-county region of northeastern
Pennsylvania (Tioga, Bradford, Susquehanna, Wyoming, and Sullivan) reported by Baldassare et al. (2014).
Baldassare etal. (2014)
This Study
Baldassare etal. (2014)
This Study
Baldassare etal. (2014)
This Study
Parameter
513CCH4
R13/~
o CCH4
62HCH4
62HCH4
5 CC2H6
c!3r
° M:2H6
n
67
16
67
16
13
9
mean
%0
-45.33
-40.86
-212.1
-184.6
-35.03
-35.67
min
%0
-67.17
-73.71
-263.9
-251.9
-42.4
-38.2
25th
%0
-46.91
-43.18
-222.6
-203.8
-37.7
-37.4
median
%0
-43.19
-38.30
-212.3
-170.3
-34.6
-37.1
75th
%0
-40.22
-32.96
-197.5
-163.2
-32.7
-36.2
90th
%0
-38.08
-32.03
-190.3
-145.4
-31.7
—
max
%0
-34.47
-28.59
-162.5
-137.5
-27.0
-29.3
93
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
homeowner well NEPAGW01 (for the two rounds 613CD|C data were collected from this location), along
with the relatively high average CH4/C2H6 ratio (>2000) observed for this location, may indicate a more
significant contribution from microbial methanogenesis.
6.6. Homeowner Well Dissolved Gas Scenarios
Multiple rounds of pre-drill methane data were generally not available for homeowner locations in the
study area, making it challenging to evaluate potential gas impacts in the study. In addition, operator
gas isotope data for individual gas wells of interest in Bradford County were not available. This limited
the ability to evaluate potential links, if any, between gas in homeowner wells and gas originating from
the Marcellus Shale. Nevertheless, several notable dissolved gas scenarios/evaluations in the study are
listed below and discussed in the ensuing sections.
Scenario 1: Homeowner wells located in valley settings in the study area that exhibit Na-CI type
water with methane concentrations >10 mg/L.
Scenario 2: Homeowner well in a valley setting for which pre- and post-hydraulic fracturing data
were collected during the course of this study.
Scenario 3: Homeowner well where three rounds of pre-gas drilling data were available and where
methane and ethane concentrations increased significantly following initiation of
hydraulic fracturing activities.
Scenario 4: Homeowner wells exhibiting the highest methane concentrations observed in the study
(up to 56.1 mg/L).
Scenario 5: Homeowner location where evacuation of home was required due to gas build-up.
Scenario 6: Homeowner location where discoloration of well water appeared to coincide with entry
of methane gas into the homeowner well.
6.6.1. Scenario 1: Valley wells with Na-CI type water and elevated methane levels
The three homeowner wells (NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW17) in Bradford County with
geochemical characteristics similar to the naturally occurring spring water in Salt Spring State Park
(Susquehanna County) exhibited methane concentrations ranging from 14.0 mg/L to 27.6 mg/L over the
course of the study. These wells are all located in stream/river valleys and exhibit the Na-CI type water
described by Williams et al. (1998) as characteristic of many stream valley wells in the study area
(Appendix E). Average TDS concentrations in each of these wells were measured at >1,000 mg/L, and
chloride concentrations were consistently >300 mg/L. All three wells also exhibited elevated barium
concentrations, and two of the three wells (NEPAGW04 and NEPAGW17) were high in combined
radium-226 and radium-228 concentrations. All three wells are located within 1 mile of one or more
well pads; however, in the case of two of the three homeowner wells—NEPAGW04 and NEPAGW08—
the gas wells on the nearby pads had been drilled but not yet hydraulically fractured when the first
round of sampling was conducted in fall 2011. Therefore, the methane present in these wells cannot be
attributed to the hydraulic fracturing (stimulation) process. Gas samples collected from the two
homeowner wells exhibited significantly different isotopic signatures from those of Marcellus Shale gas
in the study area (see Figure 32a). Figure 32a shows that the isotopic signatures for NEPAGW04,
NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW17 are outside the two standard deviation range about the mean for the more
94
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
than 1,500 Marcellus Shale mud log isotopic gas signatures reported by Baldassare et al. (2014) for gas
wells in the five-county area of northeastern Pennsylvania (including Bradford and Susquehanna
Counties). Pre-drill data were available for only one of the three homeowner wells (NEPAGW08). The
operator-reported methane concentration in this homeowner well was >20 mg/L before drilling began
on the nearby well pad (see Figure 28).
The well cap on homeowner well NEPAGW17 was reported by the homeowner to have "blown off" on
August 4, 2010, approximately four weeks after drilling was completed on a well pad approximately
3,400 feet to the south of the property (see Figure 27). Gas samples collected by the PA DEP from the
surface casings of the three wells on the pad showed 613CCH4 values ranging from -32.01%o to -32.18%o
and 62HCH4 values ranging from -157.6%o to -159.7%o. 613CCH4and 62HCH4 values for homeowner well
NEPAGW17 were measured at -46.46%o and -202.3%o, respectively, in this study (Table 9 and Figure 27),
indicating the drilled wells on the pad were not the likely source of the gas in the homeowner well.
These gas isotopic signatures are also different from the gas isotopic signatures obtained from the
hydraulically fractured wells on another pad located approximately 4,000 feet east of the homeowner
location (see Figure 27). 613CCH4 and 62HCH4 values reported for tubing and production casings from these
wells (PA DEP, 2013) were >-33%o and >-160%o, respectively (Table 6 and Figure 27). Furthermore, no
isotopic reversal was observed in a gas sample collected from NEPAGW17 indicating that, if any gas did
enter the well, it would likely have been from shallower formations.
6.6.2. Scenario 2: Homeowner well with pre- and post-hydraulic fracturing data collected in
the study
On December 31, 2011, approximately two months after completion of the first round of sampling in
this study and four months preceding the second round of sampling, hydraulic fracturing (stimulation)
was carried out on a well pad located approximately 4,000 feet from NEPAGW08, based on data
provided by the operator (Figure 28). The lateral from this hydraulically fractured well passes near the
homeowner property within a surface radius of approximately 1,200 feet—at a depth of approximately
1 mile. This homeowner location is thus of particular interest because it provides a well-specific pre-
and post-hydraulic fracturing case study for the study area. Moreover, NEPAGW08 is located in a
stream valley setting that some researchers believe would be more vulnerable to impacts from the
hydraulic fracturing of Marcellus Shale. As previously stated, it has been hypothesized that stream
valleys represent zones of weakness or increased bedrock fracturing that allowed glacial and weathering
processes to down cut preferentially into the bedrock. The increased fracture density in the stream
valleys could thus result in a greater abundance of preferential pathways for the flow of natural gas
from depth to the surface. Molofsky et al. (2013) report that water wells in Susquehanna County exhibit
median methane concentrations similar to those of upland water wells but that the 90th percentile
concentrations of methane in valley wells are significantly elevated relative to upland wells. This
observation, according to Molofsky et al. (2013), suggests that some valley water wells access natural
sources of elevated methane via interconnection with specific ground water units and/or enhanced
pathways of methane migration. Warner et al. (2012) cite the similar geochemistry between ground
water in these settings and deeper formations as evidence of a pre-existing network of cross-
formational pathways that has enhanced hydraulic connectivity to the deeper formations.
Gas samples collected from the homeowner well during the first round of sampling in this study (i.e.,
before hydraulic fracturing was conducted) showed a methane concentration of 14.8 mg/L. Following
95
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
hydraulic fracturing (stimulation) on the nearby well pad, samples collected during the subsequent two
sampling rounds showed dissolved methane concentrations of 17.3 mg/L and 20.0 mg/L, respectively
(see Figure 28). Although this might suggest a potential trend toward increasing methane
concentrations, these values are also within the margin of variability for methane measurements in
water well samples. Methane concentrations measured in ground water can be variable even when
using the same sample collection method and depend on many factors including the extent of
homeowner well use prior to sampling, the amount of purging, the amount of water drawdown during
purging and sampling, barometric pressure, and seasonal effects. Methane-to-ethane (CH4/C2H6) ratios
at this location were higher following hydraulic fracturing than before (2,682 after versus 1,873 before)
indicating that, if any gas did enter the homeowner well, it would likely have been of predominantly
biogenic origin from shallower depths rather than thermogenic gas from deeper formations. Also
importantly, two gas isotope samples obtained from this well, both of which were collected after
hydraulic fracturing was conducted on the well pad, showed mean 613CCH4and 62HCH4 values of-49.41%o
and -224.9%o, respectively. These values are outside the two-standard deviation range about the mean
of the over 1,500 Marcellus Shale mud log gas signatures reported by Baldassare et al. (2014) for
northeastern Pennsylvania and are more similar to the isotopic signature of Salt Spring State Park spring
water gas samples (Figure 32a; Table 5). Although insufficient ethane was present in the well to
evaluate the presence/absence of isotope reversal, the isotopic data and other gas data evaluated
appear to exclude the Marcellus Shale as the source of the gas in the homeowner well.
6.6.3. Scenario 3: Homeowner well with multiple rounds of pre-hydraulic fracturing data
One homeowner well in Susquehanna County (NEPAGW23) had three rounds of pre-drill sampling data
available. The data were collected by the operator before drilling began on a nearby well pad
approximately 800 feet from the homeowner well (Figure 33). The three rounds of pre-drill sampling
showed average methane concentrations of 4.9 mg/L (range: 3.8 mg/L to 6.0 mg/L) and average ethane
concentrations of 0.66 u.g/L (range: 0.43 u.g/L to 0.80 u.g/L). Following the initiation of hydraulic
fracturing activities on the well pad in summer 2009, the concentrations of methane and ethane
increased significantly. Methane concentrations increased approximately seven-fold, while ethane
concentrations increased more than 1,000-fold, indicating an influx of a different and wetter gas into the
well than was previously present. Methane-to-ethane (CH4/C2H6) ratios in the well decreased from over
6,000 to <50, consistent with a transition from a predominantly biogenic gas to a predominantly
thermogenic gas.
Although methane and ethane concentrations appear to have decreased gradually in homeowner well
NEPAGW23 since the initial influx of gas, data collected by the operator more than a year after the initial
spike in gas concentrations was first observed indicated that methane concentrations as high as 30 mg/L
were still present. A dissolved gas sample collected by the operator from the homeowner well in
January 2011 still showed a methane concentration of 17.0 mg/L, with a still low CH4/C2H6 ratio of 43.
The sample collected as part of this study in November 2011 showed a methane concentration of
7.79 mg/L, with a somewhat higher CH4/C2H6 ratio of 143. A gas isotope sample was not collected from
this well as part of this study because sampling was not conducted in Susquehanna County in rounds 2
and 3, when the majority of methane isotope sampling was conducted. However, gas isotope data for a
sample collected from this location in June 2010 by the PA DEP approximately one year following the
initially observed spike in gas concentrations showed 613CCH4 and 62HCH4 values of -45.8%o and -276%o,
respectively. These 613CCH4 and 62HCH4 values are well below those reported by Molofsky et al. (2013) for
96
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
metllane ethane ... ,.
(CH i (C H i CH4/C
NEPAGW23 Fe
8/11/08* <0,05
2/17/09* 0.061 < 0.025
8/7/09* 3.43 0.381
10/25/09* 0.279 0.192
11/23/09* 0.424 0.176
11/1/11 0.386 0.163
units in mg/L
'operator data
2/17/09*
5/27/09*
6/14/09*
7/20/09*
8/7/09*
9/15/09*
1/20/11*
9/15/11*
11/1/11
0.43 8837
0.75 8000
0.80 6125
0.42 10,476
35,000 920
30,000 840
17,000 400
12,000 200
7790 54.5
methane and ethane units in jig/L
'operator data
(PA DEP 6/16/2010)
45.8 %o;62Hcn4 = -276.8 %„)
EPA Sample Location
100 ft Contour
10 ft Contour
lateral locations are approximate,
Well Lateral (Drilled and Fractured)
Arrows depict continuation of lateral beyond map extent
Figure 33. Location of Susquehanna County homeowner well NEPAGW23 with several rounds of pre-drill sampling data collected. Data indicate methane
concentrations increased >7-fold and ethane concentrations increased >1000-fold following initiation of hydraulic fracturing activities while methane to
ethane ratios decreased from >5000 to <50. Data also appear to indicate increases in Fe and Mn concentrations following initiation of hydraulic fracturing
activities.
97
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Dimock area Marcellus Shale gas wells (613CCH4 values >-30%o and 62HCH4>-170%o) and outside the two-
standard deviation range about the mean reported by Baldassare et al. (2014) for the more than 1,500
Marcellus Shale mud log gas signatures collected in their five-county study in northeastern
Pennsylvania. The signature likely reflects a mixture of pre-existing biogenic and new thermogenic gas
that entered the well. Because of the marked difference in the methane isotope signature of the gas in
the homeowner well relative to that of Marcellus Shale gas, it is reasonable to conclude that the gas that
apparently entered the homeowner well was not Marcellus Shale gas, but rather a much more
fractionated thermogenic gas originating from a shallower formation. Ethane isotope data was not
reported for this well by the PA DEP and therefore the presence/absence of isotope reversal in this well
could not be evaluated.
6.6.4. Scenario 4: Homeowner locations exhibiting the highest levels of methane in the
study
At two homeowner well locations in Bradford County (NEPAGW01 and NEPAGW02), samples were
collected for dissolved gas analysis by the operator several months after hydraulic fracturing activities
began at a well pad located less than 700 feet from the homeowner wells (Figure 34). These samples
showed no detectable levels of methane in the homeowner wells (<0.01 mg/L). However, the three
rounds of sampling conducted as part of this study showed methane concentrations at the two well
locations ranging from 37.2 mg/L to 56.1 mg/L. In the third round of sampling (May 2013), methane
concentrations of 56.1 mg/L and 44.7 mg/L were measured in homeowner wells NEPAGW01 and
NEPAGW02, respectively. Methane isotope data for gas samples collected from the two homeowner
wells in this study showed average 613CCH4 and 62HCH4 values of -39.34%o and -202.4%o, respectively, for
NEPAGW01 and average values of -38.30%o and -205.l%o, respectively for NEPAGW02 (Table 9). Gas
samples collected by the PA DEP from the production casings from gas wells at two nearby well pads
(Figure 34) on November 4, 2010, indicated 613CCH4 values of -36.94%o and -37.25%o and 62HCH4 values
of -163.5%o and -163.2%o. Although the homeowner 613CCH4 values do not appear to differ markedly
from those of the production casing (i.e., Marcellus Shale gas), the 62HCH4 values do differ markedly and
plot outside the two-standard deviation range about the mean for Marcellus Shale mud log gas isotope
signatures reported by Baldassare et al. (2014) for northeastern Pennsylvania (Figure 32a). The isotope
data thus indicate the gas in the homeowner wells is not consistent with gas from the two nearby gas
wells. In addition, there was no isotope reversal in the one well (NEPAGW02) that yielded sufficient
ethane for isotopic analysis and the CH4/C2H6 ratios for gas in both homeowner wells (>1,400) were
considerably higher than the CH4/C2H6 ratios of <50 reported by the PA DEP for gas obtained from the
production casings at the two nearby well pads. This further appears to exclude Marcellus Shale gas
from the nearby gas wells as the source of methane in the two homeowner wells. However, this does
not preclude the gas in the homeowner wells having originated from shallower formations as a result of
drilling and well completion operations.
The observations at these two homeowner locations are also of interest in that, the initial operator data
showing non-detectable levels of gas in the homeowner wells would indicate a significant delay in the
arrival of gas at the two homeowner wells following drilling and hydraulic fracturing on the nearby well
pad. The initial non-detectable concentrations of methane in the two homeowner wells were observed
more than one month after the last of the nearby gas wells was drilled and fractured (see Figure 34).
98
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
NEPAGW02
methane (CH^
mg/L)
NEPAGW01
methane (CH4)
(mg/Ll
4/27/2009*
3/10/2011*
10/25/2011
4/25/2012
5/13/2013
4/27/2009* < 0.010
10/25/2011 40.7
4/25/2012 39.4
5/13/2013 44.7
CH4 Isotopes (5/13/13)
CH4/sotopes(5/13/13
Pfoauaian Casing
PA DEP (12/10/2010)
Production Casing
PADIPH2/JO/2010)
EPA Sample Location
100ft Contour
10 ft Contour
Well Lateral (Drilled and Fractured)
Lateral locations art approximate;
Arrows depict continuation of lateral beyond map extent.
Figure 34. Locations of homeowner wells NEPAGW01 and NEPAGW02 with highest measured methane concentrations in this study and where gas data
suggest delayed arrival of gas in homeowner wells following gas drilling activities. Drill/fracture dates from Chesapeake Energy (2/12/2012). (* Operator
data).
99
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
6.6.5. Scenario 5: Location requiring temporary evacuation of home due to gas build-up
Gas samples collected from three homeowner wells in Terry Township (Bradford County) exhibited
methane isotope signatures consistent with deeper formation (e.g., Middle Devonian) thermogenic gas.
These homes were purchased by the operator during the course of this study as part of a settlement
reached between the operator and the three homeowners. The homeowners alleged gas intrusion into
their wells as a result of hydraulic fracturing activities nearby. The operator, in response to initial
complaints from the homeowners in summer 2010, installed new wells on each of the properties. These
new wells (NEPAGW13, NEPAGW18, and NEPAGW20), as well as the original wells (NEPAGW37,
NEPAGW19, and NEPAGW38) on the three properties, were all sampled at least once as part of this
study and showed varying levels of dissolved methane, up to a concentration of 21.7 mg/L. The
complaints of stray gas in the wells were lodged by the homeowners approximately four months after
hydraulic fracturing (stimulation) had been completed on one well pad (Welles 1) and approximately six
months after drilling (only) had been completed on another well pad (Welles 3), both of which are
located 4,000 to 5,000 feet from the homeowner locations (Figure 35). No pre-drill samples were
collected by the operator at the homeowner locations. As shown in Figure 32b, the isotopic signatures
for methane at NEPAGW13, NEPAGW18, NEPAGW37, and NEPAGW38 were within one standard
deviation of the mean for the Marcellus Shale mud log gas samples reported by Baldassare et al. (2014)
for northeastern Pennsylvania.
Although the data suggest potential Marcellus Shale gas impacts on the homeowner wells, gas isotopic
data collected by the PA DEP in September 2010 from the annular spaces of the two drilled (but not yet
hydraulically fractured) wells on the Welles 3 pad showed 613CCH4 values of -30.43%o and -31.03%o and
62HCH4 values of -161.5%o and -165.4%o (Figure 35). The 613CCH4 values for these non-fractured wells are
very similar to those measured in the homeowner wells (Figure 32b). Gas isotope signatures for the two
hydraulically fractured horizontal wells on the Welles 1 pad (Figure 35) were not available.
The gas samples collected from homeowner wells NEPAGW37, NEPAGW38, NEPAGW18, NEPAGW13,
and NEPAGW20 also exhibited the isotope reversal properties (i.e., 613CCH4 > 613CC2H6) commonly
characteristic of deeper thermogenic gases originating from Middle Devonian sequences such as the
Marcellus Shale (Table 9). The magnitudes of the isotope reversal differences were slightly less than
those calculated from the mean 613CCH4 and 613CC2H6 values reported by Baldassare et al. (2014) for
Marcellus Shale gas but slightly higher than those calculated for the Hamilton Group sequences above
the Marcellus Shale (Table 5; Figure 36). Specifically, gas samples collected from NEPAGW37 and
NEPAGW38 in this study indicated isotope reversal differences of -5.18%o and -5.21%o, respectively,
while isotope reversal differences for gas samples collected from NEPAGW18, NEPAGW13, and
NEPAGW20 were less at -4.38%o, -4.15%o, and -3.08%o, respectively (Table 9; Figure 32b and Figure 36).
As previously noted, Marcellus Shale gas in the Dimock area of Susquehanna County has been reported
to exhibit an isotope reversal difference (613CC2H6- 613CCH4) ranging from -5%o to -7%o according to
Molofsky et al. (2013), while data from the Baldassare et al. (2014) mud log gas study indicate an
average isotope reversal difference of -6.11%o for Marcellus Shale mud log gas samples and -4.49%o for
mud log gas samples from Hamilton Group sequences above the Marcellus Shale (Table 5). Also as
previously noted, gas from production casing and tubing at a well pad in central Bradford County
showed isotope reversals ranging from -6.66%o to -6.97%o (Table 6). Ethane isotope data provided by
the PA DEP for the gas sample collected from the annular space of one of the two drilled (but not
100
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
95/8"casing 5'!CCH4 = -31.03%o; 52Hcm--165.4V 5"Cc2He =-37.86 %o
9 5/8" casing 513CCW = -30,43 %o; 62HCH4 = -161.5 %o
NEPAGW37 5/10/2013
NEPAGW38 5/10/2013
NEPAGW20 10/31/2011
NEPAGW20 4/28/2012
NEPAGW18 4/28/2012
NEPAGW13 4/28/2012
31.92 -163.3
32.22 -163.9
32.32 -165.4
33.32 -173.7
31.82 -168.0
33.01 -166.0
EPA Sample Location
100 ft Contour
10 ft Contour
Well Lateral {Drilled)
Well Lateral (Drilled and Fractured)
lateral locations are approximate;
Arrows depict continuation of lateral beyond map extent.
Figure 35. Location of homeowner wells where one homeowner evacuated home due to reported gas buildup. Gas isotope data and CH4/C2H6 ratios (as well as
isotope reversal differences not shown) indicate gas is more consistent with Middle Devonian origin than Upper Devonian origin. Drill/fracture dates from
Chesapeake Energy (2/12/2012).
101
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
-25
-30
§
-35
-40
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW13, NEPAGW18,
NEPAGW20, NEPAGW37,
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW17<
-50
-45
Ellis 2H surface
casing (8/9/2010)*
Strom 1H&2H gas wells
(8/10/2010)*
Dimock Township gas wells
(11/4/2011)**
Welles 3-2H 9 5/8" casing
(9/8/2010)*
Ellis 3H surface casing
(8/9/2010)*
Ellis 1H surface casing
(8/9/2010)*
-35
-30
-25
613CCH4 (%„, VPDB)
Figure 36. Isotope reversal presence/absence for samples in this study (with sufficient ethane present for isotopic analysis) relative to isotope reversals for
Marcellus gas wells on the Strom pad in central Bradford County (PA DEP 8/10/2010) and for Marcellus gas wells in Dimock Township in Susquehanna County
reported by Molofsky et al. (2013). Also shown are isotope reversal differences calculated from gas data collected by PA DEP from annular spacings of well
casings for drilled (but not yet fractured) wells on the Ellis and Welles 3 well pads. Locations of pads are shown in Figures 27 and 35. (*PA DEP; **Molofsky et
al. [2013])
102
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
fractured) horizontal wells on the nearby Welles 3 well pad indicated an isotope reversal difference
of -6.83%o. The gas isotope data from this study would appear to indicate that gas in one or more of the
subject homeowner wells likely originates from Middle Devonian strata, although it is unknown whether
any of the gas is specifically originating from the Marcellus Shale itself.
A potential complicating factor in the use of isotope reversal differences in determining the source of
gas is the fact that ethane biodegrades preferentially relative to methane (James and Burns, 1984). It is
therefore conceivable that enrichment of 13CC2H6 and a gradual narrowing (reduction) of the isotope
reversal difference may possibly occur with time. In addition, some mixing of gases may occur during
ascent of gas to the surface, resulting in modified isotope reversal differences. Whether these processes
are a factor in the magnitude of isotope reversal differences observed in homeowner wells in this study
is unknown.
Well water from two wells (NEPAGW13 and NEPAGW37) on one of the three homeowner properties
exhibited Ca-HCO3type water per the criteria of Deutsch (1997) used by Molofsky et al. (2013) in their
study of methane distribution in Susquehanna County. Molofsky et al. (2013) report that of a total of
281 samples exhibiting Ca-HCO3 type water in their study per the criteria of Deutsch (1997), none
exhibited methane concentrations above 1 mg/L The presence of methane at concentrations of
5.62 mg/L and 21.7 mg/L in the two rounds of sampling conducted at NEPAGW13, and the presence of
methane at a concentration of 15.5 mg/L during the one round of sampling conducted at NEPAGW37 in
this study, are thus in contrast to the observations of Molofsky et al. (2013) for Ca-HCO3 type ground
water in their study. The presence of methane concentrations >1 mg/L in these two wells with Ca-HCO3
water may provide an additional line of evidence for the presence of stray gas in the wells.
6.6.6. Scenario 6: Homeowner well showing sudden discoloration and high turbidity
A homeowner at a location sampled in Bradford County (NEPAGW06) reported that at approximately
7:00 p.m. on March 22, 2010, their well water suddenly changed from a relatively clear, non-turbid
state to a discolored (red-brown), turbid state. Pre-drill data from a sample collected at this location on
December 11, 2008 (as reported by PA DEP, Appendix E, Table E-l), showed a very low methane
concentration of 0.010 mg/L (Figure 37). Data collected by the PA DEP on April 1, 2010, approximately
10 days following the observed discoloration of the water, showed a methane concentration of
19.2 mg/L. A subsequent sample collected by the operator on April 7, 2010, showed a methane
concentration of 13.5 mg/L, and subsequent samples collected by PA DEP on April 21 and October 13,
2010, showed methane concentrations of 5.0 mg/L and 1.88 mg/L, respectively. The turbidity in a
sample collected from the homeowner well by PA DEP on April 1, 2010 (i.e., approximately 10 days after
the observed discoloration of the water) was very high, with a reported value of 259 NTUs. On April 21
and October 13, 2010, PA DEP-measured turbidity values were 5.76 NTU and 20.3 NTU, respectively.
The total iron and manganese concentrations measured in the sample collected on April 1, 2010 were
8.83 mg/L and 0.260 mg/L, respectively, far exceeding the respective EPA secondary drinking water
MCLs of 0.3 mg/L and 0.05 mg/L. Pre-drill data reported by PA DEP for December 2008 showed non-
detectable levels of total iron (<0.005 mg/L) and manganese (<0.002 mg/L) in the well (Appendix E,
Table E-l).
103
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
12/4/2008*
4/1/2010*
4/7/2010*
4/21/2010*
10/13/2010*
10/26/2011
4/28/2012
5/11/2013
Turbidity
-
259
5.80
5.76
20.3
0.88
0.28
0.95
Fe
(mg/L)
< 0.005
8.83
1.02
0.10
0.449
< 0.074
< 0.074
< 0.050
Mn
(mg/L)
< 0.002 I
0.260
0.034
< 0.010 I
0.018
< 0.016
< 0.016
< 0.001 |
methane (CH4) ethane (C2H6)
513CCH4 = -29.95 V 52Hcw =-136.2 %o (April 2012)
= -27.22 V 52HcH4 =-138.8 %» (May 2013)
EPA Sample Location
100 ft Contour
10 ft Contour
Well Lateral (Drilled)
Well Lateral (Drilled and Fractured)
Lateral loiatiors are approximate;
Arrows depict continuation of lateral beyond map extent.
Figures?. Location of homeowner well NEPAGW06 where well water is reported to have turned reddish-brown on March 22, 2010, appearing to
coincide with the temporary entry of gas into the homeowner well. Drill/fracture dates from Chesapeake Energy (2/12/2012). *From data compiled by
PA DEP (see Appendix E, Table E-l).
104
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
The high turbidity and high iron and manganese concentrations coinciding with the high methane
concentrations in the well are consistent with gas entering the well, likely causing physical agitation of
well sediments and/or dislodging of naturally occurring iron and manganese mineral deposits from the
well and wellbore surfaces. The methane-to-ethane ratio of the gas in the well was low (<80) for all
three sampling rounds in this study, consistent with the gas having a strong thermogenic origin (see
Figure 31). The 613CCH4 values for dissolved gas samples collected in the second and third rounds
were -29.95%o and -27.22%o, respectively (Table 9), indicating an isotopic signature more consistent
with deeper Middle Devonian formations where the Marcellus Shale is found. Sufficient ethane was not
available at this homeowner location to conduct a 13C isotope analysis of ethane (613CC2H6) for
determination of the presence/absence of isotope reversal. The well water at this homeowner location
is also a Ca-HCO3 type water per the classification used by Molofsky et al. (2013) for their study in
Susquehanna County. As noted earlier, no Ca-HCO3 type ground water samples (n=281) exhibited
methane concentrations above 1 mg/L in their study. However, the considerably more positive 62HCH4
value of the homeowner well sample (62HCH4> -140%o) relative to 62HCH4 values reported for Marcellus
Shale gas by the PA DEP, Molofsky et al. (2013), and the two standard deviation range about the mean
for Marcellus Shale gas samples evaluated by Baldassare et al. (2014) in their study (Figure 32a), would
be inconsistent with the gas originating from the Marcellus Shale. The possibility that methane could
have originated from the Marcellus Shale and undergone oxidation over time to acquire the more
positive 62HCH4 value observed, though, cannot be discounted. Regardless of origin, gas entry into the
homeowner well appears to have been a transient occurrence as evidenced by the apparent gradual
transition of the well back to its original state. This is supported by the data collected in this study
showing turbidity levels in all three rounds of sampling at <1 NTU, total iron and manganese
concentrations at <0.10 mg/L and <0.025 mg/L, respectively, and methane concentrations at <1.5 mg/L.
105
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
7. Summary of Case Study Results
Water sampling and analyses were conducted over a span of 1.5 years at 36 homeowner wells, two
springs, one pond, and one stream in northeastern Pennsylvania. Sampling was conducted primarily in
Bradford County, mainly across the southern half of the county, while some limited sampling was
conducted in Susquehanna County. With one exception, all sampling locations were within 1 mile of
one or more drilled gas wells and, with three exceptions, all sampling locations were within 1 mile of
one or more gas wells that had been hydraulically fractured (stimulated) prior to water sampling in this
study. Collectively, a total of approximately 100 drilled gas wells, most of which were fractured, were
within 1 mile of sampling locations in the study.
A multiple-lines-of-evidence approach was used in this study to evaluate potential cause and effect
relationships between hydraulic fracturing activities and contaminant presence in ground water since
many constituents of fracturing fluids and flowback/produced water can also originate from other
sources, both natural and anthropogenic. The presence of a constituent in ground water that is also
found in hydraulic fracturing fluids or flowback/produced waters does not necessarily implicate
hydraulic fracturing activities as a potential cause. However, such a finding does signify that more
focused attention is required to evaluate the potentially impacted sampling location to determine
whether additional lines of evidence might exist that could specifically link the constituent(s) to
hydraulic fracturing activities. This was the specific approach employed in this study.
The study was not random as it focused only on locations where homeowners had lodged complaints or
expressed concerns regarding potential impacts to their wells/springs from nearby hydraulic fracturing
activities. Many of the parameters that would normally serve as reliable indicators of potential
hydraulic fracturing impacts in other study areas could not be as effectively applied in this study area
due to the naturally-occurring elevated concentrations of these indicators within certain geologic
settings in the study area. Distinguishing between those findings more consistent with natural presence
and those findings more consistent with potential anthropogenic (e.g., hydraulic fracturing) impacts
presented a challenge in this study.
Parameter-specific observations of note in this study are summarized in Table 11. With the exception of
stray gas in the form of methane and ethane, the study revealed no anomalies or water quality
impairments likely linked to hydraulic fracturing activities based on our analyses of a broad suite of
inorganic and organic constituents and compounds in ground water samples collected from homeowner
wells and springs in the study area. The presence of the organic compounds 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene and
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene near quantitation limits in one spring; 1,2,3-trimethylbenzene below the
quantitation limit in a duplicate sample at one homeowner well in one round; and toluene below the
quantitation limit in a sample from another homeowner well in one round are attributed to other
anthropogenic sources that could not be determined. The study results did indicate elevated iron
and/or manganese concentrations above secondary MCLs at over 40% of ground water sampling
locations; however, this is consistent with historical data for the study area. Elevated concentrations of
iron and manganese generally coincided with reducing (i.e., low oxygen or anoxic) conditions in the
ground water. Ground water sampling results also indicated elevated concentrations of TDS, chloride,
sodium, barium, strontium, and/or combined radium-226 and radium-228 at a few locations (see
examples in Table 11). Elevated concentrations of these analytes are attributed to known localized
natural background conditions in the study area associated with specific geologic settings (e.g., stream
106
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
valley settings). High sulfate concentrations (>1,000 mg/L) measured in one homeowner well appeared
to be consistent with the subsurface presence and dissolution of the mineral gypsum. There is no
evidence from this study that hydraulic fracturing fluids, flowback waters, or produced waters
associated with hydraulic fracturing activities are entering homeowner wells.
Table 11. Parameter-specific observations of note from the case study conducted in northeastern Pennsylvania.
Parameter
Dissolved
methane
Sulfate
Barium
Combined
Ra-226 +
Ra-228
Iron and/or
Manganese
Chloride
Sample Type
Ground water
(detected in 27
of 36 wells)
(>1.0 mg/L in
17 of 36 wells)
Ground water
(one well)
Ground water
(two wells)
Ground water
(two wells)
Ground water
(16 of 36 wells
and lof 2
springs)
Ground water
(3 wells)
Surface water
(homeowner
pond)
Location(s)
NEPAGW01, NEPAGW02
NEPAGW04, NEPAGW06
NEPAGW08, NEPAGW11
NEPAGW13, NEPAGW16
NEPAGW17, NEPAGW18
NEPAGW20, NEPAGW23
NEPAGW31, NEPAGW32
NEPAGW33, NEPAGW37
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW03
NEPAGW04
NEPAGW17
NEPAGW04
NEPAGW17
NEPAGW03, NEPAGW04
NEPAGW09, NEPAGW15
NEPAGW16, NEPAGW17
NEPAGW22, NEPAGW23
NEPAGW24, NEPAGW26
NEPAGW29, NEPAGW31
NEPAGW33, NEPAGW36
NEPAGW37, NEPAGW38
NEPASW01
NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08
NEPAGW17
NEPASW03
NEPASW04
Description
Detections from
1.0 to 56.1 mg/L;
mainly thermogenic
with exception of
NEPAGW11
>1,000 mg/L;
Secondary MCL
exceedance
>5.0 mg/L;
Primary MCL
exceedance
>5.0 pCi/L;
Primary MCL
exceedance
Fe>0.3 mg/L
and/or
Mn >0.05 mg/L
Secondary MCL
exceedance
>250 mg/L;
Secondary MCL
exceedance
224-230 mg/L; high
for surface waters in
study area
Potential Sources
Natural background
conditions or hydraulic
fracturing related (e.g.,
drilling-induced,
inadequate cementing,
casing joint leaks, etc.)
(Well-specific details
provided in main body of
report.)
Natural equilibrium with
gypsum and/or natural
sulfide oxidation
Natural background
conditions known to occur
in some valley settings in
study area
Natural background
conditions known to occur
in some valley settings in
study area
Natural background
conditions in study area;
possibly stray gas-
influenced at one or more
locations
Natural background
conditions known to occur
in some valley settings in
study area
Release of fluids or
leachate from adjacent
well pad; non-point
sources
107
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table 11. Parameter-specific observations of note from the case study conducted in northeastern Pennsylvania.
Parameter
IDS
Trimethyl-
benzenes
Sample Type
Ground water
(4 wells)
Surface water
(homeowner
pond)
Ground water
(one spring)
Location(s)
NEPAGW03, NEPAGW04
NEPAGW08, NEPAGW17
NEPASW03
NEPASW04
NEPASW01
Description
>500 mg/L;
Secondary MCL
exceedance
>500 mg/L; high for
surface waters in
study area
<2.0 ug/L
Potential Sources
Natural background
conditions known to occur
in some valley settings in
study area
Release of fluids or
leachate from adjacent
well pad; non-point
sources
Localized fuel spill or
alternative source not
related to hydraulic
fracturing activities
The study did appear to provide evidence of chloride and TDS impacts on a surface water (a homeowner
pond not used as a drinking water source) located adjacent to a well pad where past fluid and solid
releases reportedly occurred. The study also indicated that stray gas impacts on ground water have
likely occurred in one or more homeowner wells sampled in the study. Perhaps the strongest evidence
of a stray gas occurrence is at location NEPAGW23 in Susquehanna County, where pre-drill and post-
fracture data collected by the operator show marked before-and-after differences in methane
concentrations and, particularly, ethane concentrations. NEPAGW23 is a location where at least three
rounds of pre-drill gas sampling were conducted by the operator, and where post-drill and post-fracture
data indicated increases in ethane concentrations of more than 1,000-fold. Moreover, the post-drill and
post-fracture methane-to-ethane ratio of the gas in the homeowner well decreased from values greater
than 6,000 to values less than 50, suggesting a transition from a previously predominantly biogenic gas
to a more thermogenic gas.
The entry of gas into homeowner wells would explain many of the issues (e.g., effervescing, increased
turbidity, discoloration, etc.) reported by homeowners who have suspected impacts from hydraulic
fracturing activities. Stray gas associated with oil and gas exploration in the study area is not a new
phenomenon and has been an issue in the study area long before the advent of modern-day hydraulic
fracturing. Nevertheless, stray gas entering homeowner wells, regardless of its point of origin, can be a
concern. In addition to posing a potential explosion risk (if allowed to accumulate in confined spaces),
gas entering homeowner wells—if sustained—can promote more reducing conditions which can
potentially lead to reductive dissolution reactions that increase the concentrations of iron and
manganese and possibly arsenic associated with iron and manganese. In this study, arsenic was
measured below the MCL of 10 u.g/L at all locations and generally less than 5 u.g/L. Ultimately, increased
reducing conditions can also potentially promote microbially-mediated sulfate reduction resulting in the
production of hydrogen sulfide that can impart a rotten egg odor to well water. It is generally accepted
that well integrity issues usually related to inadequate cementing in the annular spacing of gas wells are
the cause of stray gas problems in the study area (Groundwater Protection Council, 2012). Other issues,
such as casing joint leaks, may also be contributing factors (Baldassare et al., 2014). The added unique
feature of cyclical pressurization and depressurization of casing during the multiple stages of hydraulic
fracturing could also conceivably impact the integrity of the cement seal in the annuli of gas wells more
108
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
so than in conventional well systems (Jackson et al., 2013b; McDaniel et al., 2014). This may potentially
make hydraulically fractured gas wells more vulnerable to stray gas problems.
The significant background levels of thermogenic gas that exist at almost all depths within the study
area and the processes of mixing and biodegradation that can impact gas isotopic signatures in the
subsurface make gas source determination a very difficult and complex task. The scenarios presented in
this report pertaining to the presence of gas in various homeowner wells sampled in the study indicate
that, in some cases, the gas present in homeowner wells is almost certainly naturally occurring
background (pre-existing) gas (e.g., NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW17). However, in other cases,
such as at NEPAGW01, NEPAGW02, NEPAGW06, NEPAGW13, NEPAGW18, NEPAGW20, NEPAGW23,
NEPAGW37, and NEPAGW38, gas other than background gas appears to have entered the homeowner
well. At several of these locations (e.g., NEPAGW01, NEPAGW02, and NEPAGW23), the gas clearly
appears to be originating from shallower depths (Upper Devonian formations), based on the much
greater isotopic fractionation of the gas relative to Marcellus Shale gas, the high methane-to-ethane
ratios, and the absence of isotope reversal. However, for the cluster of homeowner wells NEPAGW13,
NEPAGW18, NEPAGW20, NEPAGW37, and NEPAGW38, the gas appears to be originating from deeper
formations—likely the Middle Devonian and possibly the Marcellus Shale itself—also based on observed
isotopic signatures, methane-to-ethane ratios, and isotope reversal differences. Linking gas in
homeowner wells to a specific formation such as the Marcellus Shale is challenging given the range of
isotopic signatures and isotope reversal differences that can be characteristic of a given formation, and
the significant overlap that apparently occurs with respect to isotopic signatures and isotope reversal
magnitudes amongst the different formations. Recent work by Darrah et al. (2014) has shown that the
evaluation of noble gases in combination with gas isotopic signatures may offer a potentially improved
means of distinguishing amongst gases originating from different formations.
Homeowner well location NEPAGW08 was of particular interest in this study because hydraulic
fracturing was carried out at a nearby well pad during the course of the study between the first and
second rounds of sampling. This homeowner well is located in a stream/river valley setting that some
researchers believe would be more vulnerable to stray gas impacts from hydraulic fracturing of
Marcellus Shale because of the more extensive natural bedrock fracturing that is believed to be
characteristic of these settings. Gas isotope data and methane-to-ethane ratio data collected from
NEPAGW08 both before and after hydraulic fracturing (stimulation) on the nearby well pad are not
consistent with the entry of Marcellus Shale gas into the homeowner well. The data from this study,
combined with operator pre-drill data, also do not indicate any impacts from fluids injected or produced
in association with hydraulic fracturing conducted at the nearby well pad.
The key observations/findings from this study are summarized below.
• No evidence of impacts from flowback water, produced water, or injected hydraulic fracturing
fluids on homeowner wells and springs sampled in this study was indicated. Detections of
inorganic and organic constituents (other than methane and ethane) in ground water samples
could not be attributed to hydraulic fracturing activities.
• Evidence did indicate one or more homeowner wells have been impacted by stray gas
associated with nearby hydraulic fracturing activities. Stray gas (in the form of methane and
ethane) entering homeowner wells can account for observed changes to well water appearance
109
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
and quality (e.g., effervescing, increased turbidity, discoloration) reported by some
homeowners.
• The specific formation(s) from which stray gas is originating could not be determined with
certainty although stray gas appears to be primarily—if not entirely—originating from
formations above the Marcellus Shale. The inability to determine the specific formation(s) from
which gas is originating is due to the overlap of isotopic signatures (including isotope reversal
differences) that can occur amongst the different formations in the study area.
• Gas isotope data for one cluster of homeowner wells in the study indicated gas in the
homeowner wells likely originated from deeper Middle Devonian strata and possibly the
Marcellus Shale itself. The isotopic signatures observed were similar to that of gas from the
annular space of a nearby Marcellus Shale gas well that had been drilled but not yet fractured.
• Iron and/or manganese concentrations exceeded secondary MCLs at over 40% of ground water
locations sampled in the study consistent with historical data for the study area.
• The presence of total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride, sodium, barium, strontium, and combined
radium-226 and radium-228 in a few homeowner wells at concentrations above those more
commonly found in the study area is attributed to localized natural background conditions
known to occur in the study area in certain valley settings.
• Elevated levels of chloride and total dissolved solids were observed in a homeowner pond (not
used as a drinking water source) and may be due to past reported fluid and/or solid releases
that occurred on an adjacent well pad where hydraulic fracturing activities had taken place. The
elevated chloride and TDS concentrations in the pond are inconsistent with naturally occurring
surface water concentrations in the study area.
110
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
References
Anderson, R. M., K. M. Beer, T. F. Buckwalter, M. E. Clark, S. D. McAuley, J. I. Sams III, and D. R. Williams.
(2000). Water quality in the Allegheny and Monongahela River Basins Pennsylvania, West Virginia, New
York, and Maryland, 1996-98. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1202, 32 pp.
Baldassare, F., M. A. McCaffrey, and J. A. Harper (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 98: 341-
372.
Barbot, E., N. S. Vidic, K. B. Gregory, and R. D. Vidic (2013). Spatial and temporal correlation of water
quality parameters of produced waters from Devonian-age shale following hydraulic fracturing.
Environmental Science and Technology 47:2562-2569. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es304638h
Battelle (2013). Bradford and Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania retrospective case study
characterization report. Submitted to American Petroleum Institute and America's Natural Gas Alliance.
Battelle Contract No. CON00011206. 100 pp.
Boyer, E. W., B. R. Swistock, J. Clark, M. Madden, and D. E. Rizo (2011). The impact of Marcellus gas
drilling on rural drinking water supplies. The Center for Rural Pennsylvania, 28 pp. Available at:
http://www.rural.palegislature.us/documents/reports/Marcellus and drinking water 2012.pdf
Bradford County Office of Community Planning and Grants (2010). Bradford County Comprehensive
Plan. Available at: http://www.bradfordcountvpa.org/Administration/Community-Planning-Grants.asp.
Accessed on October 31, 2013.
Brantley, S. L, D. Yoxtheimer, S. Arjmand, P. Grieve, R. Vidic, J. D. Abad, C. A. Simon, and J. Pollak (2013).
Water Resource Impacts During Unconventional Shale Gas Development: The Pennsylvania Experience.
Abstract PA14A-02 presented at 2013 Fall Meeting, AGU, San Francisco, CA, 9-13 Dec.
Breen, K. J., K. Revesz, F. J. Baldassare, and S. D. McAuley (2007). Natural gases in groundwater near
Tioga Junction, Tioga County, North-Central Pennsylvania—Occurrence and use of isotopes to determine
origins 2005. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report Series 2007-5085, 75 pp.
Burruss, R. C. and C. D. Laughrey (2010) Carbon and hydrogen isotopic reversals in deep basin gas:
Evidence for limits to the stability of hydrocarbons. Organic Geochemistry, 41: 1285-1296.
Carter, K. M. and J. A. Harper (2002). Oil and Gas Prospects in Northeastern Pennsylvania. In From
Tunkhannock to Starrucca: Bluestone, Glacial Lakes, and Great Bridges in the "Endless Mountains" of
Northeastern Pennsylvania, edited by J.D. Inners and G.M. Fleeger. Guidebook for the 67th Annual Field
Conference of Pennsylvania Geologists. Field Conference of Pennsylvania Geologists, Tunkhannock,
Pennsylvania, 15-31.
Chapman, E. C, R. C. Capo, B. W. Stewart, C. S. Kirby, R. W. Hammack, K. T. Schroeder, and H. M.
Edenborn (2012). Geochemical and strontium isotope characterization of produced waters from
Marcellus Shale natural gas extraction. Environmental Science and Technology, 46: 3545-3553.
Ill
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
City Data (2013). Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania (PA). Available at: http://www.city-
data.com/county/Susquehanna County-PA.html. Accessed on October 31. 2013.
Cohen, H. A., T. Parratt, and C. B. Andrews (2013). Comment on Potential Contaminant Pathways from
Hydraulically Fractured Shale to Aquifers by Tom Myers. DOI:10.1111/j.l745-6584.2012.00933.x and
"Comment/' by James E. Saiers and Erica Barth, DOI: 10.1111/J.1745-6584.2012.00990.X Groundwater
51: 317-319 doi: 10.1111/gwat.l2015.
Craig, H. (1961). Standard for reporting concentrations of deuterium and oxygen-18 in natural water.
Science 133: 1833-1834.
Darrah, T.H.; A. Vengosh; R.B. Jackson; N.R. Warner; and R.J. Poreda (2014). Noble gases identify the
mechanisms of fugitive gas contamination in drinking-water wells overlying the Marcellus and Barnett
Shales. PNAS 111: 14076-14081. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1322107111
Davies, R. J., S. A. Mathias, J. Moss, S. Hustoft, and L. Newport (2012). Hydraulic fractures: How far can
they go? Marine and Petroleum Geology, 37: 1-6.
Davis, S. N., D. O. Whittemore, and J. Fabryka-Martin ( 1998). Uses of chloride/bromide ratios in studies
of potable water. Groundwater 36: 338-350.
Douglas, J.G. (2012). Volatile organic compound contamination in groundwater samples and field
blanks. Prepared by CH2MHMI for the U.S. Department of Energy, SGW-52194, 53 pp. Available at:
http://pdw. hanford.gov/arpir/pdf. cfm?accession=0091690
Deutsch, W. J. (1997). Groundwater Geochemistry: Fundamentals and Applications to Contamination.
CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
Elick, J. M. (2002). Paleoenvironmental Interpretation of a Marginal-Marine Environment: The Catskill
Formation (Upper Devonian) at Wyalusing Rocks, PA. In From Tunkhannock to Starrucca: Bluestone,
Glacial Lakes, and Great Bridges in the "Endless Mountains" of Northeastern Pennsylvania, edited by J.D.
Inners and G.M. Fleeger. Guidebook for the 67th Annual Field Conference of Pennsylvania Geologists.
Field Conference of Pennsylvania Geologists, Tunkhannock, Pennsylvania, 8-14.
Eltschlager, K. K., J. W. Hawkins, W. C. Ehler, and F. Baldassare (2001). Technical measures for the
investigation and mitigation of fugitive methane hazards in areas of coal mining. US Department of the
Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 124 pp.
Engelder, T., G. G. Lash, and R. S. Uzacategui (2009). Joint sets that enhance production from Middle
and Upper Devonian gas shales of the Appalachian Basin. American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Bulletin 93: 857-889.Etiope, G., A. Drobniak, and A. Schimmelmann (2013). Natural seepage of shale gas
and the origin of "eternal flames" in the Northern Appalachian Basin, USA. Marine and Petroleum
Geology 43: 178-186.
Fisher, K. and N. Warpinski (2012). Hydraulic fracture-height growth: real data. SPE Production and
Operations 27: 8-19.
Flewelling, S. A. and M. Sharma (2014). Constraints on upward migration of hydraulic fracturing fluid
and brine. Groundwater 52: 9-19.
112
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Gorody, A. W. (2012). Factors affecting the variability of stray gas concentration and composition in
groundwater. Environmental Geosciences 19: 17-31.
Griffiths, W. C, P. Camara, and K. S. Lerner (1985). Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, an ubiquitous
environmental contaminant. Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science 15:140-151.
Groundwater Protection Council (2012). A white paper summarizing the Stray Gas Incidence and
Response Forum. July 24-26, 2012, Cleveland, OH. 48 pp. Available at:
Haluszczak, L. O, A. W. Rose, and L R. Kump (2013). Geochemical evaluation of flowback brine from
Marcellus gas wells in Pennsylvania, USA. Applied Geochemistry 28: 55-61.
Harrison, S. S. (1983). Evaluating system for ground-water contamination hazards due to gas-well
drilling on the glaciated Appalachian Plateau. Groundwater 21: 689-700.
Harrison, S. S. (1985). Contamination of aquifers by over-pressuring the annulus of oil and gas wells.
Groundwater 23: 317-324.
Hayes, T. (2009). Sampling and analysis of water streams associated with the development of Marcellus
shale gas. Marcellus Shale Coalition. Des Plaines, IL. Available at:
i//^^
Ingraffea, A. R., M. T. Wells, R. L. Santoro, and S. B. Shonkoff. 2014. Assessment and risk analysis of
casing and cement impairment in oil and gas wells in Pennsylvania 2000-2012. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 111(30): 10955-10960.
Inners, J.D. and G.M. Fleeger (2002). From Tunkhannockto Starrucca: Bluestone, Glacial Lakes, and
Great Bridges in the "Endless Mountains" of Northeastern Pennsylvania. Guidebook for the 67th Annual
Field Conference of Pennsylvania Geologists. Field Conference of Pennsylvania Geologists,
Tunkhannock, Pennsylvania.
Jackson, R. B., A. Vengosh, T. H. Darrah, N. R. Warner, A. Down, R. J. Poreda, S. G. Osborn, K. Zhao, and J.
D. Karr (2013a). Increased stray gas abundance in a subset of drinking water wells near Marcellus shale
gas extraction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110: 11250-11255.
Jackson, R. E., A. W. Gorody, B. Mayer, J. W. Roy, M. C. Ryan, and D. R. Van Stempvoort (2013b).
Groundwater protection and unconventional gas extraction: The critical need for field-based
hydrogeological research. Groundwater 51: 488-510.
James, A. T. and B. J. Burns (1984). Microbial alteration of subsurface natural gas accumulations.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 68: 957-960.
Kampbell, D. H. and S. A. Vandegrift (1998). Analysis of dissolved methane, ethane, and ethylene in
groundwater by a standard gas chromatographic technique. Journal of. Chromatographic Science 36:
253-256.
Kendall, C. and T. B. Coplen (2001). Distribution of oxygen-18 and deuterium in river waters across the
United States. Hydrological Processes 15: 1363-1393.
113
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Lautz, L K., G. D. Hoke, Z. Lu, D. L. Siegel, K. Christian, J. D. Kessler, and N. G. Teale (2014). Using
discriminant analysis to determine sources of salinity in shallow groundwater prior to hydraulic
fracturing. Environmental Science and Technology 48(16): 9061-9069.
Llewellyn, G. (2014). Evidence and mechanisms for Appalachian Basin brine migration into shallow
aquifers in NE Pennsylvania, USA. Hydrogeology Journal. 22(5): 1055-1066. Available at
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sl0040-014-1125-l.
Marcellus Drilling News (2012). Detailed look at PA's first half production numbers. Available at:
http://marcellusdrilling.com/2012/10/detailed-look-at-pas-first-half-production-numbers/tfmore-12622.
Accessed on October 31, 2013.
Mathes, M. V. and J. S. White (2006). Methane in West Virginia Groundwater. January 2006. Fact Sheet
2006-3011. U.S. Geological Survey, 2 pp. Available at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2006/3011/pdf/Factsheet2006 3011.pdf.
McDaniel, J., L. Watters, and A. Shadravan (2014). Cement sheath durability: Increasing cement sheath
integrity to reduce gas migration in the Marcellus Shale Play. Proceedings of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, The Woodlands, Texas. February 4-6, 2014.
Paper 168650.
McPhillips. I.E., A. E. Creamer, B. G. Rahm, and M. T. Walter (2014). Assessing dissolved methane
patterns in central New York groundwater. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 1:57-73
Michael Baker, Inc. (2012). Susquehanna County 2012 hazard mitigation plan update. Available at:
http://susqco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Susquehanna%202012%20HMP FINAL 10-26-
2012.pdf. Accessed on October 31, 2013.
Milici, R. C. and C. S. Swezey (2006). Assessment of Appalachian Basin oil and gas resources: Devonian
shale—middle and upper Paleozoic total petroleum system. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
Series 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. Available at:
http://www.eswp.com/brownfields/Present/Miller%204B.pdf
Molofsky, L. J., J. A. Connor, A. S. Wylie, T. Wagner, and S. K. Farhat (2013). Evaluation of methane
sources in groundwater in northeastern Pennsylvania. Groundwater 51: 333-349.
Molofsky, L. J., J. A. Connor, S. K. Farhat, A. S. Wylie, and T. Wagner (2011). Methane in Pennsylvania
water wells unrelated to Marcellus shale fracturing. Oil and Gas Journal 109: 54-67.
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.
Groundwater 50: 872-882.
114
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Osborn, S. G., A. Vengosh, N. R. Warner, and R. B. Jackson (2011). Methane contamination of drinking
water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing. Proceedings of the National. Academy of
Sciences 108: 8172-8176.
PA DCNR (Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources) (n.d.). Glaciated low
plateau section description. Available at:
http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/field/mapl3/13glps/index.htm.
PA DEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) (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.
PA DEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) (2012). State Water Plan. Available at:
http://www.pawaterplan.dep. state, pa. us/statewaterplan/DWA/DWAMain.aspx?theme=l&cacheld=139
1869873. Accessed on November 4, 2013.
PA DEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) (2013). Methane isotope data.
Personal communication. Received on October 25 2013.
PA DEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) (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 (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) (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.
PA DEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) (2015). Oil and Gas Wells Drilled by
County Report Viewer. Available at:
http://www.depreportingservices.state.pa.us/ReportServer/Pages/ReportViewer.aspx7/Oil Gas/Wells
Drilled By County. Accessed on February 7', 2015.
Pennsylvania Code (2011). 025 Pa. Code § 78.89. Gas Migration Response. Available at:
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/025/chapter78/s78.89.html Accessed on March 15, 2015.
Pennsylvania State University (n.d.) Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research. Marcellus thickness
map available at: http://marcellus.psu.edu/images/Marcellus thickness.gif.
Peterman, Z., J. Thamke, K. Futa, and T. Preston (2012). Strontium isotope systematics of mixing
groundwater and oil-field brine at Goose Lake in northeastern Montana, USA. Applied Geochemistry
27:2403-2408.
Revesz, K. M., K. J. Breen, A. J. Baldassare, and R. Burruss (2010). Carbon and hydrogen isotopic
evidence for the origin of combustible gases in water-supply wells in north-central Pennsylvania. Applied
Geochemistry 25:1845-1859.
115
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Saba, T. and M. Orzechowski (2011). Lack of data to support a relationship between methane
contamination of drinking water wells and hydraulic fracturing. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences 108:E663.
Saiers, J. E., and E. Barth (2012). Comment on Potential Contaminant Pathways from Hydraulically
Fractured Shale Aquifers byT. Myers. Groundwater 50:826-828. DOI: 10.1111/J.1745-
6584.2012.00990.x
Schon, S. C. (2011). Hydraulic fracturing not responsible for methane migration. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 108:E664.
Schumacher, B. A., and L. Zintek (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.
Sharma, S., M. I. Mulder, A. Sack, K. Schroeder, and R. Hammack (2014). Isotope approach to assess
hydrologic connections during Marcellus Shale drilling. Groundwater 52:424-433. SRBC (Susquehanna
River Basin Commission) (2006). Precipitation Map. Available at:
http://srbc.net/atlas/downloads/BasinwideAtlas/PDF/1100 %20Precipitation.pdf.
Siegel, D. I., N. A. Azzolina, B. J. Smith, A. E. Perry, and R. L. Bothun (2015). Methane concentrations in
water wells unrelated to proximity to existing oil and gas wells in northeastern Pennsylvania.
Environmental Science and Technology, doi: 10.1021/es505775c.
Swistock, B. R., S. Clemens, and W. E. Sharpe (2009). Drinking water quality in rural Pennsylvania and
the effect of management practices. Final report—The Center for Rural Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, PA. 24
pp.
Taylor, L. E. (1984). Groundwater resources of the Upper Susquehanna River Basin, Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey, Water Resources Report 58. 136 pp.
US 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:
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/maps/2011/Countv-Density-ll.html. Accessed on October 31,
2013.
U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (1992). Guidance for data usability in risk assessment
(Part A). Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, 9285.7-09A. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/datause/parta.htm
US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (1994). Chemical summary for 1,2,4-trimethylbenzenes. EPA
749-F-94-022a. Available at: http://www.epa.gOV/chemfact/s trimet.txt.
US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2000a). Stressor identification guidance document. Office
of Water. Office of Research and Development. National Exposure Research Laboratory.
US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2000b). Assigning values to non-detected/non-quantified
pesticide residues in human health food exposure assessments. Office of Pesticide Programs.
116
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2010). 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. Federal Register 75(052):
13125.
US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2011a). Draft plan to study the potential impacts of
hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources. EPA/600/D-11/001.
US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2011b). Plan to study the potential impacts of hydraulic
fracturing on drinking water resources. EPA/600/R-11/122.
US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2012). Study of the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing
on drinking water resources. Progress Report. EPA/601/R-12/011.
US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2013). Hydraulic fracturing retrospective case study,
Bradford-Susquehanna Counties, PA. Quality Assurance Project Plan. Available at:
http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/bradford-review-casestudy.pdf
USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) (2006). Description, properties, and degradation of selected volatile
organic compounds detected in groundwater—A review of selected literature. Open-File Report 2006-
1338. 65 pp.
USGS (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.
USGS (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.
USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) (2012c). National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) database.
Available at: http://tin.er.usgs.gov/geochem/doc/nure analyses.htm.
USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) (2013). National Water Information System (NWIS) database. Available
at: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/qw.
Vengosh, A., R. B. Jackson, N. Warner, T. H. Darrah, and A. Kondash (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 (in press).
Vidic, R. D., S. L Brantley, J. M. Vandenbossche, D. Yoxtheimer, J. D. Abad (2013). Impact of shale gas
development on regional water quality. Science 340(6134): 1235009.
Warner, N. R., R. B. Jackson, T. H. Darrah, S. G. Osborn, A. Down, K. Zhao, A. White, and A. Vengosh
(2012). Geochemical evidence for possible natural migration of Marcellus Formation brine to shallow
aquifers in Pennsylvania. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109: 11961-11966.
Warner, N. R., T. M. Kresse, P. D. Hays, A. Down, J. D. Karr, R. B. Jackson, and A. Vengosh (2013).
Geochemical and isotopic variations in shallow groundwater in areas of the Fayetteville Shale
Development, north-central Arkansas. Applied Geochemistry 35: 207-220.
117
-------
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Warner, N.R., T.H. Darrah, R.B. Jackson, R. Millot, W. Kloppman, and A. Vengosh (2014). New tracers
identify hydraulic fracturing fluids and accidental releases from oil and gas operations. Environmental
Science and Technology, dx.doi.org/10.1021/e.s5032135
Weston Solutions (2012). Evaluation of geology and water well data associated with EPA hydraulic
fracturing retrospective case study, Bradford County, Pennsylvania. Weston Solutions for Chesapeake
Energy. Available at:
White. J. S., and M. V. Mathes (2006). Dissolved-gas concentrations in groundwater in West Virginia.
U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 156. 14 pp. Available at: httjj^gujo^^
Williams, J. H. (2010). Evaluation of well logs for determining the presence of freshwater, saltwater, and
gas above the Marcellus Shale in Chemung, Tioga, and Broome Counties, New York. U.S. Geological
Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010-5224. 27 pp.
Williams, J. H. (1998). Hydrogeology and groundwater quality of the glaciated valleys of Bradford, Tioga,
and Potter Counties, Pennsylvania. U.S. Geological Survey and Pennsylvania Geological Survey Water
Resources Report 68. 89 pp.
Woodrow, D. L. and F. W. Fletcher (2002). Late Devonian stratigraphy in northeastern Pennsylvania, or,
Devonian subdividin' and correlatin'. In From Tunkhannock to Starrucca: Bluestone, Glacial Lakes, and
Great Bridges in the "Endless Mountains" of Northeastern Pennsylvania, edited by J.D. Inners and G.M.
Fleeger. Guidebook for the 67th Annual Field Conference of Pennsylvania Geologists. Field Conference
of Pennsylvania Geologists, Tunkhannock, Pennsylvania, p. 1-7.
Zampogna, D. M., D. Cornue, B. Bohm, and J. D. Arthur (2012). Summary of water quality impacts from
historical oil and gas well and industrial development in northeast Pennsylvania counties. Presented at
the Groundwater Protection Council Stray Gas Forum, Cleveland, Ohio, July 24-26 2012.
118
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix A
QA/QC Summary
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/088
A-l
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Table of Contents
Table of Contents A-2
List of Tables A-3
A.I. Introduction A-5
A.I.I. October/November 2011 Sampling Event A-5
A.I.2. April/May 2012 Sampling Event A-5
A.I.3. May 2013 Sampling Event A-5
A.2. Chain of Custody A-6
A.2.1. October/November 2011 Sampling A-6
A.2.2. April/May 2012 Sampling A-6
A.2.3. May 2013 Sampling A-6
A.3. Holding Times A-7
A.3.1. October/November 2011 Sampling A-7
A.3.2. April/May 2012 Sampling A-7
A.3.3. May 2013 Sampling A-7
A.4. Blank Samples Collected During Sampling A-7
A.4.1. October/November 2011 Sampling A-8
A.4.2. April/May 2012 Sampling A-9
A.4.3. May 2013 Sampling A-9
A.5. Duplicate Samples A-ll
A.5.1. All Sampling Events A-ll
A.6. Laboratory QA/QC Results and Data Usability Summary A-ll
A.7. Double-lab Comparisons A-12
A.8. Performance Evaluation Samples A-12
A.9. QAPP Additions and Deviations A-12
A.10. Field QA/QC A-14
A.ll. Data Qualifiers A-14
A.12. Tentatively Identified Compounds A-15
A.13. Audits of Data Quality A-15
A.M. Laboratory Technical System Audits A-16
A.15. Field TSAs A-16
A-2
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
List of Tables
Table Al. Sample containers, preservation, and holding times for water samples A-19
Table A2. Field QC samples for ground water and surface water analysis A-22
Table A3. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Blanks A-23
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks A-26
Table A5. Total Metal Blanks A-32
Table A6. VOC Blanks A-38
Table A7. Low Molecular Weight Acid Blanks A-44
Table A8. Dissolved Gas Blanks A-47
Table A9. Glycol Blanks A-50
Table A10. SVOC Blanks A-52
Table All. DRO/GRO Blanks A-62
Table A12. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, Ra-226, and Ra-228 Blanks A-64
Table A13. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Duplicates A-66
Table A14. Dissolved Metal Duplicates A-69
Table A15. Total Metal Duplicates A-73
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates A-77
Table A17. Low Molecular Weight Acid Duplicates A-81
Table A18. Dissolved Gas Duplicates A-84
Table A19. Glycol Duplicates A-87
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates A-90
Table A21. Diesel Range Organic Compounds and Gasoline Range Organic Compounds
Duplicates A-98
Table A22. O and H Stable Isotopes of Water Duplicates A-101
Table A23. Carbon and Hydrogen Isotopes of DIG and Methane Duplicates A-103
Table A24. Strontium Isotope Duplicates A-107
Table A25. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, and Radium Isotope Duplicates A-109
Table A26 Data Usability Summary A-112
A-3
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Table A27 Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements A-126
Table A28 Data Qualifiers and Data Descriptors A-132
Table A29 Tentatively Identified Compounds (TICs) for SVOCs A-133
A-4
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
A.I. Introduction
This Appendix describes general Quality Assurance (QA) and 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
Northeastern Pennsylvania met project requirements unless otherwise indicated by the application of
data qualifiers in the final data summaries. In rare cases, data were rejected as unusable and not
reported.
A.1.1. October/November 2011 Sampling Event
The October/November 2011 sampling event and analytical activities were conducted under an
approved QAPP titled "Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Bradford-Susquehanna Counties,
PA," revision 0, which was approved on October 5, 2011. Deviations from this QAPP are described in
Section A9. Thirty-three domestic wells and two springs were sampled during this event. A total of 810
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 USGS Laboratory, Denver, CO. Measurements were made for over 225 analytes per
sample location. Of the 810 samples, 277 samples (34%) were QC samples, including blanks and field
duplicates, matrix spikes, and matrix spike duplicates.
A.I.2. April/May 2012 Sampling Event
The April/May 2012 sampling event and analytical activities were conducted under an approved QAPP
titled "Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Bradford-Susquehanna Counties, PA," revision 1
approved on April 12, 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
revision 1 approved on December 20, 2012, was prepared to document QC acceptance criteria for the
reanalysis of samples for metals collected during the April/May 2012 sampling event. Twenty-two
domestic wells, one spring, one pond (two locations), and one stream (two locations) were sampled
during this event. A total of 745 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 Chemtech Consulting Group, Mountainside, NJ. Measurements were made
for over 225 analytes per sample location. Of the 745 samples, 217 samples (29%) were QC samples,
including blanks, field duplicates, matrix spikes, and matrix spike duplicates.
A.I.3. May 2013 Sampling Event
The May 2013 sampling event and analytical activities were conducted under an approved QAPP titled
"Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Bradford-Susquehanna Counties, PA," revision 2,
approved on April 23, 2013. Specific changes made to the QA documentation are described in the
A-5
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
revised QAPP. Deviations from this QAPP are described in Section A9. Twenty-one domestic wells and
one spring were sampled during this event. A total of 659 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 225 analytes per sample location. Of the
659 samples, 226 samples (34%) were QC samples, including blanks and field duplicates. Additional QC
samples included matrix spikes and matrix spike duplicates per the requirements specified in the QAPP.
A final version of the QAPP titled "Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Marcellus Shale,
Bradford-Susquehanna Counties, PA," revision 3, was approved on October 25, 2013. The QAPP is
available at http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/bradford-review-casestudy.pdf.
A.2. Chain of Custody
Sample types, bottle types, sample preservation methods, analyte holding times, and laboratories that
received samples for analysis are listed in Table Al. Samples collected in the field were packed on ice
and placed into coolers for shipment by overnight delivery 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 analyses. The following sections describe any noted
issues related to the sample shipments and potential impacts on data quality.
A.2.1. October/November 2011 Sampling
Both of the bottle lids for the TPH-DRO fraction of sample NEPAGW26 were broken when received by
the Region 8 lab. The samples were still intact and were analyzed. There is a potential impact (positive
or negative) that is taken into account for data usability.
Both of the bottle lids for the 8270 fraction of sample NEPAGW25 were broken when received by the
Region 8 lab. The samples were still intact and were analyzed. There is a potential impact (positive or
negative) that is taken into account for data usability.
A.2.2. April/May 2012 Sampling
A cooler received on May 3, 2012, by Shaw Environmental had only one of two COC seals intact. The
second COC seal was intact and the cooler was securely taped on both sides. There was no impact on
data quality, and affected sample results were not qualified.
A.2.3. May 2013 Sampling
A cooler shipped on May 3, 2012, to Isotech Laboratories, Inc., with samples for methane, ethane, and
dissolved inorganic carbon (DIG) isotope analyses was missing a 60-milliliter (mL) bottle that should have
contained sample NEPAGW32 for isotope analysis of DIG. A sample was instead pulled from a second
larger (1-L) bottle containing water collected from NEPAGW32 to be analyzed for isotopes of methane
and ethane. There was no expected impact on data quality, and the sample results were not qualified.
A-6
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
The SWRI laboratory measured pH >2 in dissolved metals sample NEPAGW10 and in a dissolved metals
equipment blank and total metals equipment blank collected on May 11, 2013. The laboratory added
nitric acid to bring the pH below 2 and allowed the samples to sit several days prior to analysis. There
was no expected impact on data quality, and the sample results were not qualified.
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 concentration
for samples with holding time exceedances are considered to be biased low.
A.3.1. October/November 2011 Sampling
Volatile organic compound (VOC) samples collected on November 1, November 2, and November 3,
2011, exceeded the 14-day holding time by up to 48 hours. The affected sample results (see Appendix
B) have an "H" qualifier for all analytes. Impact on data usability is considered minimal since the
exceedance was limited. VOCs were not detected in any of the affected samples.
Some samples were reanalyzed (due to instrument sensitivity issues) for acrylonitrile and styrene more
than 65 days past holding time. The affected sample results (see Appendix B) were qualified with an
"H". The data are considered unusable due to the long holding time.
A.3.2. April/May 2012 Sampling
Samples analyzed for bromide did not meet holding times by up to 26 days. This is because an
alternative method of Br analysis (RSKSOP-288) was ultimately required due to continued significant
interference problems posed by the high chloride content in some samples. The data are considered
usable with caution.
For semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), sample NEPAGW36 was extracted four hours past the
holding time. The "H" qualifier was applied to all the results for this sample. Since the holding time
exceedance was minor, the data is considered usable. The field blank collected on April 30, 2012, was
extracted 20 minutes past the holding time. The "H" qualifier was applied to all the results for this
sample. Since the holding time exceedance was insignificant, the data are considered usable.
A.3.3. May 2013 Sampling
All samples met holding times.
A.4. Blank Samples Collected During Sampling
An extensive series of blank samples were collected during all sampling events, including field blanks,
equipment blanks, and trip blanks (Table A2). These QC 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 of water was
used for the preparation of all blank samples (Barnstead NANOpure Diamond UV water). Field blanks
A-7
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
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, tubing) potentially contributed to analyte detections. Trip blanks consisted of serum
bottles or VOC vials filled with NANOpure water and sealed in the laboratory. Trip blanks were used to
evaluate whether VOC 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 for field parameters and isotope 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 (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 blanks analyses are reported in Tables A3-A12. In
general, field blank samples were free from detections of the vast majority of analytes examined in this
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 QL, and in these cases, the sample data were not affected and are not
discussed in the following sections.
A.4.1. October/November 2011 Sampling
Dissolved organic carbon (DOC) was reported just above the QL in one equipment blank collected on
October 26, 2011 (Table A3); four affected samples collected on October 26, 2011, are qualified with "B"
as estimated. Affected sample concentrations are similar to the blank; therefore, the data is considered
unusable.
Acetate was detected above the QL in all field blanks and the equipment blank (Table A7). (It was later
determined that the TSP preservative was the source of the acetate contamination.) All acetate data
were qualified with "R" and rejected as unusable. The field blanks collected on October 31, 2011,
November 2, 2011, and November 3, 2011, also contained formate above the QL. The "B" qualifier was
applied for formate to affected samples NEPAGW18 and NEPAGW19, and NEPAGW25 through
NEPAGW30 (Table A7). Formate detections in the field samples were similar to detections in the field
blanks, thus making the data unusable.
Dissolved gases were detected in trip blanks for October 25 and 26, 2011, and equipment blank for
October 31, 2011 (Table A8), due to carryover in the gas chromatograph from standards analyzed prior
to blanks being analyzed. The "B" qualifier was applied to affected samples NEPAGW05, NEPAGW07,
and NEPAGW19. Methane results for the affected samples were too close to blank results and the data
was thus deemed unusable. Ethane results are ~6x the blank values and may be usable with caution.
A-8
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Bis-(2-ethylhexfyl) adipate was detected in four field blanks above the QL (Table A10), likely due to the
detection of the compound in laboratory method blanks. This resulted in the "B" qualifier being applied
to a total of 16 field samples whose values were <10x that of the respective method blank detections.
The values for the samples qualified with "B" were close to the values of the method blanks, and the
data were thus deemed unusable. Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate was also detected in an equipment blank
above the QL; however, bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate in the associated field samples was not detected
above the QL. Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate was also detected in laboratory method blanks, resulting in
affected sample results being qualified with "B". The values of the sample results qualified with "B"
were close to the values for the method blanks, and the data were thus deemed unusable.
A.4.2. April/May 2012 Sampling
Two equipment blanks had DOC detections above the QL (Table A3). DOC concentrations in affected
samples NEPASW05, NEPASW06, NEPAGW36, and NEPAGW29 were less than lOxthe associated
equipment blank values, and the results were thus qualified with "B". DOC concentrations in
NEPASW05 and NEPASW06 were almost lOx the equipment blank value and were deemed usable with
caution. Values for NEPAGW29 and NEPAGW36 were near the associated equipment blank value and
were deemed unusable.
All dissolved metal blanks were free from detectable analyte concentrations (Table A4), with the
exception of dissolved phosphorus in one blank. Dissolved phosphorus was not detected in the
associated samples. Detections of total metals in blank samples were all below the QL, except for sulfur
in one field blank collected on April 30, 2012 (Table A5), requiring the "B" qualifier be applied to the
results for the three associated field samples.
Total sulfur was detected above the QL in a field blank collected on April 30, 2012 (Table A5). The "B"
qualifier was applied to the results for affected samples (NEPAGW15, NEPASW01, and NEPAGW32).
Results for the affected samples were close to the equipment blank results and were thus deemed
unusable.
Formate was detected in a field blank at the QL (Table A7). The results for the affected samples
(NEPAGW02, NEPAGW03, NEPASW04 and NEPASW04dup) were qualified with "B". Values for
NEPAGW03, NEPASW04 and NEPASW04dup were near the values of the field blank and were thus
deemed unusable. The value for NEPAGW02 was more than 9 times the field blank value data and the
data was thus deemed usable with caution.
DRO was detected at a concentration equal to the QL in a field blank collected on May 1, 2012 (Table
All). However, there was no impact on data quality because the one associated field sample
(NEPAGW29) collected on the same day did not show detectable levels of DRO above the QL.
A.4.3. May 2013 Sampling
Methane was detected in some argon laboratory blanks during analysis, which in one case impacted
sample NEPAGW03. The methane concentration for this sample was close to the blank value and is thus
unusable.
A-9
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Dissolved arsenic was detected above the QL in an equipment blank collected on May 14, 2013
(Table A4). The "B" qualifier was applied to the results for the affected samples (NEPASW01,
NEPAGW15, NEPAGW16, and NEPAGW29). The results for the affected samples were sufficiently close
to the value for the equipment blank to make the data unusable.
Dissolved Cu was detected above the QL in a field blank collected on May 15, 2013, and in two
equipment blanks collected on May 11 and 14, 2013 (Table A4). The "B" qualifier was applied to the
results for the affected samples (NEPAGW06, NEPAGW10, NEPAGW12, NEPAGW16, NEPAGW28, and
NEPAGW28dup). The results for the affected samples were either less than (NEPAGW06 and
NEPAGW16) or sufficiently close to the equipment blank value to make the data unusable.
In a number of field and equipment blanks, total metals were detected at concentrations above the QL
(Table A5), requiring the "B" qualifier be applied to the associated sample results. These included five
samples for total arsenic because two equipment blanks exceeded the QL; five samples for total copper
because one equipment blank exceeded the QL; eight samples for total molybdenum because one
equipment blank and one field blank exceeded the QL; two samples for total nickel because one
equipment blank exceeded the QL; seven samples for total lead because two equipment blanks
exceeded the QL; and three samples for total zinc because one field blank exceeded the QL. With the
exception of total nickel and total zinc for NEPAGW12, total metals results for the affected samples were
sufficiently close to the blank values to make the data unusable. All sample results for total vanadium
(except for one sample) required the "B" qualifier be applied due to the detection of total vanadium in
laboratory blanks (Table A5). For total vanadium, samples NEPAGW38 and NEPAGW38dup are usable
with caution; the vanadium data for all other samples are too close to the blank value to be usable.
For semi-volatile organic compound (SVOC) analysis, the results for the equipment blank collected on
May 14, 2013, were rejected (see Table A10) because the sample "dried up during extraction." The
equipment blank had a lower-than-acceptable internal standard response for all but one internal
standard (1,4-dichlorobenzene). All surrogates were well below the acceptable range. The QC results
for internal standards and surrogate recoveries, along with the analyst notation on the raw data form,
indicate that, for all intents and purposes, the sample was lost. All data for this equipment blank are
qualified "R" and are rejected and unusable. Bis-(2-ethyl hexyl) phthalate was detected above the QL in
field blanks collected on May 9 and 10, 2013, and in an equipment blank collected on May 9, 2013,
requiring that the "B" qualifier be applied to the results for one field sample, NEPAGW14. Bis-(2-ethyl
hexyl) phthalate was detected above the QL in a laboratory method blank associated with these
samples, requiring the results for these field blanks and equipment blank to be qualified "B." These data
are unusable for bis-(2-ethyl hexyl) phthalate as their concentrations are similar to the laboratory
method blanks.
Diesel range organics (DROs) were detected above the QL in two of the six field blanks collected and in
all six equipment blanks collected (Table All). The likely source of the DRO in the blanks was peristaltic
pump tubing used to facilitate collection of the blanks. DRO was detected above the QL in only one
sample, NEPASW01, and although a peristaltic pump was not used to collect the sample, the "B"
qualifier was nevertheless applied. The data for this sample is considered unusable.
A-10
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Field and equipment blanks were not collected for radiologicals in the final round of sampling. However,
on each day samples were collected, samples from at least two sampling locations showed Ra-226,
Ra-228, gross alpha, and gross beta values below reporting limits. These samples with values below the
reporting limits can thus be considered in place of field and equipment blanks. Results for radiologicals
(Ra-226, Ra-228, gross alpha, and gross beta) above reporting limits are thus considered valid and
usable.
A.5. 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 (%) = ABS 2 x (sample 1- sample 2
(sample 1 + sample 2)
RPDs were calculated when the constituents in both the primary sample and duplicate sample were >5
times the method QLs. Sample results are qualified if RPDs are >30%.
A. 5.1. All Sampling Events
Field duplicate results and calculated RPDs are presented in Tables A13 to A25 for each analytical
method. The field duplicates were evaluated for all parameters for which duplicate samples were
analyzed in each respective round. The only parameters that required qualification based on RPDs not
meeting the 30% criteria were the dissolved gases methane and ethane in sample NEPAGW02 from
Round 1 in October 2011. The RPDs were 37% for methane and 40% for ethane. Data from the original
sample are usable. All other duplicates for dissolved gas in all rounds showed good precision.
Field duplicate precision was assessed for select samples with results greater than 5 times the QL for
anions (Table A13), dissolved metals (Table A14), total metals (Table A15), DRO/GRO (Table A21), and
isotopic analyses (Tables A22, A23, and A24). The field duplicate results were non-detect or less than 5
times the QL for all other analyses.
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, as well as field QC. Impacts on data quality and usability as well as any issues noted
in the QA/QC results are also 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.
Data determined to be unusable were rejected and qualified with an "R." Depending on the data
A-ll
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
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 below 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 is usable with the understanding that it is an approximate
concentration, 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 to which the data are usable or not (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 (SOPs) and, in the case of certified
laboratories, as part of the certification process and to maintain certification for that laboratory. Results
of the PE tests are presented in tabular form in the Wise County, Texas, Retrospective Case Study
QA/QC Appendix and are not repeated here. These tables present the results of 1,354 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 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. For the EPA Region 8 Laboratory, a total of 424 tests were
performed, with 98.8% of the reported values falling within the acceptable range. These PE sample
results demonstrate the high quality of 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 October/November 2011 sampling event was conducted using the QAPP titled "Hydraulic Fracturing
Retrospective Case Study, Bradford-Susquehanna Counties, PA," revision 0, which was approved on
October 5, 2011. The April/May 2012 sampling event was conducted using the QAPP titled "Hydraulic
Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Bradford-Susquehanna Counties, PA," revision 1, which was
approved on April 12, 2012. The May 2013 sampling event was conducted using the QAPP titled
"Hydraulic Fracturing Retrospective Case Study, Bradford-Susquehanna Counties, PA," revision 2, which
was approved on April 23, 2013.
A deviation from the proposed sampling procedures described in the QAPP was split sampling
conducted during two of the three sampling events. During the October/November 2011 sampling
event, incremental split sampling was initially conducted at the request of one of the operators.
Incremental split sampling (which involved alternately adding sample water in increments to the bottles
of the different stakeholders until all bottles were filled) was conducted only for non-volatile analytes,
A-12
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
including metals, anions, and semi-volatiles, and at only three sampling locations (NEPAGW01,
NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW09). Incremental split sampling was subsequently terminated (due to time
constraints and concerns regarding samples in bottles remaining exposed to the elements for extended
periods of time) in favor of split sampling using a Y-adapter that allowed simultaneous sampling by two
parties. Y-adapter split sampling was continued for the duration of the October/November 2011
sampling event, but only at locations where homeowners permitted sampling by other stakeholders.
The Y-adaptor was also used during the May 2013 sampling event at all sampling locations where
homeowners permitted sampling by other stakeholders. There is no known adverse impact on data
quality as a result of the split sampling procedures used in the study. The three locations where
incremental split sampling was briefly employed in the first round were sampled in all three rounds, and
no inconsistencies in water analyses were identified that would suggest any kind of impact from the
procedure.
An additional deviation from the proposed sampling procedures was the collection of samples from
location NEPAGW14 in pre-labeled NEPAGW15 bottles and the collection of samples from location
NEPAGW15 in pre-labeled NEPAGW14 bottles during the April/May 2012 sampling round. This was the
result of the pre-labeled NEPAGW15 bottles (rather than the NEPAGW14 bottles) having been
mistakenly loaded into the sampling vehicle on the day NEPAGW14 was to be sampled. Rather than lose
valuable time in the field driving back to the hotel to retrieve the pre-labeled NEPAGW14 bottles, a
decision was made to collect the samples from NEPAGW14 in the pre-labeled NEPAGW15 bottles.
Conversely, on the day NEPAGW15 was sampled, the samples from this location were collected in the
pre-labeled NEPAGW14 bottles. The results for the two sampling locations have been properly
reconciled and recorded in Appendix B tables (i.e., April/May 2012 analytical results for NEPAGW15-
labeled samples were applied to location NEPAGW14 and vice versa). There is no impact on the data.
A deviation from planned analyses described in the QAPP was that none of the ICP-MS metals data from
the October/November 2011 sampling event were reported. These data were not reported because of
concerns about data quality. 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 April/May 2012 and May 2013 sampling events. In
general, the ICP-OES trace metal data cannot be compared with the subsequent ICP-MS data; therefore,
trace metal evaluations consider only data collected during the last two sampling events. Information
about the ICP-OES concentrations of As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Se from the first round is considered to
be for screening level evaluation.
Analysis of the original ICP-MS results for the April/May 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.
A-13
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
A.10. Field QA/QC
A YSI Model 556 electrodes 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 (when possible), and at the end of each day at a minimum (Table A27). Midday
checks were not done every day of sampling. Since an end of the day check was done to verify the
meter was still in calibration, it was confirmed that sample measurements were made with a system
within control criteria. One exception was November 4, 2011, when an end-of-day performance check
was either not recorded or not conducted. However, because all performance checks conducted
throughout the entire study showed performance within acceptable limits without exception (Table
A27), and because the YSI data collected from the final two locations on November 4, 2011, were
consistent with readings measured at these same locations in the subsequent two rounds of sampling,
there is no expected impact on data quality. NIST-traceable buffer solutions (4.00, 7.00, and/or 10.01)
were used for pH calibration and for continuing checks. YSI 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 each morning and
checked with zero-oxygen solutions to ensure good performance at low oxygen levels. Table A27
provides the results of 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 location consisted of turbidity, alkalinity, total dissolved sulfide
species (IH2S), and ferrous iron. 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. The turbidity was measured using a HACH 2100Q Portable Turbimeter, which was
calibrated using a HACH 2100QStablCal Calibration Set. The HACH 2100QStablCal Calibration Set
consists of the 20 nephelometric 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 species and ferrous iron measurements were collected using HACH DR2700 and
DR890 spectrometers, respectively. The equipment for measuring alkalinity, total dissolved sulfide
species, and ferrous iron measurements were tested in the lab prior to field deployment using known
standards. In the field, a blank sample (distilled water) was measured to confirm that no cross
contamination had 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 work conducted by various analytical 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
A-14
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
(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 need to be rejected. Data
rejection can occur for many reasons and must be explained in the QA/QC narratives. Conditions
regarding the application of qualifiers include:
• If the analyte was not detected, then it was reported as QL).
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 (Tables 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 is calculated based on a response factor of 1.00 and the
area of the nearest internal standard. The search for TICs includes 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 is
reported for each peak.
A.13. Audits of Data Quality
An ADQ was performed for each sampling event per EPA's NRMRL SOP, "Performing Audits of Data
Quality (ADQs)," to verify that requirements of the QAPP were properly implemented for the analysis of
critical analytes for samples submitted to laboratories identified in the QAPPs 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 sample collection and analysis.
Complete data packages were provided to the auditors for the October/November 2011, April/May
2012, and May 2013 sampling events. A complete data package consists of the following: sample
information; method information; a data summary; laboratory reports; raw data, including QC results;
A-15
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
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 ADQs focused on the critical analytes, as identified in revision 3 of the QAPP. These are GRO; DRO;
SVOCs (see footnote of Table 2 and Table 7 of QAPP); VOCs (ethanol, isopropyl alcohol, tert butyl
alcohol, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and naphthalene); trace elements (As, Se, Sr, and Ba);
major cations (Ca,Mg, Na, and K); and major anions (chloride and sulfate). Also included in the ADQ
were the glycols and all metals analyzed. The non-conformances identified in an ADQ can consist of the
following categories: (1) a 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 (2) observation (a deficiency that does
not have a significant effect on the quality of the reported results; a corrective action response is
required). The ADQforthe October/November 2011 sampling event noted 1 finding and 10
observations; the April/May 2012 sampling event had 2 findings and 8 observations; and the May 2013
event had no findings and 15 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 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 first sampling event in
A-16
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
October 2011 (audit date: October 27, 2011). Three observations were noted in the field ISA related to
split (incremental) sampling, sulfide calibration checks, and dissolved gas collection. All observations
were resolved through corrective actions. There was no impact on the sample data quality.
A-17
-------
Appendix A QA/QC Summary, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix A Tables
A-18
-------
A-19
Table Al. Sample containers, preservation, and holding times for water samples
Analysis Method (Lab Sample Bottles/ # of Sampling
Sample Type Method) bottles1 Preservation/ Storage Holding Time(s) Rounds2
Dissolved Gases
Dissolved Metals (Filtered)
Dissolved Metals (Filtered)
Total Metals (Unfiltered)
Total Metals (Unfiltered)
Trace Metals (Total and
Dissolved)
Sulfate (SO4), Chloride (Cl),
Fluoride (F), Bromide (Br)
Shaw Environmental6: No EPA
Method (RSKSOP-194v4 &-
175v5)
Shaw Environmental: EPA
Methods 200.7 & 6020A
(RSKSOP-213v4 & -257v2 or -
332vO)
EPA Region 7 RASP Contract
Southwest Research Institute:
EPA Methods 200.7 & 6020A
Shaw Environmental: Analysis-
EPA Methods 200.7 & 6020A
(RSKSOP-213v4 & -257v2 or -
332vO); and Digestion- EPA
Method 3015A (RSKSOP-
179 v3)
EPA Region 7 RASP Contract
Southwest Research Institute:
EPA Methods 200.7 & 6020A;
and Digestion EPA Method
200.7
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)
60-mL serum bottles/2
125-mL plastic bottle/1
1-L plastic bottle/1
125-mL plastic bottle/1
1-L plastic bottle/1
125-mL plastic bottle/1
for each total and dissolved
fraction
30-mL plastic bottle/1
No headspaceTSP3, pH
>10; refrigerate <6°C?
HNO3, pH<2
HNO3, pH<2
HNO3, pH<2
HNO3, pH<2
HNO3, pH<2
Refrigerate <6°C
14 days
6 months (Hg 28
days)
6 months
6 months
6 months
6 months
28 days
1,2,3
1,2
3
1,2
3
2
1,2,3
-------
A-20
Table Al. Sample containers, preservation, and holding times for water samples
Analysis Method (Lab Sample Bottles/ # of Sampling
Sample Type Method) bottles1 Preservation/ Storage Holding Time(s) Rounds2
Br
Nitrate+Nitrite (NO3+NO2)
Ammonia (NH3)
Dissolved Inorganic Carbon
(DIG)
Dissolved Organic Carbon
(DOC)
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
ORD/NRMRL (Ada): EPA
Method 6500 (RSKSOP-288v3)
ORD/NRMRL (Ada): EPA 353.1
(RSKSOP-214v5)
ORD/NRMRL (Ada): EPA
Method 350.1 (RSKSOP-214v5)
ORD/NRMRL (Ada): EPA
Method 9060A (RSKSOP-
330vO)
ORD/NRMRL (Ada): EPA
Method 9060A (RSKSOP-
330vO)
Shaw Environmental: EPA
Method 5021A + 8260C
(RSKSOP-299vl)
EPA Region 7 RASP Contract
Southwest Research Institute:
EPA Methods 8260B
Shaw Environmental6: No EPA
Method (RSKSOP-112v6)
EPA Region 8: EPA Method
8270D (ORGM-515 rl.l)
EPA Region 8: EPA Method
8015D (ORGM-508 rl.O)
EPA Region 8: EPA Method
8015D (ORGM-506 rl.O)
EPA Region 3: No EPA Method
(R3 Method5)
30-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
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
1-L amber glass bottle/2
40-mL amber VOA vial/2
40-mL amber VOA vial/2
Refrigerate <6°C
H2S04, pH<2;
refrigerate <6°C
H2S04, pH<2;
refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
H3PO4; refrigerate <6°C
No headspaceTSP3, pH
>10; refrigerate <6°C
No headspace HCI, pH
<2; refrigerate <6°C
TSP3, 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
28 days
28 days
28 days
14 days
28 days
14 days
14 days
30 days
7 days extraction,
30 days after
extraction
7 days extraction,
40 days after
extraction
14 days
14 days
2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2
3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
-------
A-21
Table Al. Sample containers, preservation, and holding times for water samples
Analysis Method (Lab Sample Bottles/ # of Sampling
Sample Type Method) bottles1 Preservation/ Storage Holding Time(s) Rounds2
87Sr/86Sr Isotope Analysis
226Ra
228Ra
Gross Alpha/Beta
O, H stable isotopes of
water
O, H stable isotopes of
water
513C of inorganic carbon
513C and 52H of methane
USGS: No EPA Method
(Thermal ionization mass
spectrometry)
ALS SOP783v9 (EPA Method
903.1)
ALS SOP746v9 (EPA Method
904.0)
ALS SOP702v20 & 724vll (EPA
Method 900.0)
Shaw Environmental: No EPA
Method (RSKSOP-296vO); IRMS
Shaw Environmental6: No EPA
Method (RSKSOP-334vO); CRDS
Isotech; gas stripping and IRMS
(No EPA Method)
Isotech; gas stripping and IRMS
(No EPA Method)
500-mL plastic bottle/2
1-L plastic/1
2-L plastic/1
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
Refrigerate <6°C
HNO3, pH<2; room
temperature
HNO3, pH<2; room
temperature
HNO3, pH<2; room
temperature
Refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
Refrigerate <6°C
Caplet of benzalkonium
chloride; refrigerate
<6°C
6 months
6 months
6 months
6 months
Stable
Stable
14 days
3 months
1,2,3
2,3
2,3
2,3
1
2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
Spare bottles made available for laboratory QC samples and for replacement of compromised samples (broken bottle, QC failures, etc.).
'' Sampling rounds occurred in October/November 2011 (round 1), April/May 2012 (round 2), and May 2013 (round 3).
! Trisodium phosphate.
1 Above freezing point of water.
' EPA Methods 8000C and 8321 were followed for method development and QA/QC; method based on ASTM D773-11.
' Analyses in round 3 were performed by CB&I (name changed from Shaw).
-------
A-22
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
typed (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.2
Blank samples were not collected for isotope ratio measurements, including O/ 0, H/H, and C/ C. The PI was notified if the samples arrived with no ice and/or if the
temperature recorded from the temperature blank was >6°C.
-------
A-23
Table A3. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Blanks
Sample ID
Date
Collected
DOC
mg/L
DIC
mg/L
NO3 + NO2
mg/L
NH3
mg/L
Br
mg/L
Cl
mg/L
so42-
mg/L
F
mg/L
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
MDL
QL
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
0.26
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
0.07
0.25
21/39
0.25
1.30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.02
1.00
39/39
15.1
97.2
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
19/39
0.10
3.24
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
13/39
0.01
1.32
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.13
1.00
7/39
0.14
1.46
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.11
1.00
39/39
0.75
525
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
0.05
1.00
36/39
0.14
1200
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.03
0.20
22/39
0.03
0.52
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
0.04
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.05
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
-------
A-24
Table A3. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Blanks
Sample ID
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
May 201
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Date
Collected
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
.3
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
DOC
mg/L
0.02
0.04
0.23
0.14
0.39
0.06
0.15
0.22
1.50
0.25
0.01
20/30
0.25
7.48
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
0.15
0.23
0.13
0.17
0.19
0.20
0.25
0.05
14/25
0.22
DIC
mg/L
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0.04
30/30
7.75
103
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0.09
25/25
19.1
NO3 + NO2
mg/L
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
0.05
0.01
14/30
0.06
2.81
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.02
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.01
14/25
0.01
NH3
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.01
8/30
0.14
1.42
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.02
12/25
0.02
Br
mg/L
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0.16
9/30
0.18
4.70
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0.17
5/25
0.19
Cl
mg/L
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0.11
30/30
0.72
495
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0.13
25/25
0.75
so42-
mg/L
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0.05
27/30
0.77
1260
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0.16
20/25
7.15
F
mg/L
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.20
0.03
25/30
0.04
0.62
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
<0.20
0.20
0.05
23/25
0.05
-------
A-25
Table A3. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Blanks
Sample ID
Collected
mg/L I mg/L
NO3 + NO2
mg/L
mg/L I mg/L I mg/L
Concentration max
-------
A-26
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Hg/L I mg/L I ng/L I mg/L
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank GW31
MDL
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
11/4/2011
<14
<14
<14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
4
14
0/39
<14
<14
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
<494
148
494
1/39
336
336
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
6
20
0/39
<20
<20
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
100
333
14/39
122
580
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
1
4
39/39
10
5180
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
3
10
0/39
<10
<10
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
0.09
0.29
39/39
9.21
335
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
1
4
0/39
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
1
4
3/39
1
3
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
2
7
0/39
<7
<7
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
6
20
6/39
6
31
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
20
67
20/39
32
3260
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
0.11
0.35
39/39
0.73
3.92
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.03
0.10
39/39
1.89
127
<14
<14
<14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^ i yi
^ i yi
^ 1 A
s i yi
^ i yi
^14
^ i yi
^ i yi
^ i yi
^ i yi
^14
4
14
28/39
7
1260
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
5
17
5/39
6
13
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
0.51
1.71
39/39
2.04
280
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
<84
25
84
0/39
<84
<84
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
MDL
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
^14
^14
^14
^14
^ 14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
^14
14
4
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
20.0
2.2
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.18
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
<333
333
100
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
4
1
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
10
3
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
<0.29
0.29
0.09
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.06
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
4
1
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
2.0
0.06
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
2.0
0.11
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
<67
67
20
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
<0.35
0.35
0.11
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
10.0
3.1
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.03
^14
^ i yi
^ i yi
^ i yi
^14
^ i yi
^ i yi
^14
^14
^14
^ i yi
^ i yi
^ i yi
^ i yi
14
4
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
17
5
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
<1.71
1.71
0.51
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.11
-------
A-27
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Detection in samples
0/30
6/30
12/30
11/30
30/30
0/30
30/30
0/30
9/30
0/30
11/30
21/30
30/30
Mg | Mn | Mo | Na
mg/L ng/L ng/L mg/L
25/30
30/30
26/30
0/30
29/30
5/30
Concentration min
24.8
1.0
129
9.0
12.1
<2.0
2.2
28
0.29
14.5
1.96
1.93
1.1
Concentration max
297
6.0
571
4950
352
<2.0
14.2
3530
4.08
557
129
2700
290
4.7
-------
A-28
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks
Sample ID
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blank6
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank6
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
Date
Collected
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
UEjM
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
10
0.6
0/25
<10
<10
Al
Hg/L
<20
<20
<20
6.0
4.2
<20
<20
<20
<20
6.3
4.3
5.1
20
3.5
0/25
<20
<20
As
Hg/L
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.05
0.92
<0.2
0.2
0.04
23/25
0.13
5.6
B
Hg/L
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
40
4.2
18/25
47.4
582
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
0.1
25/25
10.0
2020
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
0.1
1/25
0.12
0.12
Ca
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.10
0.01
25/25
12.1
385
|
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.1
0/25
<0.2
<0.2
HI
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
1
1/25
1.7
1.7
•m
<2
<2
<2
<2
0.45
0.38
<2
<2
<2
<2
0.44
0.45
2
0.3
4/25
0.39
0.74
HB
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.33
1.5
0.30
<0.5
2.7
<0.5
2.4
<0.5
0.5
0.2
16/25
0.26
26.2
•H
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
100
14
11/25
107
3810
K
mg/L
<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
0.05
25/25
0.65
4.00
Li
Hg/L
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
10
0.4
21/25
11.5
468
Mg
mg/L
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
0.05
0.003
25/25
2.01
134
Mn
Hg/L
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
0.2
22/25
0.22
2560
Mo
Hg/L
<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
0.15
13/25
0.58
3.00
Na
mg/L
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
0.02
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
0.25
0.01
25/25
2.79
336
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.2
25/25
0.41
13.0
-------
A-29
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks
Sample ID
Date
Collected
P
mg/L
Pb
UgA
S
mg/L
^BM*^H
119
Si
mg/L
n
Th Ti
TI
UgA
U
UgA
V
UgA
n
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank GW31
MDL
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
11/4/2011
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
0.10
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
0.02
0.06
1/39
0.10
0.10
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
5
17
0/39
<17
<17
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
0.14
0.46
36/39
0.22
384
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
<30
9
30
6/39
9
21
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
0.13
0.43
39/39
3.55
9.09
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
1
4
39/39
30
11300
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
2
7
2/39
3
9
<17
<17
<17
5
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
6
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
<17
5
17
0/39
<17
<17
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
3
10
0/39
<10
<10
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
15
50
2/39
25
43
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
MDL
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
<0.06
0.02
<0.06
<0.06
0.06
0.02
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.03
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
<0.46
0.46
0.14
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
2.0
0.08
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
5.0
1.2
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
<0.43
0.43
0.13
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
4
1
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
<7
7
2
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.04
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
1.0
0.04
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
10
3
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
50
15
-------
A-30
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks
Date
Sample ID Collected
Units
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
p Pb
mg/L
6/30
0.02
0.09
Hg/L
2/30
1.3
1.5
S
mg/L
21/30
0.30
391
Sb Se Si
Hg/L ! Mg/L 1 mg/L
0/30
<2.0
<2.0
9/30
1.3
7.3
30/30
0.79
9.14
Sr
Hg/L
30/30
62
9750
Th Ti Tl U V Zn
1/30
43
43
0/30
<1.0
<1.0
9/18
1.4
5.6
0/30
<10
<10
1/30
55
55
-------
A-31
Table A4. Dissolved Metal Blanks
Sample ID
Date
Collected
P
mg/L
Pb
UgA
S
mg/L
^BM*^H
119
Si
mg/L
n
Th Ti
TI
UgA
U
UgA
V
UgA
n
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blank6
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
<50
<50
<50
<50
6.3
11.6
<50
<50
<50
<50
10.5
5.1
50
4.5
7/25
18.5
497
0.07
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.08
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.05
9/25
0.06
0.52
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.1
3/25
0.12
0.13
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
0.43
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
2
0.4
2/25
0.40
0.45
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.005
25/25
3.39
8.18
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
2
0.1
25/25
90.3
11100
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.1
0/25
<0.2
<0.2
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
0.2
1/25
5.1
5.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.10
<0.2
<0.2
0.10
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.05
0/25
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.05
18/25
0.19
7.0
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.94
<0.2
0.2
0.02
11/25
0.03
0.25
<5
<5
2.1
<5
<5
<5
1.9
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
0.5
15/25
0.58
49.2
-------
A-32
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks
Date
Sample ID Collected Ag
Al
Hg/L
As,
UgA
B
UgA
Ba
UgA
Be
UgA
Ca
mg/L
Cd
Hg/L
Co
UgA
Cr
UgA
Cu
UgA
Fe
UgA
K
mg/L
Li
UgA
Mg
mg/L
Mn
UgA
Mo
UgA
Na
mg/L
Ni
UgA
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank GW31
MDL
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
11/4/2011
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<16
NA
NA
NA
NA
<16
4
16
1/39
30
30
<548
<548
<548
<548
<548
<548
<548
<548
<548
<548
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<548
NA
NA
NA
NA
<548
164
548
9/39
166
10700
<22
<22
<22
<22
<22
<22
<22
<22
<22
<22
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<22
NA
NA
NA
NA
<22
7
22
1/39
9
9
<370
<370
<370
<370
<370
<370
<370
<370
<370
<370
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<370
NA
NA
NA
NA
<370
111
370
14/39
123
580
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
1
4
39/39
10
5430
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<11
NA
NA
NA
NA
<11
3
11
0/39
<11
<11
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
<0.32
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.32
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.32
0.10
0.32
39/39
9.72
346
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
<4
1
4
0/39
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
<4
1
4
1/39
12
12
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<8
NA
NA
NA
NA
<8
2
8
2/39
4
11
<22
<22
10
8
<22
8
<22
<22
<22
13
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<22
NA
NA
NA
NA
11
7
22
12/39
7
46
<74
<74
<74
<74
<74
<74
<74
<74
<74
<74
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<74
NA
NA
NA
NA
111
22
74
32/39
22
10700
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
<0.39
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.39
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.39
0.12
0.39
39/39
0.75
5.25
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
<0.11
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.11
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.11
0.03
0.11
39/39
2.00
126
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
<16
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<16
NA
NA
NA
NA
<16
4
16
31/39
5
2470
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<19
NA
NA
NA
NA
<19
6
19
5/39
6
7
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
<1.90
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<1.90
NA
NA
NA
NA
<1.90
0.57
1.90
39/39
2.07
291
<93
<93
<93
<93
<93
<93
<93
<93
<93
<93
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<93
NA
NA
NA
NA
<93
28
93
0/39
<93
<93
-------
A-33
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks
oainpie lu
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
Date
L.OMcClcU
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
An
Mtt^
-------
A-34
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks
oainpie lu
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blank3
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blank6
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank6
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
Date
L.OMcClcU
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
An
Mtt^
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
10
0.6
0/25
<10
<10
«l
Hg/L
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
20
3.5
10/25
20.0
1550
As
UgA
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.21
<0.2
0.21
0.2
0.04
24/25
0.29
5.9
^^^^1
D
UgA
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
20
2.1
21/25
24.4
619
^^ff^H
DO
UgA
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
2.5
0.05
25/25
9.4
2050
Ra
oe
Hg/L
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
2.5
0.05
1/25
0.05
0.05
wsm
v-a
mg/L
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
0.05
0.005
25/25
12.5
370
P9n
"-"
Hg/L
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.1
0/25
<0.2
<0.2
V.U
UgA
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
2.5
0.5
6/25
0.53
2.3
'-'
UgA
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
0.59
0.79
0.34
2
0.3
4/25
0.80
3.6
'-"
UgA
0.20
<0.5
<0.5
0.28
<0.5
<0.5
0.20
5.5
0.24
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.2
25/25
0.66
78.5
rc
UgA
<50
<50
<50
7.9
<50
11.6
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
50
7
24/25
55.5
4720
K
mg/L
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
<0.25
0.25
0.023
25/25
0.645
4.23
"
UgA
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
0.2
23/25
0.65
460
R/ICT
IVIg
mg/L
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
<0.025
0.025
0.003
25/25
2.11
141
IV/ln
UgA
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
2.5
0.1
23/25
0.66
2640
IVIU
UgA
0.18
<0.5
0.56
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.48
0.60
0.18
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.15
17/25
0.50
2.8
Ma
IN d
mg/L
<0.125
<0.125
<0.125
<0.125
<0.125
<0.125
<0.125
<0.125
<0.125
<0.125
<0.125
<0.125
0.125
0.004
25/25
2.85
335
Ni
UgA
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.21
0.2
0.2
25/25
0.60
9.80
-------
A-35
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks
Date
Sample ID Collected
p Pb S Sb Se Si Sr Th Ti Tl U V Zn
mg/L 1 ug/L 1 mg/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 mg/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank GW31
MDL
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
11/4/2011
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.07
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.07
0.02
0.07
8/39
0.02
0.33
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<19
NA
NA
NA
NA
<19
6
19
1/39
26
26
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.51
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.51
0.15
0.51
32/39
0.16
376
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
R
NA
NA
NA
NA
R
<33
<33
<33
<33
<33
<33
<33
<33
<33
<33
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<33
NA
NA
NA
NA
<33
10
33
0/39
<33
<33
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.48
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.48
0.14
0.48
39/39
3.84
24.9
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
<4
1
4
39/39
30
10100
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<8
NA
NA
NA
NA
<8
2
8
10/39
3
374
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
<19
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<19
NA
NA
NA
NA
<19
6
19
0/39
<19
<19
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
R
NA
NA
NA
NA
R
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<11
NA
NA
NA
NA
<11
3
11
2/39
4
19
<56
<56
<56
<56
<56
<56
<56
<56
<56
<56
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<56
NA
NA
NA
NA
49
17
56
2/39
30
226
-------
A-36
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks
Sample ID
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
Date
Collected
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
^^P
mg/L
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
<0.07
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.07
0.02
13/30
0.02
0.10
•3^1
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.0
0.03
4/30
1.2
3.1
S
mg/L
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
<0.51
1.72
<0.51
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.51
0.15
24/30
0.41
385
in
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.0
0.08
0/30
<2.0
<2.0
H
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.0
1.2
6/30
2.0
8.0
Si
mg/L
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
<0.48
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.48
0.14
30/30
0.79
9.81
H
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4
1
30/30
61
10300
w
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
H
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
<8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
2
10/30
2
80
H
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.0
0.04
0/30
<1.0
<1.0
•
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.0
0.04
9/22
1.4
5.7
•
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
<11
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
11
3
2/30
4
6
m
^BjiJA^H
<56
<56
<56
<56
<56
<56
<56
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
56
17
1/30
90
90
-------
A-37
Table AS. Total Metal Blanks
Sample ID
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blank3
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blank6
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank6
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
Date
Collected
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
^^P
mg/L
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
<25
25
2.2
7/25
30.0
100
•3^1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.68
0.09
<0.2
0.58
<0.2
0.2
0.05
16/25
0.14
8.0
S
mg/L
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
in
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.1
4/25
0.15
0.16
H
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
2
0.4
0/25
<2
<2
Si
mg/L
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
0.08
<0.05
0.05
<0.05
<0.05
0.05
0.002
25/25
3.53
8.39
H
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
2
0.1
25/25
90.4
12200
w
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.17
<0.2
<0.2
0.18
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.1
4/25
0.10
0.42
H
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
2.5
0.1
15/25
0.12
21.4
H
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.05
0/25
<0.2
<0.2
•
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.05
21/25
0.05
6.4
•
0.32
0.33
0.34
0.31
0.26
0.31
0.31
0.32
0.18
0.38
0.32
0.38
0.2
0.02
24/25
0.10
2.7
m
^BjiJA^H
<2.5
0.34
3.4
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
0.27
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
2.5
0.25
20/25
0.59
72.4
-------
A-38
Table A6. VOC Blanks
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
MDL
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
12.4
100
0/39
<100
<100
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
6.4
25.0
0/39
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
6.8
25.0
0/39
<25.0
<25.0
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.16
0.5
0/39
<0.5
<0.5
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.63
1.0
0/39
<1.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
2.8
5.0
0/39
<5.0
<5.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.41
1.0
0/39
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.12
1.0
0/39
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.17
1.0
0/39
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<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
0/39
<1.0
<1.0
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.18
0.5
0/39
<0.5
<0.5
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.07
0.5
0/39
<0.5
<0.5
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.14
1.0
0/39
<1.0
<1.0
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.11
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.08
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.14
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.07
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.09
0.5
0/39
<0.5
<0.5
-------
A-39
Table A6. VOC Blanks
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/29/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
4/30/2012
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
100
12.4
0/30
<100
<100
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
25.0
6.4
0/30
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
25.0
6.8
0/30
<25.0
<25.0
<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
0.5
0.16
0/30
<0.5
<0.5
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.63
0/30
<1.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
5.0
2.8
0/30
<5.0
<5.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.41
0/30
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.12
0/30
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.17
0/30
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.15
0/30
<1.0
<1.0
<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
0.5
0.18
0/30
<0.5
<0.5
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
<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
0.5
0.07
1/30
0.30
0.30
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.14
0/30
<1.0
<1.0
<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
0.5
0.11
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.08
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.14
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.07
1/30
5.53
5.53
<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
0.5
0.09
0/30
<0.5
<0.5
-------
A-40
Table A6. VOC Blanks
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
Trip Blankl
Trip Blank2
Trip Blanks
Trip Blank4
Trip Blanks
Trip Blanks
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
100
63
0/25
<100
<100
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
10
7.4
0/25
<10
<10
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
0.07
0/25
<1
<1
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.05
0/25
<0.5
<0.5
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
0.20
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
0.28
2/25
0.33
8.3
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
10
4.9
0/25
<10
<10
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.07
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.08
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.11
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.51
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.14
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.09
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.10
2/25
0.11
0.12
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.10
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.07
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.06
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.10
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.05
1/25
0.4
0.4
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.09
0/25
<0.5
<0.5
-------
A-41
Table A6. VOC Blanks
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
MDL
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.10
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.07
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.16
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.15
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.10
0.5
1/39
0.24
0.24
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.10
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.09
0.5
0/39
<0.5
<0.5
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
0.07
1.0
0/39
<1.0
<1.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
0.17
2.0
0/39
<2.0
<2.0
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.06
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.06
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.06
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.06
0.5
2/39
0.38
0.39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.10
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.08
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.12
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.13
0.5
0/39
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.12
0.5
0/39
<0.5
<0.5
-------
A-42
Table A6. VOC Blanks
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/29/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
4/30/2012
<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
0.5
0.10
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.07
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.16
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.15
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.10
0/30
<0.5
<0.5
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
<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
0.5
0.10
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.09
0/30
<0.5
<0.5
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.07
0/30
<1.0
<1.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
2.0
0.17
0/30
<2.0
<2.0
<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
0.5
0.06
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.06
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.06
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.06
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.10
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.08
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.12
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.13
0/30
<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
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.12
0/30
<0.5
<0.5
-------
A-43
Table A6. VOC Blanks
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
Trip Blankl
Trip Blank2
Trip Blanks
Trip Blank4
Trip Blanks
Trip Blanks
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.09
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.05
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.04
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.12
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.07
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.07
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.13
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.08
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.06
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
1.0
0.15
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.06
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.07
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.08
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.03
1/25
1.6
1.6
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.09
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.07
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.15
2/25
0.17
1.1
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.05
0/25
<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
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.08
0/25
<0.5
<0.5
-------
A-44
Table A7. Low Molecular Weight Acid Blanks
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Lactate
(50-21-5)
mg/L
Formate
(64-18-6)
mg/L
Acetate
(64-19-7)
mg/L
Propionate
(79-09-4)
mg/L
Isobutyrate
(79-31-2)
mg/L
Butyrate
(107-92-6)
mg/L
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
MDL
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
2/39
0.05
0.07
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.11
<0.10
0.13
0.12
<0.10
0.08
0.01
0.10
21/39
0.10
0.30
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.02
0.10
0/39
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
0/39
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.01
0.10
0/39
<0.10
<0.10
-------
A-45
Table A7. Low Molecular Weight Acid Blanks
Sample ID
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
Date
Collected
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
4/30/2012
Lactate
(50-21-5)
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.01
2/30
0.05
0.07
Formate
(64-18-6)
mg/L
0.06
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.07
0.09
0.05
0.10
0.01
23/30
0.12
1.13
Acetate
(64-19-7)
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.01
3/30
0.10
0.15
Propionate
(79-09-4)
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.02
0/30
<0.10
<0.10
Isobutyrate
(79-31-2)
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.01
0/30
<0.10
<0.10
Butyrate
(107-92-6)
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.01
0/30
<0.10
<0.10
-------
A-46
Table A7. Low Molecular Weight Acid Blanks
Sample ID
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
Date
Collected
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
Lactate
(50-21-5)
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.021
0/25
<0.10
<0.10
Formate
(64-18-6)
mg/L
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Acetate
(64-19-7)
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.014
0/25
<0.10
<0.10
Propionate
(79-09-4)
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.020
0/25
<0.10
<0.10
Isobutyrate
(79-31-2)
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.022
0/25
<0.10
<0.10
Butyrate
(107-92-6)
mg/L
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.024
0/25
<0.10
<0.10
-------
A-47
Table A8. Dissolved Gas Blanks
Sample
Date
Collected
Methane
(74-82-8)
mg/L
Ethane
(74-84-0)
mg/L
Propane
(74-98-6)
mg/L
Butane
(106-97-8)
mg/L
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
MDL
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
0.0009
<0.0014
0.0010
<0.0014
0.0011
<0.0014
<0.0014
0.0020
0.0013
0.0019
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
0.0002
0.0014
29/39
0.0020
40.7
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
0.0022
0.0011
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
0.0037
0.0020
0.0036
0.0008
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
0.0007
0.0028
17/39
0.0009
0.2800
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
0.0030
0.0014
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
0.0070
0.0045
0.0073
0.0018
<0.0038
<0.0038
0.0021
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
0.0008
0.0038
0/39
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
0.0010
0.0012
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
0.0053
0.0031
0.0055
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
0.0012
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
0.0010
0.0048
0/39
<0.0048
<0.0048
-------
A-48
Table A8. Dissolved Gas Blanks
Sample
Date
Collected
Methane
(74-82-8)
mg/L
Ethane
(74-84-0)
mg/L
Propane
(74-98-6)
mg/L
Butane
(106-97-8)
mg/L
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Trip Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/5012
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/29/2012
5/1/2012
4/30/2012
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
0.0014
0.0003
23/30
0.0011
40.4
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
0.0028
0.0005
20/30
0.0012
0.4970
<0.0039
<0.0039
<0.0039
<0.0039
<0.0039
<0.0039
<0.0039
<0.0039
<0.0039
<0.0039
<0.0039
<0.0039
0.0039
0.0007
5/30
0.0022
0.0043
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
0.0048
0.0007
0/30
<0.0048
<0.0048
-------
A-49
Table A8. Dissolved Gas Blanks
Sample
Date
Collected
Methane
(74-82-8)
mg/L
Ethane
(74-84-0)
mg/L
Propane
(74-98-6)
mg/L
Butane
(106-97-8)
mg/L
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
Trip Blankl
Trip Blank2
Trip Blanks
Trip Blank4
Trip Blanks
Trip Blanks
QL
MDL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
<0.0014
0.0014
0.0002
17/25
0.0061
56.1
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
<0.0028
0.0028
0.0007
9/25
0.0088
0.4280
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0038
0.0038
0.0008
0/25
<0.0038
<0.0038
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
<0.0048
0.0048
0.0010
0/25
<0.0048
<0.0048
-------
A-50
Table A9. Glycol Blanks
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
Hg/L
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
5.0
0/39
<5.0
<5.0
UgA
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
25.0
0/39
<25.0
<25.0
Hg/L
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
25.0
0/39
<25.0
<25.0
UgA
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
25.0
0/39
<25.0
<25.0
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
4/30/2012
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
5.0
0/30
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
5.0
0/30
<5.0
<5.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
25.0
0/30
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
<25.0
25.0
0/30
<25.0
<25.0
-------
A-51
Table A9. Glycol Blanks
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
Hg/L
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
10.0
0/25
<10.0
<10.0
UgA
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
10.0
0/25
<10.0
<10.0
Hg/L
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
10.0
0/25
<10.0
<10.0
UgA
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
10.0
0/25
<10.0
<10.0
-------
A-52
Table A10. sVOC Blanks
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
5.00
0/39
<5.00
<5.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/30
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
May 2013
Field Blankl
5/9/2013
<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
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-53
Table A10. sVOC Blanks
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
R
<3.00
3.00
0/25
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
mium^
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-54
Table A10. sVOC Blanks
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/39
<1.00
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<2.50
<2.50
<2.50
<2.50
<2.50
<2.50
<2.50
<2.50
<2.50
<2.50
<2.50
2.50
0/39
<2.50
<2.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
5.00
0/30
<5.00
<5.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/30
<3.00
<3.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/30
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/30
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/30
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
May 2013
Field Blankl
5/9/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
<5.00
<1.00
<3.00
<2.00
<1.00
<2.00
<3.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-55
Table A10. sVOC Blanks
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
R
<5.00
5.00
0/25
<5.00
<5.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
R
<3.00
3.00
0/25
<3.00
<3.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
R
<3.00
3.00
0/25
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
R
<3.00
3.00
0/25
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
R
<3.00
3.00
0/25
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
mium^
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-56
Table A10. sVOC Blanks
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/39
<1.00
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
<5.00
5.00
0/39
<5.00
<5.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
4.10
3.72
3.53
3.73
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
3.35
1.00
16/39
2.34
4.04
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0.15
1.21
4.10
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/30
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
2/30
3.02
36.7
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
3.00
0/30
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
May 2013
Field Blankl
5/9/2013
<1.00
<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
<1.00
4.43
<1.00
<3.00
<1.00
-------
A-57
Table A10. sVOC Blanks
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
R
<3.00
3.00
0/25
<3.00
<3.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
3.86
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
4/25
3.82
18.3
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
<3.00
R
<3.00
3.00
0/25
<3.00
<3.00
mium^
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-58
Table A10. sVOC Blanks
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/39
<1.00
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/39
<1.00
<1.00
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
May 2013
Field Blankl
5/9/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-59
Table A10. sVOC Blanks
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
mium^
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-60
Table A10. sVOC Blanks
October 2011
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/39
<1.00
<1.00
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
May 2013
Field Blankl
5/9/2013
<2.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/39
<1.00
<1.00
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
0.50
0/39
<0.50
<0.50
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/39
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
2.00
0/30
<2.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
0/30
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
<2.00
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-61
Table A10. sVOC Blanks
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
KJUAM
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
KJUAM
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
KJUAM
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
KJUAM
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
KJUAM
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
KJUAM
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
<2.00
R
<2.00
2.00
0/25
<2.00
<2.00
KJUAM
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
KJUAM
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
R
<1.00
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-62
Table All. DRO/GRO Blanks
Date
Sample ID Collected
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/27/2011
10/28/2011
10/29/2011
10/31/2011
11/1/2011
11/2/2011
11/3/2011
11/4/2011
10/31/2011
GRO/TPH
UgA
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
20
0/39
<20
<20
DRO
UgA
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
20
3/39
23.1
25.1
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
4/30/2012
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
20.0
0/30
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
20.0
<20.0
NR
20.0
10/30
21.1
273
-------
A-63
Table All. DRO/GRO Blanks
Sample ID
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
QL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
Date
Collected
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
GRO/TPH
UgA
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
20.0
1/25
24.2
24.2
DRO
UgA
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
22.5
25.3
26.8
47.8
74.8
50.8
53.0
37.3
20.0
1/25
nn
27.7
-------
A-64
Table A12. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, Ra-226, and Ra-228 Blanks
October 2011 \
Field Blank
Field Blank
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
April 2012
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Field Blank
Equipment Blank
Equipment Blank
RL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
4/24/2012
4/25/2012
4/26/2012
4/27/2012
4/28/2012
4/30/2012
5/1/2012
4/26/2012
4/30/2012
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
3.0
5/30
<3.0
6.1
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
<4.0
4.0
4/30
<4.0
7.4
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
5/30
<1.00
4.40
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
1.00
2/30
<1.00
2.88
-------
A-65
Table A12. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, Ra-226, and Ra-228 Blanks
Euli^H lilSUu lilSUu lilSUu lilSUu
May 2013
Field Blankl
Field Blank2
Field Blanks
Field Blank4
Field Blanks
Field Blanks
Equipment Blankl
Equipment Blank2
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blank4
Equipment Blanks
Equipment Blanks
RL
Detection in samples
Concentration min
Concentration max
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/11/2013
5/13/2013
5/14/2013
5/15/2013
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
3.0
8/25
<3.0
5.9
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
4.0
4/25
<4.0
5.7
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
1.00
3/25
<1.00
2.70
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
1.00
0/25
<1.00
<1.00
-------
A-66
Table A13. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
DOC
mg/L
DIC
mg/L
NO3 +
NO2 NH3 Br Cl
mg/L j mg/L j mg/L j mg/L
so42-
mg/L
F
mg/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
1.25
<0.25
<0.25
NC
1.25
0.31
0.28
NC
1.25
1.29
1.30
0.8
1.25
0.29
0.34
NC
5.00
56.5
56.5
0.0
5.00
31.8
31.8
0.0
5.00
51.2
51.2
0.0
5.00
55.5
55.6
0.2
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
2.74
2.73
0.4
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
1.09
1.07
1.9
0.50
0.94
0.82
13.0
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
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
23.8
23.8
0.0
5.00
19.1
19.1
0.0
5.00
0.82
0.75
NC
5.00
8.86
8.69
1.9
5.00
0.14
0.14
NC
5.00
15.0
14.8
1.3
5.00
13.3
13.0
2.3
5.00
17.6
17.2
2.3
1.00
0.18
0.17
NC
1.00
<0.20
<0.20
NC
1.00
0.11
0.17
NC
1.00
0.04
<0.20
NC
-------
A-67
Table A13. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
DOC
mg/L
DIC
mg/L
NO3 +
NO2 NH3 Br Cl
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
so42-
mg/L
F
mg/L
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
1.25
<0.25
<0.25
NC
1.25
<0.25
<0.25
NC
1.25
7.19
7.48
4.0
5.00
37.5
37.6
0.3
5.00
34.0
34.0
0.0
5.00
7.75
7.76
0.1
0.25
<0.05
<0.05
NC
0.25
0.07
0.07
NC
0.25
0.06
0.06
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
5.00
0.40
0.41
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
0.87
0.97
NC
5.00
53.2
54.0
1.5
5.00
9.78
9.79
0.1
5.00
230
225
2.2
5.00
1.07
1.10
NC
5.00
7.41
7.36
0.7
5.00
17.6
16.1
8.9
1.00
0.08
0.12
NC
1.00
0.12
0.14
NC
1.00
<0.20
<0.20
NC
-------
A-68
Table A13. DOC, DIG, Ammonia, and Anion Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
DOC
mg/L
DIC
mg/L
NO3 +
NO2 NH3 Br Cl
mg/L j mg/L j mg/L j mg/L
so42-
mg/L
F
mg/L
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27dup
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28dup
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38dup
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
1.25
<0.25
<0.25
NC
1.25
<0.25
<0.25
NC
1.25
0.42
0.22
NC
5.00
66.6
66.5
0.2
5.00
45.3
45.3
0.0
5.00
33.9
34.4
1.5
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
0.92
0.92
0.1
0.50
0.02
0.01
NC
0.50
0.13
0.12
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
3.60
3.56
NC
5.00
6.92
6.95
0.4
5.00
7.15
7.10
0.7
5.00
10.0
9.88
1.2
5.00
20.1
20.1
0.0
5.00
7.15
7.16
0.1
1.00
0.66
0.64
NC
1.00
0.14
0.13
NC
1.00
0.13
0.15
NC
-------
A-69
Table A14. Dissolved Metal Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Ag
Hg/L
Al
UgA
As
UgA
B
UgA
Ba
Hg/L
Be
UgA
Ca
mg/L
Cd
UgA
Co
UgA
Cr
UgA
Cu
UgA
Fe
UgA
K
mg/L
Li
UgA
Mg
mg/L
Mn
UgA
Mo
UgA
Na
mg/L
Ni
UgA
P
mg/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
70
<14
<14
NC
70
<14
<14
NC
70
<14
<14
NC
70
<14
<14
NC
2470
<494
<494
NC
2470
<494
<494
NC
2470
<494
<494
NC
2470
<494
<494
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
1665
508
508
NC
1665
<333
<333
NC
1665
<333
<333
NC
1665
196
197
NC
20
1620
1600
1.2
20
396
396
NC
20
30
30
0.0
20
347
340
2.0
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
1.44
27.4
26.9
1.8
1.44
47.1
47.1
NC
1.44
70.5
70.5
0.0
1.44
36.9
36.4
1.4
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
335
232
227
NC
335
<67
<67
NC
335
190
191
NC
335
<67
<67
NC
1.77
2.14
2.11
1.4
1.77
1.54
1.55
NC
1.77
0.83
0.84
NC
1.77
3.16
3.22
1.9
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.50
6.70
6.53
2.6
0.50
5.64
5.66
0.4
0.50
5.62
5.66
0.7
0.50
10.7
10.3
3.8
70
25
25
NC
70
<14
<14
NC
70
224
225
0.4
70
10
9
NC
85
<17
11
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
8.55
74.7
73.5
1.6
8.55
10.5
10.5
0.0
8.55
2.95
2.94
NC
8.55
46.1
47.1
2.1
420
<84
<84
NC
420
<84
<84
NC
420
<84
<84
NC
420
<84
<84
NC
0.30
<0.06
<0.06
NC
0.30
<0.06
<0.06
NC
0.30
<0.06
<0.06
NC
0.30
<0.06
<0.06
NC
-------
A-70
Table A14. Dissolved Metal Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Ag
Hg/L
Al
UgA
As
UgA
B
UgA
Ba
Hg/L
Be
UgA
Ca
mg/L
Cd
UgA
Co
UgA
Cr
UgA
Cu
UgA
Fe
UgA
K
mg/L
Li
UgA
Mg
mg/L
Mn
UgA
Mo
UgA
Na
mg/L
Ni
UgA
P
mg/L
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
70
<14
<14
NC
70
<14
<14
NC
70
<14
<14
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
5.00
1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
1.1
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
1665
129
130
NC
1665
<333
<333
NC
1665
<333
<333
NC
20
1610
1590
1.3
20
179
180
0.6
20
663
656
1.1
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
1.44
36.7
36.5
0.5
1.44
31.6
31.9
0.9
1.44
36.0
35.7
0.8
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
3
3
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
3.6
3.9
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
335
204
196
NC
335
<67
<67
NC
335
59
58
NC
1.77
1.69
1.70
NC
1.77
1.14
1.17
NC
1.77
3.38
3.42
1.2
50
64.7
63.2
2.3
50
32.0
34.9
NC
50
14.5
15.9
NC
0.50
8.23
8.19
0.5
0.50
5.41
5.45
0.7
0.50
19.6
19.6
0.0
70
83
83
0.0
70
6
6
NC
70
2400
2440
1.7
85
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
8.55
40.4
40.8
1.0
8.55
20.8
21.6
3.8
8.55
76.1
75.6
0.7
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
2.9
2.7
NC
0.30
<0.06
<0.06
NC
0.30
<0.06
<0.06
NC
0.30
<0.06
<0.06
NC
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
1.00
4.7
4.4
6.6
1.00
0.71
0.65
NC
1.00
2.3
2.3
0.0
200
416
408
1.9
200
47.4
47.6
NC
200
70.4
69.4
NC
25
909
905
0.4
25
160
156
2.5
25
176
178
1.1
25
<5
0.12
NC
25
<5
<5
NC
25
<5
<5
NC
0.50
19.7
19.9
1.0
0.50
49.2
47.3
3.9
0.50
29.6
30.3
2.3
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
25
<5
<5
NC
25
<5
<5
NC
25
<5
<5
NC
10.0
<2
0.45
NC
10.0
<2
<2
NC
10.0
<2
<2
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
9.4
8.5
10.1
2.50
0.26
<0.5
NC
500
<100
<100
NC
500
<100
<100
NC
500
149
184
NC
2.50
2.57
2.57
0.0
2.50
1.66
1.58
NC
2.50
1.25
1.24
NC
50
172
172
0.0
50
23.9
22.9
NC
50
41.2
40.9
NC
0.25
3.56
3.63
1.9
0.25
16.3
15.6
4.4
0.25
4.90
4.99
1.8
25
45.7
45.3
0.9
25
<5
<5
NC
25
289
297
2.7
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
2.90
3.00
3.4
1.25
103
103
0.0
1.25
15.2
14.7
3.3
1.25
29.7
29.1
2.0
1.00
0.64
0.67
NC
1.00
2.10
1.70
21.1
1.00
1.10
1.10
0.0
250
<50
<50
NC
250
<50
<50
NC
250
<50
<50
NC
-------
A-71
Table A14. Dissolved Metal Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Pb S Sb Se Si Sr Th Ti Tl U V Zn
ug/L mg/L ug/L ug/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
85
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
2.30
2.29
2.16
NC
2.30
5.15
4.96
3.8
2.30
4.24
4.23
0.2
2.30
5.98
5.68
5.1
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
150
11
14
NC
150
<30
<30
NC
150
9
<30
NC
150
<30
<30
NC
2.17
5.57
5.50
1.3
2.17
6.12
5.93
3.2
2.17
5.57
5.63
1.1
2.17
5.42
5.34
1.5
20
3060
3020
1.3
20
1370
1370
0.0
20
79
79
0.0
20
2500
2470
1.2
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
85
<17
<17
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
250
<50
<50
NC
250
<50
<50
NC
250
<50
<50
NC
250
<50
<50
NC
-------
A-72
Table A14. Dissolved Metal Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Pb S Sb Se Si Sr Th Ti Tl U V Zn
ug/L mg/L ug/L ug/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
2.30
<0.46
<0.46
NC
2.30
<0.46
<0.46
NC
2.30
6.30
6.33
0.5
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
25
1.5
1.4
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
2.1
2.1
NC
2.17
6.06
6.05
0.2
2.17
5.11
5.12
0.2
2.17
0.79
0.80
NC
20
2930
2910
0.7
20
779
787
1.0
20
1280
1270
0.8
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
35
<7
<7
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
R
R
NC
5.00
2.3
2.3
NC
5.00
R
R
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
250
<50
<50
NC
250
<50
<50
NC
250
<50
<50
NC
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
0.20
0.21
NC
1.00
0.06
<0.2
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
0.13
0.12
NC
10.0
<2
<2
NC
10.0
<2
<2
NC
10.0
0.45
<2
NC
0.50
5.45
5.47
0.4
0.50
4.94
4.72
4.6
0.50
4.06
4.06
0.0
10.0
2430
2450
0.8
10.0
1010
983
2.7
10.0
511
496
3.0
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
25
<5
<5
NC
25
<5
<5
NC
25
<5
<5
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
1.4
1.4
0.0
1.00
2.4
2.3
4.3
1.00
<0.02
<0.02
NC
1.00
0.06
0.05
NC
1.00
0.03
0.03
NC
25
<5
<5
NC
25
12.1
9.3
NC
25
<5
<5
NC
-------
A-73
Table A15. Total Metal Duplicates
^^5
Sample ID | Collected
Ag
Hg/L
Al
UgA
As
UgA
B
UgA
Ba
UgA
Be
UgA
Ca
mg/L
Cd
Hg/L
Co
UgA
Cr
UgA
Cu
UgA
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
80
<16
<16
NC
80
<16
<16
NC
80
<16
<16
NC
80
<16
<16
NC
2740
<548
<548
NC
2740
<548
<548
NC
2740
<548
<548
NC
2740
<548
<548
NC
110
<22
<22
NC
110
<22
<22
NC
110
<22
<22
NC
110
<22
<22
NC
1850
499
487
NC
1850
<370
<370
NC
1850
<370
<370
NC
1850
178
195
NC
20
1720
1740
1.2
20
410
408
0.5
20
30
30
0.0
20
317
336
5.8
55
<11
<11
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
1.60
28.5
28.9
1.4
1.60
49.0
48.1
1.9
1.60
72.0
71.6
0.6
1.60
39.0
36.4
6.9
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
110
<22
15
NC
110
<22
<22
NC
110
<22
<22
NC
110
<22
<22
NC
Fe
UgA
K
mg/L
Li
UgA
Mg
mg/L
Mn
Hg/L
Mo
UgA
Na
mg/L
Ni
UgA
P
mg/L
370
308
307
NC
370
<74
<74
NC
370
300
294
NC
370
26
<74
NC
1.97
2.17
2.20
1.4
1.97
1.55
1.57
NC
1.97
0.85
0.86
NC
1.97
3.22
3.36
4.3
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.56
6.85
6.93
1.2
0.56
5.70
5.63
1.2
0.56
5.87
5.80
1.2
0.56
12.0
10.3
15.2
80
26
26
NC
80
<16
<16
NC
80
223
221
0.9
80
22
15
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
9.50
73.0
73.8
1.1
9.50
10.7
10.6
0.9
9.50
3.04
3.03
NC
9.50
46.0
49.8
7.9
465
<93
<93
NC
465
<93
<93
NC
465
<93
<93
NC
465
<93
<93
NC
0.34
<0.07
<0.07
NC
0.34
0.07
0.07
NC
0.34
0.03
<0.07
NC
0.34
<0.07
<0.07
NC
-------
A-74
Table A15. Total Metal Duplicates
^^5
Sample ID | Collected
Ag
Hg/L
Al
UgA
As
UgA
B
UgA
Ba
UgA
Be
UgA
Ca
mg/L
Cd
Hg/L
Co
UgA
Cr
UgA
Cu
UgA
Fe
UgA
K
mg/L
Li
UgA
Mg
mg/L
Mn
Hg/L
Mo
UgA
Na
mg/L
Ni
UgA
P
mg/L
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
80
<16
<16
NC
80
<16
<16
NC
80
<16
<16
NC
100
34.3
32.2
NC
100
89.4
80.6
NC
100
25.1
24.5
NC
5.00
1.0
1.1
NC
5.00
1.1
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
1850
124
124
NC
1850
<370
<370
NC
1850
<370
<370
NC
20
1590
1590
0.0
20
186
186
0.0
20
683
689
0.9
55
<11
<11
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
1.60
36.5
36.5
0.0
1.60
32.3
32.2
0.3
1.60
37.4
37.3
0.3
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
<4
<4
NC
20
2
2
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
6.8
7.3
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
2.3
NC
370
276
280
NC
370
77
66
NC
370
320
319
NC
1.97
2.07
2.05
1.0
1.97
1.55
1.54
NC
1.97
3.32
3.33
0.3
50
73.3
70.5
3.9
50
38.2
41.0
NC
50
19.8
20.7
NC
0.56
8.21
8.28
0.8
0.56
5.64
5.61
0.5
0.56
21.2
21.2
0.0
80
84
84
0.0
80
11
10
NC
80
2520
2500
0.8
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
9.50
45.2
45.3
0.2
9.50
25.0
25.2
0.8
9.50
77.3
78.0
0.9
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
2.7
2.6
NC
0.34
<0.07
<0.07
NC
0.34
<0.07
<0.07
NC
0.34
<0.07
<0.07
NC
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
100
23.1
91.1
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
1550
1490
3.9
1.00
4.4
4.8
8.7
1.00
0.91
0.95
NC
1.00
5.0
5.1
2.0
100
426
431
1.2
100
50.2
51.8
NC
100
81.0
81.3
NC
12.5
869
875
0.7
12.5
155
156
0.6
12.5
217
218
0.5
12.5
<2.5
<2.5
NC
12.5
<2.5
<2.5
NC
12.5
<2.5
<2.5
NC
0.25
19.2
20.0
4.1
0.25
46.5
46.8
0.6
0.25
29.1
29.3
0.7
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
12.5
<2.5
<2.5
NC
12.5
<2.5
<2.5
NC
12.5
0.88
0.84
NC
10.0
<2
0.80
NC
10.0
<2
<2
NC
10.0
1.8
1.6
NC
2.50
1.7
12.5
NC
2.50
6.3
6.1
3.2
2.50
3.9
3.8
2.6
250
92.6
338
NC
250
61.2
55.5
NC
250
4720
4670
1.1
1.25
2.46
2.48
0.8
1.25
1.58
1.57
0.6
1.25
1.53
1.49
2.6
25
164
165
0.6
25
22.2
21.9
NC
25
44.4
44.6
0.4
0.13
3.61
3.62
0.3
0.13
15.7
15.7
0.0
0.13
5.11
5.11
0.0
12.5
46.7
49.9
6.6
12.5
<2.5
<2.5
NC
12.5
327
327
0.0
2.50
0.78
0.88
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
2.8
2.8
0.0
0.63
99.0
98.8
0.2
0.63
14.2
14.2
0.0
0.63
30.1
30.3
0.7
1.00
1.10
1.40
24.0
1.00
2.30
1.80
24.4
1.00
2.90
2.80
3.5
125
<25
<25
NC
125
<25
<25
NC
125
48.0
45.2
NC
-------
A-75
Table A15. Total Metal Duplicates
^^5
Sample ID | Collected | Pb | S | Sb | Se | Si | Sr | Th | Ti | Tl | U | V | Zn
Units | Hg/L | mg/L | ng/L | ng/L | mg/L | ng/L | ng/L | ng/L | ng/L | ng/L | ng/L | ng/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
2.56
<0.51
<0.51
NC
2.56
4.43
4.37
1.4
2.56
3.69
3.65
1.0
2.56
5.39
4.78
12.0
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
165
<33
<33
NC
165
<33
<33
NC
165
<33
<33
NC
165
<33
<33
NC
2.41
5.23
5.18
1.0
2.41
5.64
5.63
0.2
2.41
5.19
5.21
0.4
2.41
5.02
4.96
1.2
20
3140
3170
1.0
20
1380
1360
1.5
20
79
79
0.0
20
2230
2430
8.6
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
95
<19
<19
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
280
<56
<56
NC
280
<56
<56
NC
280
<56
<56
NC
280
<56
<56
NC
-------
A-76
Table A15. Total Metal Duplicates
^^5
Sample ID | Collected | Pb | S | Sb | Se | Si | Sr | Th | Ti | Tl | U | V | Zn
Units | Hg/L | mg/L | ng/L | ng/L | mg/L | ng/L | ng/L | ng/L | ng/L | ng/L | ng/L | ng/L
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
1.30
<1.0
NC
2.56
0.41
0.42
NC
2.56
2.13
2.14
NC
2.56
4.97
4.97
0.0
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
2.0
2.5
NC
2.41
5.55
5.55
0.0
2.41
4.78
4.78
0.0
2.41
0.79
0.81
NC
20
2870
2880
0.3
20
765
776
1.4
20
1320
1330
0.8
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
40
<8
4
NC
40
<8
<8
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
R
R
NC
5.00
2.3
2.3
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
55
<11
<11
NC
280
<56
<56
NC
280
<56
<56
NC
280
<56
<56
NC
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
1.00
<0.2
0.14
NC
1.00
0.26
0.28
NC
1.00
1.7
1.7
0.0
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
1.00
<0.2
0.16
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
0.16
0.15
NC
10.0
<2
<2
NC
10.0
<2
<2
NC
10.0
<2
<2
NC
0.25
5.26
5.47
3.9
0.25
4.72
4.73
0.21
0.25
7.00
7.11
1.6
10.0
2400
2470
2.9
10.0
995
986
0.9
10.0
541
532
1.7
1.00
<0.2
0.33
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
0.38
0.42
NC
12.5
<2.5
<2.5
NC
12.5
0.54
0.38
NC
12.5
21.4
20.7
3.3
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
NC
1.00
0.07
0.08
NC
1.00
1.4
1.4
0.0
1.00
2.3
2.3
0.0
1.00
0.30
0.42
NC
1.00
0.46
0.44
NC
1.00
2.7
2.7
0.0
12.5
5.4
19.5
NC
12.5
7.4
6.4
NC
12.5
7.8
7.8
NC
-------
A-77
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
500
<100
<100
NC
500
<100
<100
NC
500
<100
<100
NC
500
<100
<100
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
500
<100
<100
NC
500
<100
<100
NC
500
<100
<100
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
-------
A-78
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
UgA
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
500
<100
<100
NC
500
<100
<100
NC
500
<100
<100
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
5.00
<1
<1
NC
5.00
<1
<1
NC
5.00
<1
<1
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
5.00
<1
<1
NC
5.00
<1
<1
NC
5.00
<1
<1
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
50
<10
<10
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
-------
A-79
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
Units Ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
0.38
0.39
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
5.00
<1.0
<1.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
10.0
<2.0
<2.0
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
-------
A-80
Table A16. Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
Units Ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
5.00
<0.5
<0.5
NC
5.00
<0.5
<0.5
NC
5.00
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
0.2
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
2.50
<0.5
<0.5
NC
-------
A-81
Table A17. Low Molecular Weight Acid Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Lactate
(50-21-5)
mg/L
Formate
(64-18-6)
mg/L
Acetate
(64-19-7)
mg/L
Propionate
(79-09-4)
mg/L
Isobutyrate
(79-31-2)
mg/L
Butyrate
(107-92-6)
mg/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
0.12
NC
0.50
0.26
0.26
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
R
R
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
-------
A-82
Table A17. Low Molecular Weight Acid Duplicates
Sample ID
April 20]
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
Date
Collected
L2
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
Lactate
(50-21-5)
mg/L
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
0.07
0.05
NC
Formate
(64-18-6)
mg/L
0.50
0.28
0.27
NC
0.50
0.17
0.18
NC
0.50
0.17
0.13
NC
Acetate
(64-19-7)
mg/L
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
0.14
0.15
NC
Propionate
(79-09-4)
mg/L
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
Isobutyrate
(79-31-2)
mg/L
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
Butyrate
(107-92-6)
mg/L
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
-------
A-83
Table A17. Low Molecular Weight Acid Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Lactate
(50-21-5)
mg/L
Formate
(64-18-6)
mg/L
Acetate
(64-19-7)
mg/L
Propionate
(79-09-4)
mg/L
Isobutyrate
(79-31-2)
mg/L
Butyrate
(107-92-6)
mg/L
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
0.50
<0.10
<0.10
NC
-------
A-84
Table A18. Dissolved Gas Duplicates
Sample
Date
Collected
Methane
(74-82-8)
mg/L
Ethane
(74-84-0)
mg/L
Propane
(74-98-6)
mg/L
Butane
(106-97-8)
mg/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
0.0068
40.7
27.9
37.3
0.0068
1.19
1.24
4.1
0.0068
0.0244
0.0204
17.9
0.0068
<0.0014
<0.0014
NC
0.0139
0.0257
0.0172
39.6
0.0139
0.0212
0.0236
10.7
0.0139
<0.0028
<0.0028
NC
0.0139
<0.0028
<0.0028
NC
0.0192
<0.0038
<0.0038
NC
0.0192
<0.0038
<0.0038
NC
0.0192
<0.0038
<0.0038
NC
0.0192
<0.0038
<0.0038
NC
0.0241
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
0.0241
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
0.0241
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
0.0241
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
-------
A-85
Table A18. Dissolved Gas Duplicates
Sample
Date
Collected
Methane
(74-82-8)
mg/L
Ethane
(74-84-0)
mg/L
Propane
(74-98-6)
mg/L
Butane
(106-97-8)
mg/L
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
1/0/1900
1/0/1900
0.0069
8.19
7.67
6.6
0.0069
18.4
18.0
2.2
0.0069
NA
NA
NC
0.0140
0.1090
0.1040
4.7
0.0140
0.4140
0.4010
3.2
0.0140
NA
NA
NC
0.0193
0.0022
0.0043
NC
0.0193
0.0023
0.0022
NC
0.0193
NA
NA
NC
0.0240
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
0.0240
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
0.0240
NA
NA
NC
-------
A-86
Table A18. Dissolved Gas Duplicates
Sample
Date
Collected
Methane
(74-82-8)
mg/L
Ethane
(74-84-0)
mg/L
Propane
(74-98-6)
mg/L
Butane
(106-97-8)
mg/L
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
0.0068
0.6300
0.6460
2.5
0.0068
<0.0014
<0.0014
NC
0.0068
17.5
16.9
3.5
0.0139
<0.0028
<0.0028
NC
0.0139
<0.0028
<0.0028
NC
0.0139
0.4280
0.4150
3.1
0.0192
<0.0038
<0.0038
NC
0.0192
<0.0038
<0.0038
NC
0.0192
<0.0038
<0.0038
NC
0.0241
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
0.0241
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
0.0241
<0.0048
<0.0048
NC
-------
A-87
Table A19. Glycol Duplicates
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
-------
A-88
Table A19. Glycol Duplicates
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
25
<5.0
<5.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
125
<25.0
<25.0
NC
-------
A-89
Table A19. Glycol Duplicates
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
50
<10.0
<10.0
NC
-------
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
A-90
Sample ID
Date
Collected
ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
-------
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
A-91
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Units 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 1 ug/L
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
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
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27dup
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28dup
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38dup
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
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
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
-------
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
A-92
Sample ID
Units
Date
Collected
ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
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
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
12.5
<2.50
<2.50
NC
12.5
<2.50
<2.50
NC
12.5
<2.50
<2.50
NC
12.5
<2.50
<2.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
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
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
-------
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
A-93
Sample ID
Units
Date
Collected
ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
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
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
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
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
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
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
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
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
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27dup
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28dup
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38dup
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
NC
25
<5.00
<5.00
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
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
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
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
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
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
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
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
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
NC
-------
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
A-94
Sample ID
Date
Collected
ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L I ng/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
5.00
3.57
2.76
NC
5.00
2.89
3.92
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
2.82
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
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
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
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
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
-------
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
A-95
Sample ID
Date
Collected
ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L I ug/L
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
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
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
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
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
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
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27dup
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28dup
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38dup
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
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
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
15.0
<3.00
<3.00
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
-------
A-96
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
..Ulllfiw 11* | «.w..._«,l.._v. |^|^|^|^|Q.|Q.|Q.|Q.|Q.||/)||_|4j
Units 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
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
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
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
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
NC
2.50
<0.50
<0.50
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
-------
A-97
Table A20. Semi-Volatile Organic Compound Duplicates
..Ulllfiw 11* | «.w..._«,l.._v. |^|^|^|^|Q.|Q.|Q.|Q.|Q.||/)||_|4j
Units 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L 1 ng/L
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
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
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27dup
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28dup
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38dup
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
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
5.00
<1.00
<1.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
NC
10.0
<2.00
<2.00
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
-------
A-98
Table A21. Diesel Range Organic Compounds and Gasoline Range Organic Compounds Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
GRO/TPH
UgA
DRO
UgA
October 2011
5XQL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
100
23.1
25.1
NC
100
<20
<20
NC
-------
A-99
Table A21. Diesel Range Organic Compounds and Gasoline Range Organic Compounds Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
GRO/TPH
UgA
DRO
UgA
April 2012
5XQL
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
273
267
2.2
-------
A-100
Table A21. Diesel Range Organic Compounds and Gasoline Range Organic Compounds Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
GRO/TPH
UgA
DRO
UgA
May 2013
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
5XQL
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
100
<20.0
<20.0
NC
-------
A-101
Table A22. O and H Stable Isotopes of Water Duplicates
Date
Sample ID Collected g So
October 2011
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
10/25/2011
10/26/2011
10/26/2011
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
-67.41
-66.60
1.2
-63.24
-62.76
0.8
-60.67
-61.41
1.2
-59.99
-60.56
0.9
-10.37
-10.37
0.0
-9.56
-9.70
1.5
-8.98
-9.10
1.3
-8.98
-9.07
1.0
April 2012
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
-64.72
-64.59
0.2
-62.90
-62.53
0.6
-63.54
-63.44
0.2
-9.58
-9.69
1.1
-9.45
-9.56
1.2
-8.86
-8.85
0.1
-------
A-102
Table A22. O and H Stable Isotopes of Water Duplicates
Date
Sample ID Collected g So
May 2013
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27dup
RPD (%)
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28dup
RPD (%)
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38dup
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
-63.6
-63.9
0.5
-64.1
-64.0
0.1
-63.5
-63.5
0.1
-9.64
-9.81
1.7
-9.85
-9.79
0.6
-9.47
-9.50
0.3
-------
A-10 3
Table A23. Carbon and Hydrogen Isotopes of DIG and Methane Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Helium
%
Hydrogen
%
Argon
Oxygen
%
Carbon
dioxide
%
Nitrogen
%
Carbon
monoxide
%
Methane
%
Ethane
%
Ethene
%
Propane
%
Propylene
%
Isobutane
%
Normal
Butane
%
Isopentane
%
Normal
Pentane
%
Hexane
Plus
%
October 2011
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
0.0037
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.111
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
1.94
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.17
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
5.03
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
92.72
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.0233
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.0001
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
-------
A-104
Table A23. Carbon and Hydrogen Isotopes of DIG and Methane Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
Helium
%
Hydrogen
%
Argon
Oxygen
%
Carbon
dioxide
%
Nitrogen
%
Carbon
monoxide
%
Methane
%
Ethane
%
Ethene
%
Propane
%
Propylene
%
Isobutane
%
Normal
Butane
%
Isopentane
%
Normal
Pentane
%
Hexane
Plus
%
April 2012
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
1.19
1.17
1.7
0.659
0.662
0.5
NA
NA
NC
2.03
2.00
1.5
1.69
1.87
10.1
NA
NA
NC
0.42
0.37
12.7
0.35
0.40
13.3
NA
NA
NC
59.81
61.42
2.7
30.00
29.70
1.0
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
36.33
34.83
4.2
66.58
66.63
0.1
NA
NA
NC
0.215
0.207
3.8
0.714
0.731
2.4
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.0034
0.0031
9.2
0.0026
0.0025
3.9
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
May 2013
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NR
NR
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.742
0.753
1.5
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
1.23
1.28
4.0
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.26
0.26
0.0
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
37.73
38.27
1.4
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
59.24
58.65
1.0
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.791
0.781
1.3
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.0025
0.0023
8.3
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
ND
ND
NC
-------
A-10 5
Table A23. Carbon and Hydrogen Isotopes of DIG and Methane Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
613C1
%0
6DC1
%0
613C2
%0
613C DIG
%0
Specific
Gravity
0.00
BTU
0.00
Helium
dilution
factor
October 2011
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
10/25/2011
-38.43
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
-206.7
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
-32.0
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
-15.34
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.588
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
940
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NR
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
-------
A-106
Table A23. Carbon and Hydrogen Isotopes of DIG and Methane Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
613C1
%0
6DC1
%0
613C2
%0
613C DIG
%0
Specific
Gravity
0.00
BTU
0.00
Helium
dilution
factor
April 2012
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
-39.41
-39.36
0.1
-33.32
-33.30
0.1
NA
NA
NC
-170.4
-171.5
0.6
-173.7
-171.0
1.6
NA
NA
NC
-37.7
-37.7
0.0
-36.4
-36.96
1.5
NA
NA
NC
-16.26
-16.39
0.8
-17.62
-18.07
2.5
NA
NA
NC
0.827
0.833
0.7
0.700
0.700
0.0
NA
NA
NC
372
356
4.4
687
688
0.1
NA
NA
NC
0.64
0.60
6.5
0.53
0.52
1.9
NA
NA
NC
May 2013
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
-32.22
-32.19
0.1
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
-163.9
-162.3
1.0
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
-37.4
-37.4
0.0
-15.1
-15.1
0.0
-13.2
-13.2
0.0
-17.7
-17.8
0.6
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.729
0.732
0.4
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
614
608
1.0
NA
NA
NC
NA
NA
NC
0.47
0.48
2.1
-------
A-10 7
Table A24. Strontium Isotope Duplicates
Date
Sample ID Collected Sr Rb
87Sr/86Sr
Atom Ratio
1/Sr
L/Hg
Rb/Sr
Weight Ratio
October 2011
NEPASW01-1011
NEPASW01-1011 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW25-1111
NEPAGW25-1111 DUP
RPD (%)
10/29/2011
10/29/2011
11/2/2011
11/2/2011
84
82
2.4
2500
2440
2.4
<0.5
<0.5
NC
3.2
3.2
0.0
0.711886
0.711274
0.09
0.712869
0.712859
0.001
0.01190
0.01220
2.4
0.00040
0.00041
2.4
NR
NR
NC
0.0013
0.0013
2.4
April 2012
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPASW04
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/30/2012
4/30/2012
4/28/2012
4/28/2012
4/25/2012
4/25/2012
2990
2990
0.0
877
878
0.11
1490
1470
1.4
2.0
2.0
0.0
0.8
0.8
0.0
2.8
2.7
3.6
0.713470
0.713464
0.0008
0.713097
0.713121
0.003
0.710105
0.710045
0.008
0.00033
0.00033
0.0
0.00114
0.00114
0.11
0.00067
0.00068
1.4
0.0007
0.0007
0.0
0.000912
0.000911
0.11
0.0019
0.0018
2.3
-------
A-108
Table A24. Strontium Isotope Duplicates
Sample ID
May 2013
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW28 DUP
RPD (%)
NEPAGW38
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
Date
Collected
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
5/15/2013
5/15/2013
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
m
2570
2570
0.0
934
934
0.0
482
491
1.8
B9
3.2
3.1
3.2
<1.0
<1.0
NC
<1.0
<1.0
NC
87Sr/86Sr
Atom Ratio
0.712770
0.712756
0.002
0.712246
0.712245
0.0001
0.713145
0.713137
0.001
1/Sr
L/Hg
0.00039
0.00039
0.0
0.00107
0.00107
0.0
0.00207
0.00204
1.8
Rb/Sr
Weight Ratio
0.0012
0.0012
3.2
NR
NR
NC
NR
NR
NC
-------
A-109
Table A25. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, and Radium Isotope Duplicates
pCi/L
October 2011
5XRL
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW02 DUP
RPD (%)
5XRL
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06 DUP
RPD (%)
5XRL
NEPASW01
NEPASW01 DUP
RPD (%)
5XRL
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25 DUP
RPD (%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
A-110
Table A25. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, and Radium Isotope Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
April 2012
5XRL
15.0
20
5.00
5.00
NEPAGW16
NEPAGW16 DUP
4/30/2012
<3.0
<4.0
4/30/2012
<3.0
<4.0
<1.00
1.09
<1.00
<1.00
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
5XRL
15.0
20
5.00
5.00
NEPAGW20
4/28/2012
<3.0
<4.0
<1.00
<1.00
NEPAGW20 DUP
4/28/2012
<3.0
<4.0
<1.00
<1.00
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
5XRL
15.0
20
5.00
5.00
NEPASW04
4/25/2012
<3.0
<4.0
<1.00
<1.00
NEPASW04 DUP
RPD (%)
4/25/2012
<3.0
NC
<4.0
NC
<1.00
NC
<1.00
NC
-------
A-lll
Table A25. Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, and Radium Isotope Duplicates
Sample ID
Date
Collected
May 2013
5XRL
15.0
20
5.00
5.00
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27 DUP
5/9/2013
<3.0
<4.0
5/9/2013
<3.0
4.2
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
<1.00
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
5XRL
15.0
20
5.00
5.00
NEPAGW28
5/15/2013
<3.0
<4.0
<1.00
<1.00
NEPAGW28 DUP
5/15/2013
<3.0
<4.0
<1.00
<1.00
RPD (%)
NC
NC
NC
NC
5XRL
15.0
20
5.00
5.00
NEPAGW38
5/10/2013
3.7
4.9
<1.00
<1.00
NEPAGW38 DUP
RPD (%)
5/10/2013
4.7
NC
5.7
NC
<1.00
NC
<1.00
NC
-------
A-112
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
Impact on Data/Usability
ictober/November 2011 Sampling Event
Field Parameters/EPA on-
site
Results for ferrous iron and sulfide are
considered screening values as they
were measured on site with field kits.
AYSI instrument performance check
for pH, conductivity, and ORP was
either not recorded or conducted at
the end of the day on 11/4/2011.
All detected results are qualified with "J" as
estimated. Data usability is unaffected as
this is normal for these measurements.
The YSI field instrument was calibrated and
a performance check was conducted on the
morning of 11/4/2011; all other YSI
performance checks conducted over the
course of the entire study were within
acceptable limits; and pH, conductivity, and
ORP values for affected samples
NEPAGW32 and NEPAGW33 collected end-
of-day 11/4/2011 were consistent with
values for samples collected at same
locations in subsequent two rounds. Thus,
the YSI data for affected samples
NEPASW02, NEPAGW31, NEPAGW32, and
NEPAGW33 are considered usable without
qualification.
Dissolved gases/ Shaw
Environmental
Dissolved gases: Methane, ethane,
propane, and butane were detected in
trip blanks for 10/25/11 and 10/26/11
and equipment blank for 10/31/11 due
to carryover in the analytical process
from standards analyzed prior to the
blanks.
Relative percent difference of a field
duplicate was outside acceptance
criteria of 30% for methane and
ethane in NEPAGW02 at 37.2% and
39.6%, respectively.
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPAGW05, NEPAGW07, and
NEPAGW19 for methane and NEPAGW06
and NEPAGW06dup for ethane. Methane
results for the affected samples are too
close to blank results; data is unusable.
Ethane results are ~6x the blank and may
be usable with caution.
The "*" qualifier was applied to NEPAGW02
indicating precision was outside the
acceptance limit. Lower value for methane
in field duplicate is still >25 mg/L confirming
dissolved gas concentrations at location are
high. Dissolved gas data from subsequent
two sampling rounds from same location
were consistent with first round original
sample indicating field duplicate result was
likely below true value. Data for original
sample is usable.
DOC/ORD/NRMRL-Ada
Equipment blank on 10/26/2011 had a
concentration above QL
Affected samples (NEPAGW05, NEPAGW06,
NEPAGW06Dup, and NEPAGW07) are
qualified with a "B". All values for affected
samples are similar to the blank value and
therefore the data is unusable.
DIC/ORD/NRMRL-Ada
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
-------
A-113
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Anions/Ammonia
ORD/NRMRL-Ada
Summary of QA/QC Results
Bromide: High chloride concentrations
interfered with analysis of samples
NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08, NEPAGW17,
and NEPAGW22 for bromide using
RSKSOP-276v3 (EPA Method 6500).
Impact on Data/Usability
Bromide data for NEPAGW04, NEPAGW08,
NEPAGW17, and NEPAGW22 were qualified
with "R" and rejected as unusable.
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 U are
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 cannot be
compared with the subsequent ICP-MS data
for trace metals from the last two sampling
events.
ICP-OES: Dissolved Sb and U results data
for all samples are qualified with "R" and
rejected as unusable.
All samples with detected quantities for
these metals are qualified "J" as estimated.
Data for B, Ba, K, Na, Ag, Si, S, and P are
usable as positive identifications with
estimated concentrations.
Total 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: Total Sb and U results are
subject 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.
ICP-MS: The ICP-MS data were replaced
with ICP-OES data. Detection and
quantitation limits are higher than
desirable. The ICP-OES data cannot be
compared with the subsequent ICP-MS data
for trace metals from the last two sampling
events.
ICP-OES: Total Sb and U results for all
samples are qualified with "R" and rejected
as unusable.
All samples with detected quantities for
these metals are qualified "J" as estimated.
Data for B, Ba, K, Na, Ag, Si, S, and P 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.
-------
A-114
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Charge Balance
Summary of QA/QC Results
The calculated charge balance error
ranged from 0.67 to 15.6% based on
the cations Ca, Mg, Na, K, Sr, Ba, Mn,
and Fe; and the anions Cl, SO4, HCO3,
and F.
Impact on Data/Usability
Affected sample NEPAGW22 with an ion
balance of 15.6% is excluded from use in
water typing and construction of Piper and
Durov diagrams. Individual cation and anion
concentration data for NEPAGW22 are
considered usable in development of
summary statistics. One other value >10%
(10.2%) for NEPAGW10 is considered
usable with caution.
Measured versus
calculated values of
Specific Conductance
(SPC)
The error in measured SPC versus
calculated SPC ranged from 0.0 to
19.9%
Sample NEPAGW22 was outside of the
acceptance criterion of 15%; SPC data for
this sample are used with caution.
VOC/Shaw
Environmental
The matrix spike results for 1,1-
dichloroethene and 1,1,2-
trichloroethane are significantly
outside 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.
Although samples were initially
analyzed within the 14-day holding
time, instrument sensitivity issues
required that the samples be
reanalyzed. The data reported is from
the reanalysis which exceeded the 14-
day holding time by up to 48 hours.
Acrylonitrile and styrene were
originally analyzed within the 14 day
hold-time; but, due to instrument
losing sensitivity between the ICAL and
the first Continuing Calibration Check,
reanalysis was required. The data
reported is from the reanalysis, which
exceeded the 14-day holding time by
more than 65 days.
The matrix spike and matrix spike
duplicate recoveries for carbon
All data for 1,1-dichloroethene and 1,1,2-
trichloroethane are qualified with "R" and
rejected as unusable.
The "H" qualifier was applied to all analytes
for the affected samples NEPAGW21
through NEPAGW30 and field blanks and
trip blanks collected on 11/1/2011,
11/2/2011, and 11/3/2011 (see Appendix
B). Holding time exceedance is considered
a potential negative bias. However, since
the holding time exceedance was limited
and samples were preserved, impact on
data usability is considered minimal.
The "H" qualifier was applied to the
affected samples NEPAGW11 through
NEPAGW20 and NEPASW01 for styrene and
acrylonitrile (see Appendix B). Holding time
exceedance is considered a potential
negative bias. Due to this exceedance, this
data is considered unusable. Note that in
the subsequent sampling rounds, these
analytes were not detected.
The "J-" qualifier was applied to
NEPAGW08 through NEPAGW20,
-------
A-115
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
disulfide were low in a number of
samples.
Impact on Data/Usability
NEPASW01; field and trip blanks collected
on 10/27/2011, 10/28/2011, 10/29/2011,
and 10/31/2011; and the equipment blank
collected on 10/31/2011 (see Appendix B).
There is a potential negative bias that is
taken into account for data usability.
Low Molecular Weight
Acids/Shaw
Environmental
All field blanks and the equipment
blank contained acetate above the QL
(It was later determined that the TSP
preservative was the source of the
acetate contamination.) The field
blanks collected on 10/31/2011,
11/2/2011, and 11/3/2011 also
contained formate above the QL
Low recovery (0%) for isobutyrate in
matrix spikes.
All acetate data are qualified with "R" and
rejected as unusable. For formate, the "B"
qualifier was applied to NEPAGW18 and
NEPAGW19; and NEPAGW25 through
NEPAGW30. Formate detections in field
samples are similar to detections in the
field blank; thus data for the affected
samples are unusable.
Samples were qualified with a "J-" . There is
a potential negative bias to data. As there
were no detections it is possible the
negative bias may be a factor (note the 0%
recovery for the matrix spike). Data should
be considered unusable.
Glycols/ EPA Region 3
Laboratory
The method for glycols was under
development.
The Laboratory Control Spike was
within the limits with the exception for
2-butyoxyethanol (77% recovery) in
the batch prepared and analyzed on
11/08/2011.
The QAPP stated these are to be considered
screening values until method was
validated. The data are usable as on-going
QC checks provide confidence that the
method can detect glycols.
Samples NEPAGW21 through NEPAGW33,
NEPASW02, and the field blanks collected
on 11/1/2011,11/2/2011,11/3/2011, and
11/4/2011 were qualified with "J-" (see
Appendix B). There is a potential negative
bias that is taken into account for data
usability.
SVOC/EPA Region 8
Laboratory
Sample NEPAGW22 and sample
NEPAGW24 had "bad extractions".
Both of the bottle lids for sample
NEPAGW25 were received broken.
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate and bis-(2-
ethylhexyl) adipate were detected
above QL in laboratory method blanks.
Samples were qualified with a "J-". There is
a potential negative bias that is taken into
account for data usability.
There is a potential impact (positive or
negative) that is taken into account for data
usability. All results are
-------
A-116
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab Summary of QA/QC Results Impact on Data/Usability
DRO/GRO/ EPA Region 8
Laboratory
O, H Stable Isotopes of
Water/ Shaw
Environmental
Sr Isotopes/ USGS
Laboratory- Denver
Isotech Gas Isotopes
Recoveries of limonene, adamantane,
and 1,3-dimethyl adamantine were low
in some matrix spikes.
DRO: Both bottle lids of sample
NEPAGW26 were received broken at
the laboratory.
GRO: All QA/QC criteria were met.
All QA/QC criteria were met.
All QA/QC criteria were met.
All QA/QC criteria were met.
values, data is not usable.
Affected samples NEPAGW18 through
NEPAGW33 (with exception of
NEPAGW25), five field blanks, and an
equipment blank were qualified with J- for
these three compounds (see Appendix B).
There is a potential negative bias that is
taken into account for data usability.
DRO: There is a potential impact (positive
or negative) that is taken into account for
data usability. Result is
-------
A-117
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
Bromide data reported is from re-
analysis of samples using RSKSOP-288,
Rev.3 outside of the holding time by up
to 26 days.
Impact on Data/Usability
considered a potential negative bias which
is taken into account for data usability.
However, because bromide is relatively
stable under these conditions in aqueous
solution and holding time exceedance was
not excessive, data is considered usable
with caution.
Dissolved Metals/Shaw
Environmental
ICP-MS: All ICP-MS results were
rejected due to potential interferences
and because 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.
Matrix spike issues occurred on the
analytical run from 5/7/12; silicon had
121% recovery in one matrix spike and
136% recovery in another while Ag had
77% recovery (outside SOP Revision 5
limits of 80-120%).
ICP-MS: CLP lab ICP-MS data were used.
ICP-OES: All samples with detected
quantities for these metals are qualified "J"
as estimated (see Appendix B). Data for B,
Ba, K, Na, Ag, Si, S, and P are usable as
positive identifications with estimated
concentrations.
Affected samples NEPAGW27, NEPAGW26,
NEPAGW10, NEPAGW14, NEPAGW01,
NEPAGW02, NEPAGW03, NEPASW03,
NEPASW04, NEPASW04dup, NEPAGW36,
NEPASW05, NEPASW06, NEPAGW09,
NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW11 were qualified
with J- for dissolved Ag and J+ for dissolved
Si. Data for Si are usable in cases of positive
identifications with concentrations being
biased slightly high. Potential negative bias
applies to Ag data although matrix spike
recovery was only 3% lower than
acceptable limit of 80%. There is a potential
negative bias that is taken into account for
data usability.
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 re-analyzed
using CLP lab.
ICP-OES Digestion: It was determined
that all parameters were not adhered
to in EPA Method 3015A.
For batch analyzed on 5/14/12, the
ICP-MS: CLP ICP-MS data were used.
Digestion: The "J" qualifier has been
applied to detections above the QL for all
ICP-OES total metal results. Data is usable
as positive identifications with estimated
concentrations.
Affected samples NEPAGW27, NEPAGW26,
-------
A-118
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
pre-digestion matrix spike for Si had
131% recovery, and the post-digestion
matrix spike had 135% recovery.
For batch analyzed on 5/15/12, pre-
digestion matrix spike for Ag had only
73% recovery.
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-OES: Total sulfur was detected
above the QL in a field blank collected
on 4/30/2012.
Impact on Data/Usability
NEPAGW10, NEPAGW14, NEPAGW01,
NEPAGW02, NEPAGW03, NEPASW03,
NEPASW04, NEPASW04dup, NEPAGW36,
NEPASW05, NEPASW06, NEPAGW09,
NEPAGW08, and NEPAGW11 were qualified
with "J+" for total Si. Data for Si are usable
in cases of positive identifications with
concentrations being biased slightly high.
Affected samples NEPAGW04, NEPAGW18,
NEPAGW13, NEPAGW20, NEPAGW20dup,
NEPAGW06, NEPAGW15, NEPASW01,
NEPAGW16, NEPAGWlSdup, NEPAGW17,
NEPAGW33, NEPAGW32, and NEPAGW29
were qualified with "J-" for total Ag
indicating a potential negative bias for the
data, although recovery was only 7% lower
than the acceptable limit of 80%. There is a
potential negative bias that is taken into
account for data usability.
ICP-OES: All samples with detected
quantities for these metals are qualified "J"
as estimated (see Appendix B). Data for B,
Ba, K, Na, Ag, Si, S, and P are usable as
positive identifications with estimated
concentrations.
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPAGW15, NEPASW01, and
NEPAGW32. Results for affected samples
were close to field blank; data is thus
unusable.
Total and Dissolved by
ICP-MS/CLP
The ICP-MS metals analyzed by the CLP
lab are total & dissolved: Al, As, Cd, Cr,
Cu, Pb, Li, Ni, Sb, Se, Th, Tl, and U.
The serial dilution in sample set SDG
MQ0021 exceeded the limits for
copper. The copper results were
greater than 50x MDL and the percent
difference with the serial dilution was
17%, which is above the limit.
For sample set SDG MQ0021, total Ni
results were not within control limits
for analysis of lab duplicate
NEPAGW03.
Affected total Cu field blanks (all), dissolved
Cu equipment blanks (all), and sample
NEPAGW06 for total Cu were qualified with
"J-". There is a potential negative bias that
is taken into account for data usability.
The "*" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPAGW03, NEPASW03,
NEPAGW13, and NEPAGW14. Positive
identifications may lack precision; data are
usable with caution.
-------
A-119
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
Dissolved and total Th and some
dissolved and total U results are
rejected due to interference check
standard problem.
For total Ni, a number of samples were
identified as having a potential low
bias during the CLP data validation.
Impact on Data/Usability
All dissolved and total Th results are
qualified with "R" as rejected and are
unusable. For dissolved and total U, see
Appendix B for samples qualified with "R"
and rejected as unusable.
See Appendix B for samples qualified with
"J-". There is a potential negative bias that
is taken into account for data usability.
Charge Balance
The calculated charge balance ranged
from 0.01 to 5.35% based on the
cations Ca, Mg, Na, K, Sr, Ba, Mn, Fe,
and Li; and the anions Cl, SO4, HCO3,
and F.
Meets project requirements.
Measured versus
calculated values of
Specific Conductance
(SPC)
The error in measured SPC versus
calculated SPC ranged from 1.0 to
11.1%
Meets project requirements.
VOC/Shaw
Environmental
The matrix spike results for 1,1-
dichloroethene and 1,1,2-
trichloroethane were significantly
outside 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.
Acrylonitrile, ethanol, and carbon
disulfide matrix spikes had low
recoveries.
All data for 1,1-dichloroethene and 1,1,2-
trichloroethane are qualified with "R" and
rejected as unusable.
The "J-" qualifier was applied to all samples
for acrylonitrile; the "J-" qualifier was
applied for ethanol to affected samples
NEPAGW14, NEPAGW16, NEPAGWlSdup,
NEPAGW17, NEPAGW29, NEPAGW32,
NEPAGW33, NEPASW01, field blanks
collected on 4/30/2012 and 5/1/2012, trip
blanks collected on 4/29/2012 and
5/1/2012, and equipment blank collected
on 4/30/2012; and the "J-" qualifier was
applied for carbon disulfide to affected
samples NEPAGW04, NEPAGW06,
NEPAGW08, NEPAGW09, NEPAGW11,
NEPAGW13, NEPAGW16, NEPAGWlSdup,
NEPAGW17 NEPAGW18, NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20dup, NEPAGW29, NEPAGW32,
NEPAGW33, NEPAGW36, NEPASW01,
NEPASW05, NEPASW06, all equipment
blanks, 5 of 7 field blanks, and 2 of 4 trip
-------
A-120
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
Impact on Data/Usability
blanks (see Appendix B). There is a
potential negative bias that is taken into
account for data usability.
Low Molecular Weight
Acids/Shaw
Environmental
Isobutyrate recovery in the matrix
spike and matrix spike duplicate was
below the acceptable range due to
matrix interference.
Formate was detected in a field blank
at the QL
The "J-" qualifier was applied to all samples
for isobutyrate. There is a potential
negative bias that is taken into account for
data usability.
Affected samples NEPAGW02, NEPAGW03,
NEPASW04 and NEPASW04dup were
qualified with "B". Values for NEPAGW03,
NEPASW04 and NEPASW04dup are near
the values of the field blank; data is thus
unusable. Value for NEPAGW02 is nearly
lOx that of field blank; data is usable with
caution.
Glycols/ EPA Region 3
Laboratory
The method for glycols was under
development.
The QAPP stated these are to be considered
screening values until 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
Sample NEPAGW36: the initial
extraction went dry. The sample was
re-extracted the next day but was 4
hours past holding time.
The field blank collected on 4/30/2012
was extracted 20 minutes past holding
time.
Sample NEPASW04 matrix spike
associated with batch 1200245 was
low for 4-nitroaniline, diphenyl amine
and high for carbazole.
The "H" qualifier was applied to the
affected sample NEPAGW36. Holding time
exceedance is considered a potential
negative bias. However, the holding time
exceedance was minor, and the data is
considered usable.
The "H" qualifier was applied to the field
blank. Holding time exceedance is
considered a potential negative bias.
However, holding time exceedance was
minor, so impact on data usability is
considered minimal.
Affected samples for nitroaniline and
diphenylamine were qualified with "J-"
indicating a potential negative bias (see
Appendix B). There were no detections for
carbazole in samples and the data for
carbazole are thus usable. For 4-
nitroaniline and diphenylamine there is a
potential negative bias that is taken into
account for data usability.
-------
A-121
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
Sample NEPAGW20 matrix spike
associated with batch 1200246 and
blank spike associated with batch
1200245 were low for adamantane,
1,3 dimethyl adamantane, and
limonene.
Sample NEPAGW16 matrix spike
associated with batch 1200247 was
low for 2-butoxyethanol, limonene,
adamantane, 1,3 dimethyl
adamantane, diphenylamine,
squalene, benzyl alcohol,
hexachloroethane, terpiniol, 2-
chloronapthalene, dibenzofuran, and
2-butoxyethanol phosphate.
Sample NEPAGW09 had a relatively
high level of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
(36.7 ng/L) which was attributed to
laboratory contamination of the
extract based on an investigation
conducted by the laboratory. The
laboratory found no corresponding
peak for this phthalate in the DRO
chromatogram.
Impact on Data/Usability
Affected samples for these compounds
were qualified with "J-" indicating a
negative bias. There is a potential negative
bias that is taken into account for data
usability.
Affected samples for these compounds
were qualified with "J-" (see Appendix B)
indicating a negative bias. There is a
potential negative bias that is taken into
account for data usability.
Data for sample NEPAGW09 for bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate is unusable.
DRO/GRO/EPA Region 8
Laboratory
DRO: A field blank collected on May 1,
2012, had a detectable concentration
equal to the QL
DRO: Matrix spike dup for NEPASW04
was below percent recovery limits with
44.6% and the surrogate recovery for
field blank collected on 4/24/12 was
low at 46.7%.
GRO: All QA/QC criteria were met.
DRO concentration in affected field sample
(NEPAGW29) was
-------
A-122
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
May 2013 Sampling E\
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 are qualified with "J" as
estimated. Data usability is unaffected.
Dissolved gases/ Shaw
Environmental
Methane contamination was observed
in some laboratory argon blanks during
analysis. In some cases, a field sample
was run directly after an argon blank
with detectable methane. The only
case of an impact of an argon blank on
a field sample was in sample set 6918
involving sample NEPAGW03.
The "B" qualifier was applied to the
methane result for affected sample
NEPAGW03 since it was below lOx argon
blank. The value for NEPAGW03 was close
to the argon blank; the data is thus
unusable.
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.
Anions/Ammonia
ORD/NRMRL-Ada
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
Dissolved Metals/
Southwest Research
Institute
Dissolved arsenic was detected above
the QL in an equipment blank collected
on 5/14/2013.
Dissolved Cu was detected above the
QL in a field blank collected on
5/15/2013 and in two equipment
blanks collected on 5/11/2013 and
5/14/2013.
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPASW01, NEPAGW15,
NEPAGW16, and NEPAGW29. Results for
affected samples were sufficiently close to
equipment blank making data unusable.
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPAGW06, NEPAGW10,
NEPAGW12, NEPAGW16, NEPAGW28, and
NEPAGW28dup. Results for affected
samples were either less than (NEPAGW06
and NEPAGW16) or sufficiently close to
equipment blank making data unusable.
Total Cu, ICP-MS: Laboratory duplicate
results for NEPAGW27 were <5x RL and
difference was greater than the
acceptance limit (=RL) with an RPD of
33.
Total Metals/Southwest
Research Institute
Total Ni, ICP-MS: Laboratory duplicate
Affected samples NEPAGW06, NEPAGW08,
NEPAGW09, NEPAGW10, NEPAGW11,
NEPAGW12, NEPAGW14, NEPAGW27,
NEPAGW27d, NEPAGW32, NEPAGW33,
NEPAGW37, NEPAGW38, and
NEPAGW38dup, NEPA Field Blank 1, NEPA
Equipment Blank 1, NEPA Equipment Blank
2, and NEPA Equipment Blank 3 were
qualified with "*" indicating potential
precision issues with the data for these
samples. Data is usable with caution.
Affected samples NEPAGW06, NEPAGW08,
-------
A-123
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
results for NEPAGW27 were <5x RL and
difference was greater than the
acceptance limit (=RL) with an RPD of
25.1.
Total V, ICP-MS: Preparation blanks in
SDG 523088 and SDG 523212 had total
V above the QL at 0.37 ug/L and
0.30 ug/L, respectively.
Total arsenic was detected above the
QL in equipment blanks collected on
5/13/2013 and 5/15/2013.
Total Cu was detected above the QL in
an equipment blank collected on
5/10/2013.
Total Mo was detected above the QL in
a field blank collected on 5/11/2013
and an equipment blank collected on
5/10/2013.
Total Ni was detected above the QL in
an equipment blank collected on
5/15/2013.
Impact on Data/Usability
NEPAGW09, NEPAGW10, NEPAGW11,
NEPAGW12, NEPAGW14, NEPAGW27,
NEPAGW27d, NEPAGW32, NEPAGW33,
NEPAGW37, NEPAGW38, and
NEPAGW38dup were qualified with a "*"
indicating potential precision issues with
the data for these samples. Data is usable
with caution.
The "B" qualifier was applied to all samples
with detections above the QL for total V
(see Appendix B). Detected quantities in
samples were all close to preparation blank
with exception of samples NEPAGW38 and
NEPAGW38dup which were about 7x the
blank. Data for samples NEPAGW38 and
NEPAGW38dup are usable with caution;
data for other affected samples are
unusable.
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPAGW01, NEPAGW03,
NEPAGW28, and NEPAGW28dup, and
NEPAGW36. Results for affected samples
were sufficiently close to equipment blank
making data unusable.
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPAGW32, NEPAGW33,
NEPAGW37, and NEPAGW38, and
NEPAGW38dup. Results for affected
samples were either less than or sufficiently
close to equipment blank making data
unusable.
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPAGW06, NEPAGW08,
NEPAGW10, and NEPAGW32, NEPAGW33
NEPAGW37, NEPAGW38, and
NEPAGW38dup. Results for affected
samples were close to equipment blank;
data are unusable.
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPAGW26 and NEPAGW28dup.
The results were close to lOx the
equipment blank; the data is considered
usable with caution.
-------
A-124
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
Total Pb was detected above the QL in
two equipment blanks collected on
5/10/2013 and 5/14/2013.
Total Zn was detected above the QL in
a field blank collected on 5/11/2013.
Impact on Data/Usability
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPASW01, NEPAGW15,
NEPAGW29, NEPAGW32, NEPAGW37,
NEPAGW38, and NEPAGW38dup. Results
for affected samples were sufficiently close
to equipment blank making data unusable.
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPAGW06, NEPAGW10, and
NEPAGW12. Results for NEPAGW06 and
NEPAGW10 were sufficiently close to
equipment blank making data unusable.
NEPAGW12 is ~5x the blank value and
should be used with caution.
Charge Balance
The calculated charge balance ranged
from 0.03 to 8.11% based on the
cations Ca, Mg, Na, K, Sr, Ba, Mn, Fe,
and Li; and the anions Cl, SO4, HCO3,
and F.
Meets project requirements.
Measured versus
calculated values of
Specific Conductance
(SPC)
The error in measured SPC versus
calculated SPC ranged from 0.2 to 8.2%
Meets project requirements.
VOC/ Southwest
Research Institute
All QA/QC criteria were met.
Meets project requirements.
Low Molecular Weight
Acids/Shaw
Environmental
Isobutyrate recovery in the matrix
spike and matrix spike duplicate was
below the acceptable range due to
matrix interference.
The "J-" qualifier was applied to all
isobutyrate samples. There is a potential
negative bias that is taken into account for
data usability.
The method for glycols was under
development.
Glycols/EPA Region 3
The QAPP stated these are to be considered
screening values until 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
Equipment blank 5 had low internal
standard responses for all but one
compound (1,4-dichlorobenzene). All
surrogates were well below the
acceptable range. The note on the raw
data sheet noted that the sample had
"dried up during extraction".
Bis-2(ethylhexyl) phthalate was
detected in a method blank (batch
1300167) above the QL at 2.82 ug/L
All data for Equipment blank 5 were
qualified with "R" and rejected as unusable.
The "B" qualifier was applied to affected
samples NEPAGW14, field blanks collected
on 5/9/2013 and 5/10/2013, and an
equipment blank collected on 5/9/2013.
-------
A-125
Table A26 Data Usability Summary1
Analysis/Lab
Summary of QA/QC Results
Low matrix spike recoveries were
observed as follows: MSD1 (batch
1300167): low recovery 1,3 dimethyl
adamantine; MSI (batch 1300169):
low recovery adamantine; MSD1
(batch 1300169): low recovery
limonene.
Impact on Data/Usability
Data from these samples are close to
method blank result making data unusable.
"J-"qualifiers were applied to affected
samples indicating a negative bias. There is
a potential negative that is taken into
account for data usability.
DRO: Field blanks collected 5/14 and
5/15/13 and all six equipment blanks
had detections above the QL (20 ug/L).
DRO/GRO/EPA Region 8
Laboratory
GRO: All QA/QC criteria were met.
DRO was detected above QL in only one
sample (NEPASW01); a "B" qualifier was
applied to this sample. The detections in
the equipment blanks and field blanks are
attributed to peristaltic pump tubing used
to facilitate collection of the blanks.
Although this tubing was not used for
collection of sample NEPASW01, the DRO
value for NEPASW01 is considered unusable
as a precaution.
GRO: Meets project requirements.
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.
All laboratory QA/QC criteria were
met.
Field and equipment blanks were not
collected.
ALS Radionuclides
Meets project requirements.
On each day samples were collected,
samples from at least two sampling
locations showed Ra-226, Ra-228, gross
alpha, and gross beta values below RLs.
These samples with values
-------
A-126
Table A27 Field
for YSI Electrode Measurements.
Parameter
Electrode Reading
Acceptance Range Performance Evaluation
October/November 2011
October 25, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7768
226.1
6.94
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 25, 2011 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7664
223.6
7.00
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 25, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7960
225.9
6.97
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 26, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7687
229.8
6.97
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 26, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7702
232.7
7.04
7600-7970
229-281
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 27, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7695
237.3
6.96
7600-7970
229-261
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 27, 2011 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7623
238.3
6.97
7600-7950
238-268
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 27, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7807
246.9
6.92
7600-7950
238-268
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 28, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7634
231.3
6.97
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 28, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7687
247.5
7.05
7600-7950
238-268
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
-------
A-127
Table A27 Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements.
Parameter Electrode Reading Acceptance Range Performance Evaluation
October 29, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7753
232.7
6.97
7630-8010
212-242
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 29, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7828
238.5
7.00
7600-7950
238-268
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 31, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7961
226.5
6.96
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
October 31, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7939
261.1
7.06
7600-7950
236-268
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
November 1, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7828
242.6
6.96
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
November 1, 2011 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7870
249.9
6.98
7600-7970
229-261
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
November 1, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7839
237.4
6.99
7600-7970
229-261
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
November 2, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7807
229.4
6.97
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
November 2, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7964
254.6
7.00
7600-7970
229-261
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Novembers, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7735
234.1
6.96
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
-------
A-128
Table A27 Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements.
Parameter Electrode Reading Acceptance Range Performance Evaluation
November 3, 2011 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7863
241.0
7.01
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
November 4, 2011 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7861
214.7
6.98
7630-8010
212-242
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April/May 2012
April 24, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7728
258.9
7.07
7600-7950
238-268
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 24, 2012 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7672
252.6
7.07
7600-7950
238-268
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 24, 2012 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7724
252.9
7.08
7600-7950
238-268
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 25, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7729
245.0
7.03
7600-7970
229-261
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 25, 2012 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7797
246.3
7.00
7600-7970
229-261
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 26, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7696
234.9
6.99
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 26, 2012 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
pH
7770
237.1
7.17
7600-7950
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 26, 2012 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7757
232.8
7.03
7600-7950
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
-------
A-129
Table A27 Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements.
Parameter Electrode Reading Acceptance Range Performance Evaluation
April 27, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7684
234.1
6.96
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 27, 2012 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7894
242.7
6.98
7600-7970
229-261
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 27, 2012 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7644
241.5
6.96
7600-7950
238-268
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 28, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7696
235.1
6.98
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 28, 2012 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7735
240.4
7.01
7600-7970
229-261
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 28, 2012 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7691
239.1
7.00
7600-7970
229-261
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 30, 2012 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7876
235.8
6.97
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 30, 2012 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7808
236.8
7.01
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
April 30, 2012 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7810
236.1
6.94
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 1,2012 initial
7790
235.5
6.99
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
-------
A-130
Table A27 Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements.
May 1, 2012 end-of-day
May 9, 2013 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
1405
220.2
7.07
1272-1554
197-241
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 9, 2013 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7936
230.8
7.01
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 9, 2013 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7925
227.1
7.02
7630-8010
212-242
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 10, 2013 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7803
225.6
7.02
7630-8010
212-242
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 10, 2013 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7980
225.7
7.03
7630-8010
212-242
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 10, 2013 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7933
223.9
6.98
7630-8010
212-242
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 11, 2013 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7764
223.4
7.01
7630-8010
212-242
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 11, 2013 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7833
228.1
6.96
7630-8010
212-242
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 11, 2013 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7790
226.0
7.00
7630-8010
212-242
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
-------
A-131
Table A27 Field QC Data for YSI Electrode Measurements.
Parameter Electrode Reading Acceptance Range Performance Evaluation
May 13, 2013 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7808
228.6
7.00
7630-8010
212-242
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 13, 2013 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7952
232.7
7.01
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 13, 2013 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7895
235.6
7.00
7600-7970
229-261
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 14, 2013 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7768
229.5
6.98
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 14, 2013 mid-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7853
229.1
7.05
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 14, 2013 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7840
232.7
7.00
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 15, 2013 initial
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7813
227.1
7.02
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
May 15, 2013 end-of-day
Specific Conductance
ORP
PH
7715
227.1
7.02
7630-7970
222-252
6.8-7.2
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
-------
A-132
Table A28 Data Qualifiers and Data Descriptors
Qualifier
Definition
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 in the
sample (due either to the quality of the data generated because certain quality control criteria were not met, or the
concentration of the analyte was below the QL).
J+
J-
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 and/or
meet quality control criteria. Sample results are not reported. The analyte may or may not be present in the sample.
Data Descriptors
Descriptor
NA
Definition
Not Applicable (See QAPP)
NR
Not Reported by Laboratory or Field Sampling Team
ND
Not Detected
NS
Not Sampled
-------
Table A29 Tentatively Identified Compounds f TICs) for SVOCs
A-133
Sample
NEPASW01-1011
Compound (CAS Number)
ctober 2011 Sampling Even
l-ethyl-2-methyl-Benzene (CAS# 611-14-3)
1,2,3-trimethyl-Benzene (CAS# 526-73-8)
1,3,5-trimethyl-Benzene (CAS# 108-67-8)
n-Hexadecanoic acid (CAS# 57-10-3)
(Z)- 9-Tricosene (CAS#27519-02-4)
Cholesterol (CAS# 57-88-5)
0.39
0.93
0.28
0.39
0.29
0.39
NEPASWOld-1011
l-ethyl-2-methyl-Benzene (CAS# 611-14-3)
1,2,3-trimethyl-Benzene (CAS# 526-73-8)
1,3,5-trimethyl-Benzene (CAS# 108-67-8)
0.42
1.02
0.31
NEPAGW02-1011
Oxacycloheptadecan-2-one (CAS# 1000309-04-5)
Bisphenol A (CAS# 80-05-7)
0.78
0.41
NEPAGW02d-1011
Oxacycloheptadecan-2-one (CAS# 1000309-04-5)
0.39
NEPASW02-1111
3-Methyl-2-cyclohexenone (CAS# 1193-18-6)
Phorone (CAS#504-20-1)
2.74
1.66
NEPAGW04-1011
3,4-dimethyl-2-pentene (CAS# 4914-91-4)
2-ethyl-l-Hexanol (CAS# 95-16-9)
Oxacycloheptadecan-2-one (CAS# 1000309-04-5)
Sulfur (CAS# 13798-23-7)
p-tert-Octylphenol (CAS# 140-66-9)
2-(methylthio)benzothiazol(CAS#615-22-5)
N-butyl-Benzenesulfonamide (CAS# 3622-84-2)
3.76
0.51
0.25
0.38
0.25
0.29
0.36
NEPAGW05-1011
Oxacycloheptadecan-2-one (CAS# 1000309-04-5)
0.36
NEPAGW06-1011
Oxacycloheptadecan-2-one (CAS# 1000309-04-5)
0.62
NEPAGW06d-1011
Oxacycloheptadecan-2-one (CAS# 1000309-04-5)
0.42
NEPAGW08-1011
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
0.31
NEPAGW09-1011
N,N'-Diphenyl-p-phenylenediamine (CAS# 74-31-7)
0.33
NEPAGW10-1011
Butanoic acid (CAS# 107-92-6)
0.31
NEPAGW13-1011
Tributyl acetylcitrate (CAS# 77-90-7)
0.29
NEPAGW14-1011
Oxacycloheptadecan-2-one (CAS# 1000309-04-5)
Mono-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (CAS# 4376-20-9)
0.60
0.31
NEPAGW16-1011
Sulfur (CAS# 13798-23-7)
1.21
NEPAGW17-1011
N-butyl-Benzenesulfonamide (CAS# 3622-84-2)
Diethyl hexyl adipate (CAS# 103-23-1)
0.34
0.27
NEPAGW18-1011
Hexadecanoic acid butyl ester (CAS# 111-06-8)
Octadecanoic acid butyl ester (CAS# 123-95-5)
Heptadecane (CAS# 629-78-7)
Pentacosane (CAS# 629-99-2)
Docosane (CAS# 629-97-0)
0.48
1.34
0.48
0.48
0.50
-------
A-134
Table A29 Tentatively Identified Compounds f TICs) for SVOCs
Sample
NEPAGW23-1111
NEPAGW25-1111
NEPAGW25d-llll
NEPAGW29-1111
NEPAGW31-1111
NFPAfnW33-1 111
1110018-01 (Field Blank)
1110018-02 (Field Blank)
1110018-13 (Field Blank)
111OO1Q 1/1 (Eic*\r\ D|-^nL'\
iiiuuio-i^ ^rieia bianKj
1110018-23 (Field Blank)
1110018-30 (Field Blank)
1110018-31 (Equipment
Blank)
1110018-36 (Field Blank)
1110018-42 (Field Blank)
Compound (CAS Number)
9-octyl-Heptadecane (CAS# 7225-64-1)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
Hexadecanoic acid butyl ester (CAS# 111-06-8)
Octadecanoic acid butyl ester (CAS# 123-95-5)
9-octyl-Heptadecane (CAS# 7225-64-1)
Eicosane (CAS#112-95-8)
Hexatriacontane (CAS#630-06-8)
Pentacosane (CAS# 629-99-2)
Tetratriacontane (CAS# 14167-59-0)
Hexadecanoic acid butyl ester (CAS# 111-06-8)
Octadecanoic acid butyl ester (CAS# 123-95-5)
Triacontane (CAS#638-68-6)
Heneicosane (CAS# 629-94-7)
Docosane (CAS# 629-97-0)
Hexadecanoic acid butyl ester (CAS# 111-06-8)
Octadecanoic acid butyl ester (CAS# 123-95-5)
Triacontane (CAS#638-68-6)
Heneicosane (CAS# 629-94-7)
Docosane (CAS# 629-97-0)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
l-(2-methyl-l-cyclopentenyl)ethanone(CAS#3168-90-9)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
Decanal (CAS# 112-31-2)
Diisobutyl phthalate (CAS#84-69-5)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
N,N'-Diphenyl-p-phenylenediamine (CAS# 74-31-7)
2-Monostearin (CAS# 621-61-4)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
N,N'-Diphenyl-p-phenylenediamine (CAS# 74-31-7)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Nonanone (CAS#821-55-6)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
Hexadecanoic acid butyl ester (CAS# 111-06-8)
Estimated
Concentration
(ug/L)
0.30
2.59
1.58
1.12
0.35
0.37
0.41
0.29
0.30
2.03
1.32
0.34
0.35
0.35
1.90
1.30
0.39
0.41
0.41
4.67
0.34
2.39
0.38
0.29
1.18
0.57
3.29
1.06
1.06
1.17
0.35
0.96
1.02
0.73
1.10
0.45
1.82
0.34
-------
Table A29 Tentatively Identified Compounds f TICs) for SVOCs
A-135
Sample
Compound (CAS Number)
Octadecanoic acid butyl ester (CAS# 123-95-5)
Pentacosane (CAS# 629-99-2)
Docosane (CAS# 629-97-0)
Heneicosane (CAS# 629-94-7)
Tetratriacontane (CAS# 14167-59-0)
Hexatriacontane (CAS#630-06-8)
0.99
0.39
0.43
0.42
0.26
0.27
1110018-48 (Field Blank)
2-Nonanone (CAS#821-55-6)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
0.42
1.73
1110018-49 (Field Blank)
NEPAGW01-0412
2-Nonanone (CAS#821-55-6)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
April/May 2012 Sampling Event
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
0.42
1.46
0.56
NEPAGW02-0412
Propylene glycol (CAS# 57-55-6)
2.79
NEPASW03-0412
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
Tetradecanoic acid (CAS# 544-63-8)
n-Hexadecanoic acid (CAS# 57-10-3)
Aspidoalbine (CAS# 2122-26-1)
Stigmasterol (CAS# 83-48-7)
3.00
0.70
1.41
0.74
2.04
NEPAGW04-0412
NEPASW04-0412
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
Stigmasterol (CAS# 83-48-7)
6.87
2.42
1.51
NEPASW04D-0412
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
Stigmasterol (CAS# 83-48-7)
1.08
1.53
NEPASW05-0412
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
4.16
NEPASW06-0412
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
3.81
NEPAGW08-0412
NEPAGW09-0412
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
Docosane (CAS# 629-97-0)
Pentacosane (CAS# 629-94-7)
Heneicosane (CAS# 629-94-7)
Tetracosane (CAS# 646-31-1)
Hexadecane (CAS# 544-76-3)
0.46
10.63
3.81
0.63
0.54
0.54
0.52
1.01
NEPAGW10-0412
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
5.00
NEPAGW11-0412
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
3.65
NEPAGW15-0412
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
6.46
NEPAGW16-0412
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
4.36
NEPAGW18-0412
Caprolactam (CAS# 105-60-2)
0.80
NEPAGW26-0412
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
2.83
-------
A-136
Table A29 Tentatively Identified Compounds f TICs) for SVOCs
Estimated
Concentration
Sample Compound (CAS Number) (ug/L)
NEPAGW27-0412
NWPAGW29-0512
NEPAGW33-0412
NEPAGW36-0412
Field Blank 1-0412
Field Blank 2-0412
Field Blank 3-0412
Equipment Blank 3-0412
Field Blank 4-0412
Field Blank 5-0412
Field Blank 6-0412
Field Blank 7-0412
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 10544-50-0)
2-Nonanone (CAS# 821-55-6)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Nonanone (CAS# 821-55-6)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
Nonylphenol (CAS# 25154-52-3)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 112-12-9)
2-Nonanone (CAS# 821-55-6)
0.67
5.00
2.62
1.55
0.57
4.67
1.29
0.88
4.80
0.87
4.22
1.66
1.31
1.12
1.68
0.80
1.18
4.30
0.95
May 2013 Sampling Event
NEPASW01-0513
NEPAGW02-0513
NEPAGW08-0513
NEPAGW11-0513
NEPAGW14-0513
NEPAGW15-0513
NEPAGW16-0513
NEPAGW27-0513 DUP
NEPAGW29-0513
NEPAGW36-0513
NEPA Equipment Blank
1-0513
NEPA Field Blank 2-0513
NEPA Equipment Blank
2-0513
Benzene, l-ethyl-2-methyl- (02) (CAS# 000611-14-3)
Benzene, 1,2,3-trimethyl- (01) (CAS# 000526-73-8)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 010544-50-0)
Phenol, 4,4'-(l-methylethyl... (CAS# 000080-05-7)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 010544-50-0)
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic aci... (CAS# 000084-69-5)
Phthalic acid, decyl isobut... (CAS# 1000308-94-2)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 010544-50-0)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 010544-50-0)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 010544-50-0)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 010544-50-0)
n-Hexadecanoic acid (CAS# 000057-10-3)
Cyclic octaatomic sulfur (CAS# 010544-50-0)
2-Dodecanone (CAS# 006175-49-1)
Benzoic acid, 2,4-dichloro- (CAS# 000050-84-0)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 000112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 000112-12-9)
3,5-di-tert-Butyl-4-hydroxy... (CAS# 001620-98-0)
Benzoic acid, 2,4-dichloro- (CAS# 000050-84-0)
1.07
2.18
0.600
0.530
2.44
0.550
0.520
0.510
6.82
0.880
3.38
0.540
5.11
1.17
0.910
1.04
0.620
0.520
3.71
-------
A-137
Table A29 Tentatively Identified Compounds f TICs) for SVOCs
Estimated
Concentration
Sample Compound (CAS Number) (ug/L)
NEPA Field Blank 3-0513
NEPA Equipment Blank
3-0513
NEPA Equipment Blank
3-0513
NEPA Field Blank 4-0513
NEPA Equipment Blank
4-0513
NEPA Equipment Blank
5-0513
NEPA Field Blank 5-0513
NEPA Field Blank 6-0513
N EPA Equipment Blank
6-0513
2-Undecanone (CAS# 000112-12-9)
3,5-di-tert-Butyl-4-hydroxy... (CAS# 001620-98-0)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 000112-12-9)
Benzoic acid, 2,4-dichloro- (CAS# 000050-84-0)
3,5-di-tert-Butyl-4-hydroxy... (CAS# 001620-98-0)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 000112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 000112-12-9)
Benzoic acid, 2,4-dichloro- (CAS# 000050-84-0)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 000112-12-9)
Benzoic acid, 2,4-dichloro- (CAS# 000050-84-0)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 000112-12-9)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 000112-12-9)
Benzoic acid, 2,4-dichloro- (CAS# 000050-84-0)
2-Undecanone (CAS# 000112-12-9)
n-Hexadecanoic acid (CAS# 000057-10-3)
Dodecanoic acid (CAS# 000143-07-7)
Octadecanoic acid (CAS# 000057-11-4)
0.690
0.550
0.570
21.8
0.630
0.630
2.33
11.4
1.11
9.29
2.88
3.19
8.57
2.55
1.71
0.500
1.59
-------
Appendix B Sample Results, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix B
Sample Results
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/088
B-l
-------
Appendix B Sample Results, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Table of Contents
Tables
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Northeastern Pennsylvania) B-6
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania) B-16
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania) B-26
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania) B-56
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols,
and Low Molecular Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania) B-80
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds
(Northeastern Pennsylvania) B-92
Table B-7 Sample Results -Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters
(Northeastern Pennsylvania) B-131
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania) B-141
B-2
-------
B-3
Appendix B. Sample Results. Legend (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Data Qualifiers
< The analyte concentration is less than the quantitation limit (QL).
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
U
J
J+
J-
B
H
*
R
Notes
Table B-l
Table B-2
Table B-3
Table B-4
Table B-5
Table B-6
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. Bromide data rejected. High chloride interference.
Round 2 - Br was initially analyzed using RSKSOP-276, Rev. 4 but was rejected due to chloride
interference problems. Br data shown is from re-analysis of samples using RSKSOP-288, Rev.3.
R. Data rejected for several metals. Potential spectral (mass or emission) interference or interference check sample problem reported by laboratory.
R. Data rejected for Rounds 1 and 2.1,1,2-trichloroethane is subject to alkaline hydrolysis to 1,1-dichloroethene. This reaction could be supported by the sample preservative
(trisodium phosphate).
R. Acetate data rejected in Round 1. Acetate contamination in samples and blanks is due to the sample preservative (trisodium phosphate).
The method used for glycol analysis is under development.
Round 2 -1 Suspected laboratory contamination (common laboratory contaminant) for bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, in sample NEPAGW09.
-------
B-4
Appendix B. Sample Results - Legend (Bradford 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
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 (Northeastern 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
K
Li
Mg
Mn
Mo
Na
Ni
P
Pb
Rb
S
Sb
Potassium
Lithium
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Nickel
Phosphorus
Lead
Rubidium
Sulfur
Antimony
Se
Si
Sr
Th
Ti
Tl
U
V
Zn
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 (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
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
12.82
0.633
411
0.02
8.32
-124
1.00
245
0.1J
0.03 J
11.80
0.606
394
0.03
8.50
-145
0.44
244
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
11.18
0.597
387
0.10
8.26
-153
0.17
241
<0.03 U
0.03 J
10.78
0.515
334
0.53
7.97
-149
1.88
239
0.03 J
0.06 J
10.16
0.507
330
0.08
8.15
-112
3.26
243
0.22J
0.02 J
10.47
0.501
326
0.10
8.02
-147
2.38
250
0.15 J
0.11 J
12.09
2.477
1611
0.30
6.81
-54
2.37
379
0.7 J
<0.02 U
10.55
2.573
1673
0.97
6.89
-13
1.22
382
0.4 J
<0.02 U
11.11
2.512
1633
0.39
6.89
-11
1.05
378
0.95 J
<0.02 U
-------
B-7
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW04 GW04 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
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
11.99
1.605
1043
1.28
7.74
-147
22.5
204
0.46 J
0.17J
9.96
1.514
983
0.06
7.67
-127
8.73
191
0.27 J
0.19 J
11.14
0.303
197
1.37
7.47
91
2.32
156
0.03 J
<0.02 U
10.64
0.352
229
0.08
7.06
83
0.88
126
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
10.65
0.352
229
0.16
7.15
130
0.28
122
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
11.61
0.347
226
0.10
6.91
165
0.95
125
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
12.92
0.329
214
5.09
6.99
94
6.62
139
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
-------
B-8
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
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
10.08
1.471
956
0.50
8.50
4
10.2
171
0.05 J
0.08 J
10.16
1.586
1031
0.03
8.69
-191
28.4
165
0.05 J
0.14J
10.99
1.733
1126
0.08
8.53
-200
0.73
172
0.31J
0.07 J
10.30
0.398
259
0.17
7.50
59
1.04
189
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
10.72
0.399
260
0.07
7.52
86
0.81
182
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
12.01
0.393
255
7.97
7.43
204
0.55
186
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
10.36
0.121
79
5.35
6.14
125
17.6
56
0.04 J
0.04 J
10.59
0.106
69
7.70
6.40
154
4.07
38
0.04 J
<0.02 U
11.35
0.137
89
7.32
6.12
303
21.9
41
0.05 J
0.04 J
-------
B-9
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW11 GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
Unit 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
10.51
0.453
294
1.24
8.36
228
0.79
219
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
10.84
0.505
329
0.24
8.72
88
0.88
245
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
12.23
0.487
316
0.09
8.57
13
0.61
250
0.07 J
0.07 J
11.56
0.332
216
6.62
7.20
229
1.85
151
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
13.12
0.347
225
4.99
7.34
208
1.48
161
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
9.54
0.335
218
5.60
7.64
145
8.52
131
0.04 J
0.06 J
9.46
0.342
222
0.05
7.37
157
42.0
121
0.03 J
0.1 J
-------
B-10
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15 GW16 GW16 GW16
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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
10.62
0.155
101
6.23
6.52
159
11.2
55
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
10.80
0.134
87
6.42
6.52
186
4.65
51
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
15.66
0.158
103
8.80
6.68
252
21.8
66
<0.03 U
0.05 J
10.95
0.308
200
0.06
7.83
331
8.51
150
0.07 J
0.02 J
10.43
0.310
201
0.08
7.70
-69
1.53
135
0.04 J
<0.02 U
11.19
0.303
197
0.12
7.81
-62
3.52
164
0.06 J
0.02 J
9.41
0.510
332
0.07
7.95
-62
3.90
157
0.1 J
0.2 J
10.19
0.488
317
0.07
7.92
-125
2.85
160
0.16 J
0.25 J
10.56
0.508
330
0.10
7.95
-137
2.09
161
0.14 J
0.26 J
-------
B-ll
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18 GW19 GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12 10/31/11 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1
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
9.74
1.934
1257
0.13
8.03
-108
0.35
126
0.24J
0.03 J
10.19
1.941
1262
0.04
7.82
-137
1.15
140
0.24 J
0.02 J
10.08
0.323
210
0.29
7.75
420
6.70
148
<0.03 U
0.03 J
9.23
0.314
204
0.09
7.77
170
1.79
142
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
10.13
0.268
174
4.37
6.55
426
0.46
70
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
9.56
0.324
210
0.03
7.71
327
0.95
139
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
9.22
0.316
205
0.07
7.77
173
6.01
136
0.03 J
<0.02 U
11.36
0.163
106
4.32
7.68
405
4.61
68
<0.03 U
0.02 J
10.42
0.346
225
0.06
8.37
27
3.51
110
0.12 J
0.07 J
-------
B-12
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW23 GW24 GW25 GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27
Sample Date 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/2/11 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13
Unit Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 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
11.47
0.298
194
0.10
7.97
22
4.32
123
0.07 J
0.08 J
11.75
0.257
168
2.47
7.17
158
>800
125
0.03 J
0.14J
11.28
0.537
349
0.17
7.41
450
0.37
253
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
11.23
0.610
396
0.28
7.28
111
0.40
301
0.38 J
0.03 J
10.57
0.592
385
0.15
7.36
-49
0.24
305
0.41 J
<0.02 U
12.02
0.608
395
0.34
7.30
-38
0.40
319
0.43 J
0.04 J
10.98
0.548
356
0.14
8.02
143
0.80
284
0.08 J
0.09 J
10.50
0.534
347
0.12
7.96
-98
0.65
289
0.09 J
0.08 J
12.71
0.532
346
0.18
7.80
-23
2.61
286
<0.03 U
0.08 J
-------
B-13
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample GW28 GW28 GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/15/13 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11
Round 1
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
10.44
0.411
267
1.18
7.52
411
0.48
191
0.07 J
<0.02 U
10.86
0.407
265
1.29
7.42
273
0.38
188
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
11.02
0.488
317
0.06
7.39
160
2.44
224
0.41 J
0.1J
11.36
0.483
314
0.19
7.26
-54
1.26
218
0.22 J
0.05 J
11.39
0.474
308
0.14
7.40
11
0.83
220
<0.03 U
0.02 J
11.19
0.520
338
0.06
7.28
195
0.25
258
0.03 J
<0.02 U
10.61
0.254
165
3.88
6.98
268
>800
116
<0.03 U
0.8 J
-------
B-14
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW32 GW32 GW32 GW33 GW33 GW33 GW36 GW36 GW37
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13
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
11.98
0.311
202
0.50
7.34
220
6.14
129
0.07 J
0.02 J
11.94
0.318
207
0.90
7.29
55
27.2
126
0.03 J
0.05 J
11.67
0.305
198
0.92
7.20
164
13.1
135
0.05 J
0.03 J
9.84
0.331
215
0.03
7.95
137
0.37
123
0.08 J
<0.02 U
10.34
0.324
211
0.05
7.75
-48
0.12
113
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
10.67
0.325
211
0.06
7.89
-39
0.25
121
0.03 J
<0.02 U
10.54
0.569
370
0.46
7.20
15
1.67
241
0.16 J
<0.02 U
10.63
0.564
366
0.14
7.04
20
1.13
252
0.17 J
<0.02 U
10.47
0.351
228
0.20
6.91
64
1.71
111
0.08 J
<0.02 U
-------
B-15
Table B-l Sample Results - Field Parameters (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW38 SW01 SW01 SW01 SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 5/10/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Unit Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 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
10.22
0.297
193
0.13
7.91
-134
78.0
154
0.07 J
0.11J
15.34
0.411
267
0.60
7.22
331
0.92
202
0.08 J
<0.02 U
10.39
0.324
211
2.71
7.38
107
1.30
156
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
15.84
0.423
275
0.13
7.24
-66
0.65
208
0.64 J
0.04 J
12.72
0.090
59
4.09
5.85
396
1.00
22
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
10.36
0.867
563
9.18
7.57
117
3.62
21
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
13.13
0.798
529
9.03
7.34
142
2.98
25
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
8.69
0.145
95
12.67
8.04
157
4.68
41
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
9.94
0.144
94
12.16
8.43
181
5.11
39
<0.03 U
<0.02 U
-------
B-16
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
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
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
4.19
0.25
56.4
<0.10U
0.87
<1.00U
53.1
<1.00U
0.32
4.13
0.33
57.3
<0.05 U
0.94
<1.00 U, H
47.2
<1.00 U
0.38
0.34
0.42
57.2
0.01 J
0.82
0.56 J
51.0
<1.00U
0.41
0.67
<0.25 U
56.5
<0.10 U
0.94
<1.00 U
23.8
0.14J
0.18 J
4.02
0.61
57.8
<0.05 U
0.91
0.18 H
26.3
1.10
0.23
2.02
0.28
58.4
0.03 J
0.83
0.54 J
18.9
<1.00 U
0.21
3.23
0.46
97.2
<0.10U
0.66
<1.00 U
14.0
1200
<0.20 U
3.67
0.58
103
<0.05 U
0.48
<1.00 U, H
23.5
1260
<0.20 U
0.86
0.55
94.5
<0.10U
0.50
<1.00 U
20.7
1230
<0.20 U
-------
B-17
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW04 GW04 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
4.77
0.48
48.0
<0.10 U
1.32
R
381
1.66
0.26
3.86
0.42
47.0
<0.05 U
1.42
1.88 H
344
1.50
0.30
6.52
0.25 B
33.4
0.62
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
3.88
8.90
0.07 J
1.83
0.31 B
31.8
2.74
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
19.1
15.0
<0.20 U
1.31
0.34
32.7
2.81
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
18.6
13.2
0.08 J
1.94
<0.25 U
32.4
2.49
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
16.7
13.5
0.09 J
2.57
0.62 B
34.3
3.24
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
6.97
15.7
0.05 J
-------
B-18
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
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
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
5.28
0.45
37.6
<0.10 U
0.52
R
335
3.62
0.44
4.72
0.62
38.4
<0.05 U
0.62
2.32 H
374
<1.00 U
0.40
0.03
<0.25 U
36.6
<0.10 U
0.64
2.09
440
<1.00U
0.45
1.63
<0.25 U
45.7
<0.10 U
0.01 J
<1.00 U
3.95
16.9
0.09 J
0.31
<0.25 U
47.0
<0.05 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
3.67
16.4
0.10 J
0.12
0.30
47.9
0.12
0.012 J
<1.00 U
3.80
17.2
0.16 J
10.2
0.99
19.8
0.41
<0.10 U
1.34
1.02
13.3
<0.20 U
2.53
1.16
15.5
0.95
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
0.87 J
11.5
0.05 J
8.11
0.81
19.1
0.70
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
1.39
13.3
<0.20 U
-------
B-19
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW11 GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
2.22
<0.25 U
51.1
<0.10 U
0.04 J
<1.00 U
10.2
10.9
0.51
2.42
<0.25 U
57.1
<0.05 U
0.16
<1.00 U, H
12.5
8.29
0.57
1.31
<0.25 U
56.9
<0.10 U
0.20
<1.00 U
12.0
8.13
0.50
1.21
1.08
38.0
1.26
<0.10 U
0.14J
7.20
10.5
<0.20 U
0.09
0.70
39.1
1.46
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
7.32
12.5
0.05 J
3.57
<0.25 U
30.3
0.13
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
23.4
11.2
0.11 J
2.06
0.53
31.2
0.08
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
22.3
11.1
0.07 J
-------
B-20
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15 GW16 GW16 GW16
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
3.91
0.83
21.8
0.26
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
1.04
13.6
0.03 J
0.93
0.85
18.2
0.52
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
1.19
12.2
0.07 J
0.68
0.64
19.9
0.29
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
1.01
13.6
0.10 J
3.25
<0.25 U
35.1
<0.10 U
0.02 J
<1.00 U
2.35
10.7
0.03 J
0.43
<0.25 U
36.1
<0.05 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
1.16
9.82
0.12 J
4.25
<0.25 U
36.6
0.02 J
0.06 J
<1.00 U
1.12
9.40
0.15 J
2.17
<0.25 U
36.6
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
65.8
0.39 J
0.03 J
4.00
<0.25 U
37.5
<0.05 U
<0.10 U
0.40 H
53.2
1.07
0.08 J
0.40
0.25
37.7
<0.10 U
0.05 J
0.47 J
64.7
<1.00 U
0.09 J
-------
B-21
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18 GW19 GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12 10/31/11 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
5.05
<0.25 U
28.7
<0.10 U
0.19
R
525
3.33
<0.20 U
3.21
<0.25 U
29.9
<0.05 U
0.19
4.70 H
495
0.77 J
<0.20 U
5.91
0.28
32.8
0.10
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
12.4
8.20
0.14J
5.35
<0.25 U
33.1
0.06
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
11.7
8.02
0.20
1.22
0.33
24.7
0.79
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
24.7
14.8
0.04 J
3.86
<0.25 U
32.8
0.12
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
12.5
8.06
0.03 J
2.96
<0.25 U
34.0
0.07
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
9.78
7.41
0.12 J
4.93
<0.25 U
15.1
0.26
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
1.01
13.4
<0.20 U
15.6
<0.25 U
24.6
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
R
132
<1.00 U
<0.20 U
-------
B-22
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW23 GW24 GW25 GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27
Sample Date 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/2/11 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13
Unit Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
2.62
<0.25 U
28.7
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
18.2
2.55
<0.20 U
8.92
<0.25 U
30.5
0.10
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
9.79
12.3
0.06 J
7.77
0.29
55.5
1.09
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
8.86
17.6
0.04 J
1.56
0.28
79.1
<0.10 U
0.03 J
<1.00 U
0.83 J
26.0
<0.20 U
3.39
0.33
79.6
<0.05 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
0.73 J
26.0
0.12 J
0.71
<0.25 U
82.0
<0.10 U
0.06 J
<1.00 U
0.75 J
26.7
0.12 J
5.31
<0.25 U
66.6
<0.10 U
0.11
<1.00 U
3.66
10.7
0.52
4.12
<0.25 U
67.7
<0.05 U
0.14
<1.00 U, H
3.54
11.2
0.62
0.95
<0.25 U
66.6
<0.10 U
0.13
<1.00 U
3.60
10.0
0.66
-------
B-23
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample GW28 GW28 GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/15/13 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11
Round 1
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
5.06
<0.25 U
44.6
0.90
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
7.31
20.8
<0.20 U
1.51
<0.25 U
45.3
0.92
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
6.92
20.1
0.14J
4.92
<0.25 U
54.6
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
1.13
39.6
0.10 J
3.29
0.25 B
54.9
<0.05 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
1.21
40.1
0.16 J
0.08
<0.25 U
54.6
0.01 J
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
1.50
40.3
0.20
1.92
0.28
65.6
0.12
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
2.04
21.4
<0.20 U
2.70
0.77
30.6
<0.10 U
0.36
<1.00 U
5.33
11.7
<0.20 U
-------
B-24
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW32 GW32 GW32 GW33 GW33 GW33 GW36 GW36 GW37
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13
Round 3
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
0.91
<0.25 U
32.6
2.11
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
7.45
9.59
<0.20 U
2.10
0.29
32.3
1.75
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
8.50
8.62
0.13 J
0.63
<0.25 U
32.1
1.67
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
9.06
8.92
0.11J
3.98
<0.25 U
28.9
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
29.4
<1.00 U
<0.20 U
1.56
0.35
28.8
<0.05 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
26.1
<1.00 U
0.11J
0.04
0.27
28.9
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
0.19 J
28.7
<1.00 U
0.16 J
1.11
0.63 B
62.8
<0.05 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
7.32
49.0
0.10 J
1.55
0.50
64.2
<0.10 U
0.09 J
<1.00 U
7.46
47.2
0.12 J
2.44
0.54
30.9
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
28.1
14.2
0.17 J
-------
B-25
Table B-2 Sample Results - Anions and Ammonia (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW38 SW01 SW01 SW01 SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 5/10/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Unit Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2
Anion-Cation
Balance
DOC
DIG
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ammonia
Bromide
Chloride
Sulfate
Fluoride
%
mg/L
mg/L
mgN/L
mgN/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
2.91
0.42
33.9
0.015 J
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
7.15
7.15
0.13 J
2.03
1.29
51.2
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
0.82 J
13.3
0.11 J
1.75
1.01
38.0
0.077
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
0.72 J
12.1
0.15 J
1.76
1.09
55.2
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<1.00 U
0.84 J
12.2
0.12 J
4.05
0.98
16.6
1.61
<0.10 U
1.46
1.66
9.77
<0.20 U
0.27
7.36
8.22
0.06
<0.10 U
0.61 H
224
16.2
<0.20 U
1.37
7.19
7.75
0.06
<0.10 U
0.87 H
230
17.6
<0.20 U
0.01
3.79B
9.84
0.35
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
9.23
11.2
0.04 J
1.25
3.82 B
9.86
0.35
<0.10 U
<1.00 U, H
9.25
11.1
0.05 J
-------
B-26
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
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 K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
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
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
580 J
580 J
886 J
917 J
<10U
<11U
12.0
12. 1J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
11 J
48 J
63 J
1.79 J
1.85 J
NA
NA
2.06
2.00 J
8J
<14U, J-
<16U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
571 J
588 J
855 J
880 J
<10U
<11U
12.1
12.3 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
18.9 J
40 J
48 J
2.08 J
1.96 J
101
102
1.96
2.05 J
7J
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
<0.2U
0.29 B
582
619
845
870
<5 U
<2.5 U
12.1
12.5
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.88 J
<2U
<2U
0.27 J
8.8
<100U
70.7
1.80
1.82
99.1
99.8
2.01
2.11
6.9
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
508 J
499 J
1620 J
1720 J
<10U
<11U
27.4
28.5 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
232
308 J
2.14 J
2.17 J
NA
NA
6.70
6.85 J
25
<14U, J-
<16U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
481 J
493 J
1650 J
1720 J
<10U
<11U
30.1
32. 2 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
1J
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
8.5 J
104
301 J
2.31 J
2.26 J
59.6
62.4
6.97
7.55 J
21
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
<0.2U
<0.2U
489
520
1640
1650
<5 U
<2.5 U
29.1
28.9
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
1.2 J
0.74 J
<2U
0.60
2.6
164
377
2.15
2.16
61.2
60.9
7.11
7.22
22.7
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
229 J
231 J
10 J
10 J
<10U
<11U
335
346 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
3260
3460 J
3.92J
3.94J
NA
NA
127
126 J
1120
<14U, J-
<16U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
197 J
206 J
9J
11 J
<10U
<11U
352
377 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
1J
2J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
3.2
3530
3810 J
4.08 J
4.01 J
53.6
59.2
129
144 J
1310
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.25
0.73 B
223
242
10.0
9.4
<5U
0.05 J
385
370
<0.2U
<0.2U
1.7 J
2.3 J
<2U
<2U
3.6
5.3
3810
3690
4.00
4.23
56.4
59.4
134
141
1170
-------
B-27
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW04 GW04 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
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 K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
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
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
683 J
<20U
<22U
265 J
262 J
5180 J
5430 J
<10U
<11U
50.1
51.7 J
<4U
<4U
1J
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
7J
826
1430 J
3.36J
3.59J
NA
NA
8.51
8.72 J
205
<14U
<16U, J-
121
320
1.4
1.4
250 J
245 J
4950 J
5130 J
<10U
<11U
49.3
50.9 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
2J
3J
<2.0U
<2.0U
5.6
9.9 J
432
1180J
3.69 J
3.82 J
557
567
8.13
8.71 J
99
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
430 J
447 J
<10U
<11U
38.8
40.0 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
14 J
<67U
26 J
1.56 J
1.54 J
NA
NA
4.57
4.54 J
8J
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
396 J
410 J
<10U
<11U
47.1
49.0 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
<74U
1.54 J
1.55 J
NA
NA
5.64
5.70 J
<14U
<14U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
2.5
2.5
<333U
<370U
398 J
397 J
<10U
<11U
48.7
48.2 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
2.2
<2.0U,J-
<67U
<74U
1.26 J
1.61 J
15.1
14.5
5.80
5.78J
<14U
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
2.7
2.7
<40U
35.4
388
389
<5 U
<2.5U
48.1
49.3
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
0.70 B
0.76*
<100U
<50U
1.56
1.64
11.5
12.2
5.82
5.84
0.22 J
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
164 J
174 J
<10U
<11U
44.0
45.6 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
8J
13 J
<67U
84 J
0.93 J
0.99 J
NA
NA
4.16
4.26 J
<14U
-------
B-28
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
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 K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
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
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
511J
<20U
<22U
339 J
326 J
1260 J
1580 J
<10U
<11U
9.39
11.4 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
34 J
330 J
2.66 J
3.13J
NA
NA
1.89
2.31 J
9J
<14U, J-
<16U
36.6
341
6.0
6.9
318 J
324 J
1590 J
1710 J
<10U
<11U
12.4
14.0 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
1J
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
2.7
3.6 J
119
1480 J
3.55 J
3.85 J
420
439
2.43
3.02 J
13 J
<10U
<10U
<20U
20.0
5.5
5.9
301
334
2020
2050
<5 U
<2.5 U
15.4
15.9
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
0.39 J
<2U
<0.5 U
0.69*
107
104
3.48
3.41
468
460
3.10
3.13
12.2
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
116 J
122 J
<10U
<11U
38.3
39.1 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
63 J
1.46 J
1.53 J
NA
NA
14.2
14.4 J
125
<14U, J-
<16U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333U
<370U
114 J
118 J
<10U
<11U
38.3
40.6 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
2.1 J
<67U
<74U
1.47 J
1.46 J
29.1
34.1
13.9
15.3 J
156
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.75
1.0
85.5
95.5
115
119
<5 U
<2.5 U
39.3
40.4
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
0.78
1.1*
<100U
89.8
1.47
1.76
31.3
36.7
14.9
15.4
72.0
<14U
<16U
<494U
526 J
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
135 J
145 J
<10U
<11U
16.1
16. 2 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
8J
<22U
<67U
366 J
0.90 J
1.04 J
NA
NA
2.71
2.75 J
<14U
<14U, J-
<16U
24.8
61.5
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333 U
<370U
114 J
120 J
<10U
<11U
13.9
14.6 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
11.3
9.4
34 J
170 J
0.87 J
0.89 J
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
2.31
2.50 J
<14U
<10U
<10U
<20U
56.4
0.13 J
0.34
<40U
<20U
142
149
<5U
<2.5 U
18.7
19.1
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
7.5 B
13.8*
<100U
2270
0.91 J
0.91
<10U
<5U
3.21
3.32
2.0 J
-------
B-29
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW11 GW11
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12
GW11
GW12
GW12
GW13
Parameter
Round 1
Round 2
Round 3
Round 1
Round 3
Round 1
GW13
5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
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 K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
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
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
<14U
30
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
240 J
230 J
272 J
287 J
<10U
<11U
25.0
26. 2 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
24 J
1.79 J
1.83 J
NA
NA
8.00
8.20 J
12 J
<14U, J-
<16U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
329 J
337 J
310 J
322 J
<10U
<11U
16.7
17.7 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<67U
31J
2.06 J
2.01 J
166
179
5.71
6.29J
13 J
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.14J
0.31
318
340
351
361
<5 U
<2.5 U
13.9
13.0
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
<0.5 U
0.66*
<100U
62.9
2.06
2.12
167
164
5.18
5.02
17.1
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
162 J
169 J
<10U
<11U
46.1
47.3 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
31
33 J
<67U
70 J
1.12J
1.11J
NA
NA
11.2
11.4J
<14U
<10U
<10U
<20U
29.4
0.36
0.66
<40U
<20U
165
168
<5 U
<2.5 U
48.2
48.9
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
0.65 J
<2U
8.4 B
9.7*
<100U
132
1.14
1.15
12.2
11.9
13.2
13.00
<5 U
<14U
<16U
<494U
166 J
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
222 J
244 J
<10U
<11U
40.6
41.7 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
142 J
1.68 J
1.75 J
NA
NA
6.68
6.76 J
16
<14U
<16U, J-
297
459
3.4
3.6
<333U
<370U
240 J
291 J
<10U
<11U
42.3
42.6 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
718
1650 J
1.60 J
2.48 J
21.4
26.6
7.03
7.31 J
39
-------
B-30
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15 GW16 GW16 GW16
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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 K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
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
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
187 J
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
194 J
207 J
<10U
<11U
15.1
15.5 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
11J
<22U
<67U
148 J
1.03 J
1.07 J
NA
NA
2.19
2.25 J
<14U
<14U, J-
<16U
<20.0 U
180
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333 U
<370U
165 J
177 J
<10U
<11U
14.5
15. 2 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
10.1
12.4
<67U
344 J
0.98 J
1.10 J
16.1
20.3
2.13
2.35 J
<14U
<10U
<10U
<20U
433
0.20
0.87
49.3
56.8
192
208
<5 U
<2.5 U
14.2
14.5
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.53 J
<2U
3.6
26.2
78.5 *
<100U
876
0.99
1.08
23.8
26.1
2.13
2.26
1.2 J
<14U
<16U
<494U
295 J
<20U
<22U
122 J
123 J
436 J
450 J
<10U
<11U
27.9
28.2 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
23 J
52 J
303 J
1.40 J
1.51 J
NA
NA
7.42
7.70 J
80
<14U
31 J-
<20.0 U
<20U
3.6
3.6
136 J
131 J
500 J
509 J
<10U
<11U
27.4
27.4 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
52 J
83 J
1.22 J
1.60 J
32.4
42.2
7.14
7.25 J
79
<10U
<10U
<20U
35.5
3.2B
3.7
138
152
552
579
<5 U
<2.5 U
26.7
26.9
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
<0.5 U
0.70
<100U
177
1.57
1.66
38.1
38.9
6.86
7.00
67.1
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
131 J
133 J
1780 J
1800 J
<10U
<11U
37.3
38.1 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
109
324 J
1.95 J
2.00 J
NA
NA
8.27
8.60 J
88
<14U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
34.3
1.0
1.0
129 J
124 J
1610 J
1590 J
<10U
<11U
36.7
36.5 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
3.6
6.8
204
276 J
1.69 J
2.07 J
64.7
73.3
8.23
8.21 J
83
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.65 B
1.0
127
138
1710
1670
<5U
<2.5 U
38.6
37.6
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
0.50 B
2.1
147
243
2.03
2.02
72.2
72.8
8.70
8.66
78.9
-------
B-31
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18 GW19 GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12 10/31/11 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1
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 K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
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
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
243 J
240 J
5170 J
5130 J
<10U
<11U
50.5
51.3 J
<4U
<4U
1J
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
229
275 J
3.76J
3.84J
NA
NA
8.60
8.80 J
81
<14U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
2.6
2.6
241 J
234 J
4900 J
4910 J
<10U
<11U
51.6
51.4J
<1.0U
<1.0U
1J
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
2.9
7.3
227
336 J
3.88 J
4.57 J
444
469
8.72
8.74 J
79
<14U
<16U
<494U
236 J
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
219 J
227 J
<10U
<11U
27.7
28.2 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
152 J
1.57 J
1.69 J
NA
NA
3.91
4.10J
7J
<14U
<16U,J-
<20.0 U
32.0
1.1
1.1
<333 U
<370U
205 J
207 J
<10U
<11U
28.1
28.2 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<67U
26 J
1.32 J
1.75 J
45.3
49.4
4.04
4.09 J
<14U
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
83 J
84 J
<10U
<11U
32.9
33. 2 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
<74U
0.73 J
0.75 J
NA
NA
4.67
4.80 J
<14U
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
189 J
194 J
<10U
<11U
32.6
33. 1J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
<74U
1.40 J
1.45 J
NA
NA
5.62
5.80 J
<14U
<14U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
89.4
<1.0U
1.1
<333U
<370U
179 J
186 J
<10U
<11U
31.6
32.3 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<67U
77 J
1.14J
1.55 J
32.0
38.2
5.41
5.64J
6J
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
148 J
151 J
<10U
<11U
23.2
23. 6 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
405 J
0.79 J
0.88 J
NA
NA
2.68
2.82 J
<14U
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
1850 J
1850 J
<10U
<11U
25.5
25.9 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
85
226 J
1.41 J
1.44 J
NA
NA
4.59
4.71 J
92
-------
B-32
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW23 GW24 GW25 GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27
Sample Date 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/2/11 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13
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 K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
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
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
516 J
510 J
<10U
<11U
29.2
29.3 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
15 J
65 J
386 J
1.22 J
1.26 J
NA
NA
8.89
9.03 J
161
<14U
<16U
336 J
3000
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
244 J
314 J
<10U
<11U
29.9
30.8 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
4J
6J
10 J
343
2380 J
1.00 J
1.93 J
NA
NA
7.00
7.59 J
268
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
196 J
178 J
347 J
317 J
<10U
<11U
36.9
39.0 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
26 J
3.16J
3.22J
NA
NA
10.7
12.0 J
10 J
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
150 J
151 J
<10U
<11U
68.5
67.9 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
330
320 J
2.12 J
2.19 J
NA
NA
20.8
21.5 J
864
<14U, J-
<16U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
5.6
5.8
<333U
<370U
142 J
151 J
<10U
<11U
66.8
72. 2 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
1J
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
4.9
508
712 J
2.28 J
2.28 J
15.0
18.4
20.3
22.5 J
871
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
5.6
5.4
87.5
96.5
153
154
<5 U
<2.5U
72.9
71.5
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
<0.5 U
1.2
551
556
2.29
2.25
17.0
16.4
23.1
23.2
864
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
403 J
406 J
798 J
845 J
<10U
<11U
18.8
20.0 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
48 J
55 J
2.36 J
2.54 J
NA
NA
3.40
3.62J
45
<14U, J-
<16U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
4.6
4.5
391 J
392 J
795 J
829 J
<10U
<11U
22.4
23. 3 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
2.5
78
97 J
2.73 J
2.63 J
154
180
4.15
4.47 J
70
<10U
<10U
<20U
23.1
4.7
4.4
416
426
909
869
<5U
<2.5 U
19.7
19.2
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
<0.5 U
1.7*
<100U
92.6
2.57
2.46
172
164
3.56
3.61
45.7
-------
B-33
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW28 GW28 GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/15/13 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 1
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 K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
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
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
160 J
167 J
<10U
<11U
44.2
47.7 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
22 J
1.52 J
1.62 J
NA
NA
14.2
15. 2 J
<14U
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.71
0.91 B
47.4
50.2
160
155
<5 U
<2.5 U
49.2
46.5
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
9.4 B
6.3
<100U
61.2
1.66
1.58
23.9
22.2
16.3
15.7
<5 U
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
63 J
66 J
<10U
<11U
51.2
54.9 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
12 J
302
880 J
1.20 J
1.28 J
NA
NA
14.2
15.3 J
239
<14U
<16U,J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333 U
<370U
62 J
62 J
<10U
<11U
54.0
54.3 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
339
336 J
0.97 J
1.35 J
19.3
19.8
15.3
15. 3 J
244
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.52 B
0.72
60.0
66.4
62.5
62.4
<5 U
<2.5 U
55.2
53.8
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
<0.5 U
2.1
204
347
1.29
1.28
20.9
20.2
15.6
15.5
214
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
135 J
132 J
435 J
436 J
<10U
<11U
46.1
46.9 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
9J
<67U
<74U
2.77 J
2.91 J
NA
NA
14.0
14.6 J
28
<14U
<16U
<494U
10700 J
<20U
9J
<333U
<370U
368 J
672 J
<10U
<11U
21.8
24.8 J
<4U
<4U
3J
12 J
<7U
11 J
<20U
46 J
73
10700 J
1.64 J
5.25J
NA
NA
4.29
6.70 J
1260
-------
B-34
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW32 GW32 GW32 GW33 GW33 GW33 GW36 GW36 GW37
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3 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 K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
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
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
267 J
278 J
<10U
<11U
38.4
40.9 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
6J
<22U
32J
60 J
0.91 J
0.97 J
NA
NA
5.06
5.39J
21
<14U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
256
1.7
2.1
<333 U
<370U
260 J
272 J
<10U
<11U
39.2
39.0 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
4.1
22.9
<67U
574 J
0.67 J
1.29 J
15.2
17.2
5.19
5.27J
16
<10U
<10U
<20U
144
1.6
2.1
<40U
28.8
261
262
<5 U
<2.5 U
39.5
40.3
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
2.8
12.5 B, *
<100U
242
0.95
1.09
15.2
15.5
5.29
5.36
12.3
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
923 J
967 J
<10U
<11U
26.5
28.2 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
32 J
36 J
1.15 J
1.22 J
NA
NA
2.77
2.94 J
129
<14U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333U
<370U
894 J
903 J
<10U
<11U
27.8
27.8 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
28 J
32 J
0.91 J
1.31 J
49.4
50.6
2.91
2.94 J
131
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.60
0.73
61.5
70.4
901
900
<5 U
<2.5 U
27.9
28.3
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
0.48 J
0.84 B, *
<100U
66.8
1.16
1.25
48.8
51.1
2.95
2.96
121
<14U, J-
<16J
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333U
<370U
36 J
38 J
<10U
<11U
78.6
81.9 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
4.4
166
264 J
1.25 J
1.22 J
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
14.0
15. 2 J
2670
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
0.37
0.65 B
<40U
24.4
37.2
37.9
<5 U
<2.5U
79.4
78.9
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
0.50
2.6
164
308
1.20
1.20
<10U
0.65 J
14.7
15.0
2560
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
1.5
1.9
<40U
<20U
139
137
<5U
<2.5 U
49.5
49.7
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
0.27 J
1.5 B, *
112
263
0.88
0.861
<10U
9.60
6.63
6.66
684
-------
B-35
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2
Sample GW38 SW01 SW01 SW01 SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 5/10/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
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 K
Total K
Dissolved Li
Total Li
Dissolved Mg
Total Mg
Dissolved Mn
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
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
<10U
<10U
<20U
1550
2.3
5.0
70.4
81.0
176
217
<5 U
<2.5 U
29.6
29.1
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.88 J
<2U
1.8 J
0.26 J
3.9 B, *
149
4720
1.25
1.53
41.2
44.4
4.90
5.11
289
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333 U
<370U
30 J
30 J
<10U
<11U
70.5
72.0 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
190
300 J
0.83 J
0.85 J
NA
NA
5.62
5.87 J
224
<14U
<16U, J-
<20.0 U
26.4
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333U
<370U
22 J
22 J
<10U
<11U
56.6
55.5 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
4.6
4.9
<67U
32 J
0.29 J
0.67 J
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
4.89
4.91 J
28
<10U
<10U
<20U
<20U
1.1 B
1.3
<40U
<20U
28.0
27.6
<5 U
<2.5 U
76.6
74.7
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<2U
<2U
<0.5 U
4.6
466
732
0.65
0.645
<10U
<5 U
7.08
7.02
323
<14U
<16U
<494U
<548U
<20U
<22U
<333U
<370U
137 J
144 J
<10U
<11U
9.21
9.72 J
<4U
<4U
<4U
<4U
<7U
<8U
<20U
<22U
<67U
<74U
0.84 J
0.88 J
NA
NA
2.45
2.59 J
<14U
<14U, J-
<16U
35.2
43.4
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333 U
<370U
677 J
707 J
<10U
<11U
36.2
38.1 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
3J
2J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
310
461 J
3.44J
3.36 J
16.1
19.8
19.9
21.7 J
2700
<14U, J-
<16U
<20.0 U
25.1
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333U
<370U
663 J
683 J
<10U
<11U
36.0
37.4 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
3J
2J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
59 J
320 J
3.38J
3.32J
14.5
19.8
19.6
21. 2 J
2400
<14U, J-
<16U
30.8
82.8
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333 U
<370U
28 J
30 J
<10U
<11U
14.8
15.8J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<2.0U
95
196 J
1.85 J
1.92 J
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
3.32
3.70 J
16
<14U, J-
<16U
<20.0 U
82.3
<1.0U
<1.0U
<333 U
<370U
27 J
30 J
<10U
<11U
14.8
15.8 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<4U
<4U
<2.0U
<2.0U
14.2
<2.0U
49 J
241 J
1.85 J
1.97 J
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
3.35
3.67J
15
-------
B-36
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
Round 3
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
Dissolved V
Total V
Mg/L
MgA
MgA
mg/L
mg/L
Mg/L
MJ/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
7J
<17U
<19U
115 J
124 J
<84U
<93J
<0.06 U
0.03 J
<17U
<19U
0.22 J
<0.51 U
R
R
10 J
<33 U
4.26 J
3.95 J
1790
1770 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
7J
<17U
<19U
115 J
120 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.02 J
0.04 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.46 U
<0.51 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
4.13J+
3.92 J+
1670
1720 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
R
R
<10U
<11U
7.20
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
123
123
0.41
0.76*
53.6
30.0
<0.2U
<0.2U
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.40
<2U
4.09
4.19
1730
1690
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5U
0.13 J
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.02 U
0.36 B
26 J
<17U
<19U
74.7 J
73. OJ
<84U
<93J
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
2.29 J
<0.51 U
R
R
11 J
<33 U
5.57J
5.23J
3060
3140J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
23 J
<17U
<19U
68.5 J
70.7 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
0.03 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.36 J
<0.51 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
1.3 J
<5.0U
5.45J+
5.22J+
3060
3190J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
R
R
<10U
<11U
23.3
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
71.7
72.0
0.90
1.5*
28.2 J
<25 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
5.00
5.09
3090
3120
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.12 J
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.02 U
0.10 J
1140 J
6J
<19U
73.7 J
74.7 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
384 J
376 J
R
R
21 J
<33 U
9.09 J
8.95 J
11300
10100 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
1430 J
<17U
<19U
76.6 J
80. 1J
2.6
3.5*
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
391 J
385 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
9.14J+
9.24J+
9750
10300 J
R
R
<7U
3J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<10U
<11U
1190
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
81.6
83.6
13.0
9.8*
18.5 J
<25 U
0.09 J
0.25
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
8.18
8.39
11100
12200
<0.2U
<0.2U
5.1
2.7
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.33
0.33
<0.02 U
0.43 B
-------
B-37
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW04 GW04 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
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
Dissolved V
Total V
Mg/L
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
MgA
MJ/L
MgA
MJ/L
MJ/L
MJ/L
MJ/L
MgA
Mg/L
Mg/L
214 J
<17U
<19U
228 J
233 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
0.04 J
<17U
<19U
3.26J
<0.51 U
R
R
<30U
<33U
5.93J
6.57 J
8770
8910J
NA
NA
<7U
17 J
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
109 J
<17U
<19U
213 J
222 J
<1.0U
1.4
0.04 J
0.06 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
6.68 J
<0.51U
<2.0U
<2.0U
5.2
5.2
6.39 J
6.69 J
8160
8410 J
R
R
<7U
13 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
R
R
<10U
<11U
76 J
<17U
<19U
14.3 J
14.3 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
3.15J
2.55 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
5.81J
5.27J
1240
1220 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
<16U
<17U
<19U
10.5 J
10.7 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
5.15J
4.43 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
6.12 J
5.64 J
1370
1380 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
<16U
<17U
<19U
5.72J
10.7 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
1.87 J
3.78J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
6.10 J
5.47 J
1360
1340 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
5.6J-
5.7J-
<10U
<11U
0.66 J
0.95
1.5 B
10.7
11.3
1.60
1.20*
<50U
<25 U
0.30
0.33
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
5.33
5.50
1360
1380
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
7.0
6.4
0.25
0.57 B
<16U
<17U
<19U
14.1 J
13.7 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
5.05J
4.52 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.34J
5.31J
410
399 J
NA
NA
<7U
3J
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
-------
B-38
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
Round 3
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
Dissolved V
Total V
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
MgA
mg/L
mg/L
UgA
MgA
UgA
ug/L
UgA
ug/L
UgA
ug/L
UgA
ug/L
lig/L
ug/L
11J
<17U
<19U
251 J
275 J
<84U
<93U
0.10 J
0.09 J
<17U
<19U
4.55 J
0.16 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
3.55J
4.18J
1520
1770 J
NA
NA
<7U
13 J
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
24 J
<17U
<19U
270 J
287 J
<1.0U
1.2
0.09 J
0.10 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
3.44 J
<0.51U
<2.0U
<2.0U
5.5
5.6
3.53J+
5.24J+
1810
1960 J
R
R
<7U
33 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
R
<1.0U
<10U
<11U
13.0
0.58
0.88 B
336
335
0.57
1.10*
497
100
<0.2U
<0.2U
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
3.39
3.53
2380
2470
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.05 J
0.36 B
162 J
13 J
<19U
22.1 J
22.6 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
5.99 J
4.76 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
7.03 J
6.68 J
1210
1170 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
167 J
<17U
<19U
21.6 J
21.9 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
5.37J
4.20 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
6.97J+
6.65 J+
1120
1160 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<10U
<11U
168
0.68
1.1
21.6
26.0
1.40
1.10*
<50U
<25 U
<0.2U
0.66
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
6.13
6.35
1180
1190
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.28
0.27
<0.02 U
0.31 B
5J
6J
<19U
2.54 J
2.52 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
0.02 J
<17U
<19U
4.47 J
3.95J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.10J
5.64J
97
92 J
NA
NA
<7U
13 J
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
<16U
<17U
<19U
1.93 J
<1.90 U
<1.0U
<1.0U, J-
<0.06 U
0.03 J
1.3
<1.0U
3.82J
2.70 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
4.52J+
4.38 J+
74
78 J
R
R
<7U
3J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<10U
<11U
37.5
<0.5 U
0.54 B
2.79
2.85
0.88
0.84*
<50U
<25 U
<0.2U
1.1
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
4.32
4.56
103
106
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.34
0.48
0.04 J
0.40 B
-------
B-39
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW11 GW11
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12
GW11
GW12
GW12
GW13
Parameter
Round 1
Round 2
Round 3
Round 1
Round 3
Round 1
GW13
5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
Round 2
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
Dissolved V
Total V
Mg/L
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
MgA
MJ/L
MgA
MJ/L
MJ/L
MJ/L
MJ/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
13 J
<17U
<19U
62.8 J
65. 1J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
3.79J
3.06J
R
R
<30U
<33U
5.78J
5.42 J
747
749 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
14 J
<17U
<19U
87.9 J
91.0 J
<1.0U
<1.0U,J-
0.03 J
0.05 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
2.79 J
1.96 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.31J+
4.97 J+
777
806 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<10U
<11U
19.2
0.9
1.0
95.7
95.8
0.48
0.60*
58.7
44.6
<0.2U
<0.2U
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
4.86
5.01
920
978
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.19 J
0.10 J
<0.02 U
0.31 B
<16U
<17U
7J
2.71 J
2.66 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
3.73 J
2.85 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
4.92 J
4.70 J
210
206 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
2.60
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
3.96
3.85
1.70
1.30*
<50U
<25U
0.52
1.8
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
4.23
4.30
210
218
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.56
0.53
0.04 J
0.37 B
20 J
<17U
<19U
14.5 J
14.9 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
4.03 J
3.39J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.35 J
5.24J
988
959 J
NA
NA
3J
3J
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
51J
<17U
<19U
9.89 J
14.5 J
<1.0U
1.4*
<0.06 U
0.02 J
<1.0U
1.3
0.83 J
3.26J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
7.44 J
9.81 J
939
930 J
R
R
43
80 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
1.7 J-
1.7 J-
<10U
6J
-------
B-40
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15 GW16 GW16 GW16
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
Round 3
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
Dissolved V
Total V
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
MgA
mg/L
mg/L
UgA
Mg/L
UgA
ug/L
UgA
ug/L
UgA
ug/L
UgA
ug/L
lig/L
ug/L
14 J
<17U
<19U
12.9 J
13.0 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
0.02 J
<17U
<19U
4.54 J
4.04 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
5.49 J
5.39J
225
219 J
NA
NA
<7U
3J
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
22 J
<17U
<19U
9.28 J
9.11J
1.1
1.1*
0.02 J
0.04 J
<1.0U
1.2
4.08 J
3.12J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
4.73J+
5.14J+
178
184 J
R
R
<7U
12 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<10U
<11U
72.5
<0.5 U
0.50
16.0
16.3
1.10
3.10*
<50U
52.8
<0.2U
8.0
NR
NR
0.12 J
0.16 J
<2U
<2U
4.42
5.15
214
222
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
3.9
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.38
0.65
0.06 J
1.1 B
84 J
<17U
6J
23. OJ
23. 7 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
3.27J
2.86 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.94 J
6.00 J
1360
1370 J
NA
NA
<7U
7J
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
80 J
<17U
<19U
21.5 J
26.3 J
<1.0U
<1.0U,J-
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
1.5
<1.0U
0.30 J
2.66 J,B
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
6.00 J
5.47 J
1410
1410 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<10U
<11U
69.5
1.40
1.4
28.4
28.1
0.98
1.20
<50U
<25 U
<0.2U
0.23 B
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
5.36
5.39
1470
1420
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.52 J
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.05 J
<0.02 U
0.52 B
89 J
<17U
<19U
48.0 J
49.9 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
7.63 J
0.32 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.83J
5.54J
3070
3100J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
84 J
<17U
<19U
40.4 J
45. 2 J
<1.0U
<1.0U, J-
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.46 U
0.41 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
1.5 J
<5.0U
6.06 J
5.55 J
2930
2870 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
R
R
<10U
<11U
80.4
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
50.6
51.0
1.30
1.40
<50U
<25 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
5.40
5.37
3050
3000
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.38 J
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.02 U
0.77 B
-------
B-41
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18 GW19 GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12 10/31/11 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1
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
Dissolved V
Total V
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
Hg/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
81 J
<17U
<19U
280 J
291 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
<0.46 U
<0.51 U
R
R
<30U
<33U
4.26 J
3.84J
5820
5770 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
80 J
<17U
<19U
290 J
287 J
<1.0U
<1.0U,J-
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.46 U
<0.51U
<2.0U
<2.0U
7.3
8.0
4.27 J
3.85 J
5670
5540 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
R
R
<10U
<11U
23 J
<17U
7J
30.3 J
31.4 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
2.75 J
2.37 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
5.05J
4.87 J
1320
1320 J
NA
NA
<7U
6J
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
<16U
<17U
<19U
28. 1J
32.5 J
<1.0U
<1.0U, J-
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.46 U
2.40 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.03 J
4.52 J
1300
1280 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
1.4 J-
1.4 J-
<10U
<11U
<16U
<17U
<19U
7.17 J
7.52 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
4.96 J
4.31 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.46 J
4.96 J
60
61 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
<16U
<17U
<19U
21.0 J
22.2 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
2.64 J
2.23 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.21J
4.70 J
737
742 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
11 J
<17U
<19U
20.8 J
25.0 J
<1.0U
<1.0U, J-
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.46 U
2.13 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.11J
4.78 J
779
765 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
2.3 J-
2.3 J-
<10U
<11U
6J
<17U
<19U
2.55 J
2.71 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
4.54 J
3.91 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
4.59 J
4.34 J
67
68 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
94 J
<17U
<19U
59.5 J
61.4 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
<0.46 U
<0.51 U
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.30J
4.88 J
753
752 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
-------
B-42
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW23 GW24 GW25 GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27
Sample Date 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/2/11 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13
Round 3
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
Dissolved V
Total V
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
MgA
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
Hg/L
ug/L
Hg/L
ug/L
Hg/L
ug/L
Hg/L
MgA
lig/L
ug/L
163 J
<17U
<19U
14.2 J
14.8 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
2.39 J
0.57 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
6.27 J
6.00 J
747
733 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
2470 J
<17U
<19U
9.41 J
10.1 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
3.98 J
3.37 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
6.76 J
11.3 J
306
319 J
NA
NA
9
79 J
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
4J
22 J
<17U
<19U
46. 1J
46.0 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
5.98J
5.39J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.42 J
5.02J
2500
2230 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
854 J
<17U
<19U
25. OJ
26.1 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
8.19 J
7.01 J
R
R
11J
<33 U
6.29 J
6.01 J
1820
1790 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
905 J
<17U
<19U
24.5 J
25.9 J
<1.0U
<1.0U, J-
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
8.89 J
6.79 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
6.40J+
6.08 J+
1680
1810 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
4.5 J-
4.6 J-
<10U
<11U
871
1.10
1.1
27.4
26.9
2.60
2.00 B,*
<50U
<25 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
5.83
5.75
1840
1740
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.64 J
<0.2U
<0.2U
4.9
5.0
<0.02 U
<0.2U
46 J
<17U
<19U
93.7 J
99.6 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
3.69J
3.39J
R
R
<30U
<33J
5.60J
5.24J
2350
2410 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
71 J
<17U
<19U
92.7 J
96.1 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
6.48 J
2.87 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.68J+
5.11J+
2400
2510J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<10U
<11U
46.7
<0.5 U
0.78
103
99.0
0.64
1.10*
<50U
<25 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
5.45
5.26
2430
2400
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5U
<2.5 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.07 J
<0.02 U
0.30 B
-------
B-43
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW28 GW28 GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/15/13 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 1
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
Dissolved V
Total V
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
Hg/L
Hg/L
<16U
<17U
<19U
13.8 J
14.5 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
6.62 J
5.96J
R
R
<30U
<33U
5.21J
4.99 J
1030
1060 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
<2.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
15.2
14.2
2.10
2.3*
<50U
<25 U
0.20
0.26
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
4.94
4.72
1010
995
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.54 J
<0.2U
<0.2U
1.4
1.4
0.06 J
0.46 B
247 J
<17U
6J
24.1 J
25.3 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
12.9 J
12. 1J
R
R
<30U
<33U
6.13 J
6.01 J
606
615 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
243 J
<17U
<19U
20.4 J
25. 2 J
<1.0U
<1.0U, J-
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
10.6 J
11.7 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
6.31 J
5.88 J
614
601 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
2.9 J-
2.9 J-
<10U
<11U
214
1.10
1.0
27.3
26.3
1.90
2.30
<50U
<25U
0.09 J
0.54 B
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
5.77
5.71
600
605
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.34 J
<0.2U
<0.2U
3.0
3.1
<0.02 U
0.39 B
28 J
<17U
<19U
42.8 J
43. 2 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
6.88 J
6.20 J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.36 J
5.08 J
2370
2300 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
1420 J
6J
7J
23.4 J
21.9 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
0.33 J
<17U
26 J
3.79J
3.50J
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.70J
24.9 J
647
691 J
NA
NA
<7U
374 J
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
19 J
-------
B-44
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW32 GW32 GW32 GW33 GW33 GW33 GW36 GW36 GW37
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3 Round 3
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
Dissolved V
Total V
Mg/L
Mg/L
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
Mg/L
MJ/L
MJ/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
Mg/L
23 J
<17U
<19U
13.6 J
14.2 J
<84U
<93U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
3.06J
2.76 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
5.86J
5.50J
559
568 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
35 J
<17U
<19U
10.3 J
15. 2 J
<1.0U
<1.0U, J-
<0.06 U
0.03 J
<1.0U
3.1
<0.46 U
2.51J,B
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.96 J
6.47 J
547
537 J
R
R
<7U
16 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
3.9 J-
4.0 J-
<10U
4J
18.6
0.76
1.0 B
15.7
15.5
1.40
1.20*
<50U
<25U
0.26
1.1 B
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
5.30
5.90
550
553
<0.2U
0.10 J
<5U
4.5
<0.2U
<0.2U
4.4
4.1
0.14J
0.71 B
129 J
<17U
<19U
32.6 J
34.4 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
<0.07U
<17U
<19U
<0.46 U
<0.51U
R
R
<30U
<33 U
5.26J
4.72 J
828
840 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
133 J
<17U
<19U
28.9 J
33.3 J
<1.0U
<1.0U, J-
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.46 U
<0.51 U
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.23J
4.70 J
818
804 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<10U
<11U
123
0.78
0.90 B
35.1
36.4
0.93
0.80*
<50U
<25 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
4.73
4.82
821
846
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
<2.5U
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.62
0.58
<0.02 U
0.31 B
2840 J
<17U
<19U
16. 2 J
16.5 J
<1.0U
<1.0U, J-
<0.06 U
0.02 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
16.0 J
13.9 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.36J+
5.07 J+
232
241 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
3.1 J-
3.2J-
<10U
<11U
2640
0.84
0.96
17.0
17.0
3.00
2.50
47.0 J
<25 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
4.78
4.90
245
240
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.81 J
<0.2U
<0.2U
3.2
3.3
0.08 J
0.51 B
701
0.99
1.1 B
9.35
9.12
2.20
1.90*
<50U
<25 U
0.14J
0.28 B
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
4.69
4.80
133
136
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5U
<2.5 U
<0.2U
<0.2U
1.4
1.3
<0.02 U
0.34 B
-------
B-45
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2
Sample GW38 SW01 SW01 SW01 SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 5/10/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Round 2
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
Dissolved V
Total V
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
Hg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
Hg/L
Mg/L
uj/L
Mg/L
327
2.90
2.8 B
29.7
30.1
1.10
2.90*
<50U
48.0
0.06 J
1.7 B
NR
NR
0.13 J
0.16 J
0.45 J
<2U
4.06
7.00
511
541
<0.2U
0.38
<5 U
21.4
<0.2U
<0.2U
2.4
2.3
0.03 J
2.7 B
223 J
<17U
<19U
2.95 J
3.04 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
0.03 J
<17U
<19U
4.24 J
3.69 J
R
R
9J
<33 U
5.57 J
5.19J
79
79 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
36 J
<17U
<19U
<1.71U
2.51 J
<1.0U
<1.0U, J-
0.02 J
0.03 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
0.87 J
3.49 J,B
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
5.12J
4.63 J
62
61J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<10U
<11U
323
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
3.42
3.33
2.80
2.90*
70.2
44.0
<0.2U
2.3 B
NR
NR
<0.2U
<0.2U
<2U
<2U
4.60
4.60
90.3
90.4
<0.2U
<0.2U
<5 U
0.42 J
<0.2U
<0.2U
0.40
0.39
<0.02 U
0.36 B
<16U
<17U
<19U
2.04 J
2.07 J
<84U
<93 U
<0.06 U
0.03 J
<17U
<19U
3.20J
2.88 J
R
R
<30U
<33U
4.55 J
4.29 J
30
30 J
NA
NA
<7U
<8U
<17U
<19U
R
R
<10U
<11U
2880 J
<17U
<19U
76.5 J
78.9 J
4.7
3.0*
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
<1.0U
6.28 J
4.98 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
1.9 J
2.4 J
0.81J+
0.80 J+
1300
1350 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
R
<1.0U,J-
<10U
<11U
2520 J
<17U
<19U
76. 1J
77.3 J
2.9
2.7
<0.06 U
<0.07 U
<1.0U
1.3
6.30 J
4.97 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
2.1 J
2.0 J
0.79J+
0.79 J+
1280
1320 J
R
R
<7U
<8U
<1.0U
<1.0U
R
<1.0U,J-
<10U
<11U
21J
<17U
<19U
5.81 J
5.53 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
0.03 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
3.86 J
2.78 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
1.99J+
1.98 J+
64
67 J
R
R
<7U
2J
<1.0U
<1.0U
R
R
<10U
<11U
21 J
<17U
<19U
5.85J
5.96J
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.06 U
0.03 J
<1.0U
<1.0U
3.81J
2.91 J
<2.0U
<2.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
1.91J+
2.08 J+
64
67 J
R
R
<7U
3J
<1.0U
<1.0U
R
R
<10U
<11U
-------
B-46
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Hg/L
Hg/L
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
1.7 J
<2.5 U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
0.58 J
<2.5 U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
Round 3
4.4 J
3.8
-------
B-47
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<5 U
3.0 B
Sample GW04 GW04 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
<50U
<56U
-------
B-48
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Hg/L
Hg/L
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<5 U
<2.5 U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<5 U
1.8 J
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
Round 3
<5U
4.9 B
-------
B-49
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW11 GW11
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12
Parameter
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
Round 1
<50U
<56U
Round 2
<50U
<56U
GW11
Round 3
<5 U
0.59 J
GW12
GW12
GW13
Round 1
25 J
30 J
Round 3
11.9
15.7 B
Round 1
<50U
<56U
GW13
5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
Round 2
<50U
<56U
-------
B-50
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Hg/L
Hg/L
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<5 U
8.4
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
1.4 J
<2.5 U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15 GW16 GW16 GW16
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
Round 3
0.67 J
3.5
-------
B-51
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
Sample GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18 GW19 GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12 10/31/11 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1
<50U
<56U
-------
B-52
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Hg/L
Hg/L
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
1.8 J
<2.5U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
Sample GW23 GW24 GW25 GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27
Sample Date 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/2/11 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13
Round 3
<5U
5.4
-------
B-53
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
<50U
<56U
12.1
7.4
43 J
226 J
55 U
90 J
49.2
72.4
<50U
<56U
Sample GW28 GW28 GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/15/13 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11
Unit Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 1
<50U
<56U
-------
B-54
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Hg/L
Hg/L
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
2.2 J
3.7
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
3.6J
4.9
<50U
<56U
2.1J
3.4
Sample GW32 GW32 GW32 GW33 GW33 GW33 GW36 GW36 GW37
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3 Round 3
2.6 J
2.6
-------
B-55
Table B-3 Sample Results - Dissolved and Total Metals (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Dissolved Zn
Total Zn
Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2
Hg/L
Hg/L
<5 U
7.8
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
3.9 J
44.9
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
<50U
<56U
Sample GW38 SW01 SW01 SW01 SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 5/10/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Round 2
<50U
<56U
-------
B-56
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
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
<25.0 U
<25.0 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
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5U
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
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<100U
<10U
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5U
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
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0U,J-
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
0.3 J
<1.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
5.53
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<10U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 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
-------
B-57
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW03 GW03 GW03 GW04 GW04 GW05
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1
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
<25.0 U
<25.0 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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0 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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<25.0 U
<25.0 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-58
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08
Sample Date 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 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
<25.0 U
<25.0 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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0 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
<25.0 U
<25.0 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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<10U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<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-59
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
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
<25.0 U
<25.0 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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0 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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-60
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
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
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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
0.24 J
R
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<2.0U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
-------
B-61
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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, J-
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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
<25.0 U
<25.0U,J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-62
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW16 GW16 GW16 GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12 10/31/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1
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
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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, J-
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
0.33 J
<10U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
0.12 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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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, J-
<25.0 U
<25.0U,J-
<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
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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
-------
B-63
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22 GW23 GW24 GW25
Sample Date 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/2/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1
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
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<100 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<5.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<2.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<100 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<5.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<2.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<100 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<5.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<2.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<100 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<5.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<2.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<100 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<5.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<2.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
-------
B-64
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27 GW28 GW28
Sample Date 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 11/3/11 5/15/13
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
<100 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<5.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<2.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<100U
<25.0U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<10U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<5.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<2.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<5.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<2.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<100U
<10U
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-65
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31 GW32 GW32 GW32
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13
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
<100 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<5.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<2.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<100U, J-
<25.0U
<25.0U, J-
<0.5 U
<1.0U
<5.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<1.0U
<0.5 U
R
<0.5U, 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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<10U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
0.4 J
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<5.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
R
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<1.0 U, H
<2.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0 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
<25.0 U
<25.0 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, J-
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-66
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW33 GW33 GW33 GW36 GW36 GW37 GW38
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13 5/10/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3 Round 3 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
<25.0 U
<25.0 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, J-
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1U
<0.5 U
8.3
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<10U
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-67
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample SW01 SW01 SW01 SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 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
<25.0 U
<25.0 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<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, J-
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<1U
<0.5 U
<1U
<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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<100U
<25.0 U
<25.0 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
<25.0 U
<25.0U,J-
<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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
<25.0 U
<25.0U, J-
<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
-------
B-68
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
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
<0.5U
<0.5U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 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
-------
B-69
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW03 GW03 GW03 GW04 GW04 GW05
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1
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-70
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08
Sample Date 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 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-71
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
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-72
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
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-73
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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-74
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW16 GW16 GW16 GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12 10/31/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1
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
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-75
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22 GW23 GW24 GW25
Sample Date 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/2/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1
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, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
-------
B-76
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27 GW28 GW28
Sample Date 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 11/3/11 5/15/13
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, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
-------
B-77
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31 GW32 GW32 GW32
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13
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, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U, H
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<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-78
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW33 GW33 GW33 GW36 GW36 GW37 GW38
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13 5/10/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3 Round 3 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-79
Table B-4 Sample Results - Volatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample SW01 SW01 SW01 SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 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
0.38 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
<0.5 U
1.6
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
1.1
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<0.5 U
<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-80
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
37.2
0.0178
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
40.4
0.0184
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
56.1
0.0267
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
40.7*
0.0257 *
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
39.4
0.0265
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
44.7
0.0267
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
21.1 J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5.0
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<0.10U
<0.10U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
1.13
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
0.905 B
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
NR
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
-------
B-81
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW03 GW03 GW03 GW04 GW04 GW05
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1
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)
Diethylene glycol (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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
0.0924
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.0043
<0.0028 U
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
0.0061 B
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
18.9
0.0116
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
27.6
0.0165
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
0.0032 B
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
23.4
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20U
<20U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
0.049 J
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10U
0.37 B
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
NR
<0.10 U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
0.068 J
<0.10U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
0.52
<0.10 U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
-------
B-82
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08
Sample Date 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
1.19
0.0212 B
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
1.10
0.0176
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
0.74
0.0097
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.0071 B
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
14.8
0.0079
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
17.3
0.0065
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
20.0
0.0088
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U,J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<0.10U
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.16
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
<0.10 U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.62
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
-------
B-83
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
0.0061
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.0099
<0.0028 U
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.0523
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
28.1 J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<0.10U
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.22
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
NR
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
-------
B-84
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
1.62
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
3.06
0.0012 J
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
2.44
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.0182
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
5.62
0.1560
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
21.7
0.4970
0.0038 J
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<0.10U
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.66
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
0.12
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
-------
B-85
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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)
Diethylene glycol (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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
0.0298
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.0106
<0.0028 U
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.5250
0.0048
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.6590
0.0035
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
0.6860
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
23. 1J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.17
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
NR
<0.10 U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.14
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
0.28
<0.10 U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
-------
B-86
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW16 GW16 GW16 GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18 GW19
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12 10/31/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1
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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
10.1
0.1290
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
8.19
0.1090
0.0022 J
<0.0048 U
7.53
0.0701
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
21.0
0.0264
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
24.6
0.0291
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
6.77
0.2800
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
7.90
0.2590
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
0.0020 B
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20U
<20U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<0.10U
0.15
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.28
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.22
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
0.46
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.15 B
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
0.28
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.13 B
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
-------
B-87
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22 GW23 GW24 GW25
Sample Date 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/2/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1
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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
7.55
0.2160
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
18.4
0.4140
0.0023 J
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
0.0009 J
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
7.79
0.0545
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.0085
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U, J-
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U,J-
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U, J-
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U,J-
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U, J-
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<0.10U
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.17
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
0.13
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.12
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
0.13
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.12
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
0.26 B
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
-------
B-88
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27 GW28 GW28
Sample Date 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 11/3/11 5/15/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.4470
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.4430
<0.0028 U
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
0.6300
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
21.1 J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5.0U, J-
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<5.0U,J-
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<5.0U, J-
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<0.10U
0.10B
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.21
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.30 B
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
0.81
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
NR
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
0.17B
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
NR
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
-------
B-89
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31 GW32 GW32 GW32
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 1 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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.0020
<0.0028 U
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
1.95
0.0095
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.7290
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
2.42
<0.0028 U
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
1.23
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5.0U, J-
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<5.0U,J-
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U, J-
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U,J-
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<0.10U
0.14B
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.15
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.17 B
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
0.19
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.13
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
NR
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
-------
B-90
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW33 GW33 GW33 GW36 GW36 GW37 GW38
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13 5/10/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3 Round 3 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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
27.1
0.0450
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
37.2
0.0616
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
41.5
0.0882
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.0012 J
<0.0028 U
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
15.5
0.3840
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
17.5
0.4280
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
21.1 J-
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<20.0 U
<5.0U, J-
<25.0U
<25.0U
<25.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<10.0U
<0.10U
0.13
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
0.15
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
<0.10 U
NR
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10U
-------
B-91
Table B-5 Sample Results - Dissolved Gases, Diesel and Gasoline Range Organics, Glycols, and Low Molecular
Weight Acids (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample SW01 SW01 SW01 SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 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)
Diethylene glycol (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)
Isobutyrate (79-31-2)
Butyrate (107-92-6)
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
0.0244
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
0.0011 J
<0.0028 U
<0.0039 U
<0.0048 U
0.21
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
<0.0014 U
<0.0028 U
<0.0038 U
<0.0048 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<20U
23.1
<20.0 U
<20.0U, J-
24.2
27.7 B
<20U
<20U
<20.0 U
243 J-
<20.0 U
273 J-
<20.0 U
48.2 J-
<20.0 U
46.0 J-
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<10.0 U
<5.0U, J-
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<5.0U
<5.0U
<25.0 U
<25.0 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U
R
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
NR
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
0.13
R
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
0.095
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
0.069
0.17 B
0.143
<0.10 U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U
<0.10U
<0.10U, J-
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10 U
<0.10U,J-
<0.10 U
-------
B-92
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
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
tii/L
tii/L
tii/L
tii/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
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<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
<1.00U, 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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50J
<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
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
-------
B-93
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW03 GW03 GW03 GW04 GW04 GW05
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1
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
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
<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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<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
<1.00U,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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<2.00 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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<0.50 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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
-------
B-94
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08
Sample Date 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 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)
tigA
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<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
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<2.00 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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<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
<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
<5.00 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
NR
<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
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
-------
B-95
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
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
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
<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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<2.00 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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
-------
B-96
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
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)
tigA
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<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
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<2.00 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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<0.50 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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
-------
B-97
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
<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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<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
<1.00U,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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<2.00 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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<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
<1.00U, 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
-------
B-98
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW16 GW16 GW16 GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 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)
tigA
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00U
<2.00 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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<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
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
-------
B-99
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW19 GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22 GW23 GW24
Sample Date 10/31/11 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11
Unit Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1
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)
tigA
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<0.50U,J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 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-
<5.00U, 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-
NR
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 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-
<5.00U, 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-
NR
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
<0.50U, J-
-------
B-100
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW25 GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27
Sample Date 11/2/11 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13
Unit Round 1 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)
tigA
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
<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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<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
<1.00U,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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
-------
B-101
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Sample GW28 GW28 GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/15/13 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Round 1
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)
tigA
lig/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
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<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
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
-------
B-102
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW32 GW32 GW32 GW33 GW33 GW33
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13
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
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<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
<1.00U,J-
<1.00U,J-
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<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
<1.00U, 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
-------
B-103
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Sample GW36 GW36 GW37 GW38 SW01 SW01 SW01
Sample Date 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13 5/10/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 2 Round 3 Round 3 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)
tigA
lig/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
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<2.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<3.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<5.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<3.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<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
<1.00 U
<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
<1.00 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
<0.50 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
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
NR
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<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
<1.00U, 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
-------
B-104
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 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
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
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
lig/L
<0.50U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 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
NR
<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
<1.00U,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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U,J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 U
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<2.00 U
-------
B-105
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
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
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
3.06 B
<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
<3.00U, J-
<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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
5.38
<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
<0.50 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
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
3.57B
<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
<1.00U
<3.00U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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-106
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW03 GW03 GW03 GW04 GW04 GW05
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1
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
<0.50 U
<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
2.99 B
<1.00U
<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
<3.00U, J-
<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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
18.3
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
3.10B
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 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
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
3.47 B
<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
-------
B-107
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08
Sample Date 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 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
<0.50 U
<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
2.89 B
<1.00U
<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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
3.59B
1.21 B
<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
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
3.35 B
4.10 B
<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
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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-108
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
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
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
3.54 B
<1.00U
<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
36.7t
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<0.50 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
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
3.88B
<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
<1.00U
<3.00U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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-109
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
3.15B
<1.00U
<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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
3.39B
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<0.50 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
<5.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
4.04 B
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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-110
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
2.34 B
<1.00U
<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
<3.00U, J-
<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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
5.75 B
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, 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
<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-lll
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW16 GW16 GW16 GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 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
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U, J-
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<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
2.74 B
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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-112
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW19 GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22 GW23 GW24
Sample Date 10/31/11 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11
Unit Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1
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
1.57 B
<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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<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-
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50 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
<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
<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-
-------
B-113
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW25 GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27
Sample Date 11/2/11 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13
Unit Round 1 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
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<2.50U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<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
<1.00 U
2.45 B
<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
<3.00U, J-
<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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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-114
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Sample GW28 GW28 GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/15/13 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Round 1
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
<1.00U
<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
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U, J-
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<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
<1.00 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
-------
B-115
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW32 GW32 GW32 GW33 GW33 GW33
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13
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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U, J-
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U, J-
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, 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
<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-116
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Sample GW36 GW36 GW37 GW38 SW01 SW01 SW01
Sample Date 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13 5/10/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 2 Round 3 Round 3 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
<3.00 U, H
<1.00U, H
<3.00 U, H
<3.00 U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<3.00 U, H
<1.00 U,H,J-
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<3.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<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
3.82
<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
<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
<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
<0.50 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
<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,H,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,J-
<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
<1.00U, J-
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U, 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
<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-117
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 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
<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
<1.00 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
<3.00U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U,H,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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00U, J-
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U,H,J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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,H,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
<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
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<3.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U,H,J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<3.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
3.02
<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-118
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
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
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
tii/L
tii/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
Hg/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00J
<0.50 U
<1.00J
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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-119
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW03 GW03 GW03 GW04 GW04 GW05
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1
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
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-120
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07 GW08 GW08 GW08
Sample Date 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 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
liS/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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-121
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
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
liS/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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-122
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW11 GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
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
liS/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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-123
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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
liS/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00U, J-
<1.00U, 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
<1.00U
<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-124
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW16 GW16 GW16 GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 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
liS/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<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
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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-125
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW19 GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22 GW23 GW24
Sample Date 10/31/11 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/1/11
Unit Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1
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
liS/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 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-
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 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-
-------
B-126
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW25 GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27
Sample Date 11/2/11 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13
Unit Round 1 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
liS/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 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
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<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
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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-127
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample GW28 GW28 GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/15/13 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11
Round 1
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
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<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
<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
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<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
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-128
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample GW32 GW32 GW32 GW33 GW33 GW33
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13
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
liS/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<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
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U, J-
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00U, J-
<1.00U, 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
<1.00U
<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-129
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Round 2 Round 3 Round 3 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
Sample GW36 GW36 GW37 GW38 SW01 SW01 SW01
Sample Date 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13 5/10/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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
liS/L
lig/L
lig/L
Hg/L
liS/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
Hg/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
tig/L
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<1.00U, H
<2.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<2.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<1.00 U, H
<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
<1.00 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
<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
<1.00U
<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
<1.00 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
<1.00 U
<0.50 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<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
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<2.00U, J-
<1.00U, 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
<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-130
Table B-6 Sample Results - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
^^^^^^m ^^^^^^M ^^^^^^m ^^^^^^ ^^^^^M ^^^^H
Parameter (CAS Number)
Sample SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 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
liS/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
tig/L
tig/L
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<0.50 U
<1.00U
<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
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<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
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<2.00 U
<1.00U
<1.00 U
<2.00 U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-131
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Northeastern
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW01 GW01 GW01 GW02 GW02 GW02 GW03 GW03 GW03
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
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
-67.31
-10.46
-64.65
-9.81
-65.7
-9.87
-67.41
-10.37
-64.85
-9.71
-65.5
-9.88
-64.99
-9.82
-64.57
-9.66
-65.4
-9.70
1870
5.3
0.710362
0.00053
0.0028
1870
5.4
0.710334
0.00053
0.0029
1680
5.4
0.710348
0.00060
0.0032
3010
5.9
0.710364
0.00033
0.0020
3310
6.2
0.710394
0.00030
0.0019
3290
6.0
0.710384
0.00030
0.0018
11000
9.4
0.710455
0.00009
0.0009
10800
8.4
0.710498
0.00009
0.0008
11500
8.6
0.710451
0.00009
0.0007
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
4.2 ± 2.5 J
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-132
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Northeastern
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW04 GW04 GW05 GW06 GW06 GW06 GW07
Sample Date 10/25/11 4/27/12 10/26/11 10/26/11 4/28/12 5/11/13 10/26/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
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
-63.79
-9.38
-61.77
-9.35
-64.42
-9.17
-63.24
-9.56
-61.82
-9.42
-62.9
-9.48
-61.85
-9.02
9300
8.1
0.709618
0.00011
0.0009
9090
8.1
0.709604
0.00011
0.0009
1220
1.2
0.713006
0.00082
0.0010
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1480
1.2
0.712963
0.00068
0.0008
1320
1.2
0.712953
0.00076
0.0009
424
0.8
0.713494
0.00236
0.0019
NA
NA
NA
NA
6.1+/-2.2
6.6 +/- 2.5
4.40 +/- 1.3
2.88 +/- 0.73
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.7 +/- 1.9
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
5.1 ± 1.9 J
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
B-133
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Northeastern
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW08 GW08 GW08 GW09 GW09 GW09 GW10 GW10 GW10
Sample Date 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/11/13 10/27/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/27/11 4/24/12 5/11/13
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
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
-63.76
-9.41
-63.50
-9.56
-64.4
-9.66
-62.98
-8.97
-63.44
-9.54
-64.1
-9.74
-57.54
-8.36
-59.33
-9.11
-58.6
-8.88
1570
5.4
0.711799
0.00064
0.0034
2150
6.8
0.711811
0.00047
0.0032
2350
7.2
0.711770
0.00043
0.0031
1130
1.4
0.712267
0.00088
0.0012
1270
1.6
0.712180
0.00079
0.0013
1100
1.5
0.712257
0.00091
0.0014
93
0.5
0.712668
0.01075
0.0054
89
0.5
0.712701
0.01124
0.0056
101
0.5
0.712667
0.00990
0.0050
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-134
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Northeastern
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW11 GW11 GW11 GW12 GW12 GW13 GW13
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/27/12 5/9/13 10/28/11 5/11/13 10/28/11 4/28/12
Unit 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
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
-63.92
-8.95
-63.96
-9.57
-64.3
-9.67
-59.49
-8.53
-60.2
-9.07
-64.74
-9.81
-61.73
-9.40
655
2.0
0.713092
0.00153
0.0031
907
3.1
0.712980
0.00110
0.0034
898
3.5
0.712965
0.00111
0.0039
209
0.5
0.712554
0.00478
0.0024
209
<1.0
0.712579
0.00478
NR
975
2.0
0.713118
0.00103
0.0021
1050
2.3
0.713121
0.00095
0.0022
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-135
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Northeastern
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW14 GW14 GW14 GW15 GW15 GW15 GW16 GW16 GW16
Sample Date 10/28/11 4/24/12 5/9/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13
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
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
-61.91
-9.54
-58.83
-9.04
-59.2
-9.23
-67.74
-9.93
-64.26
-9.63
-64.9
-9.80
-65.82
-9.47
-64.72
-9.58
-64.9
-9.88
224
0.7
0.712720
0.00446
0.0031
217
0.6
0.712723
0.00461
0.0028
209
0.7
0.712736
0.00478
0.0033
1390
1.8
0.713433
0.00072
0.0013
1490
2.0
0.713441
0.00067
0.0013
1410
1.9
0.713456
0.00071
0.0013
3080
2.0
0.713463
0.00032
0.0006
2990
2.0
0.713470
0.00033
0.0007
3190
2.0
0.713489
0.00031
0.0006
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
4.1 ± 1.7 J
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
1.31 ± 0.5 J
<1.00 U
-------
B-136
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Northeastern
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW17 GW17 GW18 GW18 GW19 GW20 GW20 GW21 GW22
Sample Date 10/29/11 4/30/12 10/31/11 4/28/12 10/31/11 10/31/11 4/28/12 11/1/11 11/1/11
Unit Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1
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
-62.52
-9.10
-64.92
-9.83
-61.71
-8.99
-62.53
-9.49
-57.93
-8.46
-62.75
-9.13
-62.90
-9.45
-62.37
-9.15
-60.76
-9.13
5840
4.3
0.713492
0.00017
0.0007
5860
4.5
0.713486
0.00017
0.0008
1360
0.6
0.713119
0.00074
0.0004
1450
0.7
0.713110
0.00069
0.0005
63
<0.5
0.712886
0.01587
NR
741
0.9
0.713108
0.00135
0.0012
877
0.8
0.713097
0.00114
0.0009
70
0.4
0.713519
0.01429
0.0057
773
0.6
0.713049
0.00129
0.0008
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.3 +/- 1.9
7.4 +/- 2.8
3.70+/-1-1
2.68 +/- 0.70
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
B-137
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Northeastern
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW23 GW24 GW25 GW26 GW26 GW26 GW27 GW27 GW27
Sample Date 11/1/11 11/1/11 11/2/11 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/15/13 11/2/11 4/24/12 5/9/13
Unit Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 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
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
-61.31
-8.99
-61.19
-9.03
-59.99
-8.98
-60.34
-8.62
-61.59
-9.40
-62.4
-9.59
-60.68
-8.58
-63.64
-9.59
-63.6
-9.64
759
0.5
0.713094
0.00132
0.0007
307
0.9
0.714472
0.00326
0.0029
2500
3.2
0.712869
0.00040
0.0013
1810
1.7
0.713092
0.00055
0.0009
1930
1.8
0.713089
0.00052
0.0009
1750
1.7
0.713093
0.00057
0.0010
2380
3.0
0.712764
0.00042
0.0013
2590
3.2
0.712812
0.00039
0.0012
2570
3.2
0.712770
0.00039
0.0012
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.1+/-1-7
4.7 +/- 2.1
1.79 +/- 0.69
<1.00 U
5.9 ± 1.6 J
<4.0U
2.70 ± 0.89 J
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-138
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Northeastern
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
Sample GW28 GW28 GW29 GW29 GW29 GW30 GW31
Sample Date 11/3/11 5/15/13 11/3/11 5/1/12 5/14/13 11/3/11 11/4/11
Round 1
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
-61.09
-9.20
-64.1
-9.85
-59.35
-8.93
-61.01
-9.30
-61.7
-9.52
-61.43
-9.27
-59.49
-8.87
1040
0.9
0.712233
0.00096
0.0009
934
<1.0
0.712246
0.00107
NR
585
0.6
0.713328
0.00171
0.0010
624
0.6
0.713360
0.00160
0.0010
561
<1.0
0.713340
0.00178
NR
2080
3.6
0.711836
0.00048
0.0017
666
2.2
0.714281
0.00150
0.0033
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
3.3±1.0J
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
B-139
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Northeastern
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
Sample GW32 GW32 GW32 GW33 GW33 GW33 GW36 GW36 GW37
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13
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
-61.94
-9.22
-61.94
-9.44
-62.8
-9.54
-61.59
-9.18
-62.72
-9.60
-63.6
-9.74
-57.35
-8.78
-58.5
-8.79
-61.1
-9.35
556
0.7
0.712988
0.00180
0.0013
563
0.7
0.713051
0.00178
0.0012
525
<1.0
0.713055
0.00190
NR
822
0.7
0.713013
0.00122
0.0009
861
0.8
0.713012
0.00116
0.0009
774
<1.0
0.712998
0.00129
NR
274
<0.5
0.714515
0.00365
NR
228
<1.0
0.714517
0.00439
NR
136
<1.0
0.713364
0.00735
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.3 +/- 1.7
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
4.5 +/- 2.0
2.07 +/- 0.66
<1.00 U
4.2 ± 1.6 J
5.6 ± 1.9 J
1.81 ± 0.63 J
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-140
Table B-7 Sample Results - Water Isotopes, Strontium Isotopes, and Radiological Parameters (Northeastern
Pennsylvania)
Parameter
Sample GW38 SW01 SW01 SW01 SW02 SW03 SW04 SW05 SW06
Sample Date 5/10/13 10/29/11 4/30/12 5/14/13 11/4/11 4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Unit Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2
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
-63.5
-9.47
-60.67
-8.98
-59.79
-9.10
-59.3
-8.93
-52.68
-8.09
-62.99
-8.86
-63.54
-8.86
-70.99
-10.17
-70.91
-10.20
482
<1.0
0.713145
0.00207
NR
84
<0.5
0.711886
0.01190
NR
71
<0.5
0.711131
0.01408
NR
87
<1.0
0.711228
0.01149
NR
32
0.4
0.713092
0.03125
0.0125
1490
2.8
0.710026
0.00067
0.0019
1490
2.8
0.710105
0.00067
0.0019
78
0.5
0.713350
0.01282
0.0064
79
0.5
0.713340
0.01266
0.0063
3.7 ± 1.6 J
4.9 ± 1.7 J
<1.00U
<1.00U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
<3.0U
<4.0U
<1.00 U
<1.00 U
-------
B-141
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW01
Sample Date NA
GW01
GW01
GW02
GW02
GW02
GW03
GW03
4/25/12 5/13/13 10/25/11 4/25/12 5/13/13
Parameter
GW03
4/25/12 5/13/13
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
Propylene
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
factor
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0095
ND
0.124
1.15
0.075
6.14
ND
92.48
0.0180
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-39.42
-203.9
NR
-7.25
0.587
938
NR
NR
ND
0.169
1.85
0.11
7.75
ND
90.1
0.0207
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-39.27
-201.0
NA
-6.3
0.599
914
0.31
0.0037
ND
0.111
1.94
0.17
5.03
ND
92.72
0.0233
ND
ND
0.0001
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-38.43
-206.7
-32.0
-15.34
0.588
940
NR
0.0091
ND
0.0889
1.09
0.41
3.78
ND
94.60
0.0260
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-38.26
-204.7
-31.4
-13.86
0.580
960
NR
0.0064
ND
0.0979
1.18
0.19
4.34
ND
94.16
0.0284
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-38.20
-204.0
-31.3
-14.0
0.581
955
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-15.7
NA
NA
NA
-------
B-142
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW04 GW04
Sample Date NA 4/27/12
GW05
GW06
GW06
GW06
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1
4/28/12 5/11/13
Round 2 Round 3
GW07
Round 1
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Propylene
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
factor
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
0.224
1.30
0.41
9.62
ND
88.42
0.0249
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-38.24
-201.9
NR
-12.30
0.607
897
0.49
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
1.62
3.39
2.48
86.02
ND
6.44
0.0505
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-29.95
-136.2
NR
-17.66
0.966
66
0.71
NR
ND
1.60
4.36
1.71
88.31
ND
4.00
0.023
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-27.22
-138.8
NA
-17.2
0.973
41
0.65
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
B-143
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW08
Sample Date NA
GW08
GW08
GW09
GW09
GW09
GW10
GW10
4/27/12 5/11/13
4/27/12 5/9/13
Parameter
GW10
4/24/12 5/11/13
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
Propylene
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
factor
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
0.703
1.27
0.053
34.66
ND
63.30
0.0118
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-49.96
-228.7
NR
-14.06
0.711
642
0.46
NR
ND
0.716
1.23
0.054
36.42
ND
61.57
0.0135
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-48.85
-221.1
NA
-13.4
0.718
624
0.37
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-14.8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-19.2
NA
NA
NA
-------
B-144
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW11
Sample Date NA
GW11
GW11
GW12
4/27/12 5/9/13
GW12
5/11/13
GW13
Parameter
GW13
4/28/12
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
Propylene
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
factor
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
1.42
3.32
0.12
79.76
ND
15.38
0.0050
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-73.52
-252.8
NR
-14.14
0.915
156
0.64
NR
ND
1.44
1.44
0.13
81.71
ND
15.28
0.0047
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-73.90
-251.0
NA
-13.5
0.913
155
0.64
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-14.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
0.582
1.60
0.51
28.30
ND
68.21
0.793
ND
0.0037
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-33.01
-166.0
-37.16
-18.36
0.693
705
0.46
-------
B-145
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW14
Sample Date NA
GW14
GW14
GW15
GW15
GW15
GW16
GW16
4/24/12 5/9/13
4/30/12 5/14/13
Parameter
GW16
4/30/12 5/14/13
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
Propylene
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
factor
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-17.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
1.78
3.57
0.66
90.34
ND
3.64
0.0111
ND
0.0003
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-42.17
-176.7
NR
-15.88
0.968
37
0.70
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-15.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
1.19
2.03
0.42
59.81
ND
36.33
0.215
ND
0.0034
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-39.41
-170.4
-37.7
-16.26
0.827
372
0.64
NR
ND
1.19
2.09
0.35
65.42
ND
30.8
0.144
ND
0.0024
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-40.91
-169.0
-37.3
-15.8
0.850
314
0.62
-------
B-146
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW17 GW17
Sample Date NA 4/30/12
GW18
GW18
4/28/12
GW19
GW20
GW20
GW21
10/31/11 4/28/12
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 1
GW22
Round 1
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Propylene
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
factor
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
0.524
1.27
0.14
27.21
ND
70.82
0.0364
ND
0.0003
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-46.46
-202.3
-38.2
-12.91
0.679
718
0.33
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
1.16
2.41
0.50
61.04
ND
34.36
0.535
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-31.82
-168.0
-36.2
-17.48
0.837
357
0.63
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
1.07
4.00
0.55
55.90
ND
37.98
0.495
ND
0.0007
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-32.32
-165.4
-36.3
-17.78
0.824
393
0.58
NR
ND
0.659
1.69
0.35
30.00
ND
66.58
0.714
ND
0.0026
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-33.32
-173.7
-36.4
-17.62
0.700
687
0.53
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
B-147
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW23
Sample Date NA
GW24
GW25
GW26
GW26
GW26
GW27
GW27
4/24/12 5/15/13
Parameter
Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2
GW27
4/24/12 5/9/13
Round 3
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Propylene
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
factor
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-14.6
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-15.1
NA
NA
NA
-------
B-148
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW28 GW28
Sample Date NA 5/15/13
GW29
GW29
GW29
GW30
5/1/12 5/14/13
Parameter
Round 1 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1
GW31
11/4/11
Round 1
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Propylene
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
factor
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-13.2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
1.68
2.78
2.11
93.42
ND
0.0110
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.07
0.990
0
0.68
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-14.8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
1.58
1.05
4.10
84.26
0.079
8.91
0.0174
0.0003
0.0003
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-57.50
-156.3
NR
-24.38
0.961
91
0.68
-------
B-149
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW32 GW32 GW32
Sample Date 11/4/11 4/30/12 5/10/13
GW33
GW33
GW33
GW36
GW36
Parameter
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 2 Round 3
GW37
4/30/12 5/10/13 4/26/12 5/13/13 5/10/13
Round 3
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Propylene
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
factor
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
NR
ND
1.65
6.85
1.57
86.54
0.011
3.38
0.0010
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-27.7
-79
NR
-17.52
0.978
34
0.71
NR
ND
1.50
5.33
1.32
78.21
ND
13.63
0.0062
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-38.80
-190.5
NR
-17.71
0.932
138
0.65
NR
ND
1.57
5.02
1.31
84.78
ND
7.32
0.0026
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-32.34
-145.1
NA
-17.3
0.958
74
0.68
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0137
ND
0.423
1.65
0.085
23.21
ND
74.56
0.0540
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-38.49
-217.5
-28.0
-15.76
0.663
757
NR
0.0117
ND
0.373
0.84
0.10
19.55
ND
79.04
0.0829
ND
0.0005
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-38.30
-215.2
-30.6
-14.9
0.644
803
NA
NR
ND
1.54
3.66
2.99
91.80
ND
0.0093
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NR
NR
NR
-15.94
0.995
0
0.66
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-15.4
NA
NA
NA
NR
ND
0.613
2.39
1.11
30.82
ND
64.16
0.903
ND
0.0006
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.0004
-31.92
-163.3
-37.1
-19.0
0.715
666
0.47
-------
B-150
Table B-8 Sample Results - Isotech Gas Isotopes (Northeastern Pennsylvania)
Sample GW38
Sample Date 5/10/13
SW01
SW01
SW01
SW02
SW03
SW04
SW05
4/30/12 5/14/13
Parameter
SW06
4/25/12 4/25/12 4/26/12 4/26/12
Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2 Round 2
Helium
Hydrogen
Argon
Oxygen
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen
Carbon monoxide
Methane
Ethane
Ethene
Propane
Propylene
Isobutane
Normal Butane
Isopentane
Normal Pentane
Hexane Plus
5 CCH4
5 HCH4
5 CC2H6
K13/~
o CD!C
Specific Gravity
BTU
Helium dilution
factor
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%0
%0
%0
%0
NR
ND
0.742
1.23
0.26
37.73
ND
59.24
0.791
ND
0.0025
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-32.22
-163.9
-37.4
-17.7
0.729
614
0.47
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-15.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NR
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix C
Background Data
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/088
C-l
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern 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-7
C.2. Search Areas C-7
C.2.1. Land Use C-8
C.2.2. Crop Land C-8
C.2.3. Land Use Changes C-8
C.3. Environmental Records Search C-8
C.3.1. Oil and Gas Well Inventory C-9
C.3.2. State Record Summary C-9
C.4. Evaluation of Data for Bradford County C-10
C.4.1. Environmental Records Search Report Summary C-10
C.4.2. Oil and Gas Well Inventory Summary C-ll
C.4.3. State Record Summary C-12
C.5. Evaluation of Data for Susquehanna County C-16
C.5.1. Environmental Records Search Report Summary C-16
C.5.2. Oil and Gas Well Inventory Summary C-17
C.5.3. State Record Summary C-17
C.6. References C-21
Attachment 1 EDR Record Search C-147
C-2
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
List of Tables
Table Cla Major Agricultural Land Uses in Bradford County C-24
Table Clb Major Agricultural Land Uses in Susquehanna County C-24
Table C2a Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, in Bradford County C-24
Table C2b Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, in Susquehanna County C-24
Table C3 Largest Industries, by Employment, in Bradford and Susquehanna Counties C-25
Table C4 Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area A in 1992 and 2006 C-25
Table C5 Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area B in 1992 and 2006 C-26
Table C6 Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area C in 1992 and 2006 C-26
Table C7 Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area D in 1992 and 2006 C-27
Table C8 Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area E in 1992 and 2006 C-27
Table C9 Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area F in 1992 and 2006 C-28
Table CIO Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area G in 1992 and 2006 C-28
Table Cll Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area H in 1992 and 2006 C-29
Table C12 Land Use in Susquehanna County, Search Area A in 1992 and 2006 C-29
Table C13 Land Use in Susquehanna County, Search Area B in 1992 and 2006 C-30
Table C14 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Bradford County, Search Area A C-30
Table CIS Major Agricultural Land Uses in Bradford County, Search Area B C-30
Table C16 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Bradford County, Search Area C C-31
Table C17 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Bradford County, Search Area D C-31
Table CIS Major Agricultural Land Uses in Bradford County, Search Area E C-31
Table C19 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Bradford County, Search Area F C-31
Table C20 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Bradford County, Search Area G C-32
Table C21 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Bradford County, Search Area H C-32
Table C22 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Susquehanna County, Search Area A C-32
Table C23 Major Agricultural Land Uses in Susquehanna County, Search Area B C-32
Table C24 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford County, Search Area
A C-33
C-3
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table C25 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford County, Search Area
B C-33
Table C26 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford County, Search Area
C C-33
Table C27 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford County, Search Area
D C-34
Table C28 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford County, Search Area
E C-34
Table C29 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford County, Search Area
F C-34
Table C30 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford County, Search Area
G C-35
Table C31 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford County, Search Area
H C-35
Table C32 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Susquehanna County, Search
Area A C-35
Table C33 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and 2001 to 2006, Susquehanna County, Search
Area B C-36
Table C34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania C-37
Table C35 Well Inventory Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania C-50
Table C-36 Number of Oil and Gas Wells C-59
Table C37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania C-60
Table C38 Notice of Violations - Identified Potential Candidate Causes and Distances (less than
2 Miles) to EPA Sampling Points, Bradford County, Pennsylvania C-83
Table C39 Environmental Database Review Summary, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania C-84
Table C40 Well Inventory Summary, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania C-88
Table C41 Violations Summary, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania C-96
Table C42 Notice of Violations - Identified Potential Candidate Causes and Distances (less than
2 Miles) to EPA Sampling Points, Northeast Pennsylvania - Susquehanna County C-107
C-4
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
List of Figures
Figure Cla Crop Lands, Bradford County C-109
Figure Clb Crop Lands, Susquehanna County C-110
Figure C2a Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County C-lll
Figure C2b Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Susquehanna County C-112
Figure C3a Population in Bradford County, Pennsylvania C-113
Figure C3b Population in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania C-114
Figure C4 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site A C-115
Figure C5 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site B C-116
Figure C6 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site C C-117
Figure C7 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site D C-118
Figure C8 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site E C-119
Figure C9 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site F C-120
Figure CIO Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site G C-121
Figure Cll Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site H C-122
Figure C12 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Susquehanna County, Site A C-123
Figure C13 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Susquehanna County, Site B C-124
Figure C14 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site A C-125
Figure CIS 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site B C-126
Figure C16 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site C C-127
Figure C17 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site D C-128
Figure CIS 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site E C-129
Figure C19 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site F C-130
Figure C20 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site G C-131
Figure C21 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site H C-132
Figure C22 2012 Crop Lands, Susquehanna County, Site A C-133
Figure C23 2012 Crop Lands, Susquehanna County, Site B C-134
C-5
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Figure C24 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site A C-135
Figure C25 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site B C-136
Figure C26 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site C C-137
Figure C27 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site D C-138
Figure C28 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site E C-139
Figure C29 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site F C-140
Figure C30 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site G C-141
Figure C31 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site H C-142
Figure C32 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Susquehanna County, Site A C-143
Figure C33 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Susquehanna County, Site B C-144
Figure C34a Sampling Location Map, Bradford County C-145
Figure C34b Sampling Location Map, Susquehanna County C-146
C-6
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
C.I. Land Use
This section presents descriptions of land uses in Bradford and Susquehanna counties as a whole,
followed by descriptions of land uses in and around the sampling points of this study. Building on
information provided in the Study Area Background section in the main body of this report, information
on the use of agricultural land was obtained from the Cropland Data Layer, produced by the US
Department of Agriculture's National Agricultural Statistics Service, which contains data on agricultural
uses of land based on satellite imagery and extensive agricultural ground checking of the imagery. This
layer provides data on agricultural uses of land. Figures Cla and Clb show land uses, including the
agricultural uses of land, in Bradford and Susquehanna counties in 2012. Tables Cla and Clb show the
percentages of county land devoted to the largest agricultural uses. Other hay/non-alfalfa (i.e., animal
fodder), corn, and fallow/idle cropland were the largest uses of agricultural land in both counties.
While the data from the National Land Cover Database for 1992 and 2006 are not directly comparable, it
is possible to compare data from 1992 to that from 2001, and to then compare data from 2001 to that
from 2006 to identify land use changes (Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, 2013.)
Figures C2a and C2b show changes in land use in Bradford and Susquehanna counties between 1992 and
2001 and between 2001 and 2006, respectively. Tables C2a and C2b present data on the changes in
land use in the two counties in the two sub-periods. It can be seen from the tables that only a tiny
proportion of the land in the counties changed use in either sub-period.
Figures C3a and C3b show population totals for Bradford and Susquehanna counties (i.e., an indicator of
the intensity of land use) for each census year from 1950 to 2010. (US Census Bureau, 2013a-e) Prior to
1980, the population of Bradford County was growing slightly, and since 1980 it has declined slightly.
The population of Susquehanna County has grown at a modest rate throughout the period (i.e., at an
annual average growth rate of approximately 0.5 per cent per year over the period 1980 to 2010). In
2011, the population density in Bradford County was approximately 55 persons per square mile, and the
population density in Susquehanna County was approximately 53 persons per square mile, whereas the
population density for the entire state was approximately 285 persons per square mile (US Census,
2012a). In 2010, the percentages of the land taken up by urban areas (another indicator of the intensity
of land use) in Bradford and Susquehanna counties were 0.9% and 0.5%, respectively, as compared to
10.5 per cent for the entire state (US Census Bureau, 2012b).
Employment is another broad indicator of land use in a county. Table C3 shows the largest industries,
by employment, in Bradford and Susquehanna counties. The production industries (i.e., manufacturing
and mining) accounted for 23% of employment in Bradford County and 15% of employment in
Susquehanna County.
C.2. Search Areas
The record search areas were based on 1- and 3-mile-radius areas centered around a single EPA
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. One- to 3-mile-
radius search areas were used to acquire environmental data search reports and for oil and gas well
C-7
-------
Appendix CBackground Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
inventory searches; however, only 1-mile-radius search areas were used for notices of violations
searches (as described in the sections below). Land use data was collected on a countywide basis, and
descriptions of land use were provided for each search area. In general, each 1- to 3-mile-radius search
area extended outward from either a specific sampling location or the mean center point of a cluster of
sampling locations.
In Bradford County, four 3-mile search areas and four 1-mile search areas were used to capture the EPA
sampling points. In Susquehanna County, one 3-mile search area and one 1-mile search area were used
to capture the EPA sampling points.
C.2.1. Land Use
Figures C4 through C13, which were created using data from the National Land Cover Database, present
land use maps of Bradford County Search Areas A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H and Susquehanna County
Search Areas A and B, respectively, for 1992 and 2006. Tables C4 through C13 present data on land use
in Bradford County Search Areas A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H and Susquehanna County Search Areas A and
B, respectively, for 1992 and 2006. Bearing in mind that the land use data for the two years are not
comparable due to methodological differences, they do, however, 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 C14 through C23 show land uses, including the agricultural uses of land, in Bradford County
Search Areas A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H and Susquehanna County Search Areas A and B, respectively, in
2012. Tables C14 through C23 show, respectively, the percentages of land in Bradford County Search
Areas A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H and Susquehanna County Search Areas A and B devoted to the largest
agricultural uses. Other hay/non-alfalfa (i.e., animal fodder), corn, and fallow/idle cropland were
typically the largest uses of agricultural land in each of the search areas.
C.2.3. Land Use Changes
Figures C24 through C33 show land use changes in Bradford County Search Areas A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and
H and Susquehanna County Search Areas A and B, respectively, between 1992 and 2001 and between
2001 and 2006. Tables C24 through C33 present data on the changes in land use in the two sub-periods.
It can be seen from the tables that, in general, either only a tiny proportion of the land in each search
area changed use in both sub-periods or there was little change in the sub-period 1992 to 2001 and no
change in the sub-period 2001 to 2006.
C.3. Environmental Records Search
Environmental record searches for the Bradford County and Susquehanna County areas were performed
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
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
for the two study areas with regard to the documented use, storage, or release of hazardous materials
or petroleum products (see Attachment I).1
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 on 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
include relevant environmental information (including, but not limited to, notices of relevant violations
[i.e., violations that could result in contamination to the environment as opposed to administrative
violations], current and historical use of the site, materials and wastes at the site, and releases and/or
spills) and distance from the sampling points. As a general rule, sites that were more than 1.5 miles
from a particular sampling point were generally not considered as a potential candidate cause because
of the long travel time necessary for the contaminant to migrate. However, sites at greater distances
were considered based on the magnitude and type of the release.
Sites that EDR could not automatically map due to poor or inadequate address information in the
searched databases 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, therefore, listed on the
Environmental Records Search Report as "orphan" sites. All of 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 (EPA website and state
websites). Additionally, through a more extensive review of the available records (including EnviroFacts,
business listings, etc.), a location was determined for most orphan sites, and their approximate distance
from the sampling points was measured on a map.
C.3.1. Oil and Gas Well Inventory
Well inventories were prepared for the same search areas described above for the EDR reports. 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.
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
Note: Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) does not search the EnviroFacts and its associated EnviroMapper
databases; however, it 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-9
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
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, the record search was
performed only on oil and gas wells within a 1-mile radius of each EPA sampling point.
C.4. Evaluation of Data for Bradford County
C.4.1. Environmental Records Search Report Summary
Eight separate search radii (search areas A through H) were established to perform database searches
that captured the Bradford County sampling points (see Figure C34a). The search radii for Search Areas
A through H ranged from 1 mile to 3 miles; Areas A, B, C, and F each had a 3-mile radius, and Areas D, E,
G, and H each had a 1-mile radius. The database search located 15 mapped records within these search
areas. An additional 104 orphan sites were identified during the searches. Some of the records were
identified in more than one database; therefore, the actual number of sites is less than the 119 records
identified. Orphan sites are those sites with poor locational information in the databases that may or
may not exist outside the actual search radius. An attempt was made 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 evaluations of these sites are summarized in Table C34.
Thirty-one incident/record/sites identified in the EDR databases were retained as potential candidate
causes, as described below:
• Historic Landfills (HIST LF) - This database contains a listing of inactive nonhazardous facilities,
solid waste facilities, or abandoned landfills, although portions of this database are no longer
maintained by the PADEP. Landfills are potential sources of methane. One HIST LF site, an
abandoned landfill about 1.4 miles east of NEPAGW31, was retained.
• Leaking 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 Department of Environmental
Resources' list of confirmed releases; and Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) contains a list of
registered ASTs from PADEP's listing of Pennsylvania regulated ASTs. A total of 14 UST and two
AST sites were retained. Four of the sites are located near NEPAGW31 (one site is 1.10 miles
northwest, two sites are about 0.80 miles north, and one site is 0.97 miles northeast). The other
12 sites were orphans included as potential contributors to groundwater quality impacts due to
their proximity to the nearest sampling point or because the location could not be determined.
• Facility Index System (FINDS) - This database contains both facility information and other
sources of information from the EPA/ National Technical Information Service (NTIS). A total of
three FIND sites were retained: one site 0.98 miles northeast of NEPAGW31 has ignitable and
reactive wastes; one site about 0.88 miles north of NEPAGW31 had a PAH and Fuel Oil No. 2 soil
cleanup; and one site, a quarry west of Towanda on the north side of Route 6, could not be
ruled out as potential contributor without knowing the location of the quarry.
C-10
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
• Federal RCRA Generators List (RCRA-CESQG) - This database is EPA's information system on
sites that 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 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste per month. A
total of four RCRA sites were retained: one site about 1.06 miles northeast of NEPAGW31
generates cadmium, lead, benzene, methyl ethyl keytone (MEK), tetrachloroethylene (PCE), and
trichloroethylene (TCE); the locations of the other three sites are unknown. Without further
information about these three sites, particularly their locations, they cannot be ruled out as
potential contributors to groundwater quality impacts.
• Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) List - This database lists sites involved in the Land Recycling
Program that encourages the voluntary cleanup and reuse of contaminated commercial and
industrial sites. A total of five VCP sites were retained: one site located about 0.4 miles
northwest of NEPAGW26, 0.5 miles west of NEPAGW25, and 0.5 miles northwest of NEPAGW27
involves a brine water release from a tractor trailer in August 2010. The locations of the other
four sites are unknown. Without further information about these three sites, particularly their
locations, they cannot be ruled out as potential contributors to groundwater quality impacts.
• EDR Hist 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. One EDR HIST Auto site, a potential gas station/filling
station/service station site located about 0.8 miles north of NEPAGW31, was retained.
• CERC-NFRAP (CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned) - This database contains 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 no
hazard is associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the
location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. One CERC-NFRAP site (Herrick Township Fill
site) was retained as a potential candidate cause because it could be as close as 1 mile from
NEPAGW31.
C.4.2. Oil and Gas Well Inventory Summary
As described above, the EPA sampling locations were compared with the inventory of wells identified in
the EPA geographic information system (GIS) database files and PADEP database files as of June 1, 2013
(see Table C35).
There are 156 oil and gas wells in the Bradford County search areas (A through H). Of these wells, 75 are
within 1 mile of an EPA sampling location (see Table C36). (Note: since some of the search areas
overlap, the total number of wells in Table C35, which breaks down the number of wells by search area,
is slightly more than the total number of wells in Table C36.)
C-ll
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
In summary, there are numerous oil and gas production wells in the study area. The presence of
numerous oil and gas wells increase the probability of one or more of these features being a potential
candidate cause for methane migration.
C.4.3. State Record Summary
Notice of Violations (NOVs). All oil and gas wells within a 1-mile radius of EPA sampling points were
researched for NOVs (see Table C37) by accessing Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection (PADEP) websites (NOV records as accessed in the eFACTS Facility Search website
[http://www.ahs.dep.pa.gov/eFACTSWeb] and oil and gas compliance reports presented in website
http://www.depreportingservices.state.pa.us/ReportServer/Pages/ReportViewer.aspx7/Oil Gas/OG Co
mpliance). A list of notable violations indicating a potential candidate cause was also compiled (see
Table 38).
PADEP NOV records and compliance reports indicated the following instances of discharges (drill
cuttings/fluids/brine/residual waste) to Waters of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (see Table C38):
• VANNOY 627108 2 and VANNOY 627108 3 - NEPAGW03, NEPASW03, and NEPASW04 are
approximately 0.1 miles southeast of these wells, and NEPAGW01 and NEPAGW02 are
approximately 0.6 miles west of these wells. Several notable violations recorded during
different inspections are listed below.
o March 3, 2009, inspection (VANNOY 627108 2 only): Discharge of pollutional material to
Waters of the Commonwealth. Compliance records indicated a Section 401 violation of
fresh water flowing from two 500-barrel tanks located on site, eroding the ground
surface and causing elevated turbidity in a nearby pond.
o March 20, 2009, inspection: Failure to construct properly plugged fracturing brine pits;
impoundment not structurally sound, impermeable, third-party protected, greater than
20 inches of seasonal high ground water table; Clean Streams Law - General (used only
when a specific CIS code cannot be used); discharge of pollutional material to Waters of
the Commonwealth. The associated compliance records indicate that hydrochloric acid
was not contained in the pit, tank, or series of pits and tank, and a spill occurred on-site.
The associated emergency response inspection of the hydrochloric acid spill at the site
lead to multiple violations cited in the NOV issued on April 2, 2009, in conjunction with
the March 27, 2009, follow-up inspection. The compliance record for an on-site
meeting conducted on April 1, 2009, to discuss the previous acid spill and violations,
noted that 21 roll-offs of acid-impacted soils had been removed and that the
hydrochloric acid release was estimated at 10 barrels, with further enforcement
pending.
o July 23, 2009, inspection: O&G Act 223 - General violation (used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used). The compliance record noted the following: By allowing
drill cuttings and fluid to be in direct contact with the ground surface without
containment, and thus threatening Waters of the Commonwealth, Chesapeake
Appalachia, LLC has violated 25 PA Code § 78.56(a), Section 301 of the Solid Waste
C-12
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Management Act, 35 P.S § 6018.301, Section 307(a) of the Clean Streams Law, 35 P.S.
§691.307(a), Section402(a) of the Clean Streams Law, 35 P.S. §691.402(a) and the rules
and regulations of the PADEP.
o November 5, 2009, inspection: Discharge of pollutional material to Waters of
Commonwealth; Clean Streams Law-General violation; O&G Act 223 - General violation.
The compliance record indicates pond impact (Waters of the Commonwealth): the pond
adjacent to well pad was sampled and found to have low pH and oil and gas
constituents.
• CRANRUN 2H - Industrial waste discharged without permit was cited on October 20, 2010.
NEPAGW36 is approximately 0.3 miles northwest of this well, and NEPAGW07 is approximately
1.0 mile east-northeast of this well.
• ATGAS 2H - Pit and tanks not constructed with sufficient capacity to contain pollutional
substances; discharge of pollutional material to Waters of Commonwealth; and stream
discharge of industrial waste, including drill cuttings, oil, brine, and/or silt. These violations
were cited on April 22, 2011. In July 2012, the following violations were cited: failure to adopt
pollution prevention measures required or prescribed by PADEP by handling materials that
create a danger of pollution; and failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual
waste to prevent pollution of the Waters of the Commonwealth. The associated compliance
records indicated a 30-gallon flowback spill. NEPAGW36 is approximately 1.1 miles east-
northeast of this well, and NEPAGW07 is approximately 0.1 miles northwest of this well.
• WELLES 1 3H and WELLES 1 5H - Site conditions present a potential for pollution to Waters of
the Commonwealth; Clean Streams Law - General violation; and O&G Act 223 - General
violation. Inspection comments on the compliance record indicate a self-reported pit leak that
was fixed. Soil analytical results reviewed on September 2, 2009, reported barium at 171
milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) (less than Act 2 standard [8,200 mg/kg]) and chloride at 170
mg/kg (no Act 2 standard). No remediation needed. Additional information in the compliance
record includes the following comments: failure to manage residual waste; unpermitted
discharge of industrial waste; failure to follow discharge requirements; and discharge of drilling-
contaminated fluids to the ground. These violations were cited on August 7, 2009. NEPAGW18
and NEPAGW19 are approximately 0.8 miles southeast of these wells; NEPAGW20 is
approximately 0.9 miles southeast of these wells; NEPAGW13 is approximately 0.9 miles
southeast of these well; and NEPA GW31 is approximately 2.1 miles northeast of these wells.
• WELLES 3 2H - On September 25, 2013, the PADEP arrived at the site at 11:20 p.m. in response
to a 25-gallon spill of an unknown material. Chesapeake reported the spill incident to the
Department at 6:42 p.m. on September 25, 2013. The Marcellus incident report indicates the
spill occurred as Chesapeake was getting ready to move fracturing equipment. The crew was
moving a dumpster not on containment and in the process of cleaning it out. The report alleges
a liquid, most likely water, leaked out of the container. The liquid impacted the soil around the
dumpster, and Chesapeake already scraped the soil and staged it on containment for removal.
The following violations were cited during the follow-up inspection on November 25, 2013:
failure to adopt pollution prevention measures required or prescribed by the PADEP by handling
C-13
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
materials that create a danger of pollution; pit and tanks not constructed with sufficient capacity
to contain pollutional substances; and failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of
a residual waste. The associated compliance records indicate that Chesapeake submitted a
report to the PADEP on November 18, 2013, in relation to the September 25, 2013, brine spill of
approximately 25 gallons released to the soil. The PADEP reviewed the post-excavation
sampling results on November 22, 2013, and concluded that although some evidence of the spill
may remain, there are no compounds of concern above their relevant cleanup standards, and
there is no need for additional soil remediation with respect to this spill. This well is
approximately 1.5 miles west of NEPAGW31; 0.7 miles north of NEPAGW18 and NEPAGW19; 0.8
miles north of NEPAGW20; and 0.9 miles north of NEPAGW13.
• OTTEN 626935 1H - NEPAGW06 is approximately 0.7 miles east-northeast of this well;
NEPAGW05 is approximately 0.9 miles east-northeast of this well; NEPAGW27 is approximately
1.5 miles northeast of this well; and NEPAGW25 and NEPAGW26are 1.6 miles northeast of this
well. Several notable violations recorded during different inspections are listed below.
o February 19, 2009, inspection: O&G Act 223 - General. The associated compliance
record indicates the presence of residual waste on ground surface and failure to report
a release. Additionally, comments from the subsequent July 1, 2009, compliance
evaluation inspection indicate that, during a site inspection on February 19, 2009, it was
noted that uncontained drilling fluids were located on the surface of the well pad and
also located off-site, downgradient of the fill slope. During the compliance evaluation
inspection, it was verified that the previously spilled drilling fluids had been excavated
as previously indicated; however, the fill slope had not been properly stabilized, and the
silt fence at the base of the fill slope was not properly installed to minimize erosion
potential. A subsequent compliance evaluation inspection on August 21, 2009,
indicated that all spill areas were checked and appeared to be in order.
o June 15, 2010, inspection: Discharge of pollutional material to Waters of
Commonwealth; and Administrative Code - General. The associated compliance record
indicates brine spill outside of secondary containment.
o August 19, 2010, inspection: Failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of a
residual waste. Compliance record indicates presence of waste all over ground at the
site.
o June 7, 2011, inspection: A complaint was filed with the PADEP regarding potential
contamination at this site. During the inspection, a small area approximately 1 to 2 feet
in diameter with approximately 2 to 3 gallons of standing water was noted below a
clean-out in the pipeline area, relatively close to the site entrance. An EXTECH meter
was used to measure conductivity of the water. The meter read (OL), which means over
the limit in conductivity. Sample analysis of the water was performed using SAC 046.
No violations were cited for this inspection.
• CLAUDIA 2H - Polluting substance(s) allowed to discharge into Waters of the Commonwealth;
Clean Streams Law - General; and site conditions present a potential for pollution to Waters of
the Commonwealth. The associated compliance records indicate that frac-out had released
bore gel to stream, and petroleum product spilled to the ground with potential to enter the
C-14
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
stream. Violation comments noted adequate company response and that the bore gel amount
was unknown but was estimated to be small based on similar incidents. These violations were
cited on May 7, 2010. NEPAGW10 is approximately 1.0 miles east-northeast of this well;
NEPAGW14 is approximately 1.1 miles northeast of this well; NEPAGW25 is approximately 0.8
miles west-northwest of this well; NEPAGW26 is approximately 0.9 miles west of this well;
NEPAGW27 is approximately 0.8 miles west-southwest of this well; NEPAGW05 is approximately
1.5 miles southwest of this well; and NEPAGW06 is approximately 1.6 miles southwest of this
well.
• Dave 2H - on April 28, 2011, the following violations were noted in the record:
o Discharge of pollutional material to waters of the Commonwealth; and
o There is a potential for polluting substance(s) reaching Waters of the Commonwealth
and may require a permit.
• Dave 2H - on May 4, 2011, polluting substance(s) allowed to discharge into Waters of the
Commonwealth.
Additionally, the following inspection and NOVs of insufficient or improperly cemented casing and
reports of excessive casing seat pressure, which could lead to methane contamination, were considered
notable violations even though a confirmed release was not found in the records.
• Balduzzi 2H - Failure to report defective, insufficient, or improperly cemented casing within 24
hours or submit plan to correct within 30 days. Compliance record indicates 100% LEL spike off
of 13%-inch vent port, and 90% LEL combustible gas constant off of 13%-inch vent port. The
date of the violation was May 18, 2011. A subsequent inspection (6/17/11) noted 80%
combustible gas vented off of 13%-inch vent port. This well is approximately 0.4 miles
southeast of NEPAGW12.
• Balduzzi 5H - Failure to report defective, insufficient, or improperly cemented casing within 24
hours or submit plan to correct within 30 days. Compliance records indicate 10% combustible
gas coming off of the 13%-inch vent port. The date of the violation was June 17, 2011. This well
is approximately 0.4 miles southeast of NEPAGW12.
• Stalford 5H - Failure to report defective, insufficient, or improperly cemented casing within 24
hours or submit plan to correct within 30 days. Compliance record indicates three-string design
and 13%-inch port venting 60% combustible gas, and 9%-inch port venting 90-100% combustible
gas. Date of the violation was June 17, 2011. This well is approximately 0.9 miles southwest of
NEPAGW11.
• Coates 2H - Failure to report defective, insufficient, or improperly cemented casing within 24
hours or submit plan to correct within 30 days. Compliance records indicate 60% combustible
gas off of vent. Violation was reported on August 18, 2011. This well is located approximately
0.9 miles southeast of NEPAGW29 and 1.1 miles southwest of NEPAGW28.
• Brackman 2H - Excessive casing seat pressure reported on July 1, 2010. This well is
approximately 0.6 miles northwest of NEPAGW36 and 1.7 miles west-northwest of NEPAGW07.
C-15
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
• ANDRUS UNIT 1H - Failure to report defective, insufficient, or improperly cemented casing
within 24 hours or submit plan to correct within 30 days. Violation was cited on February 28,
2012. This well is approximately 0.3 miles east of NEPAGW04, NEPASW05, and NEPASW06.
• Schlapfer S BRA 2H - On August 31, 2012, failure to report defective, insufficient, or improperly
cemented casing within 24 hours or submit plan to correct within 30 days.
• Crawford 4H - On March 4 and April 8, 2011, failure to report defective, insufficient, or
improperly cemented casing within 24 hours or submit plan to correct within 30 days.
Compliance records indicate: Bubbling in cellar. 0% combustible gas coming off annuli. Needs
further investigation and follow-up inspection.
• Dave 2H - On February 10, 2012, failure to report defective, insufficient, or improperly
cemented casing within 24 hours or submit plan to correct within 30 days.
Additionally, the following NOVs were issued for violations that could potentially lead to releases, but
for which there were no documented discharges to Waters of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in the
records:
• Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent pollution of
Waters of the Commonwealth.
• Failure to maintain 2 feet of freeboard in an impoundment.
• Failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement Erosion and Sediment Control (E & S) plan,
and maintain E&S controls. Failure to stabilize site until total site restoration.
• Failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of a residual waste.
• No Control and Disposal/Preparedness, Prevention, and Contingency (PPC) plan or failure to
implement PPC plan.
• Failure to maintain control of anticipated gas storage reservoir pressures while drilling through
reservoir or protective area.
• Improperly lined pit.
• Industrial waste was discharged without permit.
C.5. Evaluation of Data for Susquehanna County
C.5.1. Environmental Records Search Report Summary
One 3-mile search radius and one 1-mile search radius (search areas) were established to perform
database searches that captured the EPA sampling points (see Figure C34b).
The database search identified 12 mapped records within this search area. An additional 52 orphan
sites were identified during the searches. Some of the records were identified in more than one
database; therefore, the actual number of sites is less than the 64 records identified. Orphan sites are
those sites with poor locational information in the databases that may or may not exist outside the
actual search radius. An attempt was made 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 evaluations of these sites are summarized in Table C39.
C-16
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Candidate causes:
• US HIST AUTO STAT - This database lists sites that are historical gas or service stations. Three
sites (Steve's Auto Body, and two facilities called Rich's Auto Services) were retained because
they were within 1 mile of NEPAGW24. Although no details were available, they were retained
because they may have had petroleum releases.
• UNREG LTANKS - This database lists sites with leaking unregulated storage tanks. One site
(Betty J. Scalzo residence) and one orphan site (Thomas Franks residence) were retained as
potential candidate causes due to a fuel oil No. 2 releases. Date and other details for the
releases are unknown.
• Orphan LUST, UST - This database lists sites with storage tank releases. Two sites were retained
(Great Bend Travel Plaza and Exxon Service Station) as potential candidate causes because both
are within 1 mile of NEPAGW24 and both had either diesel or gasoline releases.
• Orphan: Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) List - This database lists sites involved in the Land
Recycling Program, which encourages the voluntary cleanup and reuse of contaminated
commercial and industrial sites. A total of six VCP sites were retained. The Teel Property,
located 2 miles southwest of NEPAGW21, had violations for allowing the discharge of polluting
substances into Waters of the Commonwealth. The R Hull 2H Well Site, located about 1.5 miles
northwest of NEPAGW21 and NEPAGW22, mentioned soil, diesel fuel, and inorganics
contamination and had violations for allowing the discharge of polluting substances into Waters
about 1.2 miles northwest of NEPAGW21 and NEPAGW22, involve soil cleanups and had
violations for impoundments and for allowing the discharge of polluting substances into Waters
of the Commonwealth. The Eugene Lecher residence, located less than 1 mile from NEPAGW24,
had a kerosene spill that impacted soils. This spill was closed on February 27, 2001. This site
was also listed in the unregulated leaky tanks database. Lastly, violations at the Knapik well pad
are unknown, and without further information about this site, particularly the location, it cannot
be ruled out as a potential contributor to groundwater quality impacts.
C.5.2. Oil and Gas Well Inventory Summary
As described above, the EPA sampling locations were compared with the inventory of wells identified in
the EPA GIS database files and PADEP database files as of June 1, 2013 (see Table C40).
There are 111 oil and gas wells in the Susquehanna County search areas (A and B), 30 of which are
within 1 mile of EPA sampling points (see Table C36).
In summary, there are numerous oil and gas production wells in the study area. The presence of
numerous oil and gas wells increase the probability of one or more of these features being a potential
candidate cause for methane migration.
C.5.3. State Record Summary
Notice of Violations (NOVs). All oil and gas wells within a 1-mile radius of EPA sampling points were
researched for NOVs (see Table C41) by accessing PADEP's eFACTS and oil and gas compliance reports
online. A list of notable violations indicating a potential candidate cause was also compiled (see Table
C-17
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
42). Several NOVs were identified that could potentially lead to discharges but were not linked to
documented discharges to Waters of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, including:
• Failure to design, implement, or maintain best management practices (BMPs) to minimize the
potential for accelerated erosion and sedimentation.
• Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste to prevent pollution of
Waters of the Commonwealth.
• Failure to maintain 2 feet of freeboard in an impoundment.
• Pit and tanks not constructed with sufficient capacity to contain polluting substances.
• Failure to properly store, transport, process, or dispose of a residual waste.
• No Control and Disposal/PPC plan or failure to implement a PPC plan.
Reported violations indicated the following documented discharges to Waters of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania:
• Gesford 3 - Failure to report defective, insufficient, or improperly cemented casing within 24
hours or submit plan to correct within 30 days. This was reported on May 5, 2009. This well is
0.9 miles west-southwest of NEPAGW23 and 1.1 miles north-northwest of NEPAGW21 and
NEPAGW22 (see Table C41). Compliance records indicate defective casing or cementing; failure
to prevent migration of gas or other fluids into sources of fresh groundwater; and O&G Act
601.201(f) failure to submit written notice of intent to plug well or amend plat. Methane was
detected at an elevated level only in NEPAGW23.
• Gesford 9 - Compliance records indicated a spill of approximately 100 gallons of diesel on pad;
day tank on Air Pak unit overflowed; GDS soaked up fuel with pads and scraped up soil. The spill
occurred on August 19, 2009, at approximately 9:00 a.m. This well is approximately 0.9 miles
west-south west of NEPAGW23; 1.1 miles north-northwest of NEPAGW22; and 1.1 miles north-
northwest of NEPAGW21.
• Teel Unit 1H - Compliance records for an inspection on April 30, 2010, indicate a previous
citation for cuttings blown beyond reserve pit and cuttings have not been cleaned up
(continuing violation of 25Pa section 78.54); a tear was observed in the reserve pit liner,
approximately 8 inches above fluid level (violation of 78.56 a(2)). This well is approximately 1.8
miles southwest of NEPAGW23; 0.5 miles southwest of NEPAGW22; and 0.4 miles southwest of
NEPAGW21.
• Teel Unit 2H -This well is approximately 1.6 miles southwest of NEPAGW23; 0.3 miles
southwest of NEPAGW22; and 0.3 miles southwest of NEPAGW21. There were several instances
of discharges, including the following:
o Discharge of pollutional material to Waters of the Commonwealth. This was reported
on July 21, 2010.
o There is a potential for polluting substance(s) to reach Waters of the Commonwealth
and may require a permit. This was reported on January 10, 2011. Compliance records
indicated a self-reported spill of approximately 150 barrels of treated and untreated
flow-back from a partially open valve on blender, partially on containment, response
C-18
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
recovering unfrozen material, contaminated material to be removed and Act 2
characterization to be performed.
o Discharge of industrial waste to Waters of the Commonwealth without a permit. This
was reported on January 31, 2011. Compliance records indicate contractor discharging
flow-back onto ground surface while PADEP on site; less than 5 gallons observed; and no
containment in area of discharge.
• Teel 5 - Nonadministrative violations included: failure to minimize accelerated erosion,
implement an E & S plan, maintain E & S controls, and stabilize the site until total site
restoration under O & G Act Section 206(c)(d) on June 3, 2008; and failure to maintain 2 feet of
freeboard on an impoundment on September 3, 2008. This well is located 1.7 miles southwest
of NEPAGW23 and 0.4 miles southeast of NEPAGW21 and NEPAGW22.
• Teel Unit 4 - Discharge of industrial waste to Waters of the Commonwealth without a permit.
This was reported on January 31, 2011. Compliance records indicated operator discharging flow-
back to site; less than 5 gallons observed being discharged to ground; no containment in place.
Based on the small amount discharged, this NOV is not considered a notable violation.
• Teel 2 - Nonadministrative violations included: failure to maintain 2 feet of freeboard on an
impoundment on April 7, 2008; and failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement an E & S
plan, maintain E & S controls, and stabilize the site until total site restoration under O & G Act
Section 206(c)(d) on September 10, 2008. This well is located 1.6 miles southwest of
NEPAGW23 and 0.3 miles southeast of NEPAGW21 and NEPAGW22.
• Lewis 1 - Discharge of pollutional material to Waters of the Commonwealth. This was reported
on August 20, 2008. This well is approximately 1.6 miles southwest of NEPAGW23; 0.7 miles
northwest of NEPAGW22; and 0.7 miles northwest of NEPAGW21. Compliance records
indicated that the violation was noted and immediately corrected.
• ELY 7H SE - No Control and Disposal/PPC plan or failure to implement a PPC plan. Compliance
records indicated an unpermitted discharge of diesel fuel at the site on August 6, 2009 (violation
of Chapter 78.54 of the Rules and Regulations of the Environmental Quality Board, 25 PA Code,
§ 78.54 General Requirements). Violation was immediately corrected. It was reported on
August 6, 2009. This well is located approximately 0.5 miles southwest of NEPAGW23, 1.1 miles
north-northeast of NEPAGW22, and 1.1 miles north-northeast of NEPAGW21.
• ELY 4 - Compliance records indicated a spill of approximately 100 gallons, a violation of SWMA
Section 301 for disposing diesel fuel to the ground. The spill was reported on February 2, 2009.
This well is located approximately 1.0 mile southwest of NEPAGW23, 0.4 miles north-northeast
of NEPAGW22, and 0.4 miles north-northeast of NEPAGW21.
• ELY 4H - Compliance records indicate the following: On August 20, 2009, a call was received
reporting a spill of approximately 25 gallons of drilling mud on the location. The spill occurred
due to a leaking mud hose on the rig. It was reported that the drilling mud was immediately
contained and cleaned up and the leaking hose was replaced. The area where the drilling mud
spilled was scraped with a backhoe, and the soil and mud was disposed of in the reserve pit on
site. At the time of inspection, the area appeared to be clean and free of drilling mud. Some of
the spilled drilling mud was contained in the cellar of the well. This mud was being pumped out
C-19
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
and into the reserve pit. The investigation revealed that an unpermitted discharge of drilling
mud had occurred at the site. Such a discharge is a violation of Chapter 78.54. The violation
was immediately corrected. This well is located 1 mile southwest of NEPAGW23, 0.4 miles
northeast of NEPAGW21, and 0.3 miles northeast of NEPAGW22.
• ELY 1H - Compliance records indicated an un-permitted discharge of drilling mud occurred at
the site (violation of Chapter 78.54). Violation was immediately corrected. A spill of
approximately 25 gallons of drilling mud on location due to a leaking mud hose on the rig was
reported on August 20, 2009 at approximately 10:00 a.m. It was reported that the drilling mud
was immediately contained and cleaned up and the leaking hose was replaced; the area where
the drilling mud spilled was scraped with a backhoe, and the soil and mud was disposed of in the
reserve pit on site. At the time of inspection, the area appeared to be clean and free of drilling
mud. Some of the spilled drilling mud was contained in the cellar of the well. This mud was
being pumped out and into the reserve pit. Based on the small amount discharged, this NOV is
not considered a notable violation.
• Costello 1 - Clean Streams Law - General (used only when a specific CIS code cannot be used);
and O&G Act 223 - General (used only when a specific O&G Act code cannot be used).
Compliance records indicate: SWMA 6018.401 violation for discharge of hazardous waste. It
was reported on June 2, 2011. This well is approximately 1.1 miles southwest of NEPAGW23;
0.7 miles northwest of NEPAGW22; and 0.8 miles northwest of NEPAGW21.
• Black 1H - Non-administrative violations included: failure to maintain 2 feet of freeboard on an
impoundment on July 30, 2008; failure to minimize accelerated erosion, implement an E & S
plan, maintain E & S controls, and stabilize the site until total site restoration under O&G Act
Section 206(c)(d) on September 10, 2008; and failure to properly store, transport, process, or
dispose of a residual waste on March 15, 2011. This well is located approximately 1.7 miles
south-southwest of NEPAGW23, 0.6 miles southeast of NEPAGW22, and 0.6 miles southeast of
NEPAGW21.
• Black 2H - Inspection conducted on September 24, 2008, indicated the discharge of pollutional
material to Waters of the Commonwealth and an improperly lined pit. Compliance record
indicated solid waste on ground. This well is located approximately 1.7 miles south-southwest
of NEPAGW23, 0.6 miles southeast of NEPAGW22, and 0.6 miles southeast of NEPAGW21.
• Brooks 1H - Discharge of pollutional material to Waters of the Commonwealth; stream
discharge of industrial waste, including drill cuttings, oil, brine, and/or silt; and improperly lined
pit. These were reported on June 18, 2009. This well is approximately 2.1 miles south-
southwest of NEPAGW23; 1.0 miles southeast of NEPAGW22; and 0.9 miles southeast of
NEPAGW21.
• Ratzel 1H - Non-administrative violations included: failure to minimize accelerated erosion,
implement an E & S plan, maintain E & S controls, and stabilize the site until total site
restoration under O & G Act Section 206(c)(d) on September 3, 2008, and May 13, 2011; and
failure to maintain 2 feet of freeboard on an impoundment on April 13, 2010. On the back of
the well pad is a small poly-lined reserve pit. A portion of the liner has sloughed into the fluid in
the reserve pit. Based on inspection, the liner in the reserve pit has not been properly
C-20
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
maintained, and the reserve pit is currently in violation of freeboard requirements. This well is
located approximately 0.2 miles west/northwest of NEPAGW23, 1.4 miles northeast of
NEPAGW22, and 1.3 miles northeast of NEPAGW21.
C.6. References
Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2013. Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages. Available at:
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/dsrv. Accessed on October 31, 2013.
Center for Workforce Information and Analysis, Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry. 2013.
Available at:
https://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/vosnet/lmi/area/areasummary.aspx?enc=SgfiA5gOXvil8J88hlRJLQo
13vwilWr/xlEdJOXOauCrqYopklAxBqwvFi8EQMWC. Accessed on October 31, 2013.
Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium. 2013. Frequently Asked Questions. Available at:
http://www.mrlc.gov/faq Ic.php. Accessed on October 25, 2013.
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). n.d. eFACTS Facility Search. Available
at: http://www.ahs.dep.pa.gov/eFACTSWeb. Accessed on December 6, 2013.
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). n.d. Oil and Gas Compliance Reports.
Available at:
http://www.depreportingservices.state.pa.us/ReportServer/Pages/ReportViewer.aspx7/Oil Gas/OG Co
mpliance. Accessed on December 6, 2013.
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). n.d. Pennsylvania Spatial Data Access.
Available at:
http://www.pasda.psu.edu/uci/MetadataDisplay.aspx?entrv=PASDA&file=OilGasLocations2013 Ol.xml
&dataset=283. Accessed in April 2013.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2012a. Population Division. Table 3 - Cumulative Estimates of Resident Population
Change for the United States, States, County, 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-Density-ll.html. Accessed on October 31,
2013.
U.S. 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.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2013b. DP-1 Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000. Census 2000
Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100-Percent Data. Susquehanna 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-21
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
U.S. Census Bureau. 2013c. DP-1 Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000. Census 2000
Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100-Percent Data. Bradford 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.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2013d. Community Facts. Census 2010 Total Population. Susquehanna County,
Pennsylvania. Available at:
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/isf/pages/community facts.xhtmlffnone. Accessed on
November 11, 2013.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2013e. Community Facts. Census 2010 Total Population. Bradford County,
Pennsylvania. Available at:
hhttp://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/isf/pages/community facts.xhtmlffnone. Accessed on
November 11, 2013.
U.S. 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.
U.S. Geological Service. 2012a. The National Land Cover Database. Available at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2012/3020/fs2012-3020.pdf. Accessed on October 25, 2013.
C-22
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix C Tables
C-23
-------
C-24
Table Cla Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Bradford County
Use % of County Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
Alfalfa
24.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table Clb Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Susquehanna
County
Use % of County Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
20.3
1.2
0.4
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table C2a Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and
2001 to 2006, in Bradford 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
98.5
1.5
1.0
0.3
0.1
0.1
99.7
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.2
Source US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Table C2b Changes in Land Use, 1992 to 2001 and
2001 to 2006, in Susquehanna County
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use
-to agriculture
-to urban
- other changes
% of County Land Area
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
97.2
2.8
2.3
0.2
0.3
99.8
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.2
Source US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
-------
C-25
Table C3
Industry
Largest Industries, by Employment, in Bradford and Susquehanna
Counties
Bradford County Susquehanna County
% of All % of All
Number of Industries Number of Industries
Employees Rank Employment Employees Rank Employment
Health care and social
assistance
Manufacturing
Retail trade
Accommodation and food
services
Mining
Public administration
Transportation and
warehousing
Construction
Professional, scientific, and
technical services
Other services (except
public administration)
5,087
4,199
2,980
1,414
1,337
1,214
1,187
938
668
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
21.0
17.3
12.3
5.8
5.5
5.0
4.9
3.9
2.8
1,309
590
1,273
974
822
448
316
1,039
340
1
6
2
4
5
7
9
3
8
13.7
6.2
13.3
10.2
8.6
4.7
3.3
10.9
3.6%
Note: Data relate to the final quarter of 2012
Sources: Employment by Industry: Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry (2013), All Industries Employment: Bureau
of Labor Statistics (2013)
Table C4 Land Use in Bradford County,
Search Area A in 1992 and 2006
1992 2006
Square %of Square %of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Deciduous forest
Pasture/hay
Mixed forest
Evergreen forest
Row/cultivated crops
Open water
Developed
Other
Total
13.1
5.0
4.2
3.5
1.3
0.6
0.4
0.3
28.4
46
18
15
12
5
2
2
0
100
9.6
1.9
5.7
4.0
4.2
0.6
1.5
0.9
28.4
34
7
20
14
15
2
5
3
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
-------
C-26
Table C5 Land Use in Bradford County, Search
Area B in 1992 and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Deciduous forest
Pasture/hay
Row/cultivated crops
Mixed forest
Evergreen forest
Open water
Developed
Other
Total
11.2
9.0
2.6
2.2
1.6
1.2
0.3
0.3
28.4
39
32
9
8
6
4
1
1
100
7.4
6.0
6.1
3.6
1.8
1.1
1.6
0.8
28.4
26
21
21
13
6
4
6
3
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
Table C6 Land Use in Bradford County,
Search Area C in 1992 and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Deciduous forest
Pasture/hay
Mixed forest
Row/cultivated
crops
Evergreen forest
Open water
Developed
Other
Total
12.2
8.4
2.7
2.1
1.9
0.8
0.2
0.1
28.4
43
30
9
7
7
3
1
0
100%
7.8
6.0
4.3
5.5
1.9
0.7
1.6
0.6
28.4
27
21
15
19
7
3
6
2
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
-------
C-27
Table C7 Land Use in Bradford County,
Search Area D in 1992 and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Deciduous forest
Pasture/hay
Mixed forest
Evergreen forest
Row/cultivated
crops
Developed
Other
Total
1.5
0.8
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.0
3.1
46
26
11
9
5
2
1
100
1.1
0.5
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.0
3.1
34
14
24
5
8
13
2
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
Table C8 Land Use in Bradford County, Search
Area E in 1992 and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Pasture/hay
Deciduous forest
Evergreen forest
Mixed forest
Row/cultivated crops
Developed
Other
Total
2.2
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
3.1
69
13
9
5
4
0
0
100
1.6
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.6
0.2
0.0
3.1
49
11
5
9
20
5
1
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding
-------
C-28
Table C9 Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area F in
1992 and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Pasture/hay
Deciduous forest
Evergreen forest
Row/cultivated crops
Mixed forest
Open water
Woody wetlands
Developed
Other
Total
11.9
10.6
2.6
1.5
1.5
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
28.3
42
38
9
5
5
1
0
0
0
100%
7.9
9.6
1.3
4.2
3.7
0.2
0.2
1.1
0.2
28.4
28
34
5
15
13
1
1
4
0
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
Table CIO Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area G in
1992 and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Pasture/hay
Deciduous forest
Evergreen forest
Row/cultivated crops
Mixed forest
Open water
Emergent herbaceous wetlands
Developed
Other
Total
1.1
1.0
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.1
>0.1
>0.1
0.0
3.2
35.1
33.2
8.4
9.7
11.9
1.4
0.1
0.2
0.0
100.0%
0.7
0.7
0.3
0.8
0.5
0.1
>0.1
0.1
>0.1
3.2
24.1
21.4
9.0
24.4
14.8
1.4
0.6
3.3
1.0
100.0%
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
-------
C-29
Table Cll Land Use in Bradford County, Search Area H in
1992 and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Pasture/hay
Deciduous forest
Evergreen forest
Row/cultivated crops
Mixed forest
Open water
Developed
Other
Total
0.9
1.7
0.1
0.2
0.2
>0.1
0.0
>0.1
3.2
28.0
54.6
2.6
6.6
7.6
0.4
0.0
0.2
100.0%
0.2
1.8
0.1
0.6
0.3
>0.1
0.1
0.1
3.2
7.5
56.1
2.7
18.8
10.5
0.4
3.1
0.9
100.0
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
Table C12 Land Use in Susquehanna County, Search Area
A in 1992 and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Deciduous forest
Pasture/hay
Mixed forest
Evergreen forest
Row/cultivated crops
Open water
Developed
Other
Total
12.7
8.8
2.8
1.9
1.7
0.4
0.1
0.0
28.4
45
31
10
7
6
1
0
0
100
7.5
4.3
4.3
2.0
8.3
0.4
1.1
0.5
28.4
26
15
15
7
29
1
4
3
100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
-------
C-30
Table CIS Land Use in Susquehanna County, Search Area
B in 1992 and 2006
1992 2006
Square % of Square % of
Land Use Miles Total Miles Total
Deciduous forest
Pasture/hay
Mixed forest
Evergreen forest
Row/cultivated crops
Open water
Developed
Emergent herbaceous wetlands
Other
Total
1.2
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.6
>0.1
0.1
3.2
38.5
12.9
11.1
9.7
4.6
3.8
18.2
0.4
0.8
100.0%
1.0
0.4
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.7
0.1
>0.1
3.2
30.4
11.7
15.8
8.6
3.0
4.3
21.1
2.8
2.3
100.0%
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.
Table C14 Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Bradford County,
Search Area A
Use % of Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
Soybeans
14.1
2.1
0.6
0.3
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table CIS Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Bradford
County, Search Area B
Use % of Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
Soybeans
Alfalfa
24.9
6.5
0.8
0.6
0.5
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
-------
C-31
Table C16 Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Bradford
County, Search Area C
Use % of Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
Alfalfa
24.9
4.3
0.9
0.4
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table C17 Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Bradford
County, Search Area D
Use % of Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
11.5
3.2
0.4
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table CIS Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Bradford
County, Search Area E
Use % of Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Alfalfa
Fallow/idle cropland
50.7
8.3
0.9
0.6
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table C19 Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Bradford
County, Search Area F
Use % of Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
Alfalfa
31.9
5.3
0.5
0.4
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
-------
C-32
Table C20 Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Bradford
County, Search Area G
Use % of Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
Alfalfa
39.4
0.8
0.5
0.1
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table C21 Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Bradford
County, Search Area H
Use % of Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
Alfalfa
Soybeans
15.9
2.0
1.4
0.1
0.1
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table C22 Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Susquehanna
County, Search Area A
Use % of Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
31.2
1.1
0.5
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
Table C23 Major Agricultural Land
Uses in Susquehanna
County, Search Area B
Use % of Land
Other hay/non-alfalfa
Corn
Fallow/idle cropland
Alfalfa
Soybeans
10.2
0.8
0.3
0.1
0.1
Source: US Department of Agriculture, 2012.
-------
C-33
Table C24 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to
2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford
County, Search Area A
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use:
-to agriculture
- to forest
- to grassland/shrub
-to urban
-to wetlands
- to open water
-to barren
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
98.2
1.8
1.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
99.6
0.4
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.1
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Table C25 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to
2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford
County, Search Area B
Change in Land Use
No Change
Change in land use:
-to agriculture
-to wetlands
- to forest
-to urban
- to open water
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
98.6
1.4
0.8
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Table C26 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to
2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford
County, Search Area C
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use:
-to agriculture
-to urban
- to forest
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
98.4
1.6
1.2
0.2
0.1
99.9
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
-------
C-34
Table C27 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to
2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford
County, Search Area D
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use:
-to agriculture
- to grassland/shrub
-to barren
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
99.5
0.5
0.4
0.1
0.0
99.8
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.2
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Table C28 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to
2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford
County, Search Area E
Change in Land Use
No Change
Changed land use:
-to agriculture
- to forest
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
98.8
1.2
1.1
0.1
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Table C29 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to
2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford
County, Search Area F
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use:
-to agriculture
- to open water
- to forest
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
99.4
0.6
0.4
0.1
0.1
99.9
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
-------
C-35
Table C30 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to
2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford
County, Search Area G
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use:
-to agriculture
-to urban
- to forest
-to barren land
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
97.6
2.4
2.1
0.1
0.2
0.0
99.7
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Table C31 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to
2001 and 2001 to 2006, Bradford
County, Search Area H
Change in Land Use
No change
Change in land use:
-to agriculture
- to grassland/shrub
- to forest
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
98.3
1.7
1.6
0.1
0.0
99.7
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.3
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Table C32 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to
2001 and 2001 to 2006,
Susquehanna County, Search Area
A
Change in Land Use
No Change
Change in land use:
-to agriculture
-to urban
- to forest
- to grassland/shrub
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
96.4
3.6
3.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
99.8
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
-------
C-36
Table C33 Changes in Land Use, 1992 to
2001 and 2001 to 2006,
Susquehanna County, Search Area
B
Change in Land Use
No Change
Change in land use:
-to agriculture
-to urban
- to open water
-to wetlands
-to barren land
% of Land
1992 to 2001 2001 to 2006
97.1
2.9
1.0
1.4
0.3
0.2
0.0
99.8
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
Source: US Geological Survey, 2012.
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
-------
C-37
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
RCRA-CESQG,
ARCHIVE UST,
MANIFEST, US
AIRS, NPDES, PA-
EFACTS, PCS
RCRA-CESQG
RCRA-CESQG,
LUST, NCDB, NEI,
US EPA TRIS,
NPDES, PA
EFACTS, ICIS,
PCS, RMP
Arrow United
Industries Inc.
Taylor McCarty
& Sons Inc.
Cargill Meat
Solutions
3 14 Riverside Dr.
Wyalusing, PA 18853
214 Main St.
Wyalusing, PA 18853
124 Taylor Avenue
Wyalusing, PA 18853
UOmi.NNW
ofNEPAGW31
0.98 mi. NNE of
NEPAGW31
2.34 mi. NNE of
NEPAGW31
Yes
No
No
AIR Permit Lists: in compliance (VOC and participate matter)
Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator.
Facility has received violations:
1/9/2007 - Containers of hazardous waste not labeled to
accurately identify contents.
1/9/2007 - There is no maintenance of daily records of weight or
volume of waste processed, method and location of processing
or disposal facilities, waste handling problems or emergencies.
ARCHIVE UST - Heating oil. Site included due to proximity to
site and potential for contamination.
Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator. No violations
found.
Hazardous Waste Summary - Lead, Tetrachloroethylene (PCE).
Not a likely source of contaminants or issues found in nearby
EPA sample points.
Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator.
Facility has received notices of violations;
7/25/2012 - Industrial waste was discharged without a permit.
6/21/2012 - Effluent limit(s) were violated.
5/2/2012 - Industrial waste was discharged without a permit.
8/22/2009 - Incident response to accident or event.
10/22/2009 - Incident response to accident or event.
4/28/2003 - Industrial waste was discharged without permit.
10/7/2003 - Industrial waste was discharged without a permit.
1/13/2000 - Failure to prevent sediment or other pollutant
discharge into waters of the Commonwealth.
5/26/2000 - Effluent Limits for Fecal Coliform bacteria were
violated.
LUST - Cleanup completed 4/20/1999.
AST - 8 tanks currently in use containing 'Hazardous Substance'
UST - 20,000 gallon diesel fuel, 2,000 gallon gasoline, both
currently in use. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
Search Area: 7
Federal USGS
Wells
0 Federal
FRDS Public
Water Supply
System
96 State Wells
A
A
A
-------
C-38
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
RCRA-CESQG
UST
ARCHIVE UST
ARCHIVE UST,
EDR US HIST
AUTO STATION
US MINES
US MINES
EDR US HIST
AUTO
Steeles
Automotive Inc.
Dandy Mini Mart
15
Wyalusing Area
Sch Dist
A-Z Auto
Bill Johnson II
Quarries
Bob Johnson
Flagstone Inc.
Wayne Carstar
Collision Service
110 Marsh St.
Wyalusing, PA 18853
223 State St.
Wyalusing, PA 18853
115 Main St.
Wyalusing, PA 18853
304 State St.
Wyalusing, PA 18853
Latitude: 41. 668056
Longitude: -76.261944
Latitude: 41.668056
Longitude: -76.261944
304 State St.
Wyalusing, PA 18853
1.06 mi. NNEof
NEPAGW31
>0.80 mi. N of
NEPAGW31
0.97 mi. NNE of
NEPAGW31
>0.80 mi. N of
NEPAGW31
0.97 mi. NNE of
NEPAGW31
0.97 mi. NNE of
NEPAGW31
>0.80 mi. N of
NEPAGW31
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator.
Hazardous Waste Summary - Cadmium, Lead, Benzene, Methyl
Ethyl Keytone, Tetrachloroethylene, Trichloroethylene.
Violation Status - No violations found.
Site included due to proximity to site and potential for
contamination.
UST - 8,000 gallon gasoline; currently in use, 10,000 gallon
gasoline; currently in use, 2,000 gallon kerosene; currently in
use.
Facility Violations:
2/20/2004 - Failure to comply with underground storage tank
system reporting and record keeping requirements; Failure to
comply with underground storage tank system release detection
requirements; Failure to meet performance standards for
new/upgraded tanks.
6/2/2004 - Failure to meet performance standards for
new/upgraded tanks. Site included due to proximity to site and
potential for contamination.
ARCHIVE UST - 10,000 gallon heating oil.
Site included due to proximity to site and potential for
contamination.
ARCHIVE UST - 12,000 gallon gasoline; 6,000 gallon gasoline,
2,000 gallon kerosene . Site included due to proximity to site am
potential for contamination.
Violation Summary - 13 104(a) violations between 2005 and
2011.
NOTE: Location data does not appear to be accurate based on
aerial imagery.
Not a likely source of contaminants or issues found in nearby
EPA sample points.
Violation Summary - 17 104(a) violations, and 3 104(d)(l)
violations between 2004 and 20 1 1 .
NOTE: Location data does not appear to be accurate based on
aerial imagery. Not a likely source of contaminants or issues
found in nearby EPA sample points.
Site in historical directory as a potential gas station/filling
station/service station sites. Site included due to potential for
contamination.
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
-------
C-39
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
ORPHAN VCP
ORPHAN VCP
ORPHAN
AST
UST
MANIFEST
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN HIST LF
(in PA HIST LF
ALL Abandoned
Landfill Inventory
and PA HIST LF
INACTIVE: Inactive
Facilities List)
ORPHAN HIST LF
(in PA HIST LF
ALL Abandoned
Landfill Inventory
and PA HIST LF
INACTIVE: Inactive
Facilities List)
ORPHAN Archive
UST, LUST
Gary Alexander
Prop - Cleanup
Eastern Industries
Truck Accident
Cargill Meat
Solutions
Taylor Packing
Co., Inc.
Taylor Packing
Co., Inc.
Taylor Packing
Co., Inc.
CC Allis & Sons,
Inc.
RDlBox207
New Albany, PA 18853
Route 1
Wyalusing, PA 18853
Route 706
Wyalusing, PA 18853
1252 Route 706
Wyalusing, PA 18853
Route 76
Wyalusing, PA 18853
Route 1010
Wyalusing, PA 18853
NI
NI
1.4 mi. E of
NEPAGW31
NI
1.4 mi. E of
NEPAGW31
3.5 mi. E of
NEPAGW09
>3.35 mi. of
NEPA GW28
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Could not find actual site address.
Voluntary Cleanup Program for soil and groundwater
contaminated with #2 diesel fuel.
Violations (2003) included: Polluting substance(s) allowed to
discharge into Waters of the Commonwealth; Industrial waste
was discharged without permit.
Waste site location could not be determined. Site included due
to potential for contamination.
Truck spill containing used motor oil.
Waste site location could not be determined. Site included due
to potential for contamination.
Eight ASTs (currently in use - unspecified hazardous
substances) and USTs (diesel and gasoline)
MANIFEST listings for D001, D005, D006, D007, F005, F003
wastes.
eFACTS noted a diesel release.
Site included due to potential for contamination.
Waste Code: F003
Manifest Year: 2008 New Jersey Manifest Data
MANIFEST listing and/or violations not likely sources for study
issues.
This site may be affiliated with Cargill Meat Solutions.
eFACTS violations:
*Standards for Contaminants, Odor Emissions, Limitations.
Failure to control malodorous air contaminants.
*Standards for Contaminants, Visible Emissions, Limitations.
Failure to prevent visible emissions into the atmosphere.
*Construction, Modification, Reactivation and Operation of
Sources, Operating Permit Requirements, Compliance
requirements.
Landfills are potential sources of methane. Site included due to
potential for contamination.
HIST LF, Facility is listed in the county /local unique database
(LOCAL), there are no hazardous materials listed for the site.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
ARCHIVE UST - 4,000 gallon gasoline; 1,000 gallon gasoline
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C,
H
A, B, C,
H
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
-------
C-40
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
ORPHAN UST
ORPHAN RCRA
NonGen / NLR,
FINDS
ORPHAN RCRA-
CESQG, FINDS,
MANIFEST, US
AIRS
ORPHAN UST
ORPHAN Archive
UST, LUST
ORPHAN RCRA
NonGen / NLR,
FINDS
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN FINDS,
RCRA-CESQG,
MANIFEST
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
JJS
Tewkskys Garage
B & K Equipment
Co.
Pen Mart Texaco
Friedy Country
Mart
Bates Willard &
Son
PA Game
Commission C/O
D&A
Environmental
Williams Auto
Plaza II
PA Department of
Transportation
Route 414
Franklindale, PA 18853
Route 6 Box 745
Wyalusing, PA 18853
40851 Route 6
Wyalusing, PA 18853
Route 6
Wyalusing, PA 18853
Route 6
Wyalusing, PA 18853
Latitude: 41. 732778
Longitude: -76.281667
Ely Rd.
Wyalusing, PA 18853
123 Main St.
Wyalusing, PA 18853
SR 706 Section 8 PM
Wyalusing, PA 18853
NI
NI
1 mi. NE of
NEPAGW31
NI
NI
1.3mi.NEof
NEPAGW12
1.5 mi. SE of
NEPAGW08
> 9 mi. SW of
NEPAGW15
0.98 mi. NE of
NEPAGW31
NI
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
UST: gasoline, diesel
Waste site location could not be determined. Site included due
to potential for contamination.
RCRA NLR - Handler, Non-Generator
Hazardous Waste Summary - Lead, Benzene
Violations Status - No violations found.
Waste site location could not be determined. Site included due
to potential for contamination.
RCRA-CESQG - Conditionally exempt small quantity generator
note EDR lists FINDS and PA MANIFEST information for a
Safety Kleen facility in Dolton, IL.
Violation Status - No violations found.
UST - 3 x 10,000 gallons gasoline; 10,000 gallons diesel; 2,000
gallons kerosene; 5,000 gallons heating oil.
Tank Status - all 6 USTs currently active.
Waste site location could not be determined. Site included due
to potential for contamination.
Archive UST - 8,000 gallons gasoline; 12,000 gallons diesel
Tank Status - Not reported
Waste site location could not be determined. Site included due
to potential for contamination.
Note facility map/address in EPA Envirofacts website shows
facility on PA Route 409 however the coordinates plot in a
wooded area on aerial photos. Facility is listed as a Non-
Generator of hazardous wastes.
Appears that site listed because of NY MANIFEST database
listing. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Waste codes listed: D001 and D003, no violations found; NY
MANIFEST lists 36 pounds of unknown waste in metal drums,
barrels listed 13 times; 5 gallons Tetrachloroethylene (0.73 mg/L
TCLP) listed 6 times; 112 pounds listed twice and 72 pounds
listed once of unknown waste in metal drums.
Site included due to proximity to site and potential for
contamination.
PA MANIFEST Site lists 7,500 pounds of lead in metal drums,
barrels, kegs from a facility listed within the EDR as located in
York, PA.
Not a likely source of contaminants due to no release or incident
reported.
A, B, C,
H
A, B, C,
H
A, B, C,
H
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A
A, B, C
-------
C-41
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
RCRA-CESQG,
MANIFEST, AFS,
NEI
US MINES
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN LUST,
ARCHIVE UST,
LAST
ORPHAN AST
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN FINDS,
VCP
Tennessee Gas
Pipeline Co.
B & P Inc. (Old
Beebe Mine)
PA Game
Commission C/O
D&A
Environmental
Welles Mill
Bradford County
Quarry
Towanda
Elementary
School
PA Game
Commission State
Game Land 172
St. Marys Church
of the
Assumption
Parish
Spring Hill Rd.
Wyalusing, PA
Marshview Rd.
Towanda, PA
Route 6
Burlington, PA 18848
Route 6
Wyalusing, PA 18853
1883 Route 6, Main St.
Towanda, PA 18848
State and Western Ave.
Towanda, PA 18848
RR1
Wyalusing, PA 18805
3rd and State St.
Wyalusing, PA 18853
4.4 mi. SW of
NEPASW02
2.31 mi. NEof
NEPAGW25
>3. 70 mi. Nof
NEPAGW02
>1. 30 mi. NEof
NEPAGW31
4.9 mi. Nof
NEPAGW17
4.49 mi. NE of
NEPAGW17
0.5 mi. SW of
NEPAGW13
0.88 mi. N of
NEPAGW31
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Used oil specification marketer, ignitable flammable waste,
arsenic, chromium, lead, benzene; metal drums, barrels, kegs;
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
This is an abandoned mine that produced crushed and broken
stone.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Appears that site listed because of NY MANIFEST database
listing. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Three USTS, 2 - 30,000 gallons; heating oil, 1 - 20,000 gallsons;
diesel.
LUST: Contained petroluem, cleanup completed, cause was
containment/sump failure.
LAST: Cleanup competed.
PA eFACTS: 02/16/2005; Polluting substance(s) allowed to
discharge into Waters of the Commonwealth.
Two ASTs are on site with 12,000 and 15,000 gallon capacities,
are currently in use, and contain diesel fuel. Both tanks were
installed in 201 1 . The site is also listed as a mine for crushed,
broken sandstone.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Facility is listed in the county/local unique database (LOCAL),
200 pounds of ignitable waste in metal drums, barrels, or kegs;
1,000 pounds ignitable waste in fiber or plastic boxes, cartons,
cases; 200 pounds corrosive waste in metal drums, barrels, or
kegs.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Facility is listed in the county/local unique database (LOCAL),
1,000 gallon tank for gasoline.
Site included due to proximity to site and potential for
contamination.
Facility is listed in the county/local unique database (LOCAL),
Cleanup records for PAH and Fuel Oil No. 2 from soil. Site
included due to proximity to site and potential for
contamination.
Search Area B:
16 Federal
USGS Wells 1
Federal FRDS
Public Water
Supply System
81 State Wells
B
B
g
B, H
B, C
B, C
B
B
-------
C-42
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
ORPHAN VCP
ORPHAN FINDS,
US AIRS
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN FITS,
HIST FITS,
FINDS
ORPHAN FINDS
ORPHAN VCP
ORPHAN VCP
Wickwire
Property
New Enterprise
Stone & Lime
D/B/A
PA Department of
Transportation
PA Game
Commission State
Game Land 289
Bradford County
A ran \7C\ TT7/^U
Area VU-lnUrl
H.S. (Bradford
County Area
Vocational
Technical School)
Bradford County
Quarry PLT 37
Excalibur Energy
Site
Excalibur Energy
Brine Water
Release
Cross Rocid £tt
Susquehanna St.
Wysox, PA 18854
SR2032 Masonite Rd.
Wysox, PA 18854
SR 1021 Section 8 PM
Wysox, PA 18854
US Route 6
Burlington, PA 18848
Rd#l
Towanda, PA 18848
RR1 Box 254
Towanda, PA 18848
19850 Route 187
Towanda, PA 18848
Route 187 North
Asylum Township PA near
Moody Road intersection
4.6 mi. NE of
NEPAGW17
4.4 mi. WSW of
NEPAGW29
NI
3. 7 mi. N of
NEPASW06
Approx. 4.5 mi.
WSW of
NEPAGW29
NI
3.7 mi. W of
NEPAGW08
4.3 mi. NNWof
NEPAGW11
0.4 mi. NW of
"KTT7O A /"^Wl^
NEPAGW26
and 0.5 mi. W
ofNEPAGW25
andNWof
"KTT7O A /""^Ttri"?
NEPAGW2/,
respectively
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Facility is listed in the county /local unique database (LOCAL),
Cleanup is listed as site in progress for soil and groundwater, no
contaminant listed. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
Facility is listed for criteria and hazardous air pollutant inventor)
and air synthetic. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
PA MANIFEST Site lists 1,500 pounds of lead in metal drums,
barrels, kegs from a facility listed within the EDR as located in
York, PA.
Not a likely source of contaminants due to no release or incident
reported.
Two USTs are reported. 2,000 gallon gasoline tank and a 2,000
gallon diesel tank. No other information is available regarding
these tanks. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Listed because it is in the National Compliance Data Base
(NCDB) that supports implementation of the Federal Insecticide
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Listed as "Other crushed and broken stone mining and
quarrying". Site is 9 miles west of Towanda on north side of
Route 6.
Not a likely source of contaminants or issues found in nearby
EPA sample points.
Voluntary Cleanup Program - Diesel Fuel, no other information
provided. Note location may not be correct but have no better
information. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
In August 2010 A tractor- trailer hauling brine water from a
wellpad spilled an estimated 4,800 gallons of brine water onto
private property when the truck rolled over on U.S. Route 187 in
Asylum Township (http://thedailyreview.com/news/estimated-
4800-gallons-of-brine-water-spilled-in-asylum-township-crash-
1.970596)
eFACTS violation: There is a potential for polluting substance(s
reaching Waters of the Commonwealth and may require a permi
Site included due to potential for contamination.
B
B
B,C
B, C
B, C
B, C
B, C
B, C
-------
C-43
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN AST
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN FINDS
ORPHAN RCRA-
SQG, FINDS
ORPHAN RCRA-
SQG, FINDS,
MANIFEST
ORPHAN LUST,
UST, AST
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN FINDS
Rob Elliotts Body
Shop
Heckmann Water
Resources
Township
Elementary
School
Bradford County
Conservation
District
Benson
Oldsmobile Buick
GMC
Williams Auto
Plaza
Williams Oil
Saco Hill
Furniture
Restoration
Agway Energy
Products
Bradford County
Outboard Motor
Water Sys
19496 Route 187
Towanda, PA 18849
21 114 Route 187
Towanda, PA 18848
RR2 Route 220 S
Towanda, PA 18848
RR 5 Box 5030-C
Towanda, PA 18848
Route 6
Towanda, PA 18848
Route 6 Box 6030
Towanda, PA 18848
York Avenue North
Towanda, PA 18848
3726 Covered Bridge
Road
Towanda, PA 18848
Route 6
Towanda, PA 18848
Approx. Coordinates
Latitude: 41.767601,
Longitude: -76.442987
P O Rnv ^fl^
Towanda, PA 18848
4.3 mi. NNW of
NEPAGW11
3. 8 mi. W of
NEPAGW08
4.3 mi. NNW of
NEPAGW11
3. 8 mi. W of
NEPAGW08
NI
NI
NI
NI
5. 8 mi. W of
NEPAGW29
10 mi. W of
NEPAGW29
4.6 mi. NE of
NEPAGW17
NI
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
PA Manifest lists the following: 36 pounds of D003 in 2007; 36
pounds of D001 in 2007; 36 pounds of F005 in 2007; 36 pounds
of DO 18 in 2007. Note location may not be correct, but have no
better information. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
6,000 gallon capacity tank for diesel fuel listed as currently in
use. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Heating Oil 5,000 gallons. Cannot find a location or any other
information on this school. Internet searches come up with
Towanda Elementary School which is listed above at State and
Western Ave. Waste site location could not be determined. Site
included due to potential for contamination.
In Drinking Water Program (PWSID-2080843)
Not a likely source of contaminants or issues found in nearby
EPA sample points.
RCRA-SQG of D001. No violations found. Waste site location
could not be determined. Site included due to potential for
contamination.
Lead, Benzene, Tetrachloroethylene. Waste site location could
not be determined. Site included due to potential for
contamination.
1- closed LUST with a confirmed release on 8/5/1989. The
LUST contained petroleum, 6 - open UST's (3 gasoline, 1 diesel,
1 heating oil, and 1 kerosene), 5 - open AST's (2 gasoline, 1
diesel, 1 other, and 1 kerosene). Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Waste manifest (D001, D005, D006, and D007), no violations
listed. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Waste manifest (D001), no violations. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
In Drinking Water Program (PWSID-2080370)
Not a likely source of contaminants or issues found in nearby
EPA sample points.
B, C
B C
B, C
B, C
B, C
B, C
B C
B, C
B, C
B, C
-------
C-44
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
ORPHAN TSCA
ORPHAN FINDS
ORPHAN RCRA-
CESQG, FINDS
ORPHAN RCRA
NonGen / NLR,
FINDS
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN VCP
ORPHAN RCRA-
LQG, FINDS
ORPHAN UST
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN VCP
US MINES
US MINES
Osram Sylvania
Products -
Towanda
PA Elec Towanda
OFC
Towanda
Borough
Treatment Plant
Five Star
Equipment, Inc.
Wysox
Elementary
School
Atlantic Star
Trucking
Accident Mercury
Hill Road
Cleanup
Welles Mill Co
Wysox Exxon
Sunoco 0443
3827 (Dandy's
Mini Mart)
Clarks Moving
SR3032 Accident
Cleanup
L.W. Flagstone
Dunn Bluestone
3 Hawes St.
Towanda, PA 18848
Plaza Dr.
Towanda, PA 18848
Latitude: 41.78232
Longitude: -76.45344
River St.
Towanda, PA 18848
Latitude: 41. 760908
Longitude: -76.441607
Route 187
Wysox, PA 18854
Latitude: 41. 798268
Longitude: -76.378687
100 Route 187
Wysox, PA 18854
Route 3
Wysox, PA 18854
RR 6 Box 6024
Towanda, PA 18848
Route 6 E
Wysox, PA 18848
Route 6
Wysox, PA 18854
Troy, PA 16947
Latitude: 41. 778611
Longitude: -76.339722
Latitude: 41. 803056
Longitude: -76.352222
5.6 mi. W of
NEPAGW29
> 5 mi. N of
NEPAGW17
6.0 mi. W of
NEPAGW29
4.1 mi.NEof
NEPAGW17
2 mi. W of
NEPAGW29
3.2 mi. W of
NEPAGW29
NI
4.6 mi. NE of
NEPAGW17
NI
4.3 mi. NE of
NEPAGW17
NI
1.05 mi. Sof
NEPAGW29
0.94 mi. NW of
NEPAGW29
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Manufacturer of various products (including light bulbs)
(chemicals listed include several metals, acids, salts, strontium
mixtures, etc.). No violations. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
No violations. Not a likely source of contamination due to
distance from nearest sampling point.
Sewage treatment facility, Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity
Generator, NPDES permit, In FINDS database, no violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Listed as Non-Generator. No violations found. Not a likely
source of contaminants or issues found in nearby EPA sample
points.
Former elementary school, heating oil tank, no violations. Not a
likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest
sampling point.
Truck spill site. Information on the exact location or nature of
the spill could not be identified. Internet search revealed that it
resulted in remediation of contaminated soil from fuel spill.
Waste site location could not be determined. Site included due
to potential for contamination.
Large quantity generator of RCRA hazardous waste, multiple
RCRA compliance violations, waste types not specified. Not a
likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest
sampling point.
Exxon fuel station could not be found in Wysox, PA, 4 - open
UST's (3 gasoline and 1 diesel). Waste site location could not bf
determined. Site included due to potential for contamination.
Four out of use UST's (2 gasoline, 1 kerosene, and 1 diesel).
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Diesel spill near Troy, PA, Exact location could not be verified.
Waste site location could not be determined. Site included due
to potential for contamination.
Listed as Non-coal mining, quarry. Not a likely source of
contaminants or issues found in nearby EPA sample points.
Listed as Non-coal mining, quarry. Not a likely source of
contaminants or issues found in nearby EPA sample points.
B, C, D
B, C
B, C
B, C
B, C
B, C
B, C
B, C
B, C
B, C
C
C
-------
C-45
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN LUST,
UST, ARCHIVE
UST
ORPHAN HIST LF
ORPHAN UST
ORPHAN FINDS,
US AIRS
ORPHAN FINDS,
US AIRS
ORPHAN NPDES,
ARCHIVE UST,
FINDS
ORPHAN VCP
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
PA Department of
Transportation
Pit Stop
Wysox Twp Fill
Dandy Mini Mart
36
Chief Gathering
LLC/Bradford
Comp
NTSWA/Bradfor
d Cnty Ldfl
101243
Bradford County
Manor
PPL Bradford
Cnty Extens - Hg
Meter Site
Van Dyne Oil
Bulk Pit
SRI 87 006
Wysox, PA 18854
Route 6 & Sullivan St.
Wysox, PA
Laning Creek Rd.
Wysox, PA
509 James Monroe Ave.
Monroeton, PA 18832
1935 Allen Meadow Rd.
Granville Summit, PA
16926
US Route 6 East of Troy
West Burlington, PA
16947
Latitude: 41. 774242
Longitude: -76.621893
Route 14
Troy, PA 16947
116 Center St.
Troy, PA 16947 (mailing
address)
>2.1 mi. Wof
NEPAGW29
4.7 mi. NE of
NEPAGW17
4 mi. W of
NEPAGW29
0.6 mi. N of
NEPAGW17
1.4mi.NNEof
NEPAGW04
4.1 mi.N of
NEPAGW02
9.3 mi. NW of
NEPAGW17
NI
NI
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
PA MANIFEST Site lists 25 metal boxes, cartons, and cases
(including roll-offs) of lead on 9/29/2010 and 12 metal boxes,
cartons, and cases (including roll-offs) of lead on 9/28/2010
from a facility listed within the EDR as located in York, PA.
Not a likely source of contaminants due to no release or incident
reported and distance from nearest sampling point.
4- closed LUST with confirmed releases on 2/12/2001 and
6/15/2001, 5 - open UST's (2 gasoline, 2 diesel, and 1 kerosene).
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Historic Landfill, exact location unknown. Not a likely source
of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
4 USTs on site, all currently in use: 1 x 8,000 gallon Gasoline, 2
x 4,000 gallon Gasoline, and 1 x 2,000 gallon Kerosene. Site
included due to proximity to site and potential for
contamination.
Site listed in AFS (Aerometric Information Retrieval System
(AIRS) Facility Subsystem) . Not a likely source of
contaminants or issues found in nearby EPA sample points.
Solid Waste Landfill; No other information reported. Although
landfills can be a source of methane, it is likely not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling
point.
Community water system, NPDES permit. No violations cited.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
Mercury cleanup site, exact location unknown. Not a likely
source of contaminants or issues found in nearby EPA sample
points.
4 - UST's (2 gasoline, 1 diesel, and 1 kerosene), unknown status,
location of facility unknown. Site included due to potential for
contamination.
Search Area C:
10 Federal
USGS Wells 0
Federal FRDS
Public Water
Supply System
101 State Wells
Search Area D:
1 Federal
USGS Well 1
Federal FRDS
Public Water
Supply System
Wells 13 State
Wells
Search Area E:
1 Federal
USGS Well 0
Federal FRDS
Public Water
Supply System
Wells 4 State
Wells
C
C
E, F
E
E
E
E
-------
C-46
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Database
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN HIST LF,
FINDS
ORPHAN RCRA
NonGen/NLR,
FINDS
ORPHAN UST
ORPHAN UST
ORPHAN AST
ORPHAN FINDS
ORPHAN FINDS
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
UST
Name of Facility
Troy Citgo
Calkins Motors
Bradford County
Sanitary Landfill
Bradford Cnty
Ldfl2
Milky Way Farms
Williams Oil
Bulkplant
Stockpile (DOT
Maintenance
Facility)
Bradford Co - W
Burlington Stp
Bradford Baskets
MFG
PA DOT
Bradford County
PA Department of
Transportation
Leroy Twp
Site Location Address
Troy, PA 16947
SlOElmiraStreet
Troy, PA 16947
108 Steam Hollow Rd.
Trnw PA 1 f&AH
Latitude: 41. 77431
Longitude: -76.63192
Phinney Drive
Troy, PA 16947
Near Troy, PA
Near Troy, PA
Latitude: 41. 774175
Longitude: -76. 62 1871
US Route 14 North
Latitude: 41. 773666
Longitude: -76.791861
Gulf Rd. & Route 6
Troy, PA 16947
SR 3010 Section 8PM
Summit, PA 16926
8453 Route 4 14
Canton, PA 17724
Distance from
Nearest
Sample Point
NI
17.1 mi. NW of
NEPAGW17
NEPAGW05
17.9 mi. NW of
NEPAGW17
NI
NI
9.3 mi. NW of
NEPAGW17
17.3 mi. NW of
NEPAGW17
Approx. 14.5
mi. NW of
NEPAGW17
Facility appears
to be located in
another part of
the state.
3.6 mi. W of
NEPAGW36
Yes/
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Potential Candidate Cause
Justification
3 - out of use UST's (3 gasoline), exact location unknown. Site
included due to potential for contamination.
3 - Archive UST's (3 gasoline). Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sampling point.
Industry type(s): Stationary Combustion, Municipal Landfill.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
nearest sampling point.
1 - active UST containing diesel, no violations. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sampling
point.
3 - active UST's (diesel, heating oil, and kerosene), no
violations. Waste site location could not be determined. Site
included due to potential for contamination.
1 - active AST containing diesel, no violations, exact location
unknown. Site included due to potential for contamination.
"Clean Watersheds Needs Survey 2008", no violations. Not a
likely source of contaminants or issues found in nearby EPA
sample points.
In FINDS database for selling wooden baskets, no violations.
Not a likely source of contaminants or issues found in nearby
EPA sample points.
Waste manifest with waste code "unknown", exact location
unknown. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Facility is listed in the county /local unique database (LOCAL),
Facility Address is listed as 730 Vogelsong Rd, York PA which
is another part of Pennsylvania and in aerial photos appears
likely to be a facility that would be expected to have drums. Tht
manifest list 6 metal drums, barrels, or kegs that contain 4,500
pounds of materials with a hazardous waste code for lead
(D008). Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
1 UST on site, currently in use, 500 gallon capacity and contains
diesel fuel. Not a likely source of contamination due to distance
from nearest sampling point.
Groundwater
Wells
Search Area F:
14 Federal
USGS Well 0
Federal FRDS
Public Water
Supply System
Wells 50 State
Wells
Search
Area
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E, F
F
-------
C-47
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN RGA
LUST; ICIS; FINDS
ORPHAN RGA
LUST
ORPHAN UST
ORPHAN ICIS;
FINDS
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST,
UST
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST,
FINDS US AIRS
ORPHAN SSTS
ORPHAN UST
ORPHAN CERC-
NFRAP
PA Department of
Transportation
Bluhms Shopping
Center
Bennetts Airline
Texaco
Airline Bulk PLT
Russel Hill Water
Co.
Braintrim Baptist
Church
Benscoter Forest
Pride
Cornell
Manufacturing
Inc
Agway COOP
Inc, Laceyville
New Albany
Mobil
Herman Rynnelds
& Son Corp
SR 3001 Section 374,
Laceyville, PA
Route 6, Laceyville, PA
Route 6, Laceyville, PA
Route 6, Laceyville, PA
Route 6, West Gateway
Development, Laceyville,
PA
Church Street, Laceyville,
PA
Old Route 6, Laceyville,
PA
Old Route 6, Laceyville,
PA
Old Route 6, Laceyville,
PA
Route 220, New Albany,
PA
TWP Route 378, New
Albany, PA
NI
NI
NI
NI
NI
NI
NI
NI
NI
NI
NI
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
50 containers (metal boxes, cartons, cases [including roll-offs])
on 2010. Generator EPA ID: PADEP0015304; TSD Facility:
Envirite of Pennsylvania Inc. No other details available.
Laceyville is approximately 5.5 miles east of NEPAGW31 .
Enforcement Action No.: 03-2007-0112; No additional details
available. Laceyville is approximately 5.5 miles east of
NEPAGW31.
Release date: 08/05/89; Interim or Remedial Actions initiated;
Status: 06/13/14; soils and groundwater impacted by unleaded
gasoloine; 6 tank closures. No additional details available.
Laceyville is approximately 5.5 miles east of NEPAGW31 .
The facility had a 20,000 water tank; a 10,000 gallon water tank;
and a 10,000 diesel tank. All thanks are in use and insepected
on 4/30/14. No other details available. Laceyville is
approximately 5.5 miles east of NEPAGW31.
Enforcement Action Type: SDWA 1423 AO For Comp And/Or
Pen (UIC). Program ID: FRS 1 10010717796. No other details
available. Laceyville is approximately 5.5 miles east of
NEPAGW31.
No details available. Laceyville is approximately 5.5 miles east
ofNEPAGW31.
There appears to be 4 tanks, but may only be two (two may be a
repeat of the other two). The records list an 8000 gallonn diesel
fuel tank installed September 26, 2005 and inspected 9/1 1/12.
Teh second tank is a 4000 gallonw diesel fuel tank installed
9/25/14. The other two taks are listed as 6000 galllon diesel fuel
tanks. No insstallation or inspection dates.No other details
available. Laceyville is approximately 5.5 miles east of
NEPAGW31.
Sawmill and Woodworking Machinery Manufacturing. Two
8,000 gallon heating oil tanks. Potential uncontrolled
emmissions <100 tons/yr. No other details available. Laceyville
is approximately 5.5 miles east of NEPAGW31.
Herbicides and insecticides; status: inactive: Report Year: 1990.
No other details available. Laceyville is approximately 5.5
miles east of NEPAGW3 1 .
5 USTs, 3 installed in 1992 and 2 installed in 1995. All
inspection in 2012, no leaks reported. Location unknown, but
New Albany is >3 miles WSW of NEPAGW32/33.
No details available. Location unknown, but New Albany is > 3
miles WSW of NEPAGW32/33.
Search Area G:
1 Federal
USGS Well
7 State wells
Search Area H:
4 State wells
A, G
A, G
A, G
A, G
A, G
A G
A, G
A, G
A,G
H
H
-------
C-48
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from Potential Candidate Cause
Nearest Yes/ Groundwater Search
Database Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No Justification Wells Area
ORPHAN LUST
ORPHAN NDPES
ORPHAN NDPES
ORPHAN FINDS
and US AIRS
ORPHAN CERC-
NFRAP
Freidy Country
Mart
Commpressor
Station 319
P^ntral MV O
and G Marc
Applachia
Midstream
SVC/LLC
Stagecoach
Herrick Township
Fill
Route 6
Wyalusing, PA
Off State Route 1004
Wyalusing, PA
State Route 20 10,
Wyalusing, PA
Off State Route 1004
Wyalusing, PA
TWPRoute616,
Wyalusing, PA
NI
NI
NI
NI
NI
No
No
No
No
Yes
Spill of unleaded gasoline on 8/5/89. Clean-up completed on
10/16/02. Location unknown. Wyalausing, PA is 1 mile NE of
NEPAGW31, and <7.5 miles NE of NEPA GW-32/33.
Permit to discharge to Wyalusing Creek effective 04/01/10,
expires 03/31/15. Status is minor. No other details available.
Wyalausing, PA is 1 mile NE of NEPAGW31, and <7.5 miles
NE of NEPA GW-32/33.
Permit to discharge to unnamed tributary to Panther Lick Creek
effective 09/01/12, expires 08/31/17. Status is minor. No other
details available. Wyalausing, PA is 1 mile NE of NEPAGW31,
and <7.5 miles NE of NEPA GW-32/33.
Potential uncontrolled emmissions <1 00 tons/yr. No other
details available. Wyalausing, PA is 1 mile NE of NEPAGW31,
and <7.5 miles NE of NEPA GW-32/33.
No details available. Wyalausing, PA is 1 mile NE of
NEPAGW31, and <7.5 miles NE of NEPA GW-32/33.
A, H
A, H
A, H
A, H
A H
Primary Source: Environmental records search report by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR)
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 Area A
EDR Inquiry Number:3600692.2
EDR Search Radius: 3 mi.
Search Center: Lat. 41.6313000(41° 37' 53.76") Long.76.2786000 (76° 16' 42.96")
Search Area B
EDR Inquiry Number: 3600692.8
EDR Search Radius: 3 mi.
Search Center: Lat. 41.6946000(41° 41' 40.56") Long.76.3224000 (76° 19' 20.64")
Search Area C
EDR Inquiry Number: 3600692.14
EDR Search Radius: 3 mi.
Search Center: Lat. 41.7699000(41° 46' 11.64") Long.76.3190000 (76° 19' 8.40")
Key:
AFS = Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem.
AST = Above ground storage tank.
FRDS = Federal Reporting Data System.
mi = Mile.
N= North.
NE= Northeast.
NI = No information.
Search Area D
EDR Inquiry Number: 3600692.20
EDR Search Radius: 1 mi.
Search Center: Lat. 41.7033000 (41° 42' 11.88") Long.76.4693000 (76° 28' 9.48")
Search Area E
EDR Inquiry Number: 3600692.26
EDR Search Radius: 1 mi.
Search Center: Lat. 41.7136000(41° 42' 48.96") Long.76.6376000 (76° 38' 15.36")
Search Area F
EDR Inquiry Number: 3600692.32
EDR Search Radius: 3 mi.
Search Center: Lat. 41.6845000 (41° 41' 4.20") Long.76.7028000 (76° 42' 10.08")
NW= Northwest.
NPDES = National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
PA = Pennsylvania.
RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
USGS = United States Geological Survey.
W= West.
WSW= West-southwest.
-------
C-49
Table C-34 Environmental Database Review Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Distance from
Nearest Yes/
Name of Facility Site Location Address Sample Point No
Databases:
ARCHIVE LIST: Local list of Archived Underground Storage Tank Sites
AST: Listing of Pennsylvania Regulated Aboveground Storage Tanks
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
FTTS : FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) Tracking System
HIST FTTS - FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
HIST LF: Abandoned Landfill Inventory
ICIS: Compliance Information System
LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites
MANIFEST: Hazardous waste manifest information
containing public health, safety, and public welfare problems created by past coal mining.
NCDB: National Compliance Database
NEI: National Emissions Inventory
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Listing
PA eFACTS: Pennsylvania Environmental Facility Application Compliance Tracking System
PCS: Permit Compliance System
RCRA-CESQG: Federal RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator List
RCRA-LQG: RCRA - Large Quantity Generators List
RCRA NonGen / NLR: RCRA: Non Generators List
RMP: Risk Management Plans Records
TRIS: Toxics Release Inventory System
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
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: Mnes Master Index File. The source of this database is the Dept. of Labor, Mne Safety and Health Administration
UST: Listing of Pennsylvania Regulated Underground Storage Tanks
VCP: Voluntary Cleanup Sites
Potential Candidate Cause
Justification
Groundwater Search
Wells Area
Waste Codes:
Waste Code D001 - Ignitable waste
Wast Code D003 - Reactive waste
Waste Code D005 - Barium
Waste Code D006 - Cadmium
Waste CodeDOO? - Chromium
Waste Code D008 - Lead
Wast Code D018 - Benzene
Waste Code F003 - The following spent non-halogenated solvents: Xylene, acetone, ethyl acetate, ethyl benzene, ethyl ether, methyl isobutyl ketone, n-butyl alcohol, cyclohexanone, and methanol; all spent solvent mixtures/blends
containing, before use, only the above spent non-halogenated solvents; and all spent solvent mixtures/blends containing, before use, one or more of the above non-halogenated solvents, and, a total of 10 percent or more (by volume)
of one or more of those solvents listed mFOOl, F002, F004, andF005; and still bottoms from the recovery of these spent solvents and spent solvent mixtures.
Waste Code F005 - The following spent nonhalogenated solvents: toluene, methyl ethyl ketone, carbon disulfide, isobutanol, pyridine, benzene, 2-ethoxyethanol, and 2-nitropropane; all spent solvent mixtures/blends containing,
before use, a total of ten percent or more (by volume) of one or more of the above nonhalogenated solvents or those solvents listed in F001, F002, orF004; and still bottoms from the recovery of these spent solvents and spent solvent
mixtures.
-------
Table C-35 Well Inventory Summary
C-50
Organization
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
Site Name
WELLES 1 5H OG WELL
WELLES 1 3H OG WELL
WELLES 2 2H OG WELL
WELLES 2 5H OG WELL
WELLES 3 2H OG WELL
WELLES 3 5H OG WELL
WELLES 4 2H OG WELL
WELLES 4 5H OG WELL
WELLES 5 2H OG WELL
WELLES 5 5H OG WELL
WELLES 5 6H OG WELL
MOBEAR 5H OG WELL
MOBEAR 5H OG WELL
MOBEAR 1H OG WELL
BURKMONT FARMS BRA 2H OG WELL
BURKMONT FARMS BRA 5H OG WELL
BURKMONT FARMS BRA 1H OG WELL
WALKER BRA 5H OG WELL
WALKER BRA 5H OG WELL
WALKER BRA 2H OG WELL
CUTHBERTSON BRA 2H OG WELL
VRGC BRA 2H OG WELL
VRGC BRA 5H OG WELL
VRGC BRA 6H OG WELL
WALKER S BRA 3H OG WELL
WALKER S BRA 4H OG WELL
WALKER S BRA 4H OG WELL
WALKER S BRA 1H OG WELL
WALKER N BRA 3H OG WELL
CUTHBERTSON BRA 1H OG WELL
ALEXANDER NE BRA 1H OG WELL
ALEXANDER NW BRA 3H OG WELL
ALEXANDER NW BRA 4H OG WELL
ALEXANDER NW BRA 4H OG WELL
ALEXANDER SW BRA 4H OG WELL
ALEXANDER SE BRA 1H OG WELL
AMBROSIUS UNIT A 1H OG WELL
AMBROSIUS UNIT A 1H OG WELL
AMBROSIUS UNIT A 2H OG WELL
Site ID
717905
717901
721118
721120
721356
721361
724260
724262
724263
724265
724783
746852
746852
746935
747685
747763
747882
748052
748052
748054
749217
749219
749221
749223
749674
749811
749811
750925
750926
751645
752327
752328
752329
752329
752404
752397
754458
754458
754461
Primary ID
716602
716597
719509
719510
719711
719715
722249
722254
722257
722260
722749
740537
740537
740604
741251
741342
741468
741596
741596
741598
742547
742549
742550
742553
742904
743022
743022
743949
743950
744532
745047
745048
745049
745049
745120
745113
746793
746793
746794
Sub
Facility ID
986459
986454
991860
991861
992291
992301
997713
997717
997720
997729
998633
1039970
1039971
1040074
1041661
1041823
1042035
1042308
1059951
1042310
1044459
1044461
1044463
1044465
1045270
1060867
1045583
1047553
1047554
1048690
1049955
1049959
1049963
1063274
1050081
1050073
1060315
1060316
1060317
API
Number
015-20242
015-20244
015-20314
015-20315
015-20334
015-20335
015-20416
015-20417
015-20418
015-20419
015-20432
015-21666
015-21666
015-21670
015-21704
015-21705
015-21717
015-21719
015-21719
015-21720
015-21797
015-21798
015-21799
015-21800
015-21830
015-21832
015-21832
015-21889
015-21890
015-21917
015-21965
015-21966
015-21967
015-21967
015-21977
015-21978
015-22051
015-22051
015-22052
Site Status
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Sub
Facility #
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
4
Compliance
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Search Area
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Latitude
41.649436
41.649433
41.646025
41.645986
41.653736
41.653653
41.658044
41.658061
41.657947
41.657983
41.657889
41.600153
41.600153
41.600100
41.602128
41.602061
41.602108
41.614819
41.614819
41.614886
41.617167
41.627839
41.627756
41.627767
41.614853
41.617142
41.617142
41.614822
41.614856
41.617181
41.612803
41.612756
41.612794
41.612794
41.612806
41.612742
41.592628
41.592628
41.592631
Longitude
-76.307575
-76.307519
-76.322794
-76.322794
-76.295592
-76.295594
-76.286719
-76.286769
-76.275425
-76.275447
-76.275472
-76.245683
-76.245683
-76.245667
-76.267647
-76.267636
-76.267600
-76.296222
-76.296222
-76.296158
-76.288783
-76.282375
-76.282394
-76.282464
-76.296192
-76.288864
-76.288864
-76.296136
-76.296103
-76.288850
-76.312358
-76.312292
-76.312411
-76.312411
-76.312303
-76.312400
-76.282225
-76.282225
-76.282281
-------
Table C-35 Well Inventory Summary
C-51
Sub API Sub
Organization Site Name Site ID Primary ID Site Status Compliance Search Area Latitude Longitude
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
SHELL OIL CO
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
DULCEY BRA 5H OG WELL
DULCEY BRA 5H OG WELL
ALKAN S BRA 2H OG WELL
ALKAN N BRA 2H OG WELL
CALMITCH BRA 2H OG WELL
CALMITCH BRA 6H OG WELL
KATHRYN BRA 5H OG WELL
KATHRYN BRA 5H OG WELL
REDBONE BRA 2H OG WELL
REDBONE BRA 5H OG WELL
BROWN HOMESTEAD E BRA 1H OG
WELL
BROWN HOMESTEAD SW BRA 4H OG
WELL
BROWN HOMESTEAD SW BRA 5H OG
WELL
BROWN HOMESTEAD NW BRA 4H OG
WELL
BROWN HOMESTEAD NW BRA 5H OG
WELL
CUTHBERTSON LOCATION & WALKER
LOCATION
BURKMONT FARMS LOCATION
WELLES 5 BRA 3H
ALKAN LOCATION
MOBEAR LOCATION
WELLES 3 BRA 3H OG WELL
WELLES 4 & 5
DULCEY LOCATION
WELLES 1 BRA 1H OG WELL
ALEXANDER LOCATION
KATHRYN LOCATION
RALPH KISSELL UNIT 1 OG WELL
EVANCfflCK 1 OGWELL
CHANCELLOR 626893 1 OGWELL
OTTEN 626935 1H OGWELL
OTTEN 627016 2H OGWELL
JOHN BARRETT 627210 2H OG WELL
JOHN BARRETT 62721 5 1H OG WELL
EVANCfflCK 627146 2H OGWELL
755688
755688
755780
755788
758040
758761
758797
758797
760548
760550
763135
763317
763340
763341
763342
744201
741463
725830
754147
741720
767804
725830
754457
768211
750785
755878
13420
703989
704495
713476
713479
713973
713974
714802
747752
747752
747844
747848
749783
750378
750411
750411
751880
751883
754094
754260
754262
754264
754266
756409
757942
758914
759011
759013
759034
759057
759444
759562
759656
761865
15171
704999
705398
712706
712709
713184
713185
713872
1064883
1062581
1062785
1062795
1071263
1072836
1073044
1073045
1076433
1076436
1081213
1081580
1081591
1081596
1081600
1086576
1090356
1092713
1093006
1093008
1093118
1093163
1094173
1094570
1094748
1099848
28701
966673
967228
979888
979892
980718
980720
981879
015-22080
015-22080
015-22087
015-22088
015-22143
015-22168
015-22171
015-22171
015-22223
015-22224
015-22243
015-22246
015-22247
015-22248
015-22249
015-22310
015-22392
015-22476
015-22494
015-22495
015-22499
015-22500
015-22513
015-22523
015-22528
015-22604
015-20009
015-20084
015-20085
015-20118
015-20119
015-20133
015-20134
015-20150
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/plugged well
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
361
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
41.592772
41.592772
41.628447
41.628406
41.601472
41.601492
41.626869
41.626869
41.631783
41.631789
41.660336
41.660364
41.660417
41.660322
41.660378
41.617181
41.602086
41.657908
41.628486
41.600108
41.653736
41.658075
41.592769
41.649367
41.612747
41.626867
41.699138
41.715000
41.709721
41.672524
41.672455
41.684032
41.684102
41.714961
-76.303067
-76.303067
-76.271922
-76.271911
-76.278194
-76.278242
-76.251211
-76.251211
-76.244953
-76.245006
-76.245967
-76.245886
-76.245939
-76.245900
-76.245953
-76.288850
-76.267553
-76.275406
-76.271936
-76.245614
-76.295647
-76.286822
-76.302997
-76.307625
-76.312347
-76.251264
-76.342493
-76.366397
-76.369085
-76.364502
.76.364449
-76.356923
-76.356979
-76.366378
-------
Table C-35 Well Inventory Summary
C-52
Sub API Sub
Organization Site Name Site ID Primary ID Site Status Compliance Search Area Latitude Longitude
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
JOHN BARRETT 627220 6H OG WELL
HERSHBERGER 2H OG WELL
SOLOWIEJ 5H OG WELL
SOLOWIEJ 6H OG WELL
HERSHBERGER 5H OG WELL
CLAUDIA 1H OG WELL PAD
CLAUDIA 4H OG WELL PAD
ROSELYN 3H OG WELL
ROSELYN 2H OG WELL
ROSELYN 1H OG WELL
POTTER 5HOG WELL
CLAUDIA 5H OG WELL PAD
CLAUDIA 2H OG WELL PAD
POTTER 3HOG WELL
SOLOWIEJ 5H OG WELL
HARPER 5H OG WELL
ACLA2HOGWELL
ACLA6HOGWELL
PAULINY 5H OG WELL
HARPER 4H OG WELL
POTTER 4HOG WELL
POTTER 6H OG WELL
WAY 5HOG WELL
BALDUZZI 5H OG WELL
BALDUZZI 2H OG WELL
WAY 6HOG WELL
STALFORD 5H OG WELL
WAY 1HOG WELL
DONNA 2HOG WELL
DONNA 5H OG WELL
PAULINY 2H OG WELL
CURTIS 5HOG WELL
CURTIS 4HOG WELL
BURLEIGH 4H OG WELL
PMG GOD UNIT 1H OG WELL
BURLEIGH 3H OG WELL
BURLEIGH 5H OG WELL
714986
720942
721420
721422
721445
721449
721449
722129
722131
722132
722701
721449
721449
725259
725878
726989
729728
729733
729748
729862
730453
730456
730626
730646
730647
731092
731446
732669
737094
737172
737180
739923
740040
740200
740541
742095
742099
714044
719344
719765
719767
719785
719790
719789
720380
720381
720383
720841
721119
721121
723195
723680
724577
726769
726771
726790
726881
727336
727340
727477
727499
727500
727877
728198
729221
732669
732717
732724
734882
734978
735081
735371
736584
736590
982145
991583
992392
992398
992428
992433
992432
993637
993638
993641
994700
995344
995347
999685
1000700
1002521
1006847
1006851
1006887
1007070
1007918
1007920
1008120
1008144
1008145
1008882
1009443
1011169
1017574
1017679
1017697
1021683
1021846
1022070
1022677
1024960
1024969
015-20155
015-20296
015-20320
015-20321
015-20330
015-20331
015-20332
015-20381
015-20382
015-20383
015-20402
015-20405
015-20406
015-20449
015-20470
015-20541
015-20640
015-20641
015-20646
015-20649
015-20691
015-20692
015-20715
015-20719
015-20720
015-20729
015-20771
015-20857
015-21144
015-21147
015-21150
015-21293
015-21308
015-21316
015-21344
015-21420
015-21421
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
4
4
4
4
4
401
4
4
4
4
4
401
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
41.684049
41.684208
41.712511
41.712467
41.684167
41.683100
41.683144
41.709381
41.709267
41.709344
41.684228
41.683075
41.683183
41.684214
41.712467
41.681017
41.681744
41.681767
41.686247
41.681036
41.684200
41.684214
41.718519
41.714689
41.714731
41.718472
41.711967
41.718500
41.686128
41.686167
41.686311
41.722522
41.722556
41.720186
41.715303
41.720225
41.720283
-76.357004
-76.336308
-76.299233
-76.299183
-76.336306
-76.322331
-76.322256
-76.323353
-76.323186
-76.323325
-76.291192
-76.322261
-76.322275
-76.291244
-76.299183
-76.310900
-76.343978
-76.344025
-76.302247
-76.310950
-76.291294
-76.291244
-76.274075
-76.290681
-76.290683
-76.274108
-76.320275
-76.274028
-76.281133
-76.281206
-76.302233
-76.341614
-76.341581
-76.283864
-76.341069
-76.283886
-76.283842
-------
Table C-35 Well Inventory Summary
C-53
Organization
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
FAIRMAN DRILLING CO
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
Site Name
ZALESKI 3H OG WELL
ZALESKI 2H OG WELL
BURLEIGH 2H OG WELL
ZALESKI 5H OG WELL
ROEBER 5H OG WELL
ZALESKI 6H OG WELL
PMG GOD UNIT A 2H OG WELL
PMG GOD UNIT A 3H OG WELL
PMG GOD UNIT A 4H OG WELL
CLAUDIA BRA 3H OG WELL PAD
ACLA BRA 3H OG WELL
OTTEN BRA 3H OG WELL
BALDUZZI BRA 3H
HARPER BRA 3H OG WELL
EVANCfflCK BRA 3H OG WELL
BURLEIGH BRA 2H
BURLEIGH BRA 2H
SOLOWIEJ BRA 2H
WAY 1H-6H
HERSHBERGER BRA 3H OG WELL
POTTER BRA 1H
JOHN BARRETT BRA 3H OG WELL
ZALESKI LOCATION
PAULINY BRA 6H
DONNA 1H-6H
CURTIS 1H-6H
ALLEN UNIT 1H OG WELL
ALLEN UNIT 2H OG WELL
ALLEN UNIT 3H OG WELL
ALLEN UNIT 4H OG WELL
ALLEN UNIT 5H OG WELL
KERRICK UNIT 1H OG WELL
KERRICK UNIT 3H OG WELL
HAROLD W LUNDY 1 OG WELL
STEVENS 2H OG WELL
Site ID
742353
742424
742432
742525
742579
743738
746915
746916
746918
721449
764879
765001
734912
766263
766719
738134
Ml
726297
729906
767411
723793
767962
740587
730270
736151
738625
740535
740538
740540
740874
740877
740890
740912
13413
721611
Primary ID
736809
736903
736909
736995
737051
738016
740586
740587
740588
755347
755686
755803
756723
757153
757659
757973
772290
758002
758231
758533
759030
759258
759442
759601
759992
760498
735367
735369
735370
735597
735598
735612
735620
15164
719932
Sub
Facility ID
1025320
1025502
1025516
1025643
1025753
1034249
1040053
1040054
1040055
1084112
1084958
1085418
1087329
1088298
1089444
1090420
1124536
1090529
1091060
1091774
1093113
1093674
1094176
1094652
1095996
1097016
1022674
1022675
1022676
1023119
1023120
1023132
1023148
28694
992764
API
Number
015-21436
015-21442
015-21446
015-21455
015-21463
015-21532
015-21667
015-21668
015-21669
015-22278
015-22287
015-22288
015-22331
015-22344
015-22373
015-22393
015-22818
015-22394
015-22410
015-22446
015-22498
015-22509
015-22514
015-22527
015-22539
015-22563
015-21341
015-21342
015-21343
015-21351
015-21352
015-21355
015-21357
015-20002
015-20354
Site Status
Active
Active
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator reported not
drilled
Permit pending
Proposed but never
materialized
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/plugged well
Active/Operator
reported not drilled
Sub
Facility #
4
4
401
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Ml
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
361
401
Compliance
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Ml
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
Search Area
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Naa
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B&C
B&C
B&C
B&C
B&C
B&C
B&C
C
C
Latitude
41.715258
41.715297
41.720264
41.715325
41.716072
41.715286
41.715381
41.715356
41.715328
41.683106
41.681786
41.672661
41.714772
41.681056
41.714956
41.720264
NI
41.712467
41.718478
41.684128
41.684278
41.684178
41.715353
41.686275
41.686117
41.722556
41.730264
41.730236
41.730208
41.730178
41.730150
41.730672
41.730669
41.783701
41.781133
Longitude
-76.355744
-76.355792
-76.283906
-76.355753
-76.312203
-76.355706
-76.341103
-76.341092
-76.341081
-76.322239
-76.344072
-76.364417
-76.290683
-76.310997
-76.366406
-76.283906
NI
-76.299292
-76.273981
-76.336300
-76.291214
-76.356997
-76.355711
-76.302283
-76.281186
-76.341581
-76.330425
-76.330464
-76.330506
-76.330544
-76.330586
-76.319131
-76.319242
-76.325586
-76.350144
-------
Table C-35 Well Inventory Summary
C-54
Sub API Sub
Organization Site Name Site ID Primary ID _ .... ,_ ., . Site Status _ .... „ Compliance Search Area Latitude Longitude
a y Facility ID Number Facility* M M
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
STEVENS 5H OG WELL
SCHOONOVER 2H OG WELL
SCHOONOVER 5H OG WELL
STEVENS 2H OG WELL
STEVENS 5H OG WELL
LUNDY2H
LUNDY 5H OG WELL
LUNDY BRA 2H
SCHOONOVER 2H OG WELL
SCHOONOVER 5H OG WELL
BLANNARD 5H OG WELL
BLANNARD 2H OG WELL
COATES 2H OG WELL
SCHOONOVER 1H OG WELL
BALLIBAY 2H OG WELL
BLANNARD 1H OG WELL
BLANNARD BRA 3H OG WELL
SCHOONOVER 4H OG WELL
SCHOONOVER 6H OG WELL
THEM 2HOG WELL
THEM 5HOG WELL
COATES 5HOG WELL
COATES 1HOGWELL
COATES 3HOG WELL
COATES 4H OG WELL
COATES 6HOG WELL
SCHEFFLER 2H OG WELL
SCHEFFLER 5H OG WELL
PRIMROSE 5H OG WELL
721614
722126
722133
726243
726474
728099
728101
728428
730079
730080
730635
730639
731103
731257
731925
731930
731932
732276
732277
733319
733325
733859
735997
736000
736002
736004
737746
738053
742435
719934
720379
720385
723969
724148
725488
725490
758074
727039
727040
727486
727492
727887
728022
728614
728618
728620
728929
728932
729781
729784
730236
731858
731861
731862
731865
733173
733454
736910
992766
993635
993646
1001289
1001742
1004315
1004318
1090690
1007366
1007367
1008131
1008135
1008904
1009123
1010213
1010217
1010220
1010692
1010694
1012155
1012158
1012995
1016076
1016079
1016083
1016087
1018492
1018920
1025517
015-20355
015-20380
015-20384
015-20481
015-20495
015-20556
015-20557
015-22397
015-20663
015-20664
015-20716
015-20717
015-20732
015-20750
015-20815
015-20817
015-20818
015-20847
015-20848
015-20915
015-20916
015-20946
015-21070
015-21071
015-21072
015-21073
015-21178
015-21210
015-21447
Active/Operator
reported not drilled
Active/Operator
reported not drilled
Active/Operator
reported not drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Proposed but never
materialized
Active
Active
Active
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator reported not
drilled
Operator reported not
drilled
Operator reported not
drilled
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Active
Active
401
401
401
4
4
4
4
6
4
4
4
401
4
4
4
4
401
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
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
C
C
C
41.781117
41.776506
41.776467
41.781158
41.781172
41.782642
41.782600
41.782561
41.780903
41.780917
41.784100
41.784100
41.782903
41.780964
41.750697
41.784081
41.784061
41.780953
41.780942
41.779353
41.779322
41.782939
41.782875
41.782972
41.782908
41.782944
41.744992
41.744964
41.784892
-76.350094
-76.359094
-76.359142
-76.350125
-76.350175
-76.320958
-76.320944
-76.320928
-76.361686
-76.361633
-76.311033
-76.311033
-76.330942
-76.361653
-76.283886
-76.311083
-76.311131
-76.361706
-76.361758
-76.368322
-76.368358
-76.330911
-76.330883
-76.330881
-76.330853
-76.330822
-76.360753
-76.360711
-76.342897
-------
Table C-35 Well Inventory Summary
C-55
Organization
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PROD CO
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
Site Name
ROEHRIG SMITH GAS UNIT 2H OG
WELL
ROEHRIG SMITH GAS UNIT 3H OG
WELL
PRIMROSE 1H OG WELL
PRIMROSE 3H OG WELL
PRIMROSE 4H OG WELL
PRIMROSE 6H OG WELL
ROEHRIG SMITH GAS UNIT 1H OG
WELL
JONES BRA 5H OG WELL
JONES BRA 2H OG WELL
JONES BRA 4H OG WELL
JONES BRA 6H OG WELL
HJLLIS N BRA 2H OG WELL
HJLLIS S BRA 2H OG WELL
HJLLIS N BRA 3H OG WELL
VANORDER PATRICK 1H OG WELL
VANORDER PATRICK 2H OG WELL
VANORDER PATRICK 3H OG WELL
VANORDER PATRICK 4H OG WELL
SIMPLEX BRA 1H OG WELL
SIMPLEX BRA 2H OG WELL
RABAGO-BIRK (10 PAD)
COATES BRA 3H
ROEHRIG-SMITH (S PAD) 1H-6H
ROEHRIG-SMITH (S PAD) 1H-6H
ROEHRIG-SMITH (S PAD) 1H-6H
BALLIBAY 1H-6H
PRIMROSE BRA 2H
PRIMROSE BRA 2H
THEM 1H-6H
HJLLIS S BRA 3H
SCHOONOVER 1H-6H
SCHEFFLER 1H-6H
ROEHRIG-SMITH (S PAD) 1H-6H
STEVENS BRA 3H OG WELL
Site ID
743264
743739
744847
744853
744855
744863
748254
748859
749211
749213
749214
752440
752445
752959
755074
755080
755082
755083
763134
763950
759111
730266
741492
741492
741492
731829
740840
Ml
730264
751176
723980
737097
741492
770032
Primary ID
737657
738017
738887
738893
738894
738899
741744
742282
742542
742543
742545
745150
745156
745609
747289
747297
747298
747300
754092
754766
754876
756407
756446
756448
756449
756888
757011
772141
757559
758075
758782
759259
760442
761580
Sub
Facility ID
1033391
1034251
1036234
1036242
1036244
1036252
1042735
1043851
1044453
1044454
1044456
1050144
1050156
1050956
1061248
1061257
1061259
1061261
1081212
1082613
1082934
1086573
1086674
1086677
1086678
1087751
1088019
1124122
1089252
1090691
1092308
1093675
1096842
1099205
API
Number
015-21496
015-21533
015-21573
015-21575
015-21576
015-21577
015-21728
015-21760
015-21794
015-21795
015-21796
015-21984
015-21985
015-21994
015-22067
015-22068
015-22069
015-22070
015-22242
015-22262
015-22266
015-22307
015-22313
015-22314
015-22315
015-22338
015-22341
015-22817
015-22365
015-22398
015-22474
015-22510
015-22558
015-22589
Site Status
Active
Active
Active
Active
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
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Sub
Facility #
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
NI
4
4
4
4
4
4
Compliance
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NI
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Search Area
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
C
Naa
C
C
C
C
C
C
Latitude
41.781917
41.781925
41.784942
41.784864
41.784928
41.784914
41.781856
41.754056
41.754017
41.754036
41.753997
41.748219
41.748253
41.748286
41.779061
41.779111
41.779183
41.779233
41.746947
41.746883
41.801439
41.782972
41.781828
41.781836
41.781844
41.750697
41.784878
NI
41.779289
41.748253
41.780892
41.744936
41.781792
41.781142
Longitude
-76.268367
-76.268311
-76.342919
-76.343000
-76.342972
-76.343025
-76.268428
-76.306769
-76.306792
-76.306856
-76.306875
-76.290022
-76.289989
-76.289956
-76.281231
-76.281200
-76.281233
-76.281200
-76.323408
-76.323250
-76.287531
-76.330881
-76.268644
-76.268572
-76.268500
-76.283942
-76.342950
NI
-76.368394
-76.289900
-76.361739
-76.360672
-76.268489
-76.350072
-------
Table C-35 Well Inventory Summary
C-56
Organization
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
GOODWIN IND INC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
TALISMAN ENERGY USA INC
TALISMAN ENERGY USA INC
TALISMAN ENERGY USA INC
TALISMAN ENERGY USA INC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
Sub API Sub
Site Name Site ID Primary ID _ .... ._ ... . Site Status _ .... „ Compliance Search Area Latitude Longitude
y Facility ID Number Facility* M M
STROM 627237 3H OG WELL
STROM 627236 2H OG WELL
STROM 62723 5 1HOGWELL
ARNOLD 1H OG WELL
ARNOLD 3H OG WELL
DAN ELLIS 2H OG WELL
DAN ELLIS 1H OG WELL
DAN ELLIS 3H OG WELL
STROM BRA 3H OG WELL
STROM BRA 5H OG WELL
DAN ELLIS BRA 4H
ANDRUS UNIT 1H OG WELL
LLOYD JONES 1 OG WELL
VANNOY1 OGWELL
VARGSON 1H OG WELL
VANNOY 627108 2 OGWELL
VANNOY 627109 3 OGWELL
MAY 627301 1H OGWELL
MAY 627303 3H OGWELL
JENNINGS 627527 1 OGWELL
RHEPPARD 1H OGWELL
RHEPPARD 2H OGWELL
MARTIN 2H OG WELL
D JENNINGS UNIT 1H OGWELL
BRACKMAN 2H OG WELL
MORSE 3H OGWELL
MORSE 5H OGWELL
MORSE 1 HOG WELL
SHEDDEN 01 075 02 L 2H OG WELL
SHEDDEN 01 075 03 L 3H OGWELL
SHEDDEN 01 075 04 L 4H OG WELL
SHEDDEN 01 075 01 L 1H OGWELL
CRANRUN 2H OG WELL
CRANRUN 5H OG WELL
CRANRUN 4H OG WELL
CRANRUN 1H OG WELL
PETTY 6H OGWELL
ATGAS2H OGWELL
ATGAS1H OGWELL
714887
714885
714884
719216
720946
726046
729984
729988
752955
765615
727856
740880
13424
706388
706158
712875
712876
715008
715011
715901
718030
718033
721659
730285
731283
733415
733420
733802
733835
733839
733842
733830
735036
735041
736105
737762
738057
738481
738821
713950
713949
713946
717752
719349
723822
726972
726973
745605
756381
760287
735601
15175
706916
706760
712209
712210
714066
714070
714835
716713
716716
719984
727201
728046
729870
729874
730189
730216
730220
730222
730212
731195
731201
731944
733187
733460
733808
734054
981989
981986
981978
988349
991618
1001022
1007259
1007260
1050948
1086493
1096533
1023123
28705
969850
969443
979016
979017
982172
982186
983487
986626
986631
992836
1007696
1009159
1012280
1012285
1012914
1012969
1012972
1012976
1012961
1014812
1014826
1016228
1018510
1018940
1019584
1020093
015-20147
015-20148
015-20149
015-20268
015-20299
015-20480
015-20652
015-20653
015-21990
015-22303
015-22548
015-21353
015-20013
015-20096
015-20097
015-20113
015-20114
015-20159
015-20161
015-20172
015-20247
015-20248
015-20360
015-20679
015-20758
015-20929
015-20932
015-20940
015-20947
015-20948
015-20949
015-20950
015-20995
015-20997
015-21074
015-21183
015-21212
015-21237
015-21255
Active/Operator
reported not drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/plugged well
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
401
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
361
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
E
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
41.702492
41.702439
41.702433
41.695306
41.695358
41.691936
41.691897
41.691858
41.702439
41.702467
41.691925
41.714106
41.703044
41.709197
41.710069
41.709197
41.709188
41.704000
41.704039
41.684336
41.716633
41.716600
41.726872
41.694528
41.667356
41.683219
41.683206
41.683172
41.697275
41.697369
41.697464
41.697178
41.662872
41.662911
41.662925
41.662886
41.662381
41.666425
41.666375
-76.455142
-76.455175
-76.455222
-76.467194
-76.467111
-76.466036
-76.466025
-76.466011
-76.455278
-76.455158
-76.466103
-76.632633
-76.704950
-76.682476
-76.694890
-76.682476
-76.682531
-76.722119
-76.722131
-76.704234
-76.681453
-76.681367
-76.700250
-76.728667
-76.740831
-76.656019
-76.656069
-76.655994
.76.747439
-76.747444
-76.747453
-76.747431
-76.726075
-76.726089
-76.726022
-76.726008
-76.716250
-76.709769
-76.709750
-------
Table C-35 Well Inventory Summary
C-57
Sub API Sub
Organization Site Name Site ID Primary ID _ .... ,_ ., . Site Status _ .... „ Compliance Search Area Latitude Longitude
M y Facility ID Number Facility* M M
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
UNKNOWN OPR
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
CHESAPEAKE APPALACfflA LLC
ATGAS3HOGWELL
ATGAS4HOGWELL
ATGAS6HOGWELL
PETTY 1HOG WELL
PETTY 4HOG WELL
PETTY 5HOG WELL
NEAL BRA 6H OG WELL
NEAL BRA 6H OG WELL
ACW BRA 3H OG WELL
ACW BRA 5H OG WELL
NEAL BRA 2H OG WELL
NEAL BRA 3H OG WELL
YODER UNIT 1H OG WELL
YODER UNIT 1H OG WELL
KRISE BRA 2H OG WELL
KRISE BRA 3H OG WELL
KRISE BRA 5H OG WELL
BRACKMAN BRA 5H OG WELL
ATGAS BRA 5H
CRANRUNBRA3H
PETTY BRA 3H
MARTIN 1H-6H
ACW BRA 2H
MORSE 1H-6H
BENNETT 2H
BENNETT 4H
BENNETT 3H
BENNETT 1H
BENNETT BRA 1H
BENNETT BRA 1H
BURBAGE 1
PLYMOUTH 2H
PLYMOUTH 5H
PLYMOUTH 6H
CRAWFORD 2H
CRAWFORD 4H
738824
738828
738837
739945
739948
739949
750672
750672
750768
750769
752333
752334
755374
755374
756962
756965
756966
765388
737673
734465
734465
723631
749619
730680
738071
738071
738071
738071
737436
737436
761023
728901
728901
728901
729725
729725
734058
734063
734071
734912
734915
734916
743752
743752
743825
743827
745053
745054
747519
747519
748859
748861
748862
756180
756597
757663
758198
758578
758618
760551
733483
733584
733588
733590
759214
775139
752323
726783
726787
727042
727365
727366
1020099
1020104
1020114
1021730
1021733
1021735
1047143
1062523
1047313
1047315
1049970
1049971
1061928
1061929
1064893
1064895
1064896
1086138
1086987
1089449
1090986
1091900
1092011
1097096
1018961
1019096
1019102
1019105
1093596
1132316
1077243
1006870
1006880
1007369
1007954
1007957
015-21256
015-21257
015-21259
015-21299
015-21301
015-21302
015-21863
015-21863
015-21871
015-21872
015-21958
015-21959
015-22076
015-22076
015-22121
015-22122
015-22123
015-22298
015-22318
015-22375
015-22407
015-22445
015-22453
015-22565
015-21213
015-21224
015-21225
015-21226
015-22508
015-23026
015-00005
015-20644
015-20645
015-20666
015-20701
015-20702
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator reported not
drilled
Active
Active
Active
Active
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Active
DEP Abandoned List
Active
Active
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Active
Active
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
401
401
4
524
4
4
401
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
G
G
G
G
G
G
H
H
H
H
H
H
41.666450
41.666389
41.666400
41.662356
41.662369
41.662406
41.680428
41.680428
41.669225
41.669144
41.680475
41.680433
41.679172
41.679172
41.673486
41.673494
41.673478
41.667342
41.666436
41.662950
41.662431
41.726833
41.669186
41.683236
41.719147
41.719105
41.719150
41.719108
41.719108
41.719108
41.606969
41.613275
41.613261
41.613294
41.608355
41.608344
-76.709667
-76.709697
-76.709644
-76.716356
-76.716303
-76.716378
-76.667281
-76.667281
-76.700650
-76.700650
-76.667214
-76.667211
-76.675161
-76.675161
-76.689233
-76.689178
-76.689286
-76.740883
-76.709719
-76.726103
-76.716272
-76.700244
-76.700650
-76.655967
-76.127738
-76.127736
-76.127669
-76.127666
-76.127666
-76.127666
-76.398469
-76.367180
-76.367230
-76.367308
-76.373486
-76.373538
-------
Table C-35 Well Inventory Summary
C-58
Sub API Sub
Organization Site Name Site ID Primary ID _ .... ,_ ., . Site Status _ .... „ Compliance Search Area Latitude Longitude
a y Facility ID Number Facility* M M
6l1
-------
C-59
Table C-36 Number of Oil and Gas Wells
Search Area
Name
Radius
(miles)
EPA Samples
Total
Number of
Oil and Gas
Wells
Oil and Gas
wells within 1
Mile of EPA
Sample Points
Bradford County
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
3
3
3
1
1
3
1
1
NEPAGW13
NEPAGW18
NEPAGW19
NEPAGW20/d
NEPAGW20d
NEPAGW31
NEPAGW05
NEPWGW06/d
NEPAGW09
NEPAGW10
NEPAGW11
NEPAGW12
NEPAGW14
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW08
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW29
NEPAGW15
NEPAGW16/d
NEPAGW17
NEPASWOl/d
NEPAGW04
NEPASW05
NEPASW06
NEPAGW01
NEPAGW02/d
NEPAGW03
NEPAGW07
NEPAGW36
NEPASW03
NEPASW04/d
NEPASW02
NEPAGW32
NEPAGW33
34
46
33
6
1
25
2
9
6
24
16
6
1
11
2
9
Susquehanna County
A
B
3
1
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW24
109
2
28
2
Key:
EPA = Environmental Protection Agency
-------
C-60
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
ARNOLD 1H
ARNOLD 3H
VAN NOY 1
VARGSON 1H
VANNOY6271082
015-20268
015-20299
015-20096
015-20097
015-20113
0
0
1
5
16
NA
NA
NA
02/25/09
02/25/09
02/25/09
03/03/09
03/27/09
NA
NA
No Violations Noted
No E&S plan developed, plan not on site.
No E&S plan developed, plan not on site.
Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an
impoundment.
1) Discharge of pollultional material to waters of
Commonwealth.
Compliance record: Section 401 - fresh water
flowing from two 500 bbl tanks located on site,
eroding the ground surface and causing elevated
turbidity in a nearby pond.
1) 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).
2) Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an
impoundment.
3) E&S Plan not adequate.
Compliance record: Ongoing violations related to
3/20/09 ER inspection, this 3/27/09 inspection
conducted from a complaint, related to Inspection ID
1779418 (VANNOY 627108 3) also.
NA
NA
NA
Comply /Closed
Comply /Closed
Yes
Administrative
Close Out
Yes
($27,271.93)
Operator reported not
drilled. 4/7/2009.
Technical review 1
completed of the permit
review.
Operator reported not
drilled. 5/28/2009.
Technical review 1
completed of the permit
review.
Vertical Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Monroe Twp
Monroe Twp
Granville Twp
Granville Twp
Granville Twp
41.695306
41.695358
41.709196
41.710069
41.709196
Longitude
-76.467194
-76.467111
-76.682475
-76.694890
-76.682475
Spud Date Operator
NA
NA
07/07/08
08/25/08
12/21/08
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-61
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of
Inspections Violation
03/20/09
04/01/09
07/23/09
Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector
1) O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
2) Failure to construct properly plug, frac, brine pits.
3) Impoundment not structurally sound,
impermeable, 3rd party protected, greater than 20 in.
of seasonal high ground water table.
4) Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a
specific Clean Streams Law code cannot be used.
5) Discharge of pollultional material to waters of
Commonwealth.
Compliance record
Violation Comment: HC1 not contained in pit, tank
or series of pits and tanks, spill occurred on-site, ER
inspection.
Inspection Comment: ER inspection of HC1 spill at
site, multiple violations documented and cited in
NOV issued on 4/2/09 in conjunction with 3/27/09
follow-up inspection. Inspection information
received in NOV issued 4/2/09, greater than 10 days
past the date of the ER inspection.
Corrected Comment
Municipality Latitude Longitude Spud Date
Operator
On site meeting to discuss previous acid spill and
E&S violations, E&S violations remain, portion of
drilling fluids pumped from pit closing 78.56
violations, 21 roll-offs HC1 impacted soils removed,
HC1 release estimated at 10 bbls, further enforcement
pending.
1) O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
Compliance record: By allowing drill cuttings and
fluid to be in direct contact with the ground surface
without containment, and thus threatening the waters
of the Commonwealth, Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC
has violated 25 PA Code § 78.56(a), Section 301 of
the Solid Waste Management Act, 35 P.S. §
6018.301, Section 307(a) of the Clean Streams Law,
35 P.S. §691.307(a), Section402(a) of the Clean
Streams Law, 35 P.S. §691.402(a) and the rules and
regulations of the Department.
Yes
($27,271.93)
NA
08/06/09
inspection
recommend
resolving the
7/23/09
violations
provided that
waste disposal
receipts are
provided for the
pit remediation.
-------
C-62
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... . . .. . 0 . „. . ^ .
... ... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Spud Date Operator
Inspections Violation
VANNOY 627109 3
015-20114
14
11/05/09
02/04/09
03/27/09
04/01/09
07/23/09
1) Discharge of pollultional material to waters of
Commonwealth.
2) Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a
specific Clean Streams Law code cannot be used.
3) O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
Compliance record
Violation comment: pond impact (waters of the
commonwealth)
Inspection Comment: sampled pond adjacent to well
pad. low pH and Oil & Gas constituents. Historical
NOVs associated with site.
1) 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).
2) Drillers Log not on site.
1) 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).
2) E&S Plan not adequate.
3) Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an
impoundment.
Compliance record indicates: Ongoing violations
related to 3/20/09 ER inspection, this 3/27/09
inspection conducted from a complaint, related to
Inspection ID 1778894 also.
On site meeting to discuss previous acid spill and
E&S violations, E&S violations remain, portion of
drilling fluids pumped from pit closing 78.56
violations, 21 roll-offs HC1 impacted soils removed,
HC1 release estimated at 10 bbls, further enforcement
pending.
1) O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
Compliance record indicates: By allowing drill
cuttings and fluid to be in direct contact with the
ground surface without containment, and thus
threatening the waters of the Commonwealth,
Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC has violated 25 PA
Code § 78.56(a), Section 301 of the Solid Waste
Management Act, 35 P.S. § 6018.301, Section 307(a)
of the Clean Streams Law, 35 P.S. §691.307(a),
Section 02(a) of the Clean Streams Law, 35 P.S.
§691.402(a) and the rules and regulations of the
Department.
Resolution not
listed
Yes
Yes
($27,271.93)
NA
Resolution not
listed
Horizontal Well
Granville Twp
41.709188
-76.682531
01/22/09
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-63
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... . . .. . 0 . „. . ^ .
... ... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Spud Date Operator
Inspections Violation
BRACKMAN 2H
BRACKMAN BRA 5H
CRANRUN 1H
015-20758
015-22298
015-21183
3
1
1
03/20/09
11/05/09
06/08/10
07/01/10
NA
NA
1) Impoundment not structurally sound,
impermeable, 3rd party protected, greater than 20 in.
of seasonal high ground water table.
2) Failure to construct properly plug, frac, brine pits.
3) Discharge of pollultional material to waters of
Commonwealth.
4) Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a
specific Clean Streams Law code cannot be used.
5) O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
Compliance record indicates: ER inspection of HC1
spill at site, multiple violations documented and
cited in NOV issued on 4/2/09 in conjunction with
3/27/09 follow-up inspection. Insepection
information received in NOV issued 4/2/09, greater
than 10 days past the date of the ER inspection.
Inspection created with CACP on 12/29/09, late.
1) Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a
specific Clean Streams Law code cannot be used.
2) O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a
specific O&G Act code cannot be used.
3) Discharge of pollultional material to waters of
Commonwealth.
Compliance record indicates: pond water quality
impacted by well pad activates low pH and Oil & gas
constituents. Vanoy 2H inspection duplicate.
Certified Mail NOV sent 12/30/2009.
De minimis violations noted
Excessive casing seat pressure.
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
Yes
($27,271.93)
Resolution not
listed
NA
Resolution not
listed
NA
NA
Horizontal Well
9/18/2013. The technical
review and decision
review are complete and
either the permit decision
and/or permit issuance are
forthcoming.
8/23/2010. The technical
review and decision
review are complete and
either the permit decision
and/or permit issuance are
forthcoming.
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
41.667355
41.667342
41.662886
-76.740830
-76.740883
-76.726008
05/14/10
NI
NI
ritTT7 C A DT7 A 1^T7
L^rlJ_,o/Vr J_//VIvJ_/
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-64
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
CRANRUN 2H
CRANRUN 5H
CRANRUN 4H
CRANRUN BRA 3H
ATGAS 1H
ATGAS 2H
ATGAS 3H
ATGAS 4H
ATGAS BRA 5H
015-20995
015-20997
015-21074
015-22375
015-21255
015-21237
015-21256
015-21257
015-22318
4
5
1
0
1
11
1
1
0
10/20/10
NA
NA
NA
NA
04/22/11
07/16/12
NA
NA
NA
1) 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).
2) Industrial waste was discharged without permit.
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
NA
No Violations Noted
1) Pit and tanks not constructed with sufficient
capacity to contain pollutional substances.
2) Discharge of pollultional material to waters of
Commonwealth.
3) Stream discharge of industrial waste, includes drill
cuttings, oil, brine and/or silt.
1) Failure to adopt pollution prevention measures
required or prescribed by DEP by handling materials
that create a danger of pollution.
2) Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial
or residual waste to prevent pollution of the waters of
the Commonwealth.
3) Failure of storage operator to maintain and/or
submit required information, such as maps, well
records, integrity testing information, pressure data.
Compliance records: 30 gallon flowback spill
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
NA
Yes
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes ($190,000)
Yes
NA
NA
NA
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
7/8/2010. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
11/19/2012. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
9/30/2010. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
Horizontal Well
9/30/2010. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
9/30/2010. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
10/3/2013. The technical
review and decision
review are complete and
either the permit decision
and/or permit issuance are
forthcoming.
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
41.662872
41.662911
41.662925
41.662950
41.666375
41.666425
41.666450
41.666389
41.666436
Longitude
-76.726075
-76.726088
-76.726022
-76.726103
-76.709750
-76.709769
-76.709667
-76.709697
-76.709719
Spud Date Operator
07/21/10
07/21/10
NI
NI
NI
12/22/10
NI
NI
NI
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHE S APE AKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHE S APE AKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHE S APE AKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-65
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
ATGAS 6H
PETTY BRA 3H
PETTY 1H
PETTY 4H
PETTY 6H
PETTY 5H
ACW BRA 2H
ACW BRA 3H
ACW BRA 5H
ANDRUS UNIT 1H
015-21259
015-22407
015-21299
015-21301
015-21212
015-21302
015-22453
015-21871
015-21872
015-21353
1
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
1
5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
04/13/11
02/28/12
No Violations Noted
NA
NA
NA
NA
No Violations Noted
NA
NA
No Violations Noted
Failure to achieve permanent stabilization of earth
disturbance activity.
Failure to report defective, insufficient, or
improperly cemented casing within 24 hours or
submit plan to correct within 30 days.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes
Resolution not
listed
9/30/2010. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
12/10/2012. The permit
application package is
complete, has been
accepted, and is
undergoing technical
review.
10/21/2010. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
10/21/2010. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
9/3/2010. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
Horizontal Well
Operator reported not
drilled. 12/4/2012. The
permit application
package is complete, has
been accepted, and is
undergoing technical
review.
8/10/2011. The permit
application package is
complete, has been
accepted, and is
undergoing technical
review.
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Leroy Twp
Franklin Twp
41.666400
41.662431
41.662356
41.662369
41.662381
41.662405
41.669186
41.669225
41.669144
41.714105
Longitude
-76.709644
-76.716272
-76.716356
-76.716303
-76.716250
-76.716377
-76.700650
-76.700650
-76.700650
-76.632633
Spud Date Operator
NI
NI
NI
NI
NI
02/08/11
NA
NI
01/16/12
03/11/11
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS
LLC
-------
C-66
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
WELLES 1 5H
015-20242
4
08/07/09
1) Site conditions present a potential for pollution to
waters of the Commonwealth.
2) Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a
specific Clean Stream Law code cannot be used.
3) O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
Compliance record
Inspection comments: Pit leak- self reported. Leak
fixed. 3rd page NOV sent. Soil analytical results
reviewed 9/2/09, barium 171 mg/kg (< Act 2 8200
mg/kg standard), chloride 170 mg/kg (no Act 2
standard), no remediation needed.
Violation comments: Soil analytical results reviewed
9/2/09, barium 171 mg/kg (< Act 2 8200 mg/kg
standard), chloride 170 mg/kg (no Act 2 standard),
no remediation needed. 25 PA Code §78.56 failure to
contain pollutional substances and wastes associated
with drilling a well. Solid Waste Management Act
6018.301 failure to manage residual waste. Clean
Stream Law 691.307(a) unpermitted discharge of
industrial waste. 25 PA Code §78.60(b)(l) failure to
follow discharge requirements. 25 PA Code
§78.57(a) discharge of drilling contaminated fluids to
the ground. Clean Stream Law 691.402(a) potential
pollution.
Yes
Horizontal Well
Terry Twp
41.649436
Longitude
-76.307575
Spud Date Operator
06/15/09
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-67
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
WELLES 1 3H
015-20244
7
08/07/09
09/29/11
1) Site conditions present a potential for pollution to
waters of the Commonwealth.
2) Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a
specific Clean Streams Law code cannot be used.
3) O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
Compliance record
Inspection comments: Pit leak- self reported. Leak
fixed. 3rd page NOV sent. Soil analytical results
reviewed 9/2/09, barium 171 mg/kg (< Act 2 8200
mg/kg standard), chloride 170 mg/kg (no Act 2
standard), no remediation needed.
Violation comments: Soil analytical results reviewed
9/2/09, barium 171 mg/kg (< Act 2 8200 mg/kg
standard), chloride 170 mg/kg (no Act 2 standard),
no remediation needed. 25 PA Code §78.56 failure to
contain pollutional substances and wastes associated
with drilling a well. Solid Waste Management Act
6018.301 failure to manage residual waste. Clean
Streams Law 691.307(a) unpermitted discharge of
industrial waste. 25 PA Code §78.60(b)(l) failure to
follow discharge requirements. 25 PA Code
§78.57(a) discharge of drilling contaminated fluids to
the ground. Clean Streams Law 691.402(a) potential
pollution.
Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or
residual waste to prevent pollution of the waters of
the Commonwealth.
Yes
Yes
Horizontal Well
Terry Twp
41.649433
Longitude
-76.307519
Spud Date Operator
06/16/09
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-68
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
WELLES 3 2H
WELLES 3 5H
WELLES 5 2H
WELLES 5 5H
015-20334
015-20335
015-20418
015-20419
18
18
9
6
09/25/13
11/25/13
NA
NA
NA
Incident- Response to Accident or Event Inspection
Comment: Arrived at the site at 1 1 :20 in response to
a (25) gallon spill of an unknown material.
Chesapeake reported the spill incident to the
Department at 6:42 PM on 9/25/13. The Marcellus
incident report indicates the spill occurred as
Chesapeake was getting ready to move frac
equipment. They were moving a dumpster not on
containment and in the process of cleaning it out.
The report alleges a liquid leaked out of the container
and is most likely water. The liquid impacted the
soil around the dumpster and Chesapeake already
scraped the soil and staged it on containment for
removal.
1) Failure to adopt pollution prevention measures
required or prescribed by DEP by handling materials
that create a danger of pollution.
2) Pit and tanks not constructed with sufficient
capacity to contain pollutional substances.
3) Failure to properly store, transport, process or
dispose of a residual waste.
Compliance record indicates: Chesapeake submitted
a report to the Department on 1 1/8/13 in relation to
the spill incident that occurred at the site. The report
indicates a brine spill of approximately (25) gallons
was released to the soil on 9/25/13 while equipment
was being moved after completions activities. The
report includes a brief description of the incident and
post excavation sampling results. The spill was
reported to the Department at 6:42 PM on 9/25/13.
Chesapeake originally indicated to the Department
the spill was most likely water. The Department
reviewed the post excavation sampling results on
1 1/22/13 and concluded that although there may still
be some evidence of the spill remaining, there are no
compounds of concern above their relevant cleanup
standards and there is no need for additional soil
remediation with respect to this spill.
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
Yes
NA
NA
NA
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
41.653736
41.653652
41.657947
41.657983
Longitude
-76.295591
-76.295594
-76.275425
-76.275447
Spud Date Operator
12/13/09
12/13/09
03/11/10
03/20/10
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-69
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
WELLES 1 BRA 1H
WELLES 3 BRA 3H
WELLES 5 BRA 3H
WELLES 5 6H
OTTEN BRA 3H
015-22523
015-22499
015-22476
015-20418
015-22288
0
0
0
1
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
No Violations Noted
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1/11/2013. The permit
application package is
complete, has been
accepted, and is
undergoing technical
review.
12/18/2012. The permit
application package is
complete, has been
accepted, and is
undergoing technical
review.
12/12/2012. The permit
application package is
complete, has been
accepted, and is
undergoing technical
review.
Operator reported not
drilled.
9/20/2012. Technical
review 1 completed of
permit review
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Asylum Twp
41.649367
41.653736
41.657908
41.657947
41.672661
Longitude
-76.307625
-76.295647
-76.275406
-76.275425
-76.364417
Spud Date Operator
NI
NI
NI
NA
NI
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-70
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name
API Permit Number of Date of
Inspections Violation
Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector
Corrected Comment
Municipality Latitude Longitude Spud Date
Operator
OTTEN 626935 1H
015-20118
10
01/16/09
02/19/09
06/15/10
No E&S plan developed, plan not on site.
1) 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).
2) Improperly lined pit.
3) O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
Compliance record: Residual waste to ground surface
and failure to report a release.
07/01/09 Compliance Evaluation Comments: On
2/19/09, site was inspected and noted that
uncontained drilling fluids were located on the
surface of the well pad and also located off-site,
downgradient of the fill slope. In addition, portions
of the site were not properly stabilized in accordance
with Chapter 102 regulations. It was verified that the
previously spilled drilling fluids had been excavated
as previously indicated. However, the fill slope was
not properly stabilized and the silt fence at the base
of the fill slope was not properly installed to
minimize erosion potential. Chesapeake indicated
that the violations will be corrected by next week.
Reinspection required to verify.
08/21/09 Compliance Evaluation Comments: Former
spill areas checked, all appeared to be in order.
1) Failure to post pit approval number
2) Discharge of pollultional material to waters of
Commonwealth
3) Administrative Code-General.
Compliance record indicates: Brine spill outside of
secondary containment
Yes
Yes ($4,250)
Yes
($27,271.93)
Horizontal Well
Asylum Twp
41.672523
-76.364501
12/21/08
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-71
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... . . .. . 0 . „. . ^ .
... ... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Spud Date Operator
Inspections Violation
OTTEN 627016 2H
JOHN BARRETT
627215 1H
JOHN BARRETT
627220 6H
JOHN BARRETT BRA
3H
JOHN BARRETT
627210 2H
015-20119
015-20134
015-20155
015-22509
015-20133
4
4
0
0
5
08/19/10
06/07/11
NA
NA
NA
NA
07/14/11
1) Failure to properly store, transport, process or
dispose of a residual waste.
Compliance record indicates: Waste all over ground
at site.
A complaint was filed to the Department regarding
potential contamination at this site. Conducted an
inspection of the site with Sean VanFleet Solid
Waste Specialist, North Central Region. Noted a
small area of standing water below a cleanout in the
pipeline area relatively close to the site entrance. The
area was approximately 1 to 2 feet in diameter and
the volume of water was approximately 2 to 3
gallons. Using an EXTECH meter to obtain a
conductivity reading of the water. The meter read
(OL) which means over the limit in conductivity.
Performed sampling analysis of the water using SAC
046. Also noted E&S issues off the northeast corner
of the pad behind the production tanks. The berm
was noted to contain accelerated erosion causing an
erosion channel in this area. E&S issues will be
referred to Gene Rickard, Water Quality Specialist,
who will conduct a follow up inspection of the site.
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
NA
NA
Failure to restore site within 9 months of plugging
well.
Yes
NA
NA
NA
NA
Not resolvable
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Operator reported not
drilled. 1/9/2009.
Technical review 2
completed of permit
review.
12/28/2012. The permit
application package is
compete, has been
accepted, and is
undergoing technical
review.
Horizontal Well
Asylum Twp
Asylum Twp
Asylum Twp
Asylum Twp
Asylum Twp
41.672454
41.684101
41.684049
41.684178
41.684032
-76.364448
-76.356979
-76.357004
-76.356997
-76.356923
02/23/09
04/18/09
NA
NI
05/16/09
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-72
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
HERSHBERGER 2H
HERSHBERGER BRA
3H
HERSHBERGER 5H
015-20296
015-22446
015-20330
10
0
8
07/14/11
07/26/11
12/14/11
NA
10/28/09
1) Failure to restore site within 9 months of
completion of drilling or plugging.
2) Failure to properly store, transport, process or
dispose of a residual waste.
3) Solid Waste Management Act 6018.610(1)
violation cited, operation of a residual waste
processing facility without proper authorization from
the Department. Compliance records: Department
records indicate that Chesapeake has failed to restore
the site within nine (9) months after completion of
drilling, since no drilling has occurred at this site
since October 10, 2009 and associated stimulation of
the Hershberger 2H and 5H wells on the pad was
completed on March 5, 2010. This constitutes a
violation of Section 206(c) of the Oil and Gas Act,
58 P.S. §601.206(c). The Department has revealed
the evidence of fluids being treated and stored at the
Hershberger 2H, 5H well pad since no wells have
been drilled since October 10, 2009. The site
operations constitute an unpermitted residual waste
processing facility.
Failure to restore well site within nine months after
completion of drilling, failure to remove all pits,
drilling supplies and equipment not needed for
production.
Failure to properly store, transport, process or
dispose of a residual waste.
NA
1) Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an
impoundment
2) No Control and Disposal/Pollution Prevention
Control plan or failure to implement Pollution
Prevention Control plan
Yes
Yes
Yes
NA
Yes
Horizontal Well
7/28/2009. Technical
review 1 completed of
permit review.
Horizontal Well
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
41.684208
41.684128
41.684166
Longitude
-76.336308
-76.336300
-76.336305
Spud Date Operator
07/28/09
NI
09/08/09
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-73
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... . . .. . 0 . „. . ^ .
... ... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Spud Date Operator
Inspections Violation
CLAUDIA 1H
CLAUDIA BRA 3H
CLAUDIA 5H
015-20331
015-22278
015-20405
2
0
1
07/14/11
08/21/09
11/16/09
NA
NA
1) Failure to restore site within 9 months of
completion of drilling or plugging.
2) Failure to properly store, transport, process or
dispose of a residual waste.
3) Solid Waste Mnagement Act 6018.610(1)
violation cited, operation of a residual waste
processing facility without proper authorization from
the Department. Compliance record indicates:
Department records indicate that Chesapeake has
failed to restore the site within nine (9) months after
completion of drilling, since no drilling has occurred
at this site since October 10, 2009 and associated
stimulation of the Hershberger 2H and 5H wells on
the pad was completed on March 5, 2010. This
constitutes a violation of Section 206(c) of the Oil
and Gas Act, 58 P.S. §601.206(c). The Department
has revealed the evidence of fluids being treated and
stored at the Hershberger 2H, 5H well pad since no
wells have been drilled since October 10, 2009. The
site operations constitute an unpermitted residual
waste processing facility.
1) Failure to post permit number, operator name,
address, telephone number in a conspicuous manner
at the site during drilling.
2) E&S Plan not adequate.
3) 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).
De minimis violations noted
NA
No Violations Noted
Yes
Yes
NI
NA
NA
Horizontal Well
Operator reported not
drilled. 9/20/2012.
Technical review 1 was
completed of the permit
review.
Operator reported not
drilled. 7/24/2009.
Technical review 1 was
completed of the permit
review.
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
41.683100
41.683106
41.683075
-76.322331
-76.322239
-76.322261
07/12/09
NA
NA
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-74
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
CLAUDIA 2H
CLAUDIA 4H
SOLOWIEJ 5H
015-20406
015-20332
015-20470
8
7
7
05/07/10
06/27/11
11/13/09
08/21/09
11/17/13
1) Person constructed, operated, maintained,
modified, enlarged or abandoned a water obstruction
or encroachment but failed to obtain Chapter 105
permit.
2) Polluting substance(s) allowed to discharge into
Waters of the Commonwealth.
3) Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a
specific Clean Streams Law code cannot be used.
4) Industrial waste was discharged without permit.
5) Site conditions present a potential for pollution to
waters of the Commonwealth.
Compliance records: Encroachment without permit,
frac out released bore gel to stream, petroleum
product spilled to ground with potential to enter
stream. Violation comment: Adequate company
response received 6/1/10, Clean Stream Law 401
violation closed. 691.401 - discharge of polluting
substance to Waters of the Commonwealth - bore gel
- unknown amount, estimated to be a small amount.
based on similar incidents.
1) 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).
Compliance records
Inspection comments: Complaint from property -
rusty seep and new berm.
Violation comments: 1) not marking east fill slope
berm on plan, failure to depict type and location of
best management practices, 2) failure to maintain
current E&S controls on site, 3) failure to correctly
install erosion control matting, 4) failure to provide
inspection and monitoring records at the project site.
De minimis violations noted
1) 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).
2) E&S Plan not adequate.
3) Failure to post permit number, operator name,
address, telephone number in a conspicuous manner
at the site during drilling.
Failure to properly install the permit number, issued
by the department, on a completed well.
Yes
Yes
NI
Yes
Yes
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Wyalusing
Twp
41.683183
41.683144
41.712466
Longitude
-76.322275
-76.322255
-76.299183
Spud Date Operator
09/10/09
09/20/09
12/30/09
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-75
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
SOLOWIEJ BRA 2H
SOLOWIEJ 6H
HARPER 4H
HARPER 5H
HARPER BRA 3H
POTTER 5H
POTTER BRA 1H
POTTER 3H
POTTER 4H
POTTER 6H
ACLA 2H
ACLA 6H
ACLA BRA 3H
015-22394
015-20321
015-20649
015-20541
015-22344
015-20402
015-22498
015-20449
015-20691
015-20692
015-20640
015-20641
015-22287
1
7
5
6
0
3
0
2
2
5
7
6
0
NA
11/17/10
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
No Violations Noted
Failure to properly install the permit number, issued
by the department, on a completed well.
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
NA
No Violations Noted
NA
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
NA
NA
Yes
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Proposed but never
materialized. 12/5/2012.
technical review 1
completed of permit
review
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
10/31/2012. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
Horizontal Well
12/18/2012. The permit
application package is
complete, has been
accepted, and is
undergoing technical
review.
Operator reported not
drilled.
2/18/2010. Technical
review 1 completed of
permit review.
Vertical Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
9/16/2013. The technical
review and decision
review are complete and
either the permit decision
and/or permit issuance are
forthcoming.
Wyalusing
Twp
Wyalusing
Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
41.712467
41.712466
41.681036
41.681016
41.681056
41.684227
41.684278
41.684214
41.684200
41.684213
41.681744
41.681766
41.681786
Longitude
-76.299292
-76.299183
-76.310950
-76.310900
-76.310997
-76.291191
-76.291214
-76.291244
-76.291294
-76.291244
-76.343977
-76.344025
-76.344072
Spud Date Operator
NA
12/30/09
03/13/10
12/22/09
NI
04/10/10
NI
NA
NI
04/10/10
04/11/10
05/25/10
NI
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-76
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector
STALFORD 5H
PAULINY BRA 6H
PAULINY 2H
PAULINY 5H
BALDUZZI 2H
BALDUZZI 5H
BALDUZZI BRA 3H
BURLEIGH 4H
BURLEIGH 3H
015-20771
015-22527
015-21150
015-20646
015-20720
015-20719
015-22331
015-21316
015-21420
7
0
0
5
9
9
0
5
6
11/17/10
06/17/11
NA
NA
NA
03/11/11
05/18/11
03/11/11
06/17/11
NA
01/04/11
NA
Failure to properly install the permit number, issued
by the department, on a completed well.
1) Failure to report defective, insufficient, or
improperly cemented casing within 24 hours or
submit plan to correct within 30 days.
Compliance record indicates: 3 string design.
Venting off of 13 3/8 - 60% combustable gas. 9 5/8
venting 90-100% combustible gas.
NA
NA
No Violations Noted
Failure to properly install the permit number, issued
by the department, on a completed well.
1) Failure to report defective, insufficient, or
improperly cemented casing within 24 hours or
submit plan to correct within 30 days.
Compliance record indicates: 100% LEL spike off of
13 3/8 vent port. 90% LEL combustible gas constant
off of 13 3/8 port. A subsequent inspection (6/17/11)
noted 80% combustible gas vented off of 13 3/8.
Failure to properly install the permit number, issued
by the department, on a completed well.
1) Failure to report defective, insufficient, or
improperly cemented casing within 24 hours or
submit plan to correct within 30 days.
Compliance records indicate: 10% combustible gas
coming off of the 13 3/8.
NA
1) Failure to install, in a permanent manner, the
permit number on a completed well.
Compliance record indicates: Rig off location. No
well tag or ID on well.
No Violations Noted
Yes
Resolution not
listed
NA
NA
NA
Yes
Resolution not
listed
Yes
Resolution not
listed
NA
Yes
NA
Comment Municipality Latitude
Vertical Well
1/1/2013. The permit
application package is
complete, has been
accepted, and is
undergoing technical
review.
8/6/2010. Technical
review 1 is complete of
permit review.
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
10/26/2012 Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Wyalusing
Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Wyalusing
Twp
Wyalusing
Twp
Wyalusing
Twp
Wyalusing
Twp
Wyalusing
Twp
41.711966
41.686275
41.686311
41.686247
41.714730
41.714688
41.714772
41.720186
41.720225
Longitude
-76.320275
-76.302283
-76.302233
-76.302247
-76.290683
-76.290680
-76.290683
-76.283863
-76.283886
Spud Date Operator
07/01/10
NI
NI
07/28/10
09/20/10
09/20/10
NI
12/01/10
02/09/11
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-77
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
BURLEIGH 2H
BURLEIGH 5H
BURLEIGH BRA 2H
ROEBER 5H
BLANNARD 1H
BLANNARD 2H
BLANNARD 5H
BLANNARD BRA 3H
LUNDY 5H
LUNDY BRA 3H
LUNDY 2H
COATES 1H
COATES 2H
015-21446
015-21421
015-22393
015-21463
015-20817
015-20717
015-20716
015-20818
015-20557
015-22397
015-20556
015-21070
015-20732
0
0
0
8
2
0
2
0
2
0
3
0
3
NA
NA
NA
01/04/11
NA
NA
06/08/10
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
08/18/11
NA
NA
NA
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).
No Violations Noted
NA
De minimis violations noted
NA
No Violations Noted
NA
No Violations Noted
NA
1) Failure to report defective, insufficient, or
improperly cemented casing within 24 hours or
submit plan to correct within 30 days.
Compliance records indicate: 60% combustible gas
off of vent.
NA
NA
NA
Yes
NA
NA
NI
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Resolution not
listed
Operator reported not
drilled 3/18/2011
Technical review 1 was
completed of the permit
review.
12/20/2010. Technical
review 1 was completed
of the permit review.
Operator reported not
drilled 12/6/2012
Technical review 1 was
completed of the permit
review.
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Operator reported not
drilled 3/3/2010
Technical review 1 was
completed of the permit
review.
Horizontal Well
Operator reported not
drilled.
Horizontal Well
Proposed but never
materialized 1/3/2013
Technical review 1
completed of permit
review.
Horizontal Well
Operator reported not
drilled 7/21/2010
Technical review 1 was
completed of the permit
review.
Horizontal Well
Wyalusing
Twp
Wyalusing
Twp
Wyalusing
Twp
Wyalusing
Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
41.720264
41.720283
41.720264
41.716072
41.784080
41.784100
41.784100
41.784061
41.782600
41.782561
41.782641
41.782875
41.782902
Longitude
-76.283906
-76.283842
-76.283906
-76.312202
-76.311083
-76.311033
-76.311033
-76.311131
-76.320944
-76.320928
-76.320958
-76.330883
-76.330941
Spud Date Operator
NA
NI
NA
03/23/11
05/08/10
NA
05/08/10
NA
05/08/10
NA
05/13/10
NA
07/06/10
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-78
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
COATES 3H
COATES 4H
COATES 6H
COATES BRA 3H
COATES 5H
PRIMROSE 1H
PRIMROSE 3H
PRIMROSE 4H
PRIMROSE 6H
PRIMROSE BRA 2H
PRIMROSE 5H
JONES BRA 5H
JONES BRA 2H
HAROLD W LUNDY 1
015-21071
015-21072
015-21073
015-22307
015-20946
015-21573
015-21575
015-21576
015-21577
015-22341
015-21447
015-21760
015-21794
015-20002
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
2
4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
No Violations Noted
NA
No Violations Noted
NA
NA
NA
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Operator reported not
drilled 7/21/2010
Technical review 1 was
completed of the permit
review.
Operator reported not
drilled 7/21/2010
Technical review 1 was
completed of the permit
review.
Operator reported not
drilled 7/21/2010
Technical review 1 was
completed of the permit
review.
9/18/2013. The technical
review and decision
review are complete and
either the permit decision
and/or permit issuance are
forthcoming.
Horizontal Well
2/28/20 11. Technical
review 1 completed of
permit review
2/28/2011 Technical
review 1 completed of
permit review
2/28/2011 Technical
review 1 completed of
permit review
2/28/20 11. Technical
review 1 completed of
permit review
Operator reported not
drilled 11/8/2012
Technical review 1
completed of permit
review
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Plugged well.
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
41.782972
41.782908
41.782944
41.782972
41.782938
41.784942
41.784864
41.784928
41.784914
41.784878
41.784891
41.754055
41.754016
41.783701
Longitude
-76.330881
-76.330853
-76.330822
-76.330881
-76.330911
-76.342919
-76.343000
-76.342972
-76.343025
-76.342950
-76.342897
-76.306769
-76.306791
-76.325586
Spud Date Operator
NA
NA
NA
NI
07/21/10
NI
NI
NI
NI
NA
02/15/11
07/25/11
07/29/11
NI
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
FAIRMAN
DRILLING CO
-------
C-79
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector
Inspections Violation
HILLIS N BRA 3H
HILLIS S BRA 3H
HILLIS N BRA 2H
HILLIS S BRA 2H
STROM 627236 2H
DAN ELLIS 1H
DAN ELLIS 2H
DAN ELLIS 3H
DAN ELLIS BRA 4H
STROM BRA 3H
STROM 627237 3H
STROM BRA 5H
STROM 627235 1H
JONES BRA 4H
JONES BRA 6H
LLOYD JONES 1
015-21994
015-22398
015-21984
015-21985
015-20148
015-20652
015-20480
015-20653
015-22548
015-21990
015-20147
015-22303
015-20149
015-21795
015-21796
015-20013
2
1
1
2
5
11
14
12
0
6
1
0
4
0
0
4
01/30/12
01/30/12
01/30/12
01/30/12
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
08/21/09
NA
NA
NA
O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific
O&G Act code cannot be used.
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
NA
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
NA
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).
NA
NA
No Violations Noted
Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
Yes ($500)
Yes ($500)
O&G Act 223-
General. Used
only when a
specific O&G
Act code
cannot be used
Yes
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Yes
NA
NA
NA
Horizontal Well
Proposed but never
materialized.
10/12/11. Technical
review 1 completed of
permit review
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
1/29/2013. The permit
application package is
complete, has been
accepted, and is
undergoing technical
review.
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
9/21/2012. Technical
review 1 completed of
permit review.
Horizontal Well
Operator reported not
drilled. 7/13/2011.
Technical review 1
completed of permit
review.
Operator reported not
drilled. 7/13/2011.
Technical review 1
completed of permit
review.
Plugged well.
Herrick Twp
Herrick Twp
Herrick Twp
Herrick Twp
Monroe Twp
Monroe Twp
Monroe Twp
Monroe Twp
Monroe Twp
Monroe Twp
Monroe Twp
Monroe Twp
Monroe Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Granville Twp
41.748286
41.748253
41.748219
41.748252
41.702438
41.691897
41.691936
41.691858
41.691925
41.702438
41.702491
41.702467
41.702433
41.754036
41.753997
41.703044
Longitude
-76.289955
-76.289900
-76.290022
-76.289988
-76.455175
-76.466025
-76.466036
-76.466011
-76.466103
-76.455277
-76.455141
-76.455158
-76.455222
-76.306856
-76.306875
-76.704950
Spud Date Operator
12/08/11
NA
NI
12/11/11
06/04/09
04/12/10
04/13/10
04/13/10
NI
11/04/11
11/23/11
NI
06/20/09
NA
NA
NI
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
GOODWIN IND INC
-------
C-80
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
RHEPPARD 1H
SIMPLEX BRA 1H
SIMPLEX BRA 2H
BENNETT 3H
BENNETT 2H
BENNETT 4H
BENNETT BRA 1H
BENNETT 1H
CRAWFORD 2H
SCHLAPFER S BRA
2H
SCHLAPFER N BRA
2H
CRAWFORD BRA 3H
015-20247
015-22242
015-22262
015-21225
015-21213
015-21224
015-23026
015-21226
015-20701
015-22226
015-22202
015-22304
0
1
0
NI
4
7
11
NI
2
1
1
NI
NA
NA
NA
NI
NA
NA
NA
NI
NA
8/31/2012
9/27/2012
NI
NA
No Violations Noted
NA
NI
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
NI
No Violations Noted
78.86 - Failure to report defective, insufficient, or
improperly cemented casing w/in 24 hrs or submit
plan to correct w/in 30 days
78.8 ID 1 - Failure to maintain control of anticipated
gas storage reservoir pressures while drilling through
reservoir or protective area
NI
NA
NA
NA
NI
NA
NA
NA
NI
NA
Resolution not
listed
Corrected/
Abated
NI
4/10/2009. Technical
review 1 completed of
permit review
8/14/2012. Technical
review 2 completed for
permit review.
8/10/2012. Technical
review 1 completed for
permit review.
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Operator reported not
drilled
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Granville Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Standing
Stone Twp
Tuscarora
Twp
Tuscarora
Twp
Tuscarora
Twp
Tuscarora
Twp
Tuscarora
Twp
Terry Twp
Albany Twp
Albany Twp
Terry Twp
41.716633
41.746947
41.746883
41.719150
41.719147
41.719105
41.719108
41.719108
41.608355
41.602150
41.602180
41.608333
Longitude
-76.681453
-76.323408
-76.323250
-76.127669
-76.127738
-76.127736
-76.127666
-76.127666
-76.373486
-76.400763
-76.400727
-76.373591
Spud Date Operator
NI
NI
NI
11/03/10
10/27/10
04/17/10
06/11/12
06/11/12
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-81
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... .
,,.... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude
CRAWFORD 4H
DAVE 3H
DAVE 1H
PLYMOUTH 2H
DAVE 2H
SCHLAPFERNBRA
3H
PLYMOUTH 5H
FREED BRA 2H
PLYMOUTH BRA 3H
DAVE BRA 5H
015-20702
015-21206
015-21207
015-20644
015-21208
015-22634
015-20645
015-22730
015-22896
015-22892
4
NI
NI
1
5
NI
4
9
NI
NI
3/4/2011
4/8/2011
NI
NI
NA
4/28/2011
6/27/2011
2/10/2012
NI
7/15/2010
NA
NI
NI
78.86 - Failure to report defective, insufficient, or
improperly cemented casing w/in 24 hrs or submit
plan to correct w/in 30 days
Compliance records indicate: Bubbling in cellar. 0%
combustible gas coming off annuli. Needs further
investigation and follow-up inspection.
78.86 - Failure to report defective, insufficient, or
improperly cemented casing w/in 24 hrs or submit
plan to correct w/in 30 days
Compliance records indicate: 3 string design.
Constant bubbling in cellar. Uncontrollable release
of gas.
NI
NI
No Violations Noted
1.) 401CSL - Discharge of pollultional material to
waters of Commonwealth.
2.) 102.4 - Failure to minimize accelerated erosion,
implement E&S plan, maintain E&S controls. Failure
to stabilize site until total site restoration under OGA
Sec 206(c)(d)
3.) CSL402POTPOL - There is a potential for
polluting substance(s) reaching Waters of the
Commonwealth and may require a permit
1.) 691.1 - Clean Streams Law-General. Used only
when a specific CLS code cannot be used
2.) 102.4 - Failure to minimize accelerated erosion,
implement E&S plan, maintain E&S controls. Failure
to stabilize site until total site restoration under OGA
Sec 206(c)(d)
3.) 401CSL - Discharge of pollultional material to
waters of Commonwealth.
78.86 - Failure to report defective, insufficient, or
improperly cemented casing w/in 24 hrs or submit
plan to correct w/in 30 days
NI
1.) 78.56LINER - Improperly lined pit
2.) 301UNPMTIW - Industrial waste was discharged
without permit.
No Violations Noted
NI
NI
Resolution not
listed
Resolution not
listed
NI
NI
NA
Corrected/ Abat
ed
Corrected/Abat
ed
Corrected/Abat
ed
NI
Corrected/
Abated
NA
NI
NI
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
NI
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
NI
Horizontal Well
Horizontal Well
NI
NI
Terry Twp
Albany Twp
Albany Twp
Terry Twp
Albany Twp
Albany Twp
Terry Twp
Albany Twp
Terry Twp
Albany Twp
41.608344
41.608733
41.608733
41.613275
41.608741
41.602122
41.613261
41.596655
41.613247
41.608783
Longitude
-76.389447
-76.389447
-76.367180
-76.400802
-76.367230
-76.381383
-76.367280
-76.389430
Spud Date Operator
05/30/10
05/10/10
12/30/10
05/11/10
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
-------
C-82
Table C-37 Notice of Violations Summary, Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Well Name
CRAWFORD 5H
PLYMOUTH BRA 3H
CRAWFORD 3H
BURBAGE 1
DAVE BRA 5H
DAVE 5H
PLYMOUTH 6H
FREED BRA 1H
API Permit Number of Date of Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector _ . . _ . .. . . ... . ... . . .. . 0 . „. . ^ .
... ... Corrected Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Spud Date Operator
015-21030
015-22447
015-20723
015-00005
015-22388
015-21209
015-20666
015-22443
NI
NI
NI
0
NI
3
1
7
NI
NI
NI
NA
NI
5/4/2011
NA
NA
NI
NI
NI
NA
NI
1.) 102.4 - Failure to minimize accelerated erosion,
implement E&S plan, maintain E&S controls. Failure
to stabilize site until total site restoration under OGA
Sec 206(c)(d)
2.) CSL401CAUSPL - Polluting substance(s)
allowed to discharge into Waters of the
Commonwealth
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
NI
NI
NI
NI
Corrected/ Abat
ed
NA
NA
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
VERTICAL WELL
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Failed E/S controls
caused sediment pollution
Operator Reported Not
Drilled
Regulatory Inactive Status
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Terry Twp
Albany Twp
Albany Twp
Albany Twp
Terry Twp
Albany Twp
41.608394
41.613247
41.608333
41.606969
41.608783
41.608791
41.613294
41.596686
-76.373555
-76.367280
-76.373591
-76.398469
-76.389430
-76.389486
-76.367308
-76.381422
03/21/13
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
UNKNOWN OPR
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
CHESAPEAKE
APPALACHIA LLC
Key:
Sources: http://www.depreportingservices.state.pa.us/ReportServer/Pages/ReportViewer.aspx7%2fOil Gas%2fOG Compliance&rs:Command=Render- last accessed on December 2013
http://www.ahs.dep.pa.gov/eFACTSWeb/ - last accessed on December 2013
API = American Petroleum Industry.
bbl = Barrel.
DEP = Department of Environmental Protection.
ER = Emergency response.
E&S = Erosion and sedimentation.
ft. = Feet.
HC1 = Hydrochloric acid.
ID = Identification number.
in. = Inch.
LEL = Lower explosive limit.
mg/kg = Milligram per killogram.
NI = No information available.
NA = Not applicable.
NOV = Notice of violation.
O&G = Oil and Gas.
PA = State of Pennsylvania.
Twp = Township.
-------
C-83
Table C-38 Notice of Violations - Identified Potential Candidate Causes and Distances (less than 2 Miles) to EPA Sampling Points
Well
Bradford County, Penn
VANNOY6271082
VANNOY6271083
CRANRUN 2H
ATGAS 2H
ANDRUS UNIT 1H
WELLES 1 5H
WELLES 1 3H
WELLES 3 2H
OTTEN626935 1H
CLAUDIA 2H
BALDUZZI 2H
BALDUZZI 5H
STALFORD 5H
COATES 2H
BRACKMAN 2H
HERSHBERGER 2H
HERSHBERGER 5H
SCHLAPFER S BRA 2H
SCHLAPFER N BRA 2H
CRAWFORD 4H
DAVE 2H
PLYMOUTH 5H
DAVE 5H
Latitude
sylvania
41.709196
41.709188
41.662872
41.714105
41.649436
41.649436
41.649433
41.653736
41.672523
41.683183
41.714730
41.714688
41.711966
41.789020
41.667355
41.684208
41.684167
41.602150
41.602180
41.608344
41.608741
41.613261
41.608791
Longitude
-76.682475
-76.682531
-76.726075
-76.632633
-76.307575
-76.307575
-76.307519
-76.295591
-76.364501
-76.322275
-76.290683
-76.290680
-76.320275
-76.330941
-76.740830
-76.336308
-76.336306
-76.400763
-76.400727
-76.373538
-76.389500
-76.367230
-76.389486
EPA Sampling Point EPA Sampling Point EPA Sampling Point EPA Sampling Point EPA Sampling Point EPA Sampling Point EPA Sampling Point
Search 1 Distance Distance 1 Distance Distance
Area ID Distance (mi) ID Distance (mi) ID (mi) ID (mi) ID (mi) ID (mi) ID Distance (mi)
F
F
F
F
E
A
A
A
B
A
B
B
B
C
F
B
B
H
H
H
H
H
H
NEPAGW01
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW01
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW36
NEPAGW01
NEPAGW02
NEPAGW04
NEPASW05
NEPASW06
NEPAGW18
NEPAGW19
NEPAGW18
NEPAGW19
NEPAGW31
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW10
NEPAGW12
NEPAGW12
NEPAGW11
NEPAGW29
NEPAGW36
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW32
NEPAGW32
NEPAGW32
NEPAGW32
NEPAGW32
NEPAGW32
0.6 W
0.6 W
0.3 NW
3.1NE
0.3 W
0.8 SE
0.8 SE
1.5E
0.7 ENE
1.0 ENE
0.4NW
0.4NW
0.9 NE
0.9 NW
0.6 SE
0.1 NW
0.1 NW
LINE
LINE
0.38 SW
0.49 SE
0.83 SW
0.49 SE
NEPAGW03
NEPASW03
NEPASW04
NEPAGW03
NEPASW03
NEPASW04
NEPAGW07
NEPAGW03
NEPASW03
NEPASW04
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW18
NEPAGW19
NEPAGW05
NEPAGW14
NEPAGW11
NEPAGW11
NEPAGW09
NEPAGW28
NEPAGW07
NEPAGW26
NEPAGW26
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW33
NEPAGW33
0.1 SE
0.1 SE
1.0 ENE
3.3 NE
0.9 SE
0.9 SE
0.7 S
0.9 ENE
LINE
0.7 W
0.7 W
1.1 SE
LINE
1.7 ESE
0.2 SW
0.2 SW
0.97 NE
0.97 NE
0.5SW
0.37 SE
0.94 SW
0.37 SE
NEPAGW07
NEPAGW07
NEPAGW07
NEPAGW13
NEPAGW13
NEPAGW20
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW09
NEPAGW09
NEPAGW12
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW27
3.3 SW
3.3 SW
0.1 SE
0.9 SE
0.9 SE
0.8S
1.5NE
0.8 WNW
0.6 SW
0.6 SW
1.3NE
0.3 SW
0.3 SW
NEPAGW36
NEPAGW36
NEPAGW36
NEPAGW31
NEPAGW31
NEPAGW13
NEPAGW26
NEPAGW26
NEPAGW14
NEPAGW14
NEPAGW14
NEPAGW05
NEPAGW05
4.0 SW
4.0 SW
1.0 WSW
2.1NE
2.1NE
0.9S
1.6NE
0.9 W
1.9SW
1.9SW
1.9 SE
0.9 SW
0.9 SW
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW27
NEPAGW25
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW06
1.6NE
0.8 WSW
2.0 SW
1.1 SW
1.1 SW
NEPAGW05
NEPAGW10
NEPAGW10
1.5SW
1.8E
1.8E
NEPAGW06
NEPAGW14
NEPAGW14
1.6SW
1.8 ENE
1.8 ENE
Key:
EPA = Environmental Protection Agency.
E= East.
ENE = East-northeast.
ESE = East-southeast.
ID = Identification.
mi = Mile.
NE = Northeast.
NW = Northwest.
SE = Southeast.
SW = Southwest.
W = West.
WNW = West-northwest.
WSW = West-southwest.
-------
Table C-39 Environmental Database Review Summary, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
C-84
Database Name of Facility
Site Location
Address
Distance from
Nearest Yes
Sample Point /No
Potential Candidate Cause
Details/Justification
Groundwater
Wells
US MINES
US MINES
US MINES
US MINES
US AIRS
US HIST AUTO
STAT
US MINES
UNREG
LTANKS
AST
US HIST AUTO
STAT
FINDS, US AIRS
US HIST AUTO
STAT
ORPHAN: HIST
LF
ORPHAN: CERC-
NFRAP, HIST LF
ORPHAN: CERC-
NFRAP, RCRA-
SQG, FINDS,
MANIFEST, AST
ORPHAN:
FINDS
ORPHAN: VCP
ORPHAN: VCP
ORPHAN: VCP
ORPHAN: VCP
James M. Ely Jr.,
Lenzinsky Portable,
James Lezinsky,
NW 1.194 mi.
Jackson Stone, N
2.445 mi.
Braveheart Quarry,
McLaud Flagstone,
NW 2.473 mi.
CHIEF
GATHERING
LLC/KORBAN STA
Steve's Auto Body
R Luce Flag and
Field Stone
Betty J Scalzo
Residence
Hallstead Great
Bend JT SEW
AUTH WWTP
Rich's Auto Service
Hornbeck Used Cars
Rich's Auto Service
Springville TWP
Montrose Dump
PA DOT Maint.
Facility
PA DOT- E.D. 4-0-
SUSQUEHANNA
Knapik Well Pad
R Vandermark 3H
Well
Teel Prop
R Hull 2H Well Site
Longitude: -075 51 43
Latitude: 41 43 58
Longitude: -075 52 52
Latitude: 41 44 26
Longitude: -07551 39
Latitude: 41 45 47
Longitude: -075 54 10
Latitude: 41 4501
CORBIN RD 1
Latitude: 41.72545
Longitude: -75.82037
375 Orchard Road,
Great Bend, PA
41 58 24
075 45 20
605 church Street,
Great Bend, PA
249 Spring Street,
Great Bend, PA
524 Main Street, Forest
City, PA
402 Main Street, Forest
City, PA
429 Main Street, Forest
City, PA
Herb Button Road
Springville, PA 18844
NI
Route 706 & Tiffany
Cor , Montrose, PA
18801
ERIE BOULEVARD
SUSQUEHNA SHOP
LATITUDE:
41.93791
LONGITUDE:
-75.59583
Valley View Road
Franklin Forks, PA
18801
1 129 Vandermark
Road
Montrose, PA 18801
Herb Button Road
Springville, PA 18844
Longitude:
75°53'35.81"W
Latitude:
41°43'34.40"N
Springville TWP, PA
18844
1.7 miles NNE
from NEPAGW23
1.0 miles WNW
from NEPAGW23
1.8 miles NW
from NEPAGW22
-2.5 miles NW
from NEPAGW23
~2 miles E from
NEPAGW23
0.56 miles NE of
NEPAGW24
0.6 miles south of
NEPAGW24
0.79 miles SE of
NEPAGW24
0.85 miles SE of
NEPAGW24
0.85 miles SE of
NEPAGW24
0.9 miles SE of
NEPAGW24
0.9 miles SE of
NEPAGW24
>2 miles SW from
NEPAGW21not
exact location
NI
6. 6 miles Nfrom
NEPAGW23
> 20 mi NE of any
sampling point
Unknown,
location could not
be identified.
1.9 miles Nfrom
NEPAGW23
Several TEEL
entries in
eFACTS. Not
clear which one is
this location,
however one listed
as TEEL 2 mi SW
fromNEPAGW21
1.5 miles NW
fromNEPAGW21
and NEPAGW22
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Intermittent, surface, stone quarry; 1 violation (104(g)(l)) (Orders of
Withdrawal - Untrained Miners); Dimension stone mining. Surface stone
quarry activities are not a likely source of contamination.
Intermittent, surface, stone quarry; Multiple violations (104(a) (health or
safety standards, rules, orders, or regulations) and 104(g)(l))(Orders of
Withdrawal - Untrained Miners). Surface stone quarry activities are not a
likely source of contamination.
Abandoned, surface, stone quarry; Multiple violations (104(a) (health or
safety standards, rules, orders, or regulations) and 107(a)) (imminent danger
exists). Surface stone quarry activities not likely sources of contamination.
Abandoned, surface, sandstone quarry; Multiple violations (104(a) and
104(g)(l))(Orders of Withdrawal - Untrained Miners). Stone quarry activities
not likely sources of contamination, also far from sample points and no
release violations found.
In national repository for information concerning airborne pollution in the
US, compliance status: In compliance with procedural requirements. Listed
only due to air concerns, facility is in compliance, not a likely source of
contamination.
No details available
Non-coal mine. Violation issued 11/9/05. Violation unknown. Mine status:
abandoned as of 9/16/10.
Fuel Oil No. 2
500 gal AST installed on 11/16/1 Icontaining hazardous substances; 2000 gal
AST install 1 1/16/1 1 containing hazardous substances. No reported releases.
No details available
POTENTIAL UNCONTROLLED EMISSIONS < 100 TONS/YE of
Chlorofluorocarbons
No details available
Inactive solid waste landfill. Last inspected on 1 1/27/2002. Not a likely
source of contamination due to distance from nearest sample point.
Based on a 1987 EPA Preliminary Assessment, the site was designated as No
Future Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP). Although its location was not
determined, the site is inactive and designated as NFRAP; thus, it was not
retained as a potential source of contamination.
Based on a 1986 EPA Preliminary Assessment the site was designated as No
Future Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP); 3 - open AST's (1 Hazardous
mixed with Petroleum, 1 diesel and 1 other), no violations; currently a small
quantity generator of RCRA waste (D001, D007, D008, F003, and F005),
however they were previously a large quantity generator. Not a likely source
of contamination due to distance from sample points.
Site shows up on envirofacts in RCRAINFO as Air traffic Control, the
Facility Information data indicate No Violations. Not a likely source of
contamination due to distance from nearest sample points.
The database does not provide much detail on the voluntary cleanup of the
site. It mentions soil and diesel fuel. No other information found.
Approximate location for waste site could not be determined. Site included
due to potential for contamination.
The database does not provide much detail on the voluntary cleanup of the
site. Violations found: 10/18/1 1: Code: 20 1G - Failure to post permit number,
operator name, address, telephone number in a conspicuous manner at the
site during drilling. 10/09/2012 Failure to post pit approval number.
Due to distance and lack of significant violations other than administrative,
this facility was not retained as a likely source of contamination.
The database does not provide much detail on the voluntary cleanup of the
site.
eFACTS listed violations for TEEL Property:
06/03/08: Polluting substance(s) allowed to discharge into Waters of the
Commonwealth.
07/1 1/08 and 07/13/09 : There is a potential for polluting substance(s)
reaching Waters of the Commonwealth and may require a permit.
Site included due to potential for contamination.
The database does not provide much detail on the voluntary cleanup of the
site. It mentions soil, diesel fuel and inorganics.
Violations listed in eFACTS:
10/12/1 1 : There is a potential for polluting substance(s) reaching Waters of
the Commonwealth and may require a permit;
Pit and tanks not constructed with sufficient capacity to contain pollutional
substances;
Failure to properly store, transport, process or dispose of a residual waste.
Site included due to potential for contamination.
Search Area A:
16 Federal USGS
Wells
1 Federal FRDS
Public Water
Supply System
77 State Wells
Search Area B:
5 Federal USGS
Well
1 Federal FRDS
Public Water
Supply System
Well
13 State Wells
-------
C-85
Table C-39 Environmental Database Review Summary, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
Database Name of Facility
Site Location
Address
Distance from
Nearest Yes
Sample Point /No
Potential Candidate Cause
Details/Justification
Groundwater
Wells
ORPHAN: VCP
ORPHAN: VCP
ORPHAN:
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN:
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN:
UNREG
LTANKS, UST,
LUST
ORPHAN: UST
ORPHAN: UST
ORPHAN: UST
ORPHAN: AST
ORPHAN: AST
ORPHAN: RCRA-
CESQG, FINDS
ORPHAN: RCRA-
CESQG, FINDS,
MANIFEST
ORPHAN: RCRA-
CESQG, FINDS
ORPHAN:
FINDS
ORPHAN: ICIS
ORPHAN: ICIS
ORPHAN:
FINDS
ORPHAN:
MANIFEST
ORPHAN:
FINDS, US AIRS
ORPHAN:
NPDES, FINDS
Heitsman 2V Well
Site
Heitsman 4H Well
Site
Mountain View
High School
Masters Garage
Checkered Express
Lenox Texaco
Diaz Forrest
Products LLC
Dalton Air
Cayuga Concrete
Pipe
Williams Oil
Autotek Collision
Center
Penelectric
Montrose District
Office
Tony's Auto Body
Susquehanna County
Correctional Facility
B.S. Quarries, Inc.
Powers of Stone
PA DOT - E.D. 4-0 -
SUSQUEHANNA
Montrose Industrial
Steel
Williams Field SVC
Co LLC/Springville
Susquehanna Loop
Pipeline
Longitude:
75°54'2.56"W
Latitude:
41°42'42.26"N
Springville, PA 18844
Longitude:
75°54'2.56"W
Latitude:
41°42'42.26"N
Springville, PA 18844
11748 Pennsylvania
106, Kingsley, PA
18826
Main St, Kingsley, PA
18826
Route 29
Springville, PA 18844
Longitude: -75.673035
Latitude: 41.711652
Route 106 & 92
Kingsley, PA 18826
7686 State Route 167
Kingsley, PA 18826
RTE 29 N, SOUTH
MONTROSE, PA
18843
Route 706 Montrose,
PA 18801
Route 706 Montrose,
PA 18801
Route 706 between
PennDOT Bldg & RT
167
Route 706, 1.5 miles E
of Route 29/7
Montrose, PA 18801
Valley View Road, 1/8
mile W of Route 29,
Montrose, PA 18801
137 Ellsworth Dr,
Montrose, PA 18801
Montrose, PA 18801
STONE RD RR 5
BOX 124
MONTROSE, PA
18801
ERIE BLVD
SUSQUEHANNA
SHOP CTR
SUSQUEHANNA, PA
18801
Route 706 E &
junction 167 S,
Montrose, PA 18801
Herb Button Road
Springville, PA 18844
Latitude: 41.68284
Longitude: -75.88446
Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Company
Hop Bottom, PA
Latitude: 41.739351
Longitude: -75.7973 13
1.2 miles NW
fromNEPAGW21
and NEPAGW22
1.2 miles NW
fromNEPAGW21
and NEPAGW22
6. 8 miles E from
NEPAGW23
>5.7 miles ENE
from NEPAGW23
3. 8 miles SW
fromNEPAGW21
9. 8 miles E from
NEPAGW23
4.0 miles NE from
NEPAGW23
approx. 6. 7 miles
Nfrom
NEPAGW23
> 6 mi - Exact
location could not
be identified.
> 6 mi - Exact
location could not
be identified.
approx. 6.6 miles
Nfrom
NEPAGW23
>7.0 miles NE
from NEPAGW23
> 12. 6 miles N
from NEPAGW23
4. 8 miles N from
NEPAGW23
NI
3 mi NW from
NEPAGW23
19 mi from
NEPAGW23
> 6 mi - Exact
location could not
be identified.
-2.4 miles SSW
fromNEPAGW21
—3.3 miles Efrom
NEPAGW23
based on the
coordinates,
however the
proposed pipeline
location could not
be verified.
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
The database does not provide much detail on the voluntary cleanup of the
site. It mentions soil cleanup.
Violations listed in eFACTS: 10/20/10: Impoundment not structurally sound,
impermeable, third party protected; Failure to properly store, transport,
process or dispose of a residual waste; There is a potential for polluting
substance(s) reaching Waters of the Commonwealth and may require a permit
7/8/09: Failure to post permit number, operator name, address, telephone
number in a conspicuous manner at the site during drilling
5/8/09: Discharge of pollutional material to waters of Commonwealth;
Discharge of pollutional material to waters of Commonwealth.
Site included due to potential for contamination.
The database does not provide much detail on the voluntary cleanup of the
site. It mentions soil cleanup.
Violations listed in eFACTS: 10/20/10: *Failure to properly store, transport,
process or dispose of a residual waste.* There is a potential for polluting
substance(s) reaching Waters of the Commonwealth and may require a permit
* Impoundment not structurally sound, impermeable, 3rd party protected.
9/22/09 & 9/17/09 & 9/16/09: *O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a
specific O&G Act code cannot be used*Clean Streams Law-General. Used
only when a specific CLS code cannot be used.
7/8/09: * Failure to post permit number, operator name, address, telephone
number in a conspicuous manner at the site during drilling.
Site included due to potential for contamination.
The property has/had? a 12,000 gallon heating oil tank, no violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from nearest sample
point.
2 - 2000 gallon tanks (diesel and gasoline) are/were? on the property. Current
status is unknown, no violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
1- closed LUST with a confirmed release on 10/20/1997. The UST contained
Fuel Oil No. 2. Multiple violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
5 - open UST's (3 gasoline, 1 diesel and 1 kerosene), 1 violation in 2009 for
Failure to meet performance standards for new/upgraded tanks
(abated/corrected).
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
2 - open UST's containing diesel
violations: Failure to comply with underground storage tank system release
detection requirements and Tank handling and inspection requirements
(administrative).
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
1 - out-of-use UST containing ULGAS,
07/27/07 & 10/15/10: Tank handling and inspection requirements
12/02/10: Failure to comply with temporary closure requirements.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
1 - open AST containing diesel
violations: Inspection activities without proper certification (administrative),
AST registration violation(s), Closure or change-in-service violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
1 - open AST containing diesel
violations: Failure to meet performance and design standards, Operation and
maintenance violation.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
RCRA-CESQG (D001, D008, D018, D035, D039, D040, F003, F005), no
violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
RCRA-CESQG (D007 and D008), no violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
RCRA-CESQG (D001, D007, D035, F003 and F005), no violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
In FINDS database-Public Water Supply Permit Community Water System
Operations, no violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
In LOCAL database,
ICIS-03-2003-01 14 FORMAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION no violations.
Approximate location not determined. Facility is a stone quarry, so not a
likely sources for study issues.
FORMAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION (ICIS-03-2002-0238 and ICIS-03-
2002-0239) NPDES Permit (CWA).
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
Only information found is that the site has an air permit (NAICS CODE: AIR
TRAFFIC CONTROL).
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from study area.
Waste manifest for F005, no violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from sample locations.
PAG- 10 Permit for Discharge Resulting from Hydrostatic Testing of Tanks &
Pipelines no violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from sample locations
and no record of releases.
NPDES permit (PCS-PAG1 02204) was valid from 02/05/2002 until
02/04/2007; no violations.
Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from sample locations
and no record of releases.
-------
Table C-39 Environmental Database Review Summary, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
C-86
Database Name of Facility
Site Location
Address
Distance from
Nearest Yes
Sample Point /No
Potential Candidate Cause
Details/Justification
Groundwater
Wells
ORPHAN:
NPDES;
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN:
NPDES
ORPHAN:
NPDES, FINDS,
MANIFEST
ORPHAN:
NPDES
ORPHAN
NPDES
ORPHAN
UNREG
LTANKS
ORPHAN
UNREG
LTANKS, VCP
ORPHAN RCRA-
CESQG
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN LUST,
UST
ORPHAN LUST,
UST
ORPHAN RCRA
NonGen/NLR
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN
NPDES
ORPHAN
UNREGLTANKS
ORPHAN
UNREGLTANKS
ORPHAN VCP
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE AST
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN RCRA
NonGen/NLR,
MANIFEST
ORPHAN
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN LUST,
ARCHIVE UST
ORPHAN
MANIFEST
Herbert Kilmer &
Sons Inc. Stone
Quarry
Masters RMC Inc.
Kingsley Plant
PA American Water
Montrose WTP
Williams Field SVC
CoLLC
(Vandermark
Pipeline)
Lee Allard Trucking
Thomas Franks
Residence
Eugene Lecher
Residence
Mike Cams Ford
PA DOT
Great Bend Travel
Plaza
Exxon 2 0449
Sunoco Service
Station Great Bend
Kime Apartments
Camp Iroquoina
Lafler Residence
Edward Rosenkrans
Residence
A & E Auto
Mike Cams Ford
Mercury
Chenango Industries
of PA
US Assemblies Inc.
Magnetic Lab, Inc.
Haworth Press Inc.
Hallstead Foundry
PA Game
Commission SGL
035
RR1 BOX 331
Kingsley, PA 18826
Latitude: 41.736189
Longitude: -75.717966
PA SR 1 1 in Kingsley
Kingsley, PA 18826
Route 29
Montrose, PA 18801
Latitude: 41.845633
Longitude: -75.858527
Pipeline located
between PA-29 and PA-
147.
RR1 Box 1484, Great
Bend, PA
RR1 Box 142 Spring
Street, Great Bend, PA
RRlBox 1312
Orchard Street, Great
Bend, PA
RR 1 Randolph Road,
Great Bend, NY
S.R. 1029 SEC 5508
Route 11 and 81, Great
Bend, PA
Route 11 and Route 81,
Great Bend, PA
Route 11 and Route 81,
Great Bend, PA
Box 258 RT 11 E 1-81,
Great Bend, PA
Main St, Great Bend,
PA
RR 1 Box 1601,
Hallstead, PA
RR1 Box 119,
Hallstead, PA
RR 1 Box 253, Mount
Valley Road, Hallstead,
PA
RT 11, Hallstead, PA
RT 11, Hallstead, PA
RT 81 and RT 68,
Hallstead, PA
RT 81 and RT 68,
Hallstead, PA
Rt 81 Exit, Hallstead,
PA
Franklin Ave,
Hallstead, PA
Main Street, Hallstead,
PA
State Game Land,
Hallstead, PA
7.4 miles E from
NEPAGW23
—5.8 miles E from
NEPAGW23
7.3 miles Nfrom
NEPAGW23
approx. 2.5 mi -
Exact location
could not be
identified.
Within 1 mile of
NEPAGW24
Within 1 mile of
NEPAGW24
Within 1 mile of
NEPAGW24
Within 1 mile of
NEPAGW24
Within 1 mile of
NEPAGW24
Within 1 mile of
NEPAGW24
Within 1 mile of
NEPAGW24
Within 1 mile of
NEPAGW24
Within 1 mile of
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
>1.5 miles from
NEPAGW24
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
NPDES permit is valid from 09/01/2011 until 08/31/2016; no violations.
Surface stone quarry activities are not a likely source of contamination.
NPDES permit is valid from 06/01/2010 until 05/10/2015; no violations. Not
a likely source of contamination due to distance from sample points
NPDES permit is valid from 07/01/2011 until 06/30/2016; no violations;
Drinking Water Program (PWSID-2580023); waste disposal manifests
(filters- waste code: D008 - lead in 2006 and in 2011 D001 Ignitable wastes);
no violations; Not a likely source of contamination due to distance from
study area.
NPDES permit PAG- 10 for Discharge Resulting from Hydrostatic Testing of
Tanks & Pipelines for Meshoppen Creek is valid from 05/01/2012 until
04/30/2017; no violations. Sample points area and no record of violations.
NPDES permit effictive 6/1/05 - 5/9/10
Fuel Oil No. 2 spill
BTEX spill, media soil, closed 2/27/01
Generates 100 and accumulates 1000 kg or less of hazardous waste at any
time; or generates 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous waste per calendar month
and accumulates at any time: 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous waste; or 100
kg or less of any residue or contaminated soil, waste, or other debris resulting
from the clean-up of a spill, into on any land or water, of acutely hazardous
waste; or generates 100 kg or less of aany residue or contaminated soil, waste
or other debris resulting from teh clean-up of a spill, into or on any land or
water, of acutely hazardous waste during any claendar month, and
accumulates at any time: 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous waste; or 100 kg 01
less of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting from
the clean-up of a spill into or on any land or water, of acutely hazardous
waste, hazardous wastes include: lead, benzene, methyl ethyl keytone,
tetrachloroethene, trichloroethene and several spent non-halogenated solvents
No viloations reported.
Metal boxes, cartons, cases (including roll-offs) of D008 wastes. No
violations reported.
Facility contains a 12,000 gal diesel UST installed 3/15/95; two 12000 gal
gasoline UST installed 3/15/95; 12,000 gallon gasoline UST installed 1/9/13.
Stained poil/concrete around diesel dispenser on 11/5/09. Concrete is of poor
integrity and soil had fuel odor. Clean-up completed 6/30/2010.
Unleaded gasoline spill on 8/5/89. Soil impacted. Clean-up completed
3/23/07.
No violations reported.
250 gal diesel UST. No voilations reported.
NPDES permit valid 6/1/09 - 5/31/14. No violations reported.
Fuel Oil No. 2 spill. No other details available.
Fuel Oil No. 2 spill. No other details available.
Unleaded gasoline spill VCP approved 3/21/07. No other details available.
Facility contains a 550 gal AST of used motor oil. No violations reported.
Dump trucks with D005 and D008 wastes. No violations recorded.
Facility contains an 8,000 gal and 10,000 gal USTs with heating oil. No
voilations reported.
Violation 11/19/84: FOOl-unknown waste. Compliance date 12/10/84.
Facility contains 5000 gal heating oil UST. No viloations reported.
Facility contains UST with petroleum product (gasoline). Release occurred
8/5/89 which impacted soils. Another release occurred 4/1 8/08. A
PREVIOUSLY UNKNOWN GASOLINE UST WAS FOUND AT THE
SITE. PETROLEUM ODORS AND SOIL STAINING WERE OBSERVED.
THE 3,000 GALLON TANK WILL BE REGISTERED FOR REMOVAL
PURPOSES.
Facility contained 1 55-gal drum of D001- non-listed ignitable wastes in
1996.
-------
C-87
Table C-39 Environmental Database Review Summary, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
Database Name of Facility
Site Location
Address
Distance from
Nearest Yes
Sample Point /No
Potential Candidate Cause
Details/Justification
Groundwater
Wells
Primary Source: Environmental records search report by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR)
Other Sources: Pennsylvania eFacts website, EPA envirofacts website, and http://mines.findthedata.Org/d/s/Pennsylvania. Last accessed in January 2014.
Notes:
EDR Inquiry Number: 3599152.2s
EDR Search Radius: 3 miles
EDR Center of Search latitude (North): 41.7278000 - 41° 43' 40.08", Longitude (West): 75.8655000 - 75° 51' 55.80"
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
provided by EDR Inc.
Key:
AST = Above ground storage tank. NPDES = National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
FRDS = Federal Reporting Data System. PA = Pennsylvania.
mi = Mle. USGS = United States Geological Survey.
NI = No infromation.
Databases:
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
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
FUST LF: Abandoned Landfill Inventory
ICIS: Integrated Compliance Information System
LUST: Storage Tank Release 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
UNREG LTANKS: Unregulated Tank Cases (State and tribal leaking storage tank 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
UST: Listing of Pennsylvania Regulated Underground Storage Tanks
VCP: Voluntary Cleanup Program Listing
Waste Code F003 - The following spent non-halogenated solvents: Xylene, acetone, ethyl acetate, ethyl benzene, ethyl ether, methyl isobutyl ketone, n-butyl alcohol, cyclohexanone, and methanol; all spent solvent mixtures/blends cont
use, only the above spent non-halogenated solvents; and all spent solvent mixtures/blends containing, before use, one or more of the above non-halogenated solvents, and, a total of 10 percent or more (by volume) of one or more of thost
inFOOl, F002, F004, andF005; and still bottoms from the recovery of these spent solvents and spent solvent mixtures.
Waste Code F005 - The following spent nonhalogenated solvents: toluene, methyl ethyl ketone, carbon disulfide, isobutanol, pyridine, benzene, 2-ethoxyethanol, and 2-nitropropane; all spent solvent mixtures/blends containing, before u
ten percent or more (by volume) of one or more of the above nonhalogenated solvents or those solvents listed inFOOl, F002, or F004; and still bottoms from the recovery of these spent solvents and spent solvent mixtures.
-------
Table C-40 Well Inventory Summary
C-88
Sub
Primary Facility API Sub Search
Organization Site Name Site ID ID ID Number Site Status Facility # Compliance Area Latitude Longitude
Misquenanna Louniy, v
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
ennsyivania
COSTELLO 1 OG WELL
ELY 1H OG WELL
ELY 1 OG WELL
ELY 4 OG WELL
A & M LflBBARD 2H OG
WELL
TEEL UNIT 2H OG
WELL
BAKER 3 OG WELL
D SIMPSON 1 OG WELL
D SIMPSON 2 OG WELL
W HERITAGE 1 OG
WELL
GREENWOOD 9 OG
WELL
T MAKOSKY 1 OG
WELL
COSNER 3 OG WELL
RAYIAS 1 OG WELL
C LARUE 7 OG WELL
W BROOKS 7 OG WELL
BAKER 1 OG WELL
LEWIS 1 OG WELL
REVISED SEVERCOOL
BP1
702443
704346
698055
698061
718474
725510
725522
730636
730638
732256
732776
756202
735789
731959
732254
732411
700300
702211
766829
703722
705285
700204
700211
717110
723413
723420
727487
727490
728911
729328
748178
731691
728646
728905
729019
701932
703530
758943
964485
967055
958146
958154
987284
1000140
1000150
1008130
1008133
1010665
1011380
1063519
1015813
1010257
1010656
1010834
961082
964161
1092758
115-20036
115-20049
115-20029
115-20016
115-20149
115-20228
115-20226
115-20311
115-20312
115-20355
115-20370
115-20827
115-20405
115-20352
115-20354
115-20356
115-20026
115-20035
115-21126
Active
Active
Proposed but
never materialized
Proposed but
never materialized
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Plugged well
Active
Active
4
4
6
401
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
361
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
41.728214
41.734197
41.718769
41.724333
41.739731
41.714661
41.744511
41.718656
41.718736
41.729667
41.751086
41.752617
41.697597
41.722806
41.738986
41.701058
41.744566
41.723280
41.730211
-75.879091
-75.869117
-75.872861
-75.871429
-75.900197
-75.884700
-75.879614
-75.860656
-75.860639
-75.847303
-75.867861
-75.835228
-75.855106
-75.847692
-75.913889
-75.886900
-75.879518
-75.884552
-75.908528
-------
Table C-40 Well Inventory Summary
Co
-G
Sub
Primary Facility API Sub Search
Organization Site Name Site ID ID ID Number Site Status Facility # Compliance Area Latitude Longitude
Misquenanna Louniy, v
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
ennsyivania
TEEL 1 OG WELL
C LARUE 2 OG WELL
W BROOKS 4H SE OG
WELL
A&M FflBBARD 3 OG
WELL
TEEL UNIT 3H OG
WELL
TEEL 7 OG WELL
TEEL 5 OG WELL
HEITSMAN 2 OG WELL
W BROOKS 6 OG WELL
T MAKOSKY 2 OG
WELL
BROOKS W 2 OG WELL
R VANDERMARK 1 OG
WELL
HEITSMAN 2 OG WELL
HEITSMAN 4H NW OG
WELL
GESFORD7HNWOG
WELL
F LIPPINCOTT 1H OG
WELL
DEPAOLA 2 OG WELL
KERR UNIT 2H OG
WELL
GESFORD 2 OG WELL
J PLONSKI 1 OG WELL
673724
713793
721126
725461
725511
697803
697880
698294
732413
756248
713787
748843
717433
719971
719973
753604
727466
730003
698286
731194
681598
713017
719512
723367
723414
699989
700047
700405
729020
748219
713014
742260
716186
718454
718455
746122
724968
726983
700396
727964
923737
980448
991863
1000069
1000141
957770
957911
958444
1010835
1063688
980440
1043815
985644
989706
989712
1051940
1003317
1007276
958436
1009037
115-20007
115-20082
115-20176
115-20221
115-20229
115-20023
115-20024
115-20021
115-20357
115-20828
115-20089
115-20603
115-20140
115-20162
115-20163
115-20721
115-20240
115-20276
115-20033
115-20337
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Proposed but
never materialized
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
41.713153
41.731116
41.698472
41.741825
41.700828
41.708000
41.713119
41.726403
41.701044
41.752625
41.698392
41.764153
41.726403
41.726392
41.738692
41.732936
41.752303
41.697694
41.738713
41.740167
-75.877927
-75.921320
-75.892689
-75.910369
-75.889817
-75.871256
-75.871074
-75.893230
-75.886792
-75.835175
-75.892772
-75.862317
-75.893230
-75.893311
-75.879050
-75.822119
-75.903053
-75.840111
-75.878913
-75.837883
-------
Table C-40 Well Inventory Summary
C-90
Sub
Primary Facility API Sub Search
Organization Site Name Site ID ID ID Number Site Status Facility # Compliance Area Latitude Longitude
Misquenanna Louniy, v
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
ennsyivania
COSNER 4 OG WELL
A & M fflBBARD 4 OG
WELL
R HULL 4 OG WELL
ELY 5H OG WELL
BROOKS W 1 OG WELL
HUBBARD 6H OG
WELL
ELY 1H OG WELL
ELY 2 OG WELL
W HERITAGE 2 OG
WELL
COSNER 5 OG WELL
J PLONSKI 2 OG WELL
HESS 3 OG WELL
GESFORD 9 OG WELL
R HESS 5 OG WELL
R HULL 2H OG WELL
R VANDERMARK 3 OG
WELL
C LARUE 3H SE OG
WELL
TEEL 6 OG WELL
CARSON 3 OG WELL
RAYIAS 2 OG WELL
T MAKOSKY 4 OG
WELL
735792
725466
729573
705193
713789
718481
704346
698059
732423
735785
741095
743395
722151
753845
716463
748845
720155
697802
731025
731962
756269
731693
723369
726652
705955
713015
717115
705285
700209
729030
731687
735773
737755
720402
746346
715311
742261
718629
699987
727814
728651
748243
1015815
1000078
1006618
968114
980445
987302
1059519
958152
1010852
1015809
1023465
1033560
993666
1052303
984205
1043823
989994
957767
1008751
1010262
1063719
115-20406
115-20222
115-20261
115-20054
115-20090
115-20147
115-20049
115-20015
115-20361
115-20404
115-20476
115-20494
115-20187
115-20728
115-20121
115-20604
115-20172
115-20011
115-20320
115-20353
115-20830
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/
plugged well
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
361
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
41.697653
41.739669
41.709664
41.734333
41.700989
41.749638
41.734197
41.729172
41.729586
41.697633
41.740211
41.759514
41.733816
41.759453
41.711919
41.764117
41.731083
41.708530
41.697367
41.722797
41.752642
-75.854958
-75.900319
-75.906542
-75.869335
-75.887047
-75.874510
-75.869117
-75.871993
-75.847283
-75.855006
-75.837872
-75.868847
-75.876477
-75.868772
-75.900936
-75.862294
-75.921356
-75.880083
-75.865619
-75.847581
-75.835067
-------
Table C-40 Well Inventory Summary
C-91
Sub
Primary Facility API Sub Search
Organization Site Name Site ID ID ID Number Site Status Facility # Compliance Area Latitude Longitude
Misquenanna Louniy, v
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
ennsyivania
ELY 6H OG WELL
BLACK 2H OG WELL
ROZANSKI 1 OG WELL
REVISED SEVERCOOL
BP1
R SMITH 1H OG WELL
GESFORD5HNWOG
WELL
RATZEL 3V OG WELL
BROOKS 3V OG WELL
POST 1 OG WELL
J PLONSKI 6 OG WELL
J PLONSKI 5 OG WELL
REVISED SEVERCOOL
BP1
A & M HIBBARD 1H OG
WELL
GREENWOOD 1 OG
WELL
HUBBARD 1 OG WELL
LEWIS 2 OG WELL
P KELLEY 3 OG WELL
B SEVERCOOL 1 OG
WELL
GESFORD 4R OG WELL
HOOVER IV OG WELL
KERR UNIT 3 OG WELL
704361
705602
705895
766829
713731
723562
716448
719977
731197
759277
760083
766829
718469
691948
698063
700997
733007
713740
714093
723842
733183
705298
706268
706532
758944
712964
721614
715295
718460
727969
750797
751406
758946
717108
695541
700214
702511
729531
712971
713268
721861
729659
967070
968561
969022
1092759
980387
996391
984181
989719
1009042
1074137
1075586
1092763
987281
949405
958157
962235
1011702
980391
980868
996863
1011959
115-20041
115-20056
115-20057
115-21127
115-20078
115-20201
115-20117
115-20161
115-20338
115-20896
115-20914
115-21128
115-20150
115-20008
115-20039
115-20030
115-20374
115-20080
115-20091
115-20207
115-20377
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Inactive/
plugged well
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
361
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
NO
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
41.724239
41.712103
41.718364
41.730292
41.702883
41.738839
41.736538
41.705336
41.732903
41.740372
41.740331
41.730250
41.741908
41.751108
41.749649
41.723400
41.718683
41.729828
41.733258
41.725375
41.697639
-75.871352
-75.864579
-75.885966
-75.908514
-75.907406
-75.885567
-75.862843
-75.866078
-75.840892
-75.837828
-75.837839
-75.908519
-75.910381
-75.868132
-75.874785
-75.878330
-75.899208
-75.908470
-75.886172
-75.909356
-75.840083
-------
Table C-40 Well Inventory Summary
C-92
Sub
Primary Facility API Sub Search
Organization Site Name Site ID ID ID Number Site Status Facility # Compliance Area Latitude Longitude
Misquenanna Louniy, v
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
ennsyivania
TEEL 8H OG WELL
P KELLEY 4 OG WELL
R HESS 4 OG WELL
T MAKOSKY 3 OG
WELL
F LIPPINCOTT 3H OG
WELL
ELY 4H OG WELL
RATZEL 2H OG WELL
R HULL 1 HOG WELL
R HULL 6 OG WELL
J PLONSKI 7 OG WELL
J PLONSKI 3 OG WELL
CARSON 1 OG WELL
POST 2 OG WELL
TEEL UNIT 4 OG WELL
J GRIMSLEY 1 OG
WELL
TEEL 13V OG WELL
HUBBARD 3 OG WELL
HUBBARD 5H OG
WELL
ELY 7H SE OG WELL
J GRIMSLEY 2H SE OG
WELL
KERR UNIT 1H OG
WELL
704359
735640
753843
756258
753611
701331
707043
716461
759272
759280
759908
731024
731027
731449
714550
716443
716894
718477
719681
720153
724053
705296
731605
746345
748226
746131
702795
707401
715310
750793
750800
751274
727813
727819
728201
713642
715292
715677
717112
718200
718628
722058
967067
1015645
1052302
1063694
1051950
962733
970658
984203
1074134
1074140
1075217
1008749
1008759
1009445
981565
984177
984809
987289
989174
989993
997372
115-20045
115-20402
115-20727
115-20829
115-20723
115-20034
115-20152
115-20122
115-20894
115-20897
115-20904
115-20319
115-20321
115-20342
115-20095
115-20116
115-20131
115-20148
115-20160
115-20171
115-20212
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
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
4
4
4
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
41.703792
41.718608
41.759483
41.752633
41.732861
41.724333
41.736600
41.711822
41.709558
41.740411
41.740250
41.697211
41.732822
41.714717
41.726314
41.703833
41.748939
41.749513
41.734100
41.726375
41.697739
-75.881335
-75.899256
-75.868811
-75.835119
-75.822164
-75.871429
-75.862887
-75.900864
-75.906400
-75.837817
-75.837861
-75.865544
-75.840875
-75.884697
-75.903103
-75.881405
-75.889175
-75.874432
-75.869010
-75.902975
-75.840136
-------
Table C-40 Well Inventory Summary
C-93
Sub
Primary Facility API Sub Search
Organization Site Name Site ID ID ID Number Site Status Facility # Compliance Area Latitude Longitude
Misquenanna Louniy, v
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
ennsyivania
R HULL 5 OG WELL
D SIMPSON 4 OG WELL
B SEVERCOOL 2H NW
OG WELL
GESFORD 3 OG WELL
BROOKS 1H OG WELL
TEEL 10H OG WELL
NOBLE UNIT 1H OG
WELL
P KELLEY 1 OG WELL
C LARUE 6 OG WELL
GREENWOOD 8 OG
WELL
T MAKOSKY 5 OG
WELL
W BROOKS 5 OG WELL
GESFORD 1 OG WELL
D SIMPSON 3 OG WELL
R HULL 7 OG WELL
RATZEL1 HOG WELL
GREENWOOD 3V OG
WELL
HOOVER 2H SE OG
WELL
GESFORD 8HNWOG
WELL
COSTELLO 2 OG WELL
BLACK 1H OG WELL
729572
730644
719975
698291
704357
704712
748441
723473
725457
730331
756290
725474
698282
730640
759276
704351
717504
721464
721693
703945
704343
726651
727496
718459
700403
705294
705569
741917
721548
723365
727239
748265
723374
700393
727493
750795
705288
716251
719807
720011
704963
705282
1006616
1008139
989718
958441
967064
967473
1043142
996251
1000064
1007786
1063762
1000088
958434
1008136
1074135
967058
985764
992454
992889
966630
967052
115-20260
115-20314
115-20164
115-20019
115-20051
115-20055
115-20596
115-20196
115-20220
115-20284
115-20831
115-20225
115-20040
115-20313
115-20895
115-20047
115-20142
115-20177
115-20183
115-20043
115-20048
Active
Active
Active
Plugged well
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
4
4
4
361
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
41.709681
41.721358
41.729919
41.733889
41.705442
41.703372
41.717086
41.718689
41.731203
41.751081
41.752650
41.701047
41.738858
41.721350
41.709567
41.736480
41.748228
41.725275
41.733261
41.728308
41.712033
-75.906433
-75.854581
-75.908628
-75.876964
-75.866018
-75.874872
-75.835858
-75.899219
-75.921703
-75.867808
-75.835014
-75.886847
-75.885416
-75.854692
-75.906347
-75.862799
-75.863906
-75.908914
-75.886272
-75.885294
-75.864524
-------
Table C-40 Well Inventory Summary
C-94
Sub
Primary Facility API Sub Search
Organization Site Name Site ID ID ID Number Site Status Facility # Compliance Area Latitude Longitude
Misquenanna Louniy, v
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CABOT OIL & GAS CORP
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
CHIEF OIL & GAS LLC
WPX ENERGY
APPALACFUA LLC
WPX ENERGY
APPALACHIA LLC
WPX ENERGY
APPALACHIA LLC
e^8EESWe>OD 6 OG
WELL
TEEL 2 OG WELL
T MAKOSKY 6 OG
WELL
TEEL12HNWOG
WELL
F LIPPINCOTT 2H OG
WELL
GREENWOOD 7 OG
WELL
TEEL UNIT 1H OG
WELL
DEPAOLA 3 OG WELL
COSNER 2 OG WELL
HEITSMAN 1H OG
WELL
HESS 2 OG WELL
R SMITH 2H OG WELL
NOBLE WELL PAD
NOBLE WELL PAD
COYLE SOUTH 1 4H OG
WELL
COYLE SOUTH 1 2H OG
WELL
COYLE NORTH 1 1H
725469
697799
756312
719990
753607
725471
725505
727468
732769
704349
742479
713729
748769
748769
761321
761315
759608
723371
699986
748284
718473
746125
723373
723412
724971
729319
705287
736951
712962
761847
761846
752561
752556
752555
1000084
957766
1063796
989733
1051943
1000085
1000139
1003320
1011359
967057
1025573
980386
1099789
1099788
1077764
1077761
1077760
115-20223
115-20010
115-20832
115-20167
115-20722
115-20224
115-20227
115-20241
115-20366
115-20050
115-20492
115-20077
115-21228
115-21227
115-20934
115-20932
115-20931
Active
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
4
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
NA1
NA1
B
41.751094
41.717291
41.752661
41.717397
41.732897
41.751089
41.711647
41.752383
41.697617
41.731194
41.759544
41.702978
41.717128
41.717044
41.983089
41.983114
41.983136
-75.868028
-75.879041
-75.834958
-75.879167
-75.822142
-75.867917
-75.886864
-75.903053
-75.855056
-75.891402
-75.868886
-75.907478
-75.835858
-75.835856
-75.773300
-75.773342
-75.773319
-------
C-95
Table C-40 Well Inventory Summary
Sub
Primary Facility API Sub Search
Organization Site Name Site ID ID ID Number Site Status Facility # Compliance Area Latitude Longitude
^WPJMNftMY^y- v
APPALACHIA LLC
WPX ENERGY
APPALACHIA LLC
WPX ENERGY
APPALACHIA LLC
ennsyivania
COYLE SOUTH 1 2H
COYLE NORTH 1 3H
COYLE SOUTH 1 4H
759608
759608
759608
752556
752560
752561
1077761
1077763
1077764
115-20932
115-20933
115-20934
Active
Active
Active
4
4
4
YES
YES
YES
B
B
B
41.983113
41.983111
41.983088
-75.773341
-75.773277
-75.773300
Source:
Key:
http://www.pasda.psu.edu/uci/MetadataDisplav.aspx?entrv=PASDA&file=OIIGasLocations2013 Ol.xml&dataset=283 (Accessed April 2013)
API = American Petroleum Industry.
NA = Not applicable.
ID = Identification.
-------
C-96
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation
TEEL UNIT 2H
115-20228
06/30/10
07/21/10
01/10/11
01/31/11
09/19/11
Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector
1. O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
2. Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an impoundment.
1. Failure to properly install the permit number, issued by the
department, on a completed well.
2. Pit and tanks not constructed with sufficient capacity to contain
pollutional substances.
3. Discharge of pollutional material to waters of Commonwealth.
4. Failure to maintain 2 ft. of freeboard in an impoundment.
1. There is a potential for polluting substance(s) reaching Waters of the
Commonwealth and may require a permit.
2. Failure to properly store, transport, process or dispose of a residual
waste.
3. Pit and tanks not constructed with sufficient capacity to contain
pollutional substances.
Compliance records indicate: self reported spill of approximately 150
bbls treated & untreated flowback from partially open valve on
blender, partially on containment, response recovering unfrozen
material, contaminated material to be removed and Act 2
characterization to be performed.
1. Failure to properly store, transport, process or dispose of a residual
waste.
2. Failure to design, implement or maintain BMPs to minimize the
potential for accelerated erosion and sedimentation.
3. Discharge of industrial waste to waters of Commonwealth without a
permit.
4. Failure to design, implement or maintain BMPs to minimize the
potential for accelerated erosion and sedimentation.
Compliance records indicate: contractor discharging flowback onto
ground surface while the department on site. Less than 5 gallons
observed. No containment in area of discharge.
Rat hole not filled.
Corrected
Yes
Spud
Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Active
Horizontal Well
Springville
Twp
41.714661
-75.884700
4/10/10
Operator
CHIEF OIL &
GAS LLC
-------
C-97
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of Spud
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected13 Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date Operator
TEEL UNIT 1H
TEEL7
TEEL 6
TEEL 5
115-20227
115-20023
115-20011
115-20024
11
24
7
24
03/20/10
03/23/10
04/30/10
06/03/08
09/03/08
02/18/09
12/10/08
02/18/09
06/03/08
09/03/08
02/18/09
O&G Act 223 -General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
1 . O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
2. Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a specific Clean
Stream Law code cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
3. O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
1 . Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an impoundment.
2. O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
Compliance records indicate: previously cited for cutting blown
beyond reserve pit. Cuttings have not been cleaned up which is
continuing violation of 25 PA Section 78.54. Observed tear in
reserve pit liner approx. 8 in. above fluid level. This is violation of
78.56 a(2). No company man on site at time of inspection.
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 . E&S Plan not adequate.
2. Failure to post permit number, operator name, address, telephone
number in a conspicuous manner at the site during drilling.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
Drillers Log not on site.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
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 maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an impoundment.
2. Failure to post permit number, operator name, address, telephone
number in a conspicuous manner at the site during drilling.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Not resolvable
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Active
Horizontal Well
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Vertical Well
Springville
Twp
Springville
Twp
Springville
Twp
Springville
Twp
41.711647
41.708000
41.708530
41.713119
-75.886863
-75.871256
-75.880082
-75.871073
12/10/09
5/6/08
12/3/08
5/17/08
CHIEF OIL &
GAS LLC
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
-------
C-98
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of Spud
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected13 Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date Operator
TEEL UNIT 4
TEEL2
TEEL1
ROZANSKI 1
RATZEL 3V
RATZEL 2H
115-20342
115-20010
115-20007
115-20057
115-20117
115-20152
3
22
19
11
3
12
01/31/11
01/07/08
04/07/08
05/06/08
09/10/08
02/18/09
01/16/07
02/18/09
04/27/11
NA
NA
1 . Failure to design, implement or maintain BMPs to minimize the
potential for accelerated erosion and sedimentation.
2. Failure to obtain pit approval/permit.
3 . Discharge of industrial waste to waters of Commonwealth without a
permit.
4. Failure to properly control or dispose of industrial or residual waste
to prevent pollution of the waters of the Commonwealth.
Compliance records indicate: operator discharging flowback to site.
Less than 5 gallon observed being discharged to ground. No
containment in place.
No E&S plan developed, plan not on site.
Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an impoundment.
1 . O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
2. Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an impoundment.
1 . 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).
2. O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
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 submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
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).
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes ($4,700 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
NA
NA
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Horizontal Well
Springville
Twp
Dimock Twp
Springville
Twp
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
41.714716
41.717291
41.713152
41.718363
41.736538
41.736599
-75.884697
-75.879040
-75.877926
-75.885966
-75.862842
-75.862887
4/20/10
2/26/08
9/25/06
12/17/08
1 1/3/09
5/17/09
CHIEF OIL &
GAS LLC
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
-------
C-99
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of Spud
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected13 Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date Operator
RATZEL 1H
LEWIS 2
115-20047
115-20030
11
14
09/03/08
04/13/10
05/13/11
06/03/08
02/18/09
01/06/10
1 . O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
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 maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an impoundment.
Compliance records indicate: Inspected the well head for evidence of
leakage. No standing water was present in the cellar and no visible
bubbling observed. The area around the base of the well has been filled
to grade with P-gravel. The well is online. Gas readings were collected
around the well head using a Model 60 gas meter. No readings were
detected. There was no activity on site. The site has not been restored.
Inspection revealed a failure to properly maintain the liner, and to
maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard in the reserve pit. This is a
violation of Section 78.56(a) (2) of the Department's regulations, 25
PA Code 78.56(a) (2).
On the back of the well pad is a small poly-lined reserve pit. A portion
of the liner has sloughed into the fluid within the reserve pit. Based on
inspection, the liner in the reserve pit has not been properly
maintained, and the reserve pit is currently in violation of freeboard
requirements.
1 . 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).
2. Failure to implement and maintain BMPs in accordance with
Chapter 102.
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 submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
Yes
Yes
Resolution not listed •
no other inspections
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Active
Horizontal Well
Active
Vertical Well
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
41.736480
41.723399
-75.862798
-75.878329
10/31/08
5/28/08
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
-------
C-100
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of Spud
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected13 Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date Operator
LEWIS 1
GESFORD 3
115-20035
115-20019
20
43
06/03/08
07/08/08
07/16/08
08/20/08
02/18/09
04/14/11
06/03/08
12/08/08
02/18/09
05/05/09
03/22/11
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 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 . O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
2. Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an impoundment.
Discharge of pollutional material to waters of Commonwealth.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
1 . 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).
2. Failure to implement and maintain BMPs in accordance with
Chapter 102.
No E&S plan developed, plan not on site.
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 submit plugging certificate 30 days after well plugged.
2. Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of
drilling.
1 . O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
2. O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
3 . Failure to report defective, insufficient, or improperly cemented
casing within 24 hours or submit plan to correct within 30 days.
Compliance records indicate: 78.86 defective casing or cementing,
7 8. 81 (a) (2) failure to prevent migration of gas or other fluids into
sources of fresh groundwater, O&G Act 601.201(f) failure to submit
written notice of intent to plug well or amend plat.
1 . Failure to implement and maintain BMPs in accordance with
Chapter 102.
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).
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes (Compliance
Schedule Agreed To
$120,000 -possibly
from many facilities)
Yes
Active
Vertical Well
Plugged Well/
Vertical Well
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
41.723280
41.733888
-75.884552
-75.876963
6/16/08
5/28/08
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
-------
C-101
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of Spud
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected13 Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date Operator
GESFORD 2
GESFORD 9
ELY 7H SE
ELY6H
ELY5H
115-20033
115-20187
115-20160
115-20041
115-20054
15
24
8
23
16
06/03/08
02/18/09
08/21/09
08/27/09
08/06/09
04/23/08
06/03/08
09/03/08
02/18/09
09/03/08
No E&S plan developed, plan not on site.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
1 . O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
2. Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a specific Clean
Streams Lasw code cannot be used.
Compliance records indicate: Spill of approximately 100 gallons of
diesel on pad. Day tank on air pak unit overflowed. Spill occurred on
8/19/09 at approximately 9:00 am. Soaked up fuel with pads and
scraped up soil. Resource Environmental is overseeing sampling and
reporting.
O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
1 . No Control and Disposal/Pollution Prevention Control plan or
failure to implement Pollution Prevention Control plan.
Compliance records indicate: an un-permitted discharge of diesel fuel
has occurred an the site. Such a discharge is a violation of Chapter
78.54 of the Rules and Regulations of the Environmental Quality
Board, 25 PA Code, § 78.54 General Requirements.
1. No E&S plan developed, plan not on site.
2. Failure to post permit number, operator name, address, telephone
number in a conspicuous manner at the site during drilling.
1 . 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).
2. O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
E&S Plan not adequate.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
E&S Plan not adequate.
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Active
Horizontal Well
Active
Horizontal Well
Active
Horizontal Well
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
41.738713
41.733816
41.734099
41.724238
41.734332
-75.878912
-75.876477
-75.869009
-75.871351
-75.869334
9/23/08
9/25/08
7/28/09
4/18/08
12/17/08
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
-------
C-102
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of Spud
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected13 Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date Operator
ELY4H
ELY 2
ELY 1H
115-20034
115-20015
115-20049
24
27
22
04/07/08
06/03/08
09/03/08
02/18/09
06/03/08
02/18/09
09/03/08
02/18/09
08/20/01
Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an impoundment.
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).
E&S Plan not adequate.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
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 submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
E&S Plan not adequate.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
1 . O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
Compliance records indicate: On August 20, 2009 at approximately
10:00 am, a call was received from Paul Harten of GDS reporting a
spill of approximately 25 gallons of drilling mud on location. The spill
occurred due to a leaking mud hose on the rig. It was reported that the
drilling mud was immediately contained and cleaned up and the
leaking hose was replaced. Mr. Harten indicated that the area where
the drilling mud spilled was scraped with a backhoe, and the soil and
mud was disposed of in the reserve pit on site. At the time of
inspection, the area appeared to be clean and free of drilling mud.
Some of the spilled drilling was contained in the cellar of the well. This
mud was being pumped out and into the reserve pit. The investigation
revealed that an un-permitted discharge of drilling mud has occurred at
the site. Such a discharge is a violation of Chapter 78.54. Violation was
immediately corrected.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Vertical Well
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
41.724333
41.729171
41.734197
-75.871429
-75.871993
-75.869116
3/27/08
7/24/08
10/23/08
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
-------
C-103
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of Spud
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected13 Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date Operator
ELY1
ELY 4
COYLE
SOUTH 1 4H
COYLE
SOUTH 1 2H
COSTELLO 2
115-20029
115-20016
115-20934
115-20932
115-20043
3
2
2
3
19
06/03/08
09/03/08
02/02/09
NA
NA
07/30/08
02/18/09
03/22/1 1
O&G Act 223 -General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
E&S Plan not adequate.
1 . O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
Compliance records indicate: This was a violation of Solid Waste
Management Act Section 301 for disposing diesel fuel to the ground.
They spilled approximately 100 gallons.
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
1 . 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).
2. O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
1 . Failure to implement and maintain BMPs in accordance with
Chapter 102.
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).
Yes
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
NA
NA
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Proposed But
Never
Materialized
Active
Horizontal Well
Active
Horizontal Well
Active
Vertical Well
Dimock Twp
Dimock Twp
Liberty Twp
Liberty Twp
Dimock Twp
41.718769
41.724333
41.983088
41.983113
41.728308
-75.872861
-75.871429
-75.773300
-75.773341
-75.885293
NA
NA
6/28/12
6/28/12
8/16/08
JOT OIL & GAS C(
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
WPX ENERGY
APPALACHIA
LLC
WPX ENERGY
APPALACHIA
LLC
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
-------
C-104
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of Spud
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected13 Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date Operator
COSTELLO 1
BROOKS 1H
115-20036
115-20051
35
11
06/03/08
02/18/09
03/22/1 1
02/18/09
06/18/09
04/11/11
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 submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
1. Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a specific Clean
Streams Law code cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
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).
3. O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
4. Failure to implement and maintain BMPs in accordance with
Chapter 102.
5. Pit and tanks not constructed with sufficient capacity to contain
pollutional substances.
Compliance records indicate: Solid Waste Management Act 6018.401
violation for discharge of hazardous waste.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
1. Discharge of pollutional material to waters of Commonwealth.
2. Stream discharge of industrial waste, includes drill cuttings, oil,
brine, and/or silt.
3. Improperly lined pit.
1 . 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).
2. Failure to implement and maintain BMPs in accordance with
Chapter 102.
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Resolution not listed
Active
Vertical Well
Active
Horizontal Well
Dimock Twp
Springville
Twp
41.728213
41.705441
-75.879090
-75.866018
7/16/08
11/18/08
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
-------
C-105
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of Spud
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector Corrected13 Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date Operator
BLACK 2H
BLACK 1H
COYLE
SOUTH 1 2H
COYLE
NORTH 1 3H
COYLE
SOUTH 1 4H
115-20056
115-20048
115-20932
115-20933
115-20934
13
18
3
2
2
07/30/08
09/10/08
09/24/08
02/18/09
07/30/08
09/10/08
02/18/09
03/15/11
NA
NA
NA
1. No E&S plan developed, plan not on site.
2. Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an impoundment.
3. Failure to post permit number, operator name, address, telephone
number in a conspicuous manner at the site during drilling.
1 . 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).
2. O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
1. Discharge of pollutional material to waters of Commonwealth.
2. Improperly lined pit.
3. O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used.
Compliance record indicates: 6018.301 Solid waste to ground.
Failure to submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
1 . No E&S plan developed, plan not on site.
2. Failure to maintain 2 ft. freeboard in an impoundment.
1 . O&G Act 223-General. Used only when a specific O&G Act code
cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
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 submit well record within 30 days of completion of drilling.
1. Failure to properly store, transport, process or dispose of a residual
waste.
2. Clean Streams Law-General. Used only when a specific Clean
Streams Law code cannot be used. (Administrative Violation)
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
No Violations Noted
Yes
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
Yes
Yes ($120,000 -
possibly from many
facilities)
Yes
NA
NA
NA
Active
Horizontal Well
Active
Horizontal Well
Active Horizontal
Well
Active Horizontal
Well
Active Horizontal
Well
Springville
Twp
Springville
Twp
Liberty Twp
Liberty Twp
Liberty Twp
41.712102
41.712033
41.983113
41.983111
41.983088
-75.864579
-75.864523
-75.773341
-75.773277
-75.773300
7/10/08
6/16/08
NA
NA
NA
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
CABOT OIL &
GAS CORP
WPX ENERGY
APPALACHIA
LLC
WPX ENERGY
APPALACHIA
LLC
WPX ENERGY
APPALACHIA
LLC
-------
C-106
Table C-41 Violations Summary. Susquehanna County. Pennsylvania
Number of Date of
Well Name API Permit Inspections3 Violation
COYLE
NORTH 1 1H
115-20931
2
NA
Violations Identified by PADEP Inspector
No Violations Noted
Spud
Corrected13 Comment Municipality Latitude Longitude Date Operator
NA
Active Horizontal
Well
Liberty Twp
41.983136
-75.773319
NA
WPX ENERGY
APPALACHIA
LLC
Sources: http://www.depreportingservices.state.pa.us/ReportServer/Pages/ReportViewer.aspx?%2fOil_Gas%2fOG_Compliance&rs:Command=Render - Accessed December 2013.
http://www.ahs.dep.pa.gov/eFACTSWeb/ - Accessed December 2013.
KEY:
bbl = Barrel.
BMPs = Best management practices.
DEP = Department of Environmental Protection.
E&S = Erosion and sedimentation.
ft. = Feet.
in. = Inch.
NA = Not applicable.
NI = No information available.
O&G = Oil and Gas.
PA = Sate of Pennsylvania.
Twp = Township.
-------
C-107
Table C-42 Notice of Violations - Identified Potential Candidate Causes and Distances (less than 2 Miles) to EPA
Search
Well Latitude Longitude Area
GESFORD 3
GESFORD 9
TEEL UNIT 1H
TEEL UNIT 2H
TEEL 5
TEEL UNIT 4
TEEL 2
LEWIS 1
ELY 7H SE
ELY 4
ELY4H
ELY1H
COTSELLO 1
BLACK 1H
BLACK 2H
BROOKS 1H
RATZEL 1H
wywmm-
41.7338278
41.7116470
41.7146610
41.713119
41.7147160
41.717291
41.7232800
41.7340990
41.7243330
41.724333
41.7341970
41.7282130
41.7120330
41.7121020
41.7054410
41.736480
Sfl$qfl$j§pn
-75.8765139
-75.8868630
-75.8847000
-75.871073
-75.8846970
-75.879040
-75.8845520
-75.8690090
-75.8714290
-75.871429
-75.8691160
-75.8790900
-75.8645230
-75.8645790
-75.8660180
-75.862798
Cojtint}
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
EPA Sample Point EPA Sample Point EPA Sample Point
Distance Distance Distance
(mi) (mi) (mi)
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
NEPAGW23
0.9 ENE
0.9 ENE
1.8NE
1.6NE
1.7NE
2.0 NE
1.6NE
1.6NE
0.5 NE
LONE
LONE
0.5 NE
LINE
1.7NNE
1.7NNE
2.1NNE
0.2 ESE
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
NEPAGW22
1.1 SSE
1.1 SSE
0.5 NE
0.3 NE
0.4 NW
0.7 NE
0.3 NE
0.7 SE
1.1 SSW
0.4 SSW
0.4 SW
1.1 SW
0.7 SE
0.6 NW
0.6 NW
l.ONW
1.4SW
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
NEPAGW21
1.1 SSE
1.1 SSE
0.4 NE
0.3 NE
0.4 NW
0.7 NE
0.3 NE
0.7 SE
1.1 SSW
0.4 SSW
0.3 SW
1.1 SW
0.8 SE
0.6 NW
0.6 NW
0.9 NW
1.3 SW
Key:
EPA = Environmental Protection Agency.
ENE = East-northeast.
ID = Identification.
mi = Mile.
NE = Northeast.
NNE = North-northeast.
NW = Northwest.
SE = Southeast.
SSE = South-southeast.
SSW = South-southwest.
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix C Figures
C-108
-------
C-109
Source: Land Use, l^5P^, Mvnictpaitties PASDA; ampte Locations, EPA QRD
Crop Lands
Com
Sorghum
Soybeans
Sweet Com
Sarley
Writer Whea!
Obi Crap Osti/Coen
Pumpkins
SMBlMB
EPA Sampling Loutlons
Dbl Crop Barley/Soyteans
inds
Open Water
Pastim/Grass
Olher Crops Peaches
Peas 0£ Apples
CloveriWildflowers
Sod Grass Seed ^^ Christmas Trees
•4
fallow.ldle Cropland f^ Winter-Wheat Corn
2012 Crop Lands
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure Cla Crop Lands, Bradford County
-------
C-110
,XL
T3
^Pittsburgh ^
\f>J jt-hiii/itni-i n /V
'•«•
plftl^rf
llnuil l« PloiB""
IW
L I •
t«1
I ', fr II '•" L^m II I;,L Itl-tl'.l -^'
Source: t.3ftt/ Use, USDA. Municipalities. PASDA, Sample Locations, EPA PRO
Clifton
T»p
2.5
I . 1,1 'ii f
] Miles
Croplands
Fsllowjl*eCiopland
Grapes
Apples
Ba*y
Barren
Burtwheai
Obi Crop Bartey/Soybeans
DblCropWinTOiBSoybeans
Dry Beans
Rye Iritkale
Sod/Grass Seed . IMntei Wheat
Oats Sorgtam Other Lands
Oltier Crop! ^4 Soybeans
OlhefHayfflonWfella Striwbenies ^
^^^r
tes SwtetCom ^^ ^
I|"MI')B 6r«sland,'Sh,1*
Wetlands
EPA5amplwii|LotaEions
,
Townih|Ps
2012 Crop Lands
Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure Clb Crop Lands, Susquehanna County
-------
C-lll
1992-2001
2001-2006
0 2.5 5
Changed Land Use
•4 To Water
0t To Urban
ft& To Barren
To Forest ^ ^ Search Areas
To Grassland/Shrub • EPA Sampling Locations
To Agriculture r^j-J Townships
To Wetlands d^p Boroughs
Land Use Changes
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C2a Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County
-------
C-112
-
Land Use Change •£ TO Forest < Search Area
£4» To Water ^4 To Grassland/Shrub i Townships
££ To Urban To Agriculture r^_P Boroughs
(C To Barren •£ To Wetlands
• EPA Sampling Locations
JM: S*n»^ Lof*fB?fi5 EPAQBO
Land Use Changes
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C2b Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Susquehanna County
-------
C-113
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
1950 1960 1970 1980
Figure C3a Population in Bradford County, Pennsylvania
1990
2000
2010
-------
C-114
50,000
45,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990
Figure C3b Population in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
2000
2010
-------
C-115
2006
BRADFORD COUNTY
Land Use
0% Open Water
Developed
Barren
Forest
Shru bland
Grass/Herbaceous
Agricultural
Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
search Areas Land Use Land Cover
Townships 1992 and 2006
Boroughs Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area A
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Sourca: Landuse. USGS National Lend Cover Dataiase f 1992,2006^; Municipalities. PASDA:
SampMg Locations, US EPA QRD
Figure C4 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site A
-------
C-116
2006
BRADFORD COUNTY
Land Use
££ Open Water
Developed
Barren
Forest
Shrubland
Grass/Herbaceous
Agricultural
Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Search Areas
Townships
Boroughs
Land Use Land Cover
1992 and 2003
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area B
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Landuse. USSS National Land Cover Database (1392.2006): Municipalities. PASDA:
Sampling Locations. US EPA ORD
Figure C5 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site B
-------
C-117
o
BRADFORD COUNTY
• EPA Sampling Locations Land Use
arch Areas f£ Open Water
Townships H Deve|oped
Barren
Forest
Shrubland
Grass/Herbaceous
Agricultural
Wetlands
Land Use Land Covei
1992 and 2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area C
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: LaMuse. USGS Natiortal Land Cover Database (1992.2006): MumcipaMies. PASOA:
Sampling Locations. US EPA PRO
Figure C6 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site C
-------
C-118
BRADFORD COUNTY
Land Use
Open Water
Developed
Barren
Forest
Shrubland
Grass/Herbaceous
Agricultural
Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
'Search Areas Land Use Land Cover
Townships 1992 and 2006
Boroughs Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area D
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: iantivse. USGS National Land Cover Oatatose f 1992.20IK): Municipalities, PASDA;
Sampling Loeslions, US EPA ORD
Figure C7 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site D
-------
C-119
•
Land Use
Open Water
Developed
Barren
Land Use Land Cover
1992 and 2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area E
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Forest
Shrubland
Grass/Herbaceous
Agricultural
EPA Sampling Locations
Source: Lanause. USGS National Land Cover Database (1991.2006): Municipalities. PASDA:
Sampling Locations, US EPA ORD
BRADFORD COUNTY
Figure C8 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site E
-------
C-120
BRADFORD COUNTY
Land Use
0^ Open Water
Developed
Barren
Forest
Shru bland
Grass/Herbaceous
Agricultural
Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
earch Areas Land Use Land Cover
Townships 1992 and 2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area F
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Landuse. U5GS National Land Cover Database (1932.2006); Municipalities. PASDA:
Sampling Locations. US EPA ORD
Figure C9 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site F
-------
C-121
BRADFORD COUNTY
• EPA Sampling Locations Land Use
arch Areas f£ Open Water
Townships 0£ Developed
Barren
Forest
Shru bland
Agricultural
Land Use Land Cover
1992 and 2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area G
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Lanttuse. USGS National Lairt Caver Database (1992.200SI: Municipalities. WSEM;
Sampling Locations. US EPA PRO
Figure CIO Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site G
-------
C-122
Land Use Shrubland
Open Water Grass/Herbaceous
Developed Agricultural
Forest
EPA Sampling Locations Land Use Land COV6
Search Areas 1992 and 200
Townships Bradford County, Pennsylvani
Search Area
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing
Source: LanOuae. USGS Nations/ Land Cover Database (1992.200S): Municipalities. PASDA;
SampSno Localions, US EPA ORO
BRADFORD COUNTY
Figure Cll Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Bradford County, Site H
-------
C-123
SUSQUEHANNA
COUNTY
Land Use
Open Water
Developed
Barren
Forest
Shrubland
Grass/Herbaceous
Agricultural
Wetlands
EPA HF Sampling Locations
Search Area
Municipal Boundaries
Land Use/Land Cover
1992 and 2006
Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
Search Area A
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Land Use, USDA; Municipalities, PASDA; Sample Locations, EPA ORD
Figure C12 Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Susquehanna County, Site A
-------
C-124
Land Use
Open Water
Developed
Barren
Forest
Shrubland
Grass/Herbaceous
Agricultural
wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Bomu9^ Land Use/Land Cover
Townships 1992 and 2006
Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
Search Area B
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
SUSQUEHANNA
COUNTY
Source. Land Use. USDA: Municipalities, PASDA: Sample Locations. EPA ORD
Figure CIS Land Use Land Cover in 1992 and 2006, Susquehanna County, Site B
-------
C-125
Use, USOA; Municipalities. PASQA, gameteLocations, EPA OKD
Crop Lands
Corn
94 Soybeans
94 Winter Wheat
94 Winter Wheat-Soybeans
•4 °ats
Alfalfa
Other Hay Non Alfalfa 9£ Cabbage Grassland
Dry Seans Other Lands {^& Wetlands
OtherCrops 94 Open Water 0 EPA Sampling Locations
Clover/Wildflowers 94 Developed C^ ^Search Areas
Fallow/Idle Cropland 0£ Forest tj^ Townships
Christmas Trees Shurbland tj Boroughs
Strawberries Barren
2012 Crop Lands
Bradford County, Pennsylvania (Search Area A)
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C14 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site A
-------
C-126
USDA: Municloalities, PASHA: SarnBtoLocations. FPA CRQ
Crop Lands
Com
Soybeans
Winter Wheat
Winter Wheat-Soybeans
•4
Other Hay Won Alfalfa Pumpkins
Dry Beans Other Lands
BRADFORD COUNTY
Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Other Crops
Peas
CloverAViidflowets
Fallow/Idle Cropland
Christmas Trees
Strawberries
Open Water C ^ Search Area s
Developed rj Townships
, Forest rj Boroughs
Shurbland
Barren
Grassland
2012 Crop Lands
Bradford County, Pennsylvania (Search Area B)
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure CIS 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site B
-------
C-127
tee: Lara) Use. USDA Mumneatites. PASDA. Sample Locations.
BRADFORD COUNTY
• EPA Sampling Locations 9ft Oats
C_ ^Search Areas
f^ Townships
Croplands
Com
9ft Soybeans
9ft Winter Wheat
Fallow/Idle Cropland
Alfalfa 9ft Christmas Trees
Other Hay Non Alfalfa .', Strawberries
Dry Beans Other Lands
^ft Other Crops 9ft Open Water
9ft peas 9ft Developed
Clove r/YVild flowers 9ft forest
Shurbland
Barren
Grassland
Wetlands
2012 Crop Lands
Bradford County, Pennsylvania (Search Area C)
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C16 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site C
-------
C-128
ource Land Use. USD A. Mumcioslilies. PASDA. Samoa (.oca tons. ERA ORO
BRADFORD COUNTY
Crop Lands
Corn
Soybeans
Oats
Alfalfa
Other Hay Non Alfalfa
Other Crops
Fallow/Idle Cropland
Other Lands
Open Water
Developed
Forest
Shurbland
Barren
Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Search Areas
Townships
Boroughs
2012 Crop Lands
Bradford County, Pennsylvania (Search Area D)
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C17 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site D
-------
C-129
3ource Land Use, (JSDA: Municinaities. PA SPA. Sampe Locations. EPA PRO
BRADFORD COUNTY
Crop Lands
Cofn
Sorghum
Soybeans
Other Hay Non Alfalfa
Other Crops
Fallow/Idle Cropland
Christmas Trees
Winter Wheat Pumpkins
Oats Other Lands
Alfalfa 0£ Open Water
Developed
Forest
Shurbland
Barren
Grassland
Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
CT ^Search Areas
[J Townships
2012 Crop Lands
Bradford County, Pennsylvania (Search Area E)
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure CIS 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site E
-------
C-130
MumctoaWes FASDA: Sample Locations, FFA PRO
Alfalfa
Other Hay No n Alfalfa
Dry Beans
Strawberries
Dbl Crop Oats/Coen
Pumpkins
Other Crops Other Lands
Fallow/Idle Cropland % Open Water
Grapes (£ Developed
Christmas Trees ft Forest
BRADFORD COUNTY
Shurblartti
Barren
Grassland
Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Search Areas
Townships
2012 Crop Lands
Bradford County, Pennsylvania (Search Area F)
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C19 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site F
-------
C-131
Source: LmOilse. USDA Muncvaiaes. PASM, Same Locations. EFHORD
BRADFORD COUNTY
• EPA Sampling Locations
C ^Search Areas
fy Townships
Crop Lands
Corn
Sorghum
Alfalfa
Other Hay Non Alfalfa
££ OtherCrops
Fallow/Idle Cropland
Other Lands
94 Open Water
££ Developed
Shurbland
Barren
Grassland
Wetlands
2012 Crop Lands
Bradford County, Pennsylvania (Search Area G)
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C20 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site G
-------
C-132
Crop Lands
Corn
0£ Soybeans
fM Winter Wheat
Oats
Alfalfa
Other Hay Non Alfalfa
£$ Other Crops
Fallow/Idle Cropland
0£ Grapes
££ Christmas Trees
Other Lands
04 Open Water
0( Developed
Forest
Shurbland
Barren
Grassland
0C Wetlands
0 EPA Sampling Locations
C.^3 Search Areas
Townships
BRADFORD COUNTY
2012 Crop Lands
Bradford County, Pennsylvania (Search Area H)
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C21 2012 Crop Lands, Bradford County, Site H
-------
C-133
Croplands
Alfalfa
Bailey
Barren
'i, 7'j Christmas Trees
Clover/Wildflowers
Com
SUSQUEHANNA
COUNTY
Cl jpsoarcrt Area
t^j-1 Townships
Urban
Forest
Grauland'ShrLib
Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Source: Land Use. USDA: Municipalities
PASDA: Sample Locations. EPA ORO
2012 Crop Lands
Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
Search Area A
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C22 2012 Crop Lands, Susquehanna County, Site A
-------
C-134
othertfops Other Lands
Other Hay/Non Alfalfa open Water
Pasture/Grass
Alfalfa
Barren
Com
Dbl Crop Barley/Soybeans
Fallow/Idle Cropland
Oats
SUSQUEHANNA
COUNTY
Urban
Forest
Grassland/Shrub
Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
arch Area
Source: Land Use. USDA: Municipalities
PASDA: Sample Locations. EPA ORO
2012 Crop Lands
Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
Search Area B
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C23 2012 Crop Lands, Susquehanna County, Site B
-------
C-135
To Forest
To Grassland/Shrub
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Townships
Boroughs
Changed Land Use
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
Land Use Changes
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area A
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Land Use, USGS National Land Cover Database (1992,2006): Municipalities, PASDA;
Sampling Locations. EPA ORD
Figure C24 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site A
-------
C-136
1992-2001
WILMOT
2001-2006
WAUKING
\\ /
WYALUSING
0 0.5 1
Miles
O
BRADFORD COUNTY
Changed Land Use
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest lfjj-1 Townships
To Grassland/Shrub £? Boroughs
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Search Area
Land Use Changes
1992-2001 and 2001 -2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area B
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Lane Use. (JSGS National Land Cover Database {1992.2006!: Municipalities. PASDA.
Sampling Locations, EPA ORD
Figure C25 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site B
-------
C-137
2001 -2006
o
BRADFORD COUNTY
Changed Land Use
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest
To Grassland/Shrub
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Search Area
Boroughs
Townships
Land Use Changes
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area C
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Sauice Lara use. uses National Lana Cover Database (1992.10061: Municipalities. flUSDA
Sampflffo Locations, EPA ORD
Figure C26 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site C
-------
C-138
TOWANDA
1992-2001
JOWANDA-
2001-2006
0.5
1
] Miles
BRADFORD COUNTY
Changed Land Use
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest dj-J Townships
To Grassland/Shrub £jp Boroughs
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Search Area
Land Use Changes
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area D
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Land Use. USGS National land Cover Database (1992.2006): Municipalities. PASDA:
Sampling Locations. EPA ORD
Figure C27 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site D
-------
C-139
1992-2001
2001-2006
URLINGTQN
BRADFORD COUNTY
Changed Land Use
•4 To Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest ifj Townships
To Grassland/Shrub cj Boroughs
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Search Area
Land Use Changes
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area E
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source Land Use. USGS National Land Cover Database (1992.2006): Municipalities. PASDA:
Sampling Locations, EPA ORD
Figure C28 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site E
-------
C-140
TROY
WBURLINGTI
1992-2001
TROY
2001-2006
o
BRADFORD COUNTY
Changed Land Use
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest
To Grassland/Shrub
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Search Area
rljj-' Townships
Boroughs
Land Use Changes
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area F
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Land Use. t/SGS National Land Cover Database it 992,2006); Municipalities. PASDA:
Sampling Locations. EPA ORD
Figure C29 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site F
-------
C-141
STEVENS
BRADFORD COUNTY
Changed Land Use
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest
To Grassland/Shrub
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Search Area
Boroughs
Townships
2001-2006
Land Use Changes
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area G
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Sauice Lara use. uses National Lana Cover Database (1992.10061: Municipalities. flUSDA
Sampflffo Locations, EPA ORD
Figure C30 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site G
-------
C-142
2001-2006
BRADFORD COUNTY
Changed Land Use
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
To Forest f Townships
To Grassland/Shrub £?
To Agriculture
To Wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Search Area
Land Use Changes
1992-2001 and 2001-2006
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Search Area H
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Sauice Lara use. uses National Lana Cover Database (1992.10061: Municipalities. flUSDA
Sampflffo Locations, EPA ORD
Figure C31 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Bradford County, Site H
-------
C-143
JESSUP-
BRIDGEWATER
^^- '
frjttill
1992
JESSUP
SUSQUEHANNA
COUNTY
Land Use
Open Water
Developed
Barren
Forest
Shrubland
Grass/Herbaceous
Agricultural
wetlands
EPA Sampling Locations
Townships
Land Use/Land Cover
1992 and 2006
Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
Search Area A
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Source: Land Use. USDA: Municipalities, PASDA: Sample Locations, EPA ORO
Figure C32 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Susquehanna County, Site A
-------
C-144
CONKLIN,NY
SUSQUEHANNA
COUNTY
2001-2006
Land Use Change
To Forest • EPA Sampling Locations rf^p Boroughs
To Grassland/Shrub ^^^ Search Area f^ Townships
To Agricui^
To Water
To Urban
To Barren
Souice Land use USDA. Municipalities. PASOA: Sample Locations. EPA ORD
Land Use Changes
1 992-2001 and 2001 -2006
Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
Search Area B
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C33 Land Use Changes 1992-2001 and 2001-2006, Susquehanna County, Site B
-------
C-145
TVoy
GW03
swoa
, . , •_
* Search Area E
swo4 (1 -mile radius)
Search Area F
(3-mile radius)
-•I,,,
4* Tow^nda"
.....
'Search Area D
(1-mile radius)
Search Area C
(3-mile radius).
Search Area G
(1-mile radius)
01
___. ....... _
GWOS (3-mile radius)
wi4
GW3i \ Search Area A
(3-mile radius)
dfsrx v °™.
I *••* ' V
WGW32 X
Search Area H
.(1-mile radius) „
Dushore
•BiiHjIi.
^L
LJ
,Pinsbury*i v
» T'ffi
-^hii
Ann^ •
Oil and Gas Well Locations '' EPA Sampling Locations
. Gas (Unconventional) ^ Search Areas
ft Gas (Conventional)
* Oil (Conventional!
Source: Background. ESRI: Sample Locationn. EPA ORD: Wells. Pennsylvania DEP
2.5
I Miles
Sampling Location Map
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C34a Sampling Location Map, Bradford County
-------
C-146
'Buffalo
-XI
.Pittsbwgi,
.
Susquehanna
County
South Mottfros*
Location A
(3-mile radius)
r
.Brooklyn
4 south Gibson"
EPA Sampling Locations
Well (Gas-Oil)
Search Area
Source: Background, ESRi Sample Locations, EPA ORD
Well Locations, Pennsylvania DEP
1.5
) Miles
Sampling Location Map
Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study
Figure C34b Sampling Location Map, Susquehanna County
-------
Appendix C Background Data, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Attachment 1 EDR Record Search
C-147
-------
C-148
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-149
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-150
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-151
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-152
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-153
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-154
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-155
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-156
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-157
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-158
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-159
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-160
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-161
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-162
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-163
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-164
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-165
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-166
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-167
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-168
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-169
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-170
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 PA DEP Investigations for Study Area, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix D
PA DEP Investigations for Study Area
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/088
D-l
-------
D-2
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
IN THE MATTER OF:
Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC : Violations of The Oil and Gas Act,
Tuscarora, Terry, Monroe, Towanda, : and The Clean Streams Law
and Wilmot Townships :
Bradford County :
CONSENT ORDER AND AGREEMENT
This Consent Order and Agreement is entered into this ^ ^ day of
2011, by and between the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Environmental
Protection (hereinafter "Department"), and Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC (hereinafter
"Chesapeake").
The Department has found and determined the following:
A. The Department is the agency with the duty and authority to administer and
enforce the Oil and Gas Act, Act of December 19, 1984, P.L. 1140, as amended, 58 P.S.
§§ 601.101-601.605 ("Oil and Gas Act"); The Clean Streams Law, Act of June 22, 1937, P.L.
1987, as amended, 35 P.S. §§ 691.1-691.1001 ("Clean Streams Law"); Section 1917-Aofthe
Administrative Code of 1929, Act of April 9, 1929, P.L. 177, as amended, 71 P.S. §§ 510-17
("Administrative Code"); and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder (hereinafter
"Regulations").
B. Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC (hereinafter "Chesapeake") is an Oklahoma
Limited Liability Company authorized to do business in Pennsylvania which maintains a
business address of P.O. Box 18496, Oklahoma City, OK 73154-0496.
-------
D-3
C. Chesapeake constitutes a "person" as that term is defined by Section 103 of the
Oil and Gas Act, 58 P.S. § 601.103, and by Section 1 of the Clean Streams Law, 35 P.S. § 691.1.
D. Chesapeake is the "owner" and "operator," as those terms are defined by
Section 103 of the Oil and Gas Act, 58 P.S. §601.103, of certain gas wells within the areas
defined by the Department as follows: the Miller/Luce area of Towanda Township, Bradford
County (hereinafter "Miller/Luce Area"); the Sivers area in Tuscarora Township, Bradford
County (hereinafter "Sivers Area"); the Paradise Road area of Terry Township, Bradford
County (hereinafter "Paradise Road Area"); the Dan Ellis area in Monroe Township, Bradford
County (hereinafter "Dan Ellis Area"); the Sugar Run area of Wilmot Township, Bradford
County (hereinafter "Sugar Run Area"); the Spring Hill Road area of Tuscarora Township,
Bradford County (hereinafter "Spring Hill Road Area"); and the Vargson residence. Maps of the
Miller/Luce Area, Sivers Area, Paradise Road Area, Dan Ellis Area, Sugar Run Area, Spring Hill
Road Area, and Vargson Area, are attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein.
Miller/Luce Area
E. hi February of 2010, Mr. Luce contacted Chesapeake to complain about his water
supply well producing black water and "churning."
F. Chesapeake responded and provided Mr. Luce with temporary replacement water.
G. On February 26, 2010, Chesapeake contacted the Department about the Luce
water well and the actions Chesapeake intended to take in response to Mr. Luce's complaint.
H. The Department reviewed Chesapeake's planned tasks and asked that additional
measures be taken, including on-site gas screening of residences, low lying areas, and
springs/streams; and that the annulus pressures at the Miller, Farr and Kent well pads be
checked.
I. Chesapeake carried out the additional measures requested by the Department.
-------
D-4
J. On March 1, 2010, Mr. Luce informed Chesapeake that a pond on his property
was bubbling.
K. On March 3, 2010, Chesapeake installed a PVC riser pipe (vent stack) on the
Luce water well. An elevated concentration of methane was detected in the well headspace.
Methane also was detected at low levels in the basement and upstairs of the Luce residence.
L. On March 4, 2010, Chesapeake installed a methane monitor in the basement of
the Luce residence.
M. On March 24, 2010, a second landowner, Mr. Mignano, contacted Chesapeake
about problems with his water well. Chesapeake responded and notified the Department.
N. Chesapeake installed methane monitoring equipment in a total of five residential
locations in the Miller/Luce area.
O. On March 29, 2010, with the approval of the Department, Chesapeake began
remedial work at the Miller gas wells.
P. On April 13, 2010, the Department issued Chesapeake a Notice of Violation for
the failure to prevent the migration of gas into sources of fresh groundwater and for defective
casing or cementing of the Miller gas wells.
Q. By approximately April 20, 2010, visible water disturbance had subsided in the
Luce pond. Chesapeake drilled a new water well for the Luce residence in May, 2010.
Sivers Area
R. On June 25, 2010, the Department received a complaint of bubbling in a beaver
pond in Tuscarora Township, Bradford County.
S. The nearest gas wells to the beaver pond are operated by Chesapeake.
Chesapeake's Sivers well pad is 1,700 feet from the pond and Chesapeake's Mo wry 2 well pad is
3,600 feet from the beaver pond.
-------
D-5
T. The Department notified Chesapeake of this complaint on June 30, 2010 and
Chesapeake initiated an investigation.
U. On July 26, 2010, Chesapeake provided the Department with a summary of its
investigation relating to the Sivers well pad, including an isotopic analysis of the gas emitted
from the beaver pond and of gas found in the annular space of the surface casing of
Chesapeake's wells on three surrounding pads. A plan of action was also submitted that called
for modifying the wellbore construction, particularly with respect to cementing; additional
testing; and implementing a 3-string casing design.
V. On August 6, 2010, the Department issued Chesapeake a Notice of Violation for
the unpermitted discharge of polluting substances and failure to prevent the migration of gas into
sources of fresh groundwater for the Sivers area.
W. On August 7, 2010, Chesapeake instituted a monitoring plan which included
inspections of the beaver pond, private residences, and gas wells in the Sivers area.
X. Gas emitted from the beaver pond had similar characteristics to gas found in the
annular space of the surface casing of Chesapeake's Mowry 2 gas well.
Y. Bubbling at the beaver pond continued from June 25, 2010, in diminishing
amounts, to August 26, 2010.
Z. Chesapeake completed remedial work on their nearby gas wells between August
18, 2010, and August 30, 2010.
AA. Since August 26, 2010 to the present, no bubbling has been observed at the beaver
pond.
-------
D-6
Paradise Road Area
AB. On July 13, 2010, the Department became aware of water supply complaints by
Michael Phillips and Tared McMicken, who reside on Paradise Road, Terry Township, Bradford
County.
AC. On July 15, 2010, the Department investigated the complaints and collected
groundwater samples at the Phillips and McMicken residences.
AD. On July 21, 2010, the Department became aware of a water supply complaint by
Scott Spencer, also on Paradise Road, Terry Township, Bradford County. The Department
investigated and collected samples of the Spencer well on the same day.
AE. On August 2 and 3, 2010, Chesapeake collected water samples and installed
methane alarm systems at the McMicken, Spencer and Phillips residences.
AF. On August 6, 2010, the Department issued Chesapeake a Notice of Violation for
the unpermitted discharge of polluting substances and failure to prevent the migration of gas into
sources of fresh groundwater for the Paradise Road Area.
AG. Chesapeake has provided temporary replacement water, installed water well vent
stacks, drilled replacement wells, and installed water treatment systems at the McMicken,
Phillips and Spencer residences.
AH. Isotopic analyses of gas from a residence and water wells in the Paradise Road
Area indicate that the gas at the homes is not microbial in origin and is consistent with isotopic
analyses of gas found in the annular space of surface casing of Chesapeake's Welles gas wells.
Dan Ellis Area
AI. On August 4, 2010, Chesapeake responded to a landowner complaint of possible
methane intrusion in a water supply at a home on Brockton Road, Monroe Township, Bradford
-------
D-7
County. Chesapeake responded and, that same day, notified the Department that methane was
detected in three private water supplies and one home along Brockton Road.
AJ. On August 6, 2010, the Department confirmed the presence of methane in the
headspace of the three home water wells along Brockton Road.
AK. On August 6, 2010, Chesapeake instituted a monitoring plan of certain residences
in the area of Chesapeake's Dan Ellis well pad, which is located approximately 4,700 feet to the
South.
AL. On August 6, 2010, the Department issued Chesapeake a Notice of Violation for
the unpermitted discharge of polluting substances and the failure to prevent the migration of gas
into sources of fresh groundwater for the Dan Ellis area.
Sugar Run Area
AM. On September 2, 2010, the Department received information of bubbling in the
Susquehanna River near the community of Sugar Run, in Wilmot Township, Bradford County.
AN. On September 3, 2010, the Department inspected the Sugar Run Area and found
gas bubbling at numerous locations in the Susquehanna River. A sample of the gas was
collected and sent to an independent laboratory to be analyzed, hi addition, the Department
inspected numerous residential dwellings in the Sugar Run Area and found methane in several
water supply wells.
AO. On September 3, 2010, Chesapeake began screening the locations of bubbling in
the river, certain residential water wells, and soils in the Sugar Run Area.
AP. On September 7, 2010, the Department collected water samples from the
potentially impacted water wells in the Sugar Run Area.
AQ. Chesapeake installed vent stacks on water supply wells at residences in the Sugar
Run Area owned or occupied by Dale Dunklee, Donald Pickett, Carl Postupak, Kenneth
-------
D-8
Reinhart, David Buck (Rental Unit 1), and Robert Baldwin. Chesapeake also provided
temporary replacement water for Donald Pickett and Carl Postupak.
AR. On September 9, 2010, the Department issued Chesapeake a Notice of Violation
for the unpermitted discharge of polluting substances and the failure to prevent the migration of
gas into sources of fresh groundwater for the Sugar Run Area.
Spring Hill Road Area
AS. On September 16, 2010, Chesapeake notified the Department that methane gas
was detected in a water supply located along Spring Hill Road in Tuscarora Township, Bradford
County.
AT. The nearest drilled Marcellus well, Chesapeake's Champdale well, is
approximately 880 feet from the water supply referenced in paragraph AT, above.
AU. On September 24, 2010, the Department issued Chesapeake a Notice of Violation
for the unpermitted discharge of polluting substances and the failure to prevent the migration of .
gas into sources of fresh groundwater for the Spring Hill Road Area, and for defective casing or
cementing of the Champdale/Champluvier gas wells.
Vargson Residence
AV. On or about June 24, 2010, Bruce and Sherry Vargson contacted Chesapeake with
a complaint about their water at 2331 Baileys Corners, in Granville Township, Bradford County.
Chesapeake initiated an investigation and determined that an elevated concentration of methane
gas was present in the well headspace.
AW. A water sample collected from the Vargson's water supply on June 26, 2010,
indicated an elevated level of methane.
AX. On July 8, 2011, Sherry Vargson filed a complaint with the Department alleging
her water supply had been impacted by gas drilling activity.
7
-------
D-9
AY. On July 14, 2010, methane was detected in the headspace of the Vargson water
well.
AZ. On September 15, 2010, the Department issued Chesapeake a Notice of Violation
for the unpermitted discharge of polluting substances and the failure to prevent the migration of
gas into sources of fresh groundwater.
Additional Investigations
AAA. Since August of 2010, the Department has inspected various Chesapeake gas
wells in the Sivers, Dan Ellis, Paradise Road, Sugar Run, and Spring Hill Road Areas. As a
follow-up and precaution, Chesapeake has perforated and squeezed additional cement behind the
casing in a number of its gas wells in the subject areas.
AAB. In the course of its investigation, the Department has collected water samples
from drinking water wells at residences in the Paradise Road, Dan Ellis, Sugar Run, and Spring
Hill Road Areas. The Department also has collected isotopic gas samples to compare the gas
from various gas wells drilled by Chesapeake to gas from various locations.
Determination of Discharge of Natural Gas into the Groundwater
AAC. Chesapeake has caused or allowed the unpermitted discharge of natural gas, a
polluting substance, into the groundwater, which constitutes a "water of the Commonwealth" as
that term is defined in 35 P.S. §691.1, in violation of Section 401 of the Clean Streams Law, 35
P.S. §691.401.
AAD. As of the date of this Consent Order and Agreement, Chesapeake has taken
certain actions approved by the Department to prevent the ongoing, unpermitted discharge of
natural gas into the waters of the Commonwealth.
-------
D-10
Determination of Gas Migration Violations
AAE. Chesapeake failed to properly case and cement the gas wells and to prevent the
migration of gas into sources of fresh groundwater in violation 25 Pa. Code §§ 78.73(a),
78.81 (a), and 78.86, as in effect prior to February 5, 2011.
AAF. The violations described in Paragraphs AAC through AAE, above constitute
unlawful conduct under the laws and regulations administered by the Department, including
Section 509, of the Oil and Gas Act, 58 P.S. § 601.509 and Section 611 of the Clean Streams
Law, 35P.S. §691.611; constitute a public nuisance under Section 502 of the Oil and Gas Act,
58 P.S. § 601, and Section 401 of the Clean Streams Law, 35 P.S. § 691.401; require restoration
or replacement of certain water supplies pursuant to Section 208 of the Oil and Gas Act, 58 P.S.
§ 601.208 and 25 Pa. Code § 78.51; and subject Chesapeake to civil penalty liability under
Section 506, of the Oil and Gas Act, 58 P.S. § 601.506 and Section 605 of the Clean Streams
Law, 35 P.S. §§691.605.
Order
After full and complete negotiation of all matters set forth in this Consent Order and
Agreement, and upon mutual exchange of the covenants contained herein, the parties desiring to
avoid litigation and intending to be legally bound, it is hereby ORDERED by the Department
and AGREED to by Chesapeake as follows:
1. Authority. This Consent Order and Agreement is an Order of the Department
authorized and issued pursuant to Section 503, of the Oil and Gas Act, 58 P.S. § 601.503;
Section 5 of the Clean Streams Law, 35 P.S. § 691.5; and Section 1917-A of the Administrative
Code, supra.
-------
D-ll
2. Findings.
a. Chesapeake agrees that the findings in Paragraphs A through AAB above
are true and correct and, in any matter or proceeding involving Chesapeake and the
Department, Chesapeake shall not challenge the accuracy or validity of these findings.
b. The parties do not authorize any other persons to use the findings in this
Consent Order and Agreement in any matter or proceeding.
c. Chesapeake disagrees with the determinations stated in Paragraphs AAC
through AAF above.
3. Corrective Actions.
a. Within fourteen (14) days after the date of this Consent Order and
Agreement, Chesapeake shall submit to the Department, for review and approval, a plan
which:
1) includes a list of all gas wells drilled by or on behalf of
Chesapeake in the areas depicted on Exhibit A and identifies the number of
casings used in each well and the depth to which the strings of casing are set;
2) includes the defined logging protocol (hereinafter "wellbore
evaluations") which Chesapeake shall employ to evaluate the integrity of wells
appearing on the list submitted pursuant to Paragraph 3.a. 1), identification of a
hierarchy of the wells that will be so evaluated, and an explanation of the
rationale for selecting the hierarchy of such wells, above;
3) includes an implementation schedule not to exceed six (6) months
which sets forth, at a minimum, the date on which Chesapeake shall commence
the wellbore evaluation on the wells identified for evaluation pursuant to
Paragraph 3.a.2), above; and
10
-------
D-12
4) identifies the actions Chesapeake shall take to analyze each and
every gas well identified for evaluation pursuant to Paragraph 3.a.2), above, and
recommendations for the rehabilitation work necessary to control and mitigate
shut-in surface casing pressure and stray gas from those wells;
b. Within five (5) days of approval by the Department, Chesapeake shall
implement the plan submitted pursuant to Paragraph 3.a., above, as approved by the
Department;
c. Within seven (7) days of the date of the approval of the plan submitted
pursuant to Paragraph 3.a, above, Chesapeake shall begin pressure testing of each
accessible annuli on each of the gas wells identified for evaluation pursuant to Paragraph
3.a.2), above. Chesapeake shall pressure test each annuli for forty-eight (48) consecutive
hours, and shall provide the test results for each tested well within five (5) days of
completion of the pressure test on each respective well. At least twenty-four (24) hours
before Chesapeake begins pressure testing in accordance with this Paragraph,
Chesapeake shall provide the Department written notice of the gas well to be tested, and
the date and approximate time that Chesapeake shall begin such pressure test.
d. Within sixty (60) days of the date of the approval of the plan submitted
pursuant to Paragraph 3.a, above, in all cases Chesapeake shall have completed the 48-
hour pressure test of the annuli on all of the gas wells identified pursuant to Paragraph
3.a.2), above, and shall provide the Department with the results of the pressure tests for
all of those wells.
e. Every other Monday following the approval of the plan submitted
pursuant to Paragraph 3.a., above, Chesapeake shall submit a report containing the
following information for each well identified pursuant to Paragraph 3.a.2):
11
-------
D-13
1) the status of the work at each well (i.e., 'Deemed Finished,' 'In
Progress,' or 'Scheduled');
2) Chesapeake's analysis of each well's logs and recommended
actions to be taken based on all of the information available to Chesapeake.
3) For wells hi Progress:
i. the date logged; date or dates on which cement was
squeezed; depth of squeezes; date and time the 48-hour casing pressure
build-up test was started, supported by information in the form of a chart
or digital recording;
ii. a daily well work activity summary, separate from any
monitoring report, that includes a brief description of that work and of the
wellhead's status; and
iii. Chesapeake's daily completion reports, including all of the
days of work on each well.
f. Chesapeake's obligation to submit the weekly reports required in
Paragraph 3.e. shall terminate when the Department determines in writing that
Chesapeake has eliminated the unpermitted discharge of natural gas into the waters of the
Commonwealth from any well owned and/or operated by Chesapeake within the areas of
Bradford County identified in Paragraph D, above, in this Consent Order and Agreement.
4. Specifications of New Wells. All gas wells drilled by or on behalf of
Chesapeake in the areas identified in Paragraph D, above on or after the date of this Consent
Order and Agreement shall be cased and cemented in a manner consistent with the specifications
and practices described in Exhibit D unless, based on conditions observed in advance of or at the
time of drilling, Chesapeake determines that alternate specifications or practices are warranted.
12
-------
D-14
In the event that Chesapeake determines that alternate specifications or practices are warranted,
Chesapeake shall notify the Department of the alternate specifications or practices utilized.
5. Installation of Pressure Gauges. Within ninety (90) days after the date of this
Consent Order and Agreement, Chesapeake shall install pressure gauges on all existing wells
within the areas described in Paragraph D, above, at the surface and intermediate casing ports in
a manner allowing pressures to be inspected at any time by the Department. Chesapeake shall
install such gauges on all wells drilled by or on behalf of Chesapeake within the areas described
in Paragraph D, above, on or after the date of this Consent Order and Agreement.
6. Reporting Water Supply Complaints. Attached as Exhibit B is a Protocol For
Reporting Water Supply Complaints identifying (i) the procedures Chesapeake shall implement
within the areas identified in Paragraph D, above, to report to the Department water supply
complaints within twenty four (24) hours after Chesapeake receives any such complaint, in
accordance with 25 Pa. Code § 78.51(h) (effective February 5, 2011); (ii) the actions Chesapeake
shall take to investigate any such complaint; (iii) the information to be reported to the
Department based on such investigation; and (iv) the timing and form of such reports.
Chesapeake shall implement the plan for any future complaint within the areas identified in
Paragraph D, above.
7. Remediation of Water Supplies.
a. Beginning upon execution of this Consent Order and Agreement, with
respect to the water supplies listed on Exhibit C, Chesapeake shall:
1) at least once every two weeks, screen the well at each water supply
listed in Exhibit C for percentage of free combustible gas, and sample the well at
each of those water supplies, provided the landowner consents to such screening
and sampling;
13
-------
D-15
2) for each water sample collected at a water supply listed in Exhibit
C, Chesapeake shall have the water sample analyzed in a Pennsylvania-accredited
laboratory for dissolved methane, dissolved ethane, and dissolved propane;
3) Chesapeake shall continue to conduct the screening and sampling
under Paragraph V.a.l), above, once every two weeks at each water supply listed
in Exhibit C, provided the landowner consents, until the results of the screenings
and sampling done by the Department or by Chesapeake under Paragraph 7.a.l),
above, show (A) that either no combustible free gas is present at the water
supply's wellhead, or, that such levels of combustible free gas, if properly vented
pursuant to applicable regulations and Department practice, do not pose a danger
to persons or property and (B) that the concentration of dissolved methane is
below 7 milligrams/liter. However, Chesapeake may petition the Department,
based on information obtained in accordance with this Paragraph for a
determination that the concentration of methane in the water supply is at
background levels for the aquifer that supplies the water supply. Chesapeake may
further petition the Department for a determination that the concentration of
combustible free gas at the wellhead is at levels that do not present a danger to
persons or property if properly vented according to applicable regulations and
Department practice;
4) for each water supply that meets the standards under Paragraph
7.a.3), above, or for which a plan has been submitted and approved pursuant to
Paragraph 7.b and 7.c, Chesapeake shall continue to screen each such water
supply for free combustible gas and shall sample each such water supply at least
once per quarter, and shall have the water sample analyzed in a Pennsylvania-
14
-------
D-16
accredited laboratory for the parameters listed in Exhibit E, provided the
landowner consents to such screening and sampling; and
5) unless the Department determines that the concentration of
methane in the water supply is at background levels for the aquifer that supplies
the water supply, Chesapeake shall continue such screenings and sampling under
paragraph 7.a.4), above, for each quarter until the results of the screenings and
sampling done by the Department and by Chesapeake under this Paragraph 7
show that, for eight consecutive quarters, seventy-five percent (75%) of the water
samples within each monitoring point over time contain seven (7) milligrams per
liter or less of dissolved methane (or meets the standard then prescribed by
applicable regulations), and no individual water sample exceeds two times this
standard.
b. If after 60 days beyond the date of this Consent Order and Agreement, the
dissolved methane is equal to or greater than 7 mg/1, or the measured free gas in the
headspace is greater than 25% of the L.E.L., then Chesapeake shall submit to the
Department for review and approval a plan and schedule to address each water supply
listed on Exhibit C, including such remedial actions as Chesapeake may already have
implemented. The quality of a restored or replaced water supply will be deemed
adequate if it meets the standards established under the Pennsylvania Safe Drinking
Water Act (35 P.S. §§ 721.1—721.17), or is comparable to the quality of the water
supply before it was affected if that water supply did not meet these standards. Despite
the filing of such a plan, Chesapeake shall remain obligated to monitor and screen such
water supplies as required by this Paragraph 7.
15
-------
D-17
c. Within fourteen (14) days of the Department's approval of any plan
submitted pursuant to Paragraph 7.b., above, Chesapeake shall fully implement that plan
as approved by the Department, subject to any determination by the Department that the
concentration of methane in the water supply is at background or otherwise acceptable
levels for the aquifer that supplies the water supply and the concentration of combustible
free gas at the wellhead is at levels that do not present a danger to persons or property if
properly vented according to applicable regulations and Department practice.
d. hi the event that the owner of a residence identified in Exhibit C does not
allow Chesapeake to fully implement the plan approved by the Department pursuant to
Paragraph 7.d., above, then for each such residence Chesapeake shall establish an escrow
account, or a common account for all such residences, in an amount approved by the
Department to be used for the exclusive purpose of funding all of the expenses associated
with providing either a treatment system or a replacement permanent water supply to the
residence(s).
e. Chesapeake shall be responsible for paying any fees, charges, or taxes
associated with every required escrow account or any common account.
f. Chesapeake shall maintain each escrow account, or the common account,
until such time as the occupants of the residence(s) for which the account has been
established notify Chesapeake in writing that installation of a treatment system or a
replacement permanent water supply either has occurred at the residence owner's
expense, or the funds in the escrow account may be used to install a permanent water
supply at the residence.
g. Within thirty (30) days of the Department's receipt of notice that the funds
in an escrow account may be used to install a treatment system or a replacement
16
-------
D-18
permanent water supply at a residence, Chesapeake shall make all necessary
arrangements with any necessary vendors or contractors for the purchase and installation
of a treatment system or replacement permanent water supply at the residence at issue.
Chesapeake shall provide copies of the paid invoice(s) from the vendors or contractors to
the Department.
h. Within fourteen (14) days of receiving the paid invoice(s) for the purchase
and installation of the treatment system or replacement permanent water supply, the
Department shall draw on the appropriate escrow account, or the common account, in the
amount necessary to reimburse Chesapeake for the payments to the vendors or
contractors for such.
i. Following the purchase and installation of any system or water supply
using funds drawn against an escrow account, Chesapeake shall maintain the escrow
account to secure the long term operation and maintenance expenses of such systems or
supply.
j. In the absence of any notification referenced in Paragraph 7. g.,
Chesapeake shall maintain each escrow account, or the common account, until such time
as other arrangements for disposition of the escrow account are made by the Department.
8. Sampling Protocol. All water samples gathered and analyzed by or on behalf of
Chesapeake, and submitted to the Department pursuant to this Consent Order and Agreement,
shall be collected in accordance with the following protocol, or other method approved by the
Department:
After purging the well, fill the 5 gallon bucket with water. Attach a nozzle and 12" length
of 1A inch diameter tubing to the end of the 5/8 inch hose connected to a faucet. Make sure that
the flow rates through the tubing are low. Remove the cap of the 1 L bottle (or vial) and fill it
17
-------
D-19
with water. Once the bottle filled, immerse it in the 5 gallon bucket full of water, keeping the
tubing at the bottom of the bottle. Place the bottle at the bottom of the bucket under a head of
water, and keep water flowing at a low rate until another 2 volumes of water have been displaced
from the bottle. Then slowly lift the tubing out of the bottle and immediately cap it under water.
No air should be allowed into the 1 L bottle. When finished, tape the cap to the bottle around the
neck, pack the bottle upside down in ice, and ship it overnight.
9. Submission of Documents. With regard to any document that Chesapeake is
required to submit pursuant to this Consent Order and Agreement, the Department will review
Chesapeake's document and will approve, modify or disapprove the document, or a portion
thereof, in writing. If the document, or any portion of the document, is found to be deficient by
the Department, within 14 days of receipt of the deficiencies, Chesapeake shall submit a revised
document to the Department that addresses the Department's concerns. The Department will
approve, modify or disapprove the revised document in writing. Upon approval by the
Department, the document, and any schedule therein, shall become a part of this Consent Order
and Agreement for all purposes and shall be enforceable as such.
10. Civil Penalty Settlement. In settlement of any claim for civil penalties which the
Department is authorized to pursue under law, including Section 506 of the Oil and Gas Act,
58 P.S. § 601.506, and Section 605 of the Clean Streams Law, 35 P.S. §§ 691.605, the
Department hereby assesses a civil penalty of Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000) for
the violations set forth in the Findings, above. The payment shall be made by corporate check or
the like, made payable to the "Commonwealth of Pennsylvania," and forwarded to the
Department pursuant to Paragraph 17, below, or by an alternate method approved by the
Department, within five days of execution of the Consent Order and Agreement.
18
-------
D-20
11. Donation to Well Plugging Fund. Chesapeake agrees to donate Two Hundred
Thousand Dollars ($200,000) to the Department's Well Plugging Fund. Chesapeake shall make
such payment in the manner described in Paragraph 10, within five days of execution of the
Consent Order and Agreement.
12. Stipulated Civil Penalties.
a. If Chesapeake fails to comply with any provision of this Consent
Order and Agreement, Chesapeake shall be in violation of this Consent Order and
Agreement and, in addition to other applicable remedies, shall pay a civil penalty as
follows: If Chesapeake fails to comply with any obligation imposed upon it pursuant to
this Consent Order and Agreement, Chesapeake shall be in violation of this Consent
order and Agreement, and, in addition to other applicable remedies, shall pay a civil
penalty in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1000) per day for each day, or any
portion thereof, that Chesapeake fails to comply with its obligation.
b. Stipulated civil penalties shall be due automatically without further notice
on or before the 15th day of each succeeding month, shall be made by corporate check or
the like made payable to "Commonwealth of Pennsylvania," and shall be sent to the
Department at the address set forth in Paragraph 17, below.
c. Any payment under this Paragraph shall neither waive Chesapeake's duty
to meet its obligations under this Consent Order and Agreement, nor preclude the
Department from commencing an action to compel Chesapeake's compliance with the
terms and conditions of this Consent Order and Agreement for which payment is made.
13. Additional Remedies.
a. In the event Chesapeake fails to comply with any provision of this
Consent Order and Agreement, the Department may, in addition to the remedies
19
-------
D-21
prescribed herein, pursue any remedy available for a violation of an order of the
Department.
b. The remedies provided by this paragraph and Paragraph 12 (Stipulated
Civil Penalties) are cumulative and the exercise of one does not preclude the exercise of
any other. The failure of the Department to pursue any remedy shall not be deemed to be
a waiver of that remedy. The payment of a stipulated civil penalty, however, shall
preclude any further assessment of civil penalties for the violation for which the
stipulated civil penalty is paid.
14. Reservation of Rights. The Department reserves the right to require additional
measures to achieve compliance with applicable law. Chesapeake reserves the right to challenge
any action which the Department may take to require those measures.
15. Liability of Chesapeake. Chesapeake shall be liable for any violations of the
Consent Order and Agreement, including those caused by, contributed to, or allowed by its
officers, directors, agents, employees, contractors, successors, and assigns.
16. Transfer of Gas Wells.
a. Chesapeake's duties and obligations under this Consent Order and
Agreement shall not be modified, diminished, terminated or otherwise altered by the
transfer of any legal or equitable interest in any of the gas wells identified on the list
submitted pursuant to paragraph 3.a.l), above, or any other Chesapeake gas wells
covered hereby.
b. If before the termination of this Consent Order and Agreement,
Chesapeake intends to transfer any legal or equitable interest in any of the gas wells on
the list submitted pursuant to paragraph 3.a.l), above, Chesapeake shall provide a copy of
this Consent Order and Agreement to the prospective transferee at least thirty (30) days
20
-------
D-22
prior to the contemplated transfer and shall simultaneously inform the Department of
such intent at the address set forth in Paragraph 17, below.
c. The Department, in its discretion, may agree to modify or terminate
Chesapeake's duties and obligations under this Consent Order and Agreement and may
agree to a transfer upon determination that Chesapeake is in full compliance with this
Consent Order and Agreement, including payment of any stipulated penalties owed, and
upon the transferee entering into a Consent Order and Agreement with the Department
concerning the gas wells at issue. Chesapeake agrees to waive any right that it may have
to challenge the department's decision in this regard.
17. Correspondence with Department. All correspondence with the Department
concerning this Consent Order and Agreement shall be addressed to:
Jennifer W. Means
Environmental Program Manager
Eastern Region Oil and Gas Management
Department of Environmental Protection
208 West Third Street - Suite 101
Williamsport, PA 17701-6448
Phone (business hours): (570) 321-6557
Phone (non-business hours): (570)327-3636
e-Mail: jenmeans@state.pa.us
18. Correspondence with Chesapeake. All correspondence with Chesapeake
concerning this Consent Order and Agreement shall be addressed to:
Tal Oden
Regulatory Manager North, East Division
Chesapeake Energy Corporation
P.O. Box 18496
Oklahoma City, OK 73154
Phone: (405)935-4073
e-Mail: tal.oden@chk.com
Chesapeake shall notify the Department whenever there is a change in the contact person's
name, title, or address. Service of any notice or any legal process for any purpose under this
21
-------
D-23
Consent Order and Agreement, including its enforcement, may be made by mailing a copy by
first class mail to the above address.
19. Severability. The paragraphs of this Consent Order and Agreement shall be
severable and should any part hereof be declared invalid or unenforceable, the remainder shall
continue in full force and effect between the parties.
20. Entire Agreement. This Consent Order and Agreement shall constitute the entire
integrated agreement of the parties. No prior or contemporaneous communications or prior
drafts shall be relevant or admissible for purposes of determining the meaning or intent of any
provisions herein in any litigation or any other proceeding.
21. Attorneys Fees. The parties shall bear their respective attorney fees, expenses
and other costs in the prosecution or defense of this matter or any related matters, arising prior to
execution of this Consent Order and Agreement.
22. Modifications. No changes, additions, modifications, or amendments of this
Consent Order and Agreement shall be effective unless they are set out in writing and signed by
the parties hereto.
23. Titles. A title used at the beginning of any paragraph of this Consent Order and
Agreement may be used to aid hi the construction of that paragraph, but shall not be treated as
controlling.
24. Decisions under Consent Order and Agreement. Except for Paragraph 16.c.,
above, any decision which the Department makes under the provisions of this Consent Order and
Agreement, including a notice that stipulated civil penalties are due, is intended to be neither a
final action under 25 Pa. Code § 1021.2, nor an adjudication under 2 Pa. C.S. § 101. Any
objection which Chesapeake may have to the decision will be preserved until the Department
enforces this Consent Order and Agreement.
22
-------
D-24
25. Termination. Chesapeake's obligations, but not the Findings, of this Consent
Order and Agreement shall terminate when the Department provides written notice that
Chesapeake has completed all of the requirements of this Consent Order and Agreement, and has
paid any outstanding stipulated civil penalties due under Paragraph 12, above.
26. Execution of Agreement. This Consent Order and Agreement may be signed in
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument. Facsimile signatures shall be valid and effective.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Consent Order and
Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives. The undersigned
representatives of Chesapeake certify under penalty of law, as provided by 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904,
that they are authorized to execute this Consent Order and Agreement on behalf of Chesapeake;
that Chesapeake consents to the entry of this Consent Order and Agreement as a final Order of
the Department; and that Chesapeake hereby knowingly waives its rights to appeal this Consent
Order and Agreement and to challenge its content or validity, which rights may be available
under Section 4 of the Environmental Hearing Board, the Act of July 13, 1988, P.L. 530, No.
1988-94, 35 P.S. § 7514; the Administrative Agency Law, 2 Pa. C.S. § 103(a) and Chapters 5A
and 7A; or any other provision of law.
Signature by Chesapeake's attorney certifies only that the agreement has been signed
after consulting with counsel.
23
-------
D-25
FOR CHESAPEAKE APPALACHIA, L.L.C.
V •• Y \\ !__ ,,-
'. Reinliart
(Date)
Vice President, Operations-Eastern Division
Wilson, Esq. (Date)
Attorney for Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.
FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF
PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT 0V
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION:
Jeifoifer W/ Means
/ivironnieutal Program Manager
Bast Region Oil & Gas Management
jeottfety J//^yers
Regional Counsel
Northcentral Region
ate
(Date)
David J. Raphael
Chief Counsel
Department of Environmental Protection
24
-------
D-26
Exhibit A
Maps of:
Miller/Luce Area
Sivers Area
Paradise Road Area
Dan Ellis Area
Sugar Run Area
Spring Hill Area
Vargson Area
-------
D-27
Miller / Luce Stray Gas Area - 4 Mile Radius
I HUM
• Permitted Oil and Gas Location
if Millar Luca Stray Gas
•PtnrtMd CM «nfl G«! LOCMBOS rnai cccnin mMDtXA
I V«r loc*ton Refer to ««adiwl dbJ*
-------
D-28
Sivers Beaver Pond Stray Gas Area - 4 Mile Radios
9Q7/2O10
0 0.5 1
ihUes
•fr Siwers Beaver Pond Stray Gas
• Permitted Oil and Gas Walls
•PwrnnfttaJ O* «nd G»i LoeaUona rat cccttain mubpto
wMl. p«r locnton. fttMr to «lMotv*d taMt
-------
D-29
Paradise Rd Stray Gas Area - 4 Mile Radius
W27C01Q
0 OS 1
tunes
Pefmited Owl and Gas Location
Paradise Rd Stray Gas
•Pcrmtited CM *nd G*t Loeattont nwl contain mu*m>(»
«tM p*r locitton Rtttr to «a*ah»d taHi
-------
D-30
Dan Ellis / Brocktown Rd Stray Gas Area - 4 Mile Radius
W27JQD1Q
0 OS 1
I Mites
* Permitted Oil and Gas Locations
* Dan Ellis Brocktown Stray Gas
"Pwriwttftd Oitnt O»s fjKatKw* nut «*mm mufcole
Ktletto oHKttvd t»Wt
-------
D-31
Sugar Run Stray Gas Area - 4 Mile Radius
I Mites
Sugar Run Stray Gas
Permitted Oil and Gas Location
"Purafltod CM end Gas Locations nut contain muttpt»
wif* |Hr location fitter to atlKtiKj tabt*
-------
D-32
Sprinqhill Rd Stray Gas Area - 4 Mile Radius
M7/201D
0 0.5 1
I Mites
Springhill Rd Stray Gas
Permitted Oil and Gas Location
'P*roi¥ii*(l Q* and G»* Lotstnns rat oeocain muftdls
fi*i*r to anwhwl taM*
-------
Varoson • Granville Two.. Bradford County
D-33
0.5 1
I Miles
investigated Gas Wefe
Oil and Gas Well
Vargson Viferter Supply
4/12/2011
-------
D-34
EXHIBIT B
PROTOCOL FOR REPORTING WATER SUPPLY COMPLAINTS
(1) Reporting of water supply complaints - combustible gas detected = 10 % LEL
If combustible gas is detected inside a building or structure at a concentration equal to or greater
than 10 % LEL, then (A) immediate notification shall be made to the Department, (B) a report
shall be filed with the Department by phone and email within 24 hours after the interview with
the complainant and field survey of the extent of natural gas, and (C) weekly reports shall be
provided to the Department in accordance with (3) and (4) below.
(2) Investigating water supply complaints
All investigations of potential gas migration incidents shall be conducted in accordance with 25
Pa. Code § 78.89, or as subsequently prescribed by applicable regulation.
(3) Information to be reported to the Department
Weekly reports required by (1)(C) above shall include, in addition to what is required pursuant to
25 Pa. Code § 78.89, the following:
(A) The location and type of all gas monitoring equipment installed;
(B) Results of methane readings, if any, in tabular form and including % of methane by volume
and % of LEL, from each potentially affected location (water wells, headspace, surface water);
(C) Results of water chemistry data from water well samples and surface water samples, when
available, including the location of each sampling point; and
(D) An explanation of any corrective actions undertaken, including a description of any
equipment installed.
The first weekly report submitted in connection with any investigation shall identify the nearest
Chesapeake gas well and include the following well construction information: well depth,
number of casings, length of each casing string, wellbore evaluation results, caliper logs, and
cement returns.
The first weekly report submitted in connection with any investigation also shall identify the
latitude and longitude and street address of each home, business, farm, water well, surface water
body, and structure implicated by the complaint, and the owner or occupier of such.
(4) Timing and form of reports
Weekly reports required by (1)(C) above shall be submitted each Monday, beginning one week
after the 24-hour report has been made to the Department in accordance with (1)(B) above. The
obligation to submit weekly reports shall continue until a final report is submitted for the
incident.
-------
D-35
EXHIBIT C
List of Water Supplies
Determination letters pursuant to Section 208(b) of the Oil and Gas Act
Sugar Run
Carl Postupak
DonPickett
Robert Baldwin
David Buck Well#l
David Buck Well #2
Dale Dunklee
Kenneth Reinhart
Paradise Rd
Scott Spencer
Michael Phillips
Jared McMicken
Brocktown/Dan Ellis
8156Routel87S.
RR#lBoxl2
RD 1 Box 1
7417Routel87S
7417Routel87S
7939 Route 187S
480 Table Rock Road
RR2 Box 37C
Paradise Rd
244 Paradise Rd
224 Paradise Rd
Sugar Run, PA
Sugar Run, PA
Sugar Run, PA
Sugar Run, PA
Sugar Run, PA
Sugar Run, PA
Gettysburg, PA
Wyalusing, PA
Wyalusing, PA
Wyalusing, PA
Greg Laws 2420 Brocktown Rd. Monroeton, PA
Earl Sites (owned by 2600 Brocktown Rd Monroeton, PA
Paul Sites)
Sibley (owned by Paul 2600 Brocktown Rd Monroeton, PA
Sites)
Springhill Rd
JohnPary
Ron Brown
Vargson
Sherry Vargson
No determination letter
Sugar Run
Peggy Loomis
525 Spring Hill Rd Laceyville, PA
3096 Springhill Rd Laceyville, PA
18846
18846
18846
18846
18846
18846
17325
18853
18853
18853
18832
18832
18832
18623
18623
2331 Baileys Corner Granville Summitt, PA 16926
8081 Rt. 187
Sugar Run, PA
18846
-------
EXHIBIT D
SPECIFICATIONS AND PRACTICES FOR CASING AND CEMENTING
-------
Well Casing and Cement Illustration
D-37
20" Cond @ ±70'
13-3/8" Surf Csg @ ±50'
below fresh groundwater
9-5/8" Intrm Csg® ±2500'
KOP @ ±6750'
Surface Cement (0' - ±50' below fresh groundwater)
Neat cement (Type 1, Class A & H) with gas block additive
Density = ±15.2 ppg to 15.6 ppg
Intermediate Cement (0' - ±2500')
Neat cement (Type 1, Class A & H) with gas block additive
Density = ±15.2 ppg to 15.6 ppg
TOC @ ±3,500'
Production Cement (±3,500' - Top of Curve)
Neat cement (Type 1, Class A & H) with gas block additive
Density = ±15.2 ppg to 15.6 ppg
Production Cement (Top of Curve - TD)
Neat cement (Type 1, Class A & H)
Density = ±15.5 ppg to 15.6 ppg
5-1/2" Production Csg
@ ±13000' MD,
±7230' TVD
-------
D-38
Cementing Practices
Conductor
• 26" Hole to minimum depth of ±70'.
• 20" Conductor to be cemented with High Density Cement.
• Record all fresh ground water encountered in the Driller's Log Book.
Surface Section
• 17-1/2" hole to be drilled to minimum of ±50' below base of fresh ground water. In the absence of
other data, the depth of fresh ground water is determined primarily by using the known depths of
surrounding water wells within a ±2500' radius, and correcting for elevation differences.
• Record all fresh ground water encountered in the Driller's Log Book.
• Circulate and condition hole.
• Run new string of 13-3/8" surface casing.
• Run centralizers in the middle and top of the first joint, top of third joint, and every third to surface.
• Pump ±35 bbls of gelled spacer, ±100 bbls of fresh water, drop bottom plug.
• Pump High Density Cement with gas block additive.
• Drop top plug and displace with water at maximum rate.
• Record volume of cement to surface in the Driller's Log Book.
• Wait on cement for 8 hrs.
• Performing FIT to 15 ppg EMW on surface casing (squeeze shoe if less than 15 ppg EMW).
-------
D-39
Cementing Practices (continued)
Intermediate Section
• 12-1/4" hole to be drilled to intermediate casing depth. Intermediate depth is typically at a minimum
of ±2000', but is well specific and is based on various data sources and geologic interpretation.
• Circulate and condition hole.
• Run new string of 9-5/8" intermediate casing.
• Run centralizers in the middle and top of the first joint, top of third joint, and every third to surface.
• Reciprocate casing throughout the cement job.
• Pump ±35 bbls of gelled spacer, ±100 bbls of fresh water, drop bottom plug.
• Pump High Density Cement with gas block additive.
• Drop top plug and displace with water at maximum rate.
• Record volume of cement to surface in the Driller's Log Book.
• Wait on cement for 8 hrs.
• Performing FIT to 16 ppg EMW on intermediate casing (squeeze shoe if less than 16 ppg EMW).
-------
D-40
Cementing Practices (continued)
Production Section
• 8-3/4", 8-1/2", or 7-7/8" hole to be drilled to casing depth.
• Run new string of 5-1/2" production casing.
• Run centralizers at least from end of curve to TOC on every second joint.
• Prior to cementing, circulate at least three bottoms up annular volumes.
• If possible, reciprocate and rotate casing throughout the cement job.
• Pump minimum of ±50 bbls of weighted chem wash at ±14.0 ppg.
• Drop bottom plug.
• Pump High Density Cement with gas block additive from above curve to TOC.
• Drop top plug and displace with water at maximum rate.
• Wait on cement for 8 hrs and attempt to hold 250 psi on annulus.
-------
D-41
EXHIBIT E
STANDARD ANALYSIS CODE 942 LIST OF PARAMETERS
SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY @ 25.0 C
pH, LAB (ELECTROMETRIC)
ALKALINITY TOTAL AS CACO3 (TITRIMETRIC)
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (TDS)
HARDNESS TOTAL (Calculated)
CALCIUM, TOTAL BY TRACE ELEMENTS IN WATERS & WASTES
MAGNESIUM, TOTAL BY TRACE ELEMENTS IN WATERS &
SODIUM, TOTAL BY TRACE ELEMENTS IN WATERS & WASTES
POTASSIUM, TOTAL BY TRACE ELEMENTS IN WATERS &
CHLORIDE, TOTAL
BARIUM, TOTAL BY TRACE ELEMENTS IN WATERS & WASTES
IRON, TOTAL BY TRACE ELEMENTS IN WATERS & WASTES BY
MANGANESE, TOTAL BY TRACE ELEMENTS IN WATERS &
STRONTIUM, TOTAL BY TRACE ELEMENTS IN WATERS &
TURBIDITY
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
-------
D-42
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Dept. of Environmental Protection
Commonwealth News Bureau
Room 308, Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg PA., 17120
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
05/17/2011
CONTACT:
Katy Gresh, Department of Environmental Protection
717-787-1323
DEP Fines Chesapeake Energy More Than $1 Million
Penalties Address Violations in Bradford, Washington Counties
HARRISBURG — The Department of Environmental Protection today fined Chesapeake Energy
$1,088,000 for violations related to natural gas drilling activities.
Under a Consent Order and Agreement, or COA, Chesapeake will pay DEP $900,000 for
contaminating private water supplies in Bradford County, of which $200,000 must be dedicated
to DEP's well-plugging fund. Under a second COA, Chesapeake will pay $188,000 for a Feb.
23 tank fire at its drilling site in Avella, Washington County.
"It is important to me and to this administration that natural gas drillers are stewards of the
environment, take very seriously their responsibilities to comply with our regulations, and that
their actions do not risk public health and safety or the environment," DEP Secretary Mike
Krancer said. "The water well contamination fine is the largest single penalty DEP has ever
assessed against an oil and gas operator, and the Avella tank fire penalty is the highest we could
assess under the Oil and Gas Act. Our message to drillers and to the public is clear."
At various times throughout 2010, DEP investigated private water well complaints from
residents of Bradford County's Tuscarora, Terry, Monroe, Towanda and Wilmot townships near
Chesapeake's shale drilling operations. DEP determined that because of improper well casing
and cementing in shallow zones, natural gas from non-shale shallow gas formations had
experienced localized migration into groundwater and contaminated 16 families' drinking water
supplies.
As part of the Bradford County COA, Chesapeake agrees to take multiple measures to prevent
future shallow formation gas migration, including creating a plan to be approved by DEP that
outlines corrective actions for the wells in question; remediating the contaminated water
supplies; installing necessary equipment; and reporting water supply complaints to DEP. The
well plugging fund supports DEP's Oil and Gas program operations and can be used to mitigate
historic and recent gas migration problems in cases where the source of the gas cannot be
identified.
-------
D-43
The Avella action was taken because on Feb. 23, while testing and collecting fluid from wells on
a drill site in Avella, Washington County, three condensate separator tanks caught fire, injuring
three subcontractors working on-site. DEP conducted an investigation and determined the cause
was improper handling and management of condensate, a wet gas only found in certain geologic
areas. Under the COA, Chesapeake must submit for approval to the department a Condensate
Management Plan for each well site that may produce condensate.
"Natural gas drilling presents a valuable opportunity for Pennsylvania and the nation," Krancer
said. "But, with this opportunity comes responsibilities that we in Pennsylvania expect and insist
are met; we have an obligation to enforce our regulations and protect our environment."
For more information, visit www.depweb.state.pa.us.
-------
D-44
Oil & Gas
North Region
October 17, 2011
VIA E-MAIL AND OVERNIGHT EXPRESS MAIL
Mr. S. Craig Lobins
Regional Manager
Oil and Gas Management
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
Northwest Regional Office
230 Chestnut Street
Meadville, PA 16335
Re: -Response to Department's May 9, 2011 letter Dimock and Springville Townships,
Susquehanna County
-Request to Resume Natural Gas Drilling and Well Completion Activities
-Consultation Regarding Discontinuation of Temporary Potable Water
Dear Mr. Lobins:
This letter is Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation's response to the Department's letter dated May 9, 2011
("May 9 Letter").' We are hereby renewing our request to resume natural gas drilling and well completion
activities in the Dimock/Carter Road Area. In addition, we are seeking your concurrence regarding the
discontinuation of the provision of temporary potable water. As further discussed herein, Cabot believes that it
is in compliance in all material respects with the Consent Order and Settlement Agreement ("COSA") and that
any differences of opinion that may remain regarding Cabot's compliance with the COSA do not pose a risk to
allowing Cabot to resume its drilling and well completion activities.
Background
As you know, on December 15, 2010 Cabot and the Department entered into the COSA to address and
resolve issues related to methane that exist in water supplies along Carter Road in Dimock. Pennsylvania.
Another purpose of the COSA was to provide a mechanism for resumption of gas drilling and completion
activities and a mechanism to terminate temporary water supplies. Cabot has aggressively investigated the
origin of such methane, including extensive sampling of water supplies in areas where no drilling has yet
occurred, to determine comparable background levels of methane in the vicinity. Cabot has also engaged third
party consultants and prominent experts to conduct numerous studies and evaluations of these water supplies
and Cabot has carefully reviewed its drilling practices with the assistance of these and other experts. Much of
this work is memorialized in the COSA, but additional work and study have occurred since the COSA was
executed. Cabot has shared this work product with the Department and has also made these experts available
to meet and discuss the results with Department representatives. Cabot is happy to provide any additional
background information that the Department would require.
As is also memorialized in the COSA, Cabot had agreed to temporarily suspend further drilling and
hydraulic fracturing activities in the Dimock/Carter Road Area pending the outcome of these studies.
Meanwhile, Cabot continues to undertake natural gas well drilling and hydraulic fracturing activities "outside"
1 The letter is being sent at this time in accordance with the extension granted by the Department on July 18,
2011, permitting Cabot to submit a response to the May 9 Letter on or before October 17, 2011.
-------
D-45
the Dimock/Carter Road Area and this work has proceeded successfully and in compliance with the
Department's regulations. Moreover, other producers with comparable practices have been allowed to proceed
with drilling and hydraulic fracturing activities in and around the Dimock/Carter Road Area. This shows that
drilling and fracing can be conducted in the Dimock/Carter Road Area without impacting water supplies.
On April 14, 2011, Cabot submitted a letter to the Department requesting notice to resume natural gas
well drilling and well completion activities in the Dimock/Carter Road Area. Attached to that letter was the
necessary supporting information to allow the Department to provide notice to resume activities, as provided
for and set forth in the COSA.
In the May 9 Letter, the Department responded to Cabot's request for notice to resume activities in the
Dimock/Carter Road Area and noted that Cabot has complied with most of the obligations set forth in the
COSA. However, the Department also suggests that Cabot has not achieved full compliance with some of
these obligations. Respectfully, Cabot does not agree that it has not fulfilled all of its obligations under the
COSA.
In addition, Cabot had previously requested that it be permitted to discontinue the provision of
temporary potable water. The Department's May 9 Letter indicates that Cabot has met all of the requirements
contained in the COSA for the discontinuation of temporary potable water. For several residents, the
Department requested that Cabot continue providing water for the time being. Cabot now requests that the
temporary potable water be discontinued for all residents as the groundwater meets all applicable DEP
requirements and there is no valid technical reason to continue providing the water.
Specific Responses to Items Raised in the May 9 Letter2
I. Compliance with Environmental Laws and Regulations
The COSA includes a general provision that Cabot agrees to comply with all applicable laws and
regulations.
Greenwood 6 Well; Greenwood 7 WeO; Greenwood 8 Well
The Department's May 9 Letter identifies three natural gas wells at the Greenwood well pad for which
Notices of Violation ("NOVs") were issued and suggests that issues at those wells are considered a failure to
comply with the COSA.
First, these three natural gas wells are located outside the Dimock/Carter Road Area and thus are not
subject to the compliance obligations set forth in the COSA. Second, it is Cabot's position that the NOVs
should not have been issued for these three wells. Cabot believes that each of these wells was properly
installed, cased and cemented in accordance with the Department's extensive regulations and the Department-
issued permits. Furthermore, the casing and cementing plans were each individually approved by the
Department. Cabot, at the Department's request, completed a 30 day pressure build-up test on the annuli
identified in the NOVs. At the end of the 30 day test period the annular pressure for all three wells was 0 psi,
again supporting Cabot's position that these NOVs should not have been issued.
Finally, an NOV does not constitute a final agency action that determines whether an issue of non-
compliance exists. Rather, an NOV serves as the Department's allegation of a non-compliance issue that can
be pursued or otherwise resolved. Indeed, the Environmental Hearing Board has held that an NOV is merely a
"provisional, interlocutory, decisionf]" that does not require a party to take any action, and therefore is not an
appealable action. County of Berks v. DEP, 2003 EHB 77.
The following items respond point-by-point to the items contained in the Department's May 9, 2011 letter.
-2-
-------
D-46
Consequently, we request that DEP rescind these NOVs or indicate affirmatively that Cabot has
complied with the NOVs. Cabot has worked hard to comply with environmental laws and regulations. In a
highly regulated industry, it is always possible that a company will violate a provision of the Department's
regulations. Such a violation, however, does not indicate a lack of intent to comply with the laws and
regulations or a lack of ability to comply. Thus, the implication that Cabot either has not or will not comply
with the Department's laws and regulations is unfounded.
II. Gas in the Annul! of Dimock/Carter Road Natural Gas Production Wells
In the May 9 Letter, the Department states that, "as a general rule, gas (as shown by gas pressure) in
an annular space of a gas well indicates that the well has defective, insufficient or improperly cemented
casing." This statement is not supported by the comprehensive framework of oil and gas regulations
implemented by the Department, which anticipates nominal amounts of gas in the annular space. Specifically,
[a]fter a well has been completed, recompleted, reconditioned or altered the operator shall
prevent surface shut-in pressure and surface producing back pressure inside the surface
casing or coal protective casing from exceeding the following pressure: 80% multiplied by
0.433 psi per foot multiplied by the casing length (in feet) of the applicable casing.
25 Pa. Code § 78.73(c) (emphasis added).
Thus, the "general rule" asserted by the Department neither exists nor is supported by the regulations.
Rather, Section 78.73(c) provides the standard for assessing the mechanical integrity of gas wells based on an
assessment of the critical hydrostatic pressure exerted on the casing seat. Further, 25 Pa. Code § 78.88
(Mechanical integrity of operating wells) establishes pressure testing as a means of assessing mechanical
integrity and includes several references to section 78.73(c).
If the surface shut-in pressure of the annulus is less than 80% of the hydrostatic pressure at the depth
of the casing seat then a mechanical failure has not occurred. A pressure of less than 80% presents no risk of
migration because any gas in the annular space will follow the path of least resistance to the well head and then
be vented into a tank system in accordance with Department regulations.
Gas pressure can and often exists in annular spaces and this is no indication of defective cement or
casing. The Department's Technical Advisory Board ("TAB") shares this awareness. Cabot's efforts to
survey the Technical Advisory Board ("TAB") suggest that at least four of the five members support the notion
that surface shut-in pressure should not exceed 80% x 0.433 psi/ft x the casing length (in feet) of the applicable
casing string. See 25 Pa. Code § 78.73(c). Thus, the "general rule" asserted by the Department neither exists
nor is supported by the TAB or the regulations.
To assert otherwise would require a fundamental and industry-wide attempt to change the
Commonwealth's well design criteria and would require considerable input from noted authorities on this topic
(i.e., TAB) as well as the various stakeholders involved. None of the wells identified in the May 9 Letter have
exceeded the pressure standards set forth in the regulations, except the Teel 7V well. For the Teel 7V well,
Cabot is submitting a plan in accordance with the Department's request contained in the May 9 letter.
Further, there is nothing in the Department's regulations that supports the position that 25 Pa. Code §
78.73(c) does not apply to unconventional gas wells. The title of the regulation is "General provision for well
construction and operation," 25 Pa. Code § 73, explicitly stating that it applies to all wells Further, since other
regulations explicitly discuss unconventional gas wells and 25 Pa. Code § 78.73(c) does not differentiate
between conventional and unconventional wells, the regulation applies to both.
It would appear that in the absence of any more specific regulatory definition of what constitutes
"defective, insufficient or improperly cemented casing," operators should look to newly promulgated section
-3-
-------
D-47
78.88 addressing "Mechanical integrity of operating wells." That section identifies progressive corrosion,
rusting, and equipment deterioration as indicators of mechanical integrity. None of these indicators were
present at the wells at issue in the May 9 Letter. Furthermore, section 78.88 establishes pressure testing as a
means of assessing mechanical integrity and includes several references to section 78.73(c). As previously
noted, none of the wells at issue here, with the exception of Teel 7V (as discussed above), have exceeded the
pressure standards set forth in the regulations.
In addition, no provision of section 78.88 provides that the presence of gas in the annular space is de
facto evidence of a "defective, insufficient or improperly cemented casing." While section 78.85(a)(5)
provides that the cement that is used in well construction should "prevent gas flow in the annulus," it does not
stand for the proposition that there may not be gas present in the annular space. The Marcellus Shale
Coalition previously raised this very issue when it provided comments on the Department's proposed
"Instructions for Evaluating Well Mechanical Integrity of Operating Oil and Gas Wells - Form 5500-FM-
OGXXXX."
Moreover, while not specific to oil and gas wells, 25 Pa. Code Sections 78.401 - 78.407, Subchapter
H for Underground Storage Wells, recognize the reality that gas is often found in the annular space of a
properly cemented well. In recognition of the venting process that then takes place for these types of wells, the
Department has set out a maximum allowable amount of venting per day. The small amounts of gas identified
in Cabot's oil and gas wells within the Dimock/Carter Road Area do not come close to reaching the regulatory
maximum for underground storage wells. Considering this, the presence of a nominal amount of gas in the
annular space is not an indication that Cabot's oil and gas wells are defective, nor is it an indication that
Cabot's oil and gas wells pose a threat of methane gas migration into nearby water supplies.
Accordingly, Cabot appreciates the opportunity afforded by the Department to discuss technical issues
with respect to nominal amounts of gas in the annular space. Cabot urges the Department to recognize that this
very common occurrence is not grounds for further delaying the Company's ability to conduct drilling and
hydraulic fracturing activities within the Dimock/Carter Road Area.
Information Requested by DEP:
The May 9 Letter identifies the following and requests a response:
[T]he Gesford 2 gas well was one of 14 'Defective Wells' identified by the
Department in the 2009 Modified Agreement between the Department and
Cabot. Nonetheless, Cabot did not inform the Department within 24 hours
of discovery of the gas in the Gesford 2 gas well and in the other gas wells
that Cabot tested in November and early December. In fact, Cabot did not
inform the Department of this gas in the annular space of the Gesford 2 gas
well and other gas wells until after execution of the 2010 Agreement. [The
Department seeks] a written explanation about why [Cabot] did not inform
the Department of these material facts within 24 hours of discovery and
before execution of the 2010 Agreement.
May 9 Letter at 3.
Cabot's Response:
With respect to the Gesford 2 gas well, Cabot did not believe and still does not believe that any notice
obligations under the regulations were triggered by data indicating the presence of nominal amounts of gas in
the annular space. Notably, the gas levels detected at the Gesford 2 well (78 psi) were substantially below the
conservative threshold set forth in Pennsylvania's regulations (i.e., 80% of hydrostatic pressure which would
be 359 psi for the Gesford 2 well). Although 25 Pa. Code Section 78.86 discusses "defective, insufficient or
.4.
175048,3
-------
D-48
improperly cemented casing," it is our view that Section 78.86 cannot be used to bootstrap a well that is in
compliance with all other Department regulations into a well that is in violation. In other words, it is not
Section 78.86 that defines what is a defective, insufficient or improperly cemented casing, but rather that
Section merely establishes a reporting requirement.
Cabot has been working directly and closely with the Department throughout the process of
evaluating the Dimock/Carter Road gas wells, including taking pressure readings and providing data on several
occasions at the Department's request, all of which it performed in a timely fashion.
Information Requested by DEP:
DEP seeks information regarding the Category I and II wells. May 9 Letter at 4.
Cabot's Response:
Category I Wells
There are six Category I wells. These wells include:
Brooks 1H
Ely 4V
ElySH
Gesford 2
Ratzel 2H
Ratzel 3V
Cabot has conducted additional testing of these wells, including determining the annular flow rate,
conducting 48-hour pressure buildups on annuli, and running temperature / noise logs on selected wells. But
for the Brooks 1H well, Cabot's additional testing of the Category I wells demonstrate that the wells have a
decrease in annular pressure. Further, the temperature / noise logs that have been conducted demonstrate that
there is no indication of gas migration. The following table provides a summary of Cabot's additional testing
of the Category I wells, the actions taken, and the action plan (where applicable).
Category I Gas Wells
Well Name
Brooks 1H
Ely 4V
ElySH
Gesford 2
Ratzel 2H
Ratzel 3V
Comments
Annular pressure
increased
Annular pressure zero
7x9=1 psi, 4x7=0 psi
Temp/noise log shows no
gas migration
Annual pressure
decreased
Temp/noise log shows no
gas migration
Temp/noise log shows no
gas migration
7x9=0 psi, 4x7=2 psi
Temp/noise log shows no
gas migration
Action Taken
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Action Plan
Cement Squeeze
None
None
None
None
None
175048.3
-5-
-------
D-49
On September 30, 2011, Cabot submitted a proposed workover procedure to the Department's North
Central Regional Office to perform a cement squeeze on the Brooks 1H well. On October 13,2011, Cabot
submitted a minor revision to the workover procedure to the Department.
Further detailed information on the Category I wells is provided in slides 174 - 207 of the PowerPoint
Presentation included as Attachment A.
Category II Wells
There are eight Category II wells. These wells include:
Costello IV
Ely 1H
Grimsley IV
Heitsman 4H
Hubbard 5H
Hull 1H
Teel 6V
Teel 13V
Like the Category I wells, Cabot has conducted additional testing of the Category II wells, including
determining the annular flow rate, conducting 48-hour pressure buildups on annuli, and running temperature /
noise logs on selected wells. Cabot's additional testing of the Category II wells demonstrate that six of the
wells have a decrease in annular pressure, one well had a minor annular pressure increase (to 6 psi), and the
remaining well had an annular pressure increase of 21 psi.
The following table provides a summary of Cabot's additional testing of the Category II wells, and the
actions taken.
Category II Gas Wells
Well Name
Costello IV
ElylH
Grimsley IV
Heitsman 4H
Hubbard 5H
Hull 1H
Teel 6V
Teel 13V
Comments
4x7 pressure increased
4x7 pressure decreased
Annular pressure
decreased, 5x9=1 psi
Annual pressure flat
7x9=6 psi, minor
increase,
4x7=32 psi,
minor decrease
Annular pressure
decreased
Annular pressure
decreased
Annular pressure
decreased
Action Taken
Vent Annulus
Ran temp/noise log
Shows no gas migration
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Action Plan
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
Further detailed information on the Category II wells is provided in slides 208 - 247 of the
PowerPoint Presentation included as Attachment A.
-6-
-------
D-50
Information Requested by DEP:
DEP seeks information regarding the Category III wells. May 9 Letter at 4.
Cabot's Response:
Category III Wells
It is our understanding from the meeting held with DEP on June 7, 2011, that Cabot has provided
adequate information and the Department does not consider the wells in Category III to be in violation. Cabot
will check the Teel 7V well, pursuant to the procedure to be submitted to the Department, to check for a well
head seal leak. Other than for the Teel 7V well, no further information is required to be provided to the
Department. The following table provides a summary of Cabot's additional testing of the Category III wells,
the actions taken, and the action plan (where applicable).
Category III Gas Wells
Well Name
Ely7H
Gesford IV
Hubbard IV
Kelley, P. 1H
Ratzel 1H
Teel 2V
Teel 5V
Teel 7V
Comments
Zero annular pressure
Annular pressure
decreased, 5x8 -1 psi
Zero annular pressure
Annular pressure
decreased
Annular pressure
decreased
Annular pressure
increased on 4x7, TOC
below shoe
7x9= 0 psi, 4x7- 3 psi
Annular pressure
increased
Action Taken
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Vent Annulus
Action Plan
None
None
None
None
None
Monitor flow
None
Check for wellhead seal
leak
Further detailed information on the Category III wells is provided in slides 248 - 287 of the
PowerPoint Presentation included as Attachment A.
Information Requested by DEP:
The May 9 Letter identifies the following and requests a response:
[F]or each Cabot Gas Well in Categories I-III, the Department requests that
Cabot: submit sufficient written information to show that Cabot has
completed all corrective actions necessary to fix the leak, and/or fix the
defective, insufficient, or improperly cemented casing, and/or other defect in
-7-
175048.3
-------
D-51
compliance with 25 Pa. Code § 78.86, and that tests show no gas pressure
for the well; or submit a written plan, for approval by the Department, that
identifies the specific corrective action that Cabot will take to fix the leak,
and/or fix the defective, insufficient, or improperly cemented casing, and/or
other defect in compliance with 25 Pa. Code § 78.86.
May 9 Letter at 4.
Cabot's Response:
As a general response, see our statement at the beginning of this section. Cabot disagrees that the
mere presence of any gas in the annular space means that the casing is "defective, insufficient, or improperly
cemented."
Further, the information provided above concerning the Category I and II wells demonstrates that
Cabot has either completed all corrective action regarding the wells, or has submitted a plan for corrective
action to the Department. The following additional information responds to the Department's request.
Retesting of pressure in certain annuli
During the meeting with the Department on October 11, 2011, Department staff requested that Cabot
re-test the pressure in particular annuli of certain gas wells where Cabot's recent pressure testing data showed
anomalous results. These gas wells / annuli include:
Gas Well
Costello IV
Heitsman 4H
Hubbard 5H
Hull 1H
Teel 6V
Ratzel 1H
Annuli
4x7
4x9
4x7
and 7 x 9
5x9
4x7
4x7
Cabot will re-test the pressure in the above-named wells / annuli using a 72-hour pressure test. Cabot
will provide the Department with the results of the re-testing.
Additional information regarding cement squeezes
During the meeting with the Department on October 11, 2011, Department staff requested that Cabot
provide to the Department additional information regarding gas wells where Cabot has performed a cement
squeeze. Specifically, Department staff requested that Cabot provide the specific location within each
wellbore that was squeezed.
Cabot is providing additional information responsive to the Department's request as an attachment to
this letter. The information is included as Attachment B.
175048.3
-------
D-52
III. Screenings and Sampling of Water Supplies
Cabot's contractor and DEP-certified laboratory have been regularly testing 7 water supplies out of
the 18 identified in the COSA. Of the remaining 11 wells, all are plaintiffs and only six (6) have regularly
allowed Cabot to sample. Three (3) of the plaintiffs have refused all efforts to sample their water and two (2)
on occasion have permitted sampling. The May 9 Letter requests that Cabot again seek plaintiffs' counsel's
consent for access to the remaining plaintiffs' homes to conduct water and CGI testing.
Information Requested by DEP:
DEP requests that "Cabot meet with the current Attorneys for the Appellants and take any and all
other reasonable action necessary to obtain the Appellants' consent to assess their properties to conduct the
water sampling and well head screening as required under Paragraph 5.b of the 2010 Agreement." May 9
Letter at 5.
Cabot's Response:
By letter dated June 1, 2011, Cabot again asked plaintiffs' counsel for permission to conduct the
testing of the plaintiff property owners' water supplies. In response, plaintiffs' counsel again refused to permit
Cabot or its contractors, including Quantum Laboratories, to enter their property to conduct water sampling
and CGI testing. At plaintiffs' counsels' request, Cabot identified another third-party water testing company
for the plaintiffs' counsels' consideration. Cabot will promptly notify the Department if and/or when
plaintiffs' counsel responds to Cabot's proposal.
On October 14, 2011, counsel for the plaintiffs advised that his clients would now provide Cabot
access in order to conduct testing of their water.
Information Requested by DEP:
DEP states the following:
If, within forty (40) days of the date of this letter, Cabot provides sufficient
information in writing, to show that, after meeting(s) and other reasonable
actions by Cabot, the current attorneys for the Appellants continue to deny
Cabot the necessary access, the Department will consider the option of the
Department obtaining access from the Appellants and conducting the water
sampling and well head screening at their properties in accordance with
Paragraph 5.b. of the 2010 Agreement. However the Department will
consider this option only upon Cabot's agreement, in writing, to reimburse
the Department within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice for all
applicable costs incurred by the Department for the previous month.
May 9 Letter at 5-6.
Cabot's Response:
Cabot intends to communicate immediately with plaintiffs' counsel to obtain access for testing in
accordance with counsel's October 14, 2011 e-mail. If such effort is unsuccessful, Cabot will request that the
Department obtain access to Appellants' respective properties and conduct sampling, or assist Cabot in
obtaining access to Appellants' respective properties. Cabot agrees to reimburse the Department within thirty
days of receipt of an invoice for reasonable expenses incurred in obtaining access to Appellants' properties and
sampling (if conducted by the Department).
.9.
-------
D-53
IV. Ely 2H and Ely 6H Gas Wells
Cabot agrees with and appreciates the Department's acknowledgement that the Ely 2H and 6H wells
are in compliance with the COSA.
V. Escrow Funds and Temporary Water
a. Cabot's Compliance with the COSA Escrow Fund Obligations
The Department contends that Cabot failed to timely fund an escrow account. Exhibit D of the COSA
expressly identifies only 18 property owners and the corresponding dollar amount that Cabot was required to
fund for each of those property owners. Cabot funded each of those 18 escrow accounts on January 14, 2011,
within the time set forth in the COSA. On January 19, 2011, Cabot advised the 18 property owners identified
on Exhibit D of the COSA that Cabot had funded the escrow accounts and provided instructions for obtaining
the funds. Thus, Cabot had fully complied with its escrow funding requirements under the COSA.
The Department later informed Cabot that a tenant (and son) of one of the property owners had been
inadvertently excluded from Exhibit D. Cabot then worked closely with the Department to address promptly
the concern and subsequently funded a nineteenth escrow account with a portion of the funds escrowed for the
owner of the subject property. It is not clear what more Cabot could or should have done under these
circumstances.
Thus, we request that you rescind the suggested civil penalty under these circumstances.
b. The Department's Request that Cabot Continue to Supply Temporary Potable Water
and Cabot's Request that DEP permit the termination of Temporary Potable Water
Termination of Temporary Potable Water
Cabot appreciates the Department's acknowledgement that Cabot has complied with its obligations
under Paragraphs 6.b. through 6.f. of the COSA as relates to the restoration and replacement of water supplies.
However, in its May 9 letter, the Department requested that Cabot continue to provide temporary potable water
to Dimock/Carter Road residents.
As you know, Cabot has been providing temporary supplies of fresh water to many residents in the
Dimock area for many months and, in some cases, for years. Some of the temporary water supply systems
were installed in January 2009. Others were installed or began3 later. During the past few months, at my
direction, Cabot has undertaken a careful review of this temporary water supply situation. I have spoken with
the Cabot professionals and the third-party experts who have been involved with the water supply concerns in
Dimock, reviewed their reports and I also have reviewed the history of the various Department enforcement
actions and settlements.
Furthermore, Cabot's extensive evaluations of undrilled areas throughout Susquehanna County
demonstrate that pre-existing, naturally-occurring methane is common in groundwater. Specifically, data from
approximately 2,000 pre-drill samples demonstrate that 80% of groundwater samples have detectable levels of
pre-existing methane.
3 These temporary water supplies have been delivered or arranged using different containers or methods as
selected by the homeowners. In some cases, Cabot has arranged for deliveries of bottles of drinking water, since
that was the preference of the homeowner. In other cases, whole house systems have been installed and plumbed
into homes so as to temporarily substitute the source of fresh water by a connection to a homeowner's water well.
-10-
-------
D-54
As a result of this review, we have reached several conclusions. First, these temporary water supplies
were initiated because of a concern for potential impacts to permanent water supplies. Cabot unilaterally
arranged for the first temporary water supplies when it decided in January 2009 to provide whole house
temporary water supplies to four homes on Carter Road in Dimock. Second, Cabot installed those systems
because Cabot was informed that there was a safety concern and it was not immediately clear that Cabot was
not the cause of that safety concern. I am proud to work for a company that responds in this fashion. We
made sure that these four homes were safe, even if these temporary measures later turned out to be
unnecessary. Third, subsequently, it was decided that several more homes and homeowners should receive
temporary water supplies - and this decision was later memorialized in a settlement agreement. Specifically,
the COSA identified nineteen4 Dimock-area property owners (the "Property Owners") who were to continue to
receive temporary water supplies until certain conditions were met. Cabot and the Department had the same
interest in mind - to put temporary measures in place to ensure the safety of homeowners and residents while
scientific studies could be completed and, based upon those studies if or where necessary, permanent remedies
could be implemented. Fourth, now that those studies are complete, and for other reasons discussed below, we
have concluded that it is appropriate to discontinue the temporary water supplies.5
Consequently, Cabot is writing to inform you that it seeks the Department's concurrence to
discontinue deliveries of bottled and bulk fresh water to the Property Owners effective November 30,
2011. The Property Owners' permanent water supplies have been repeatedly tested by Department-approved,
Pennsylvania-certified professional laboratories and the results confirm that the water supplies are safe to drink
and are safe to use for residential purposes (bathing, drinking, laundry, showering, dishwashing, etc.) relative
to the parameters analyzed. The various test results were submitted to the Department via e-mail on October
12, 2011, and are enclosed with this letter as Attachment C.
All of the identified substances present in the Property Owners' water supplies are at levels below the
Department's and EPA's primary drinking water regulations maximum contaminant levels, established to
protect the public health. To the extent that there are various miscellaneous elements, metals or minerals
present in the water supplies, Cabot has discussed these results with its professional environmental consultants
who compared the results with those from other water wells in Susquehanna County and from adjacent
counties in areas where natural gas well drilling has yet to occur. Our professional consultants confirm that the
substances found in the Dimock water supply are typical of what is found in these other undrilled areas. The
presence of any of these constituents may be naturally-occurring or caused by other activities, but they are
unrelated to natural gas exploration and production activities.
Thus, the primary reason to discontinue these temporary water supplies now is, simply, that they are
no longer needed (and have not been necessary for quite some time or never needed). As mentioned above,
each of the water wells have been professionally sampled and professionally tested on multiple occasions over
many months by independent, state-approved environmental testing laboratories and this testing confirms that
the water is safe to use and to drink relative to the parameters analyzed. To the extent that there is any concern
with the detectable presence of methane in some of these water wells (as you know, there are no known health
effects associated with the ingestion of water containing methane), Cabot either has installed or remains
4 As noted on page 8 of this letter, the COSA identified eighteen property owners. The parties included a
nineteenth property owner upon the realization that one property owner had been inadvertently excluded.
5 We appreciate that the Department earlier confirmed in the May 9 Letter that Cabot had satisfied the
restoration and replacement of water supplies requirements under the COSA section entitled "Settlement of
Restoration/Replacement Obligation," paragraphs 6.a through 6.f,. Thus, we believe that pursuant to paragraph 6.c,
Cabot was officially informed that it could cease further efforts related to provision of temporary water supplies for
the Property Owners.
-11-
175048.3
-------
D-55
willing to install a whole-house methane mitigation water treatment device that removes methane from the
water to a level of 5 mg/1 (5 parts per million) or less.
To effectuate discontinuance of temporary water supplies, on or before November 1, 2011, Cabot will
send written notices to the Property Owners (through counsel as necessary). In that notice, Cabot will inform
each Property Owner that, for a period of sixty days, a professional plumber will be available to reconnect
water well supplies at no expense to the Property Owner and, if requested, to install a whole house methane
removal system, again at no expense to the Property Owner. Homeowners who accept this offer, in writing,
prior to November 30, 2011 will continue to receive temporary water supplies until the work is completed,
unless Cabot determines that any delay in scheduling the work is the result of failure to allow access on a
reasonable schedule. Cabot will explain in the notice that, for those Property Owners who refuse to allow
testing of their permanent water well supply, Cabot will discontinue deliveries at its earliest opportunity, and
will not wait until November 30, 2011 to discontinue deliveries of fresh water.
Cabot seeks the Department's concurrence in this request.
VI. Status of Request for Notice to Resume Drilling/Hydro-fracturing Within the Dimock/Carter
Road Area
We disagree with the Department's position that Cabot may not begin any "hydro-fracturing" or new
drilling in the Dimock/Carter Road Area until the Department receives and approves further information
and/or remedial work. In the May 9 Letter, the Department attempts to apply different standards and
conditions beyond those expressly established in the COSA. Cabot, however, has complied with the COSA.
As is discussed above, there has never been a basis or reason to interrupt hydraulic fracturing and thus
notice to resume this work should be provided immediately. In fact, the Department has publicly stated that
hydraulic fracturing is neither a suspected or actual cause of any groundwater/water supply issue. Indeed,
other drilling companies currently are drilling and conducting hydraulic fracturing activities within the
Dimock/Carter Road Area the same area that Cabot is precluded from.
In addition, Cabot has successfully proceeded with the drilling and tracing of new gas wells outside
the Dimock/Carter Road Area in compliance with Department regulations. Cabot and the Department have
worked closely to develop and implement drilling, casing and cementing approaches that meet or exceed both
the prior and newly-revised regulations. Thus, gas drilling is occurring all around the Dimock/Carter Road
Area without any threat to water supplies. Cabot should be permitted to resume this work in the
Dimock/Carter Road Area.
Additional Information Discussed in October 11. 2011 Meeting
1. Background on methane concentration
The Upper Devonian age Catskill formation is charged with pre-existing natural gas that is naturally
occurring and that pre-exists oil and gas drilling activity. As a result of erosion, the Catskill formation crops
out and forms the bedrock throughout most of Susquehanna County. In other portions of Susquehanna
County, the Catskill formation underlies layers of glacial till and/or recent alluvium. Valleys and drainages in
Susquehanna County are developed parallel and coincident with joints and fractures in the Catskill bedrock.
Furthermore, organic material contained within the sandstones and siltstones of the Catskill formation has
matured through deep burial over geologic time and has reached a maturation level sufficient to produce dry
methane gas from the organic material. The naturally occurring 'stray gas' is now contained within the various
lithologic layers of the Catskill formation located at or near the ground surface in Susquehanna County. Based
upon Cabot's (1) direct observation and measurement of shallow, background, stray gas while drilling gas
wells and from locating at least one natural gas seep in outcrop, (2) interviews with experienced water well
drillers and long time resident Citizens in Susquehanna County and, (3) data collected from extensive review
-12-
175048.3
-------
D-56
of the technical and popular literature, it is indisputable that the occurrence of the 'stray gas' is a natural
phenomenon in northeast Pennsylvania. See PowerPoint slides 13-21, Attachment A.
Most water wells in Susquehanna County are drilled into the Catskill formation to a depth sufficient to
encounter water production rates to supply a single family home and also penetrate the sandstone and siltstone
layers in the Catskill bedrock that can contain 'stray gas.' Based upon the sampling and mapping of the
dissolved methane in more than 1800 water wells that produce from the Catskill formation and interviews with
area drillers and homeowners, the measurement of 'stray gas' in the water wells of the region is observed to
have a higher rate of occurrence in water wells located in valleys. The interpretation of data from isotopic
measurements from these water wells also shows that the source of the 'stray gas' is the Upper Devonian age
rocks of the Catskill formation (and not Marcellus shale gas). In addition, water wells that produce from the
glacial till or alluvium may or may not have as much methane as water wells drilled into the Catskill formation
and based upon the interpretation of isotopic measurements from these types of water wells that do contain
methane, the 'stray gas' found in these water wells is biogenic in origin (or stray Catskill formation gas).
The background levels of naturally occurring methane measured in water wells in Susquehanna
County is highlighted in Attachment D.
The data used to generate the above map is included in this response as Attachment E. The data
demonstrates the presence of naturally occurring methane in literally thousands of locations in Susquehanna
County. Importantly, the geographic distribution patterns of pre-existing methane in areas where there has
been no oil and gas drilling activity is statistically equivalent to the methane concentrations within the Dimock
/ Carter Road Area.
2. Methane concentrations fluctuate naturally
Methane concentrations in water fluctuate naturally based on many factors. These factors include the
domestic use of water, precipitation and the hydrostatic column of a water well, the seasonal fluctuation in
aquifer levels, barometric pressure (impacting head space gas), the presence of a snow / ice cap, the
maintenance of a water well, and the use of surrounding water wells.
Thus, the background of methane concentration is a range and not a fixed number. The variability of
methane concentrations is indicative of this background range. The water well data collected by Cabot over
the last several months (and in some cases years) illustrate this variability.
3. There is no correlation between methane concentrations and the concentration of
aluminum, iron, manganese, and pH.
Cabot has collected water sampling data on the water wells throughout the Dimock / Carter Road
Area. The data include extensive information on the concentration of methane, in addition to the concentration
of metals such as aluminum, iron, manganese, along with pH.
Cabot has not identified any correlation between methane concentrations and the concentration of
aluminum, iron, manganese, and pH. The lack of any correlation suggests that the concentration of aluminum,
iron, manganese, and pH in the samples represents background levels for those constituents.
4. Depth of Water Wells
During the meeting with the Department on October 11, 2011, Department staff raised questions about
the depth of certain water wells within the Dimock / Carter Road Area. Although Cabot has sought
construction records for these water wells, such records do not exist for all of the wells. In those cases, Cabot
has either obtained anecdotal information from the property owner regarding the presumed depth of the water
well, or determined that information on the depth of the water well is unavailable. Attached hereto as
-13-
-------
D-57
Attachment F is a table that sets forth the depth (or presumed depth, where indicated) of the water wells in the
Dimock / Carter Road Area.
The data indicate that the depth of water wells within the Dimock / Carter Road Area vary
significantly. Further, the presence of e. coli in certain water wells (as demonstrated in the water sampling
data supplied to the Department on October 12, 2011) indicates that such wells are under the influence of
surface water and/or septic systems.
Conclusion
Cabot wishes to thank the Department for providing Cabot with the opportunity to present this
information to the Department. In light of Cabot's compliance with the COSA, we are renewing our request to
resume natural gas drilling and well completion activities in the Dimock/Carter Road Area. In addition, we are
seeking the Department's concurrence regarding the discontinuation of the provision of temporary potable
water.
In closing, please allow Cabot to express its appreciation for the time and attention the Department
has invested in this matter.
Sincerely,
Phillip L. Stalnaker
Vice President, Regional Manager - North Region
ATTACHMENTS
cc: Alisa Harris, Special Deputy Secretary for External Affairs (w/ attachments)
Scott R. Perry, Deputy Secretary for Oil and Gas (w/ attachments)
David J. Raphael, Chief Counsel (w/ attachments)
-14-
-------
D-58
t
Pennsylvania
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
NORTHCENTRAL REGION
October 20,2011
CERTIFIED MAIL NO. 7010 2780 0001 8652 0278
Mr. Phil Stalnaker
Cabot Oil and Gas
Five Penn Center West
Suite 401 " "~"
Pittsburgh, PA 15276
Re: Gas Migration Investigation
Springville Township, Susquehanna County
Dear Mr. Slalnaker:
In June 2010, Cabot Oil and Gas (Cabot) provided to the a list
that were being supplied drinking water by Cabot as required by the and
Agreement (which was initially signed on November 4, 2009, and oc
April 15 and July 19, 2010) related to the Consent Order and oc
December 15, 2010. The Department subsequently visited all of the on the bet
provided, and collected water samples from each location. One of the is
within close proximity to the G. Shields well pads located on Township Ed T-3S2 in
Township. Cabot indicated they have been providing supplied to this
January 15, 2010. The private water supply is located approximately TOO feet the g»
pad housing the G, Shields 2H Well, Permit 1 1 5-201 1 8, nod the G. 4H 1 1 5-
20 3 81, and is approximately 1700 feet from the gas well pad the. G, IV
Permit 1 15-20092, and the G. Shields 5H Well, Permit 1 15-20170.
the private water supply on November 18, 2010, Pebruaty 7, 2, 203 1, 19,
201 1 , and June 29, 201 1 , Below is a table showing the fe
the water supply,
~ ....... Date Collected Dissolved Methane (ngl.)
.......
^ drill i August 20» 2009 . v 23
November 18, 2010 83.7
' " "
March 2, 2011 67.6
A}MU9V2pn , "'" '"•-. '-' -"•'- ;""""! ' •"-•-'- •'' - '" ' " ' "'76-6
June 29, 2011 _ S3J
X» Strwt 1 101 I f*
S70.327.3636 | fm 570.327.3565
-------
D-59
Mr. Phil Sfalnaker
Cabot Oil and Gas -2- October 20,201
Combustible gas was also detected in die headspace of the affected private water well.
Additionally, an inspection of the above referenced four natural gas wells documented the
presence of natural gas between various casing strings.
The Department's investigation has revealed the following violations of the Oil and Gas Act, 58
P.S. § 601.101 et seq,, the Clean Streams law, 35 P.S. § 691.1 et seq,, and the rales and
regulations promulgated under these statutes:
1. Failure to prevent migration of gas or other fluids into.sources of fresh groundwater
The Department's investigation revealed that Cabot has caused or allowed gas front
lower formations to enter fresh ground water in Springville Township, Susquehanna
County, This is a violation of the Department's regulations, 25 Pa Code §78.81(a) (2)
and (3) which provides:
"The operator shall conduct casing and cementing activities under this section and
§§78.82-78.87 or an approved alternate method under §78.75 (relating to alternative
methods). The operator shall case and cement a well to accomplish the following:
Prevent the migration of gas or other fluids into sources of fresh groundwater.
Prevent pollution or diminution of fresh groundwater."
2. Defective Casing or Cementing
Cabot failed to report the defective, insufficient, or improperly cemented casing. This
is a violation of the Department's regulations, 25 Pa Code §78.86(a) which provides:
"In a well that has defective, insufficient or improperly cemented casing, the operator
shall report the defect to the Department within 24 hours of discovery by the operator
and shall correct the defect. The operator shall correct the defect or submit a plan to
correct the defect for approval by the Department within 30 days. Tf the defect cannot
be corrected or an alternate method is not approved by the Department, the well shall
be plugged under §§ 78.91 - 78.98 (relating to plugging)."
3, Uivperinitted discharge of polluting substances
Our investigation revealed that Cabot has caused or allowed the unpermitted
discharge of natural gas, a polluting substance, to the waters of the Commonwealth.
This is a violation of Section 401 of the Clean Streams Law, 35 P.S. § 691.401, which
provide;
-------
D-60
Mr, Phil Stalnaker
Cabot Oil and Gas -3- October 20, 20: t
"It shall be unlawful for any person or municipality to put or place into any of the
waters of the Commonwealth, or allow or to be discharged property
owned or occupied by such person into any of the Commonwenlth, .my
substance of any kind or character resulting in pollution as defined,"
A violation of the Oil and Gas Act or the rules or is contrary
to Sections 505 and 509 of that Act, for which the Department institute administrative,
civil, and/or criminal proceedings. The Act provides for up to $25,000 in civil penalties plus
$1,000 for each day of a continued violation, up to $300 in summary criminal penalties, and up
to $5,000 in misdemeanor criminal penalties for each violation, Kach day of continued violation
constitutes a separate offense.
A violation of the Clean Steams Law or the rules or regulations promulgated thereunder is
contrary to sections 602 and 611 of the Act, for which the Department could institute
administrative, civil, and/oi* criminal proceedinp. The Act provides for up to $10,000 per day in
civil penalties, up to $10,000 in summary criminal penalties, and up to $25,000 in misdemeanor
criminal penalties for each violation. Each day of continued violation constitutes t separate
offense.
Please provide a written response within 30 days of your receipt of this letter, as to when the
above listed violations will be corrected, and what steps are being taken to prevent their
recurrence. The Department requests that your response be in the form of a summary report of
your investigation as required by 25 PA Code § 78.89 and that it include;
• Efforts taken, or planned to be taken, to mitigate the problem both at the gas wells and in
the areas impacted by the migration including homes, weOs, surface waters and
subsurface soils;
• A plan to correct the defective casing for approval by the Department;
• On-going measures that will be needed to maintain public safety as a result of the gas
migration;
* An explanation of the cause of the gas migration. Please discuss casing pressures and
monitoring prior to and during the incident; evidence indicating which well is the likely
source of the migration including water quality and isotopie date; the hydrologic
connection of formations below the depth(s) of the surface casings and the surface
expression or gas detection; information relative to the specification ofthecaaug j»|Je
utilized for the nearby wells. Please provide copies of all casing and cement information
-------
D-61
Mr. Phil Stalnaker
Cabot Oi! and Gas -4- October 20,2011
and field documents, daily drilling reports and digital copies of all logging information
obtained (i.e. mud lop, open hole electronic logs, cement bond logs, etc.). At a
minimum, this information should be provided for the wells located on each of the G,
Shields well pads, but also for any other nearby Cabot Oil & Cos wells that are suspected
potential sources.
• Preventative measures that will be utilized to prevent similar situations from occurring in
the future. Include any changes to well construction/materials that Cabot Oil & Gas will
employ; also include any changes to casing pressure monitoring, venting, or other
relevant practices and procedures.
All reports submitted in accordance with the above requirements that contain an analysis of
geological or engineering data shall be prepred and sealed by a geologist or engineer licensed in
this Commonwealth,
This Notice of Violation is neither an order nor any other final action of the Department of
Environmental Protection. It neither imposes nor waives any enforcement action available to the
Department under any of its statutes. If the Department determines that additional enforcement
action is appropriate, you will be notified of the action.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at (570) 327-0553 or by electronic mail at
mcoolcy@pa.gov.
Sincerely,
MarcB. Cooley
Environmental Group Manager
Oil and Gas Management
Scranton District Office
-------
Pennsylvania
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
SECRETARY
D-62
My 12, 2012
Joseph Otis Minott, Esq.
Executive Director, Clean Air Council
135 South 19th Street, Suite 300
Philadelphia, PA 19013
Dear Mr. Minott:
Thank you for your June 26, 2012, letter regarding a methane sampling survey in Leroy
Township, Bradford County, The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has reviewed
your letter and the attached June 8, 2012, report titled "Report to the Clean Air Council on Field
Inspection and Methane Sampling Survey of Leroy Township, Bradford County, Pennsylvania,
8 June 2012 performed by Gas Safety, Inc."
First, let me tell you that this situation was immediately grasped by the Department and DEP
immediately responded. The situation is, and at all times was, under control by DEP. Indeed, at
this point in time the situation is for the most part over.
On May 19,2012, DEP was notified of a methane gas migration event in Leroy Township. An
immediate response to address potential safety concerns and to delineate the areal extent of the
incident was jointly undertaken by DEP and Chesapeake Energy staff. At all times, DEP's
activities in this regard were very transparent to the public. Indeed, on May 21,2012, two weeks
prior to the Clean Air Council's (CAC) investigation, DEP issued a press statement describing
these activities, I have enclosed a copy of that statement to the press herein.
Additionally, an evaluation of Chesapeake's nearby Morse well pad was undertaken, revealing
the presence of a failed packer that was installed to protect previously installed up-hole
perforations, which were squeezed with cement. Those remedial activities occurred as part of a
remediation effort that was being conducted under a previous Consent Order and Agreement
between Chesapeake and DEP. During the operations to repair/replace the packer, the up-hole
perforations were exposed to gas pressure from deeper in the well. It appears that the pressure
may have caused gas to escape through these perforations into the shallow subsurface geologic
section. Operations have been undertaken to "re-squeeze" the up-hole perforations and the gas
wells are being monitored to determine the effectiveness of the repairs. At present, we continue
to monitor the site and those remedial actions have proven to be successful.
Since the onset of the incident, DEP has undertaken considerable monitoring and investigative
activities in the area. While investigatory activities are still ongoing, a significant improvement
(i.e, substantial decrease in observed methane concentrations/expressions) has been observed in
the private water supplies and surface water bodies in the area.
Rachel Carson State Office Building | P.O. Box 2063 [ Harrlsburg, PA 17105-2063
717.787.2814 printed on Recycled Paper ^ www.depweb.state.pa.us
-------
D-63
Joseph Otis Minott, Esq. - 2 - My 12,2012
The Department has been responsive to the gas migration incident in Leroy Township since its
initial onset, and we continue to work to resolve this issue. Should you have any further questions
regarding the Leroy gas migration investigation, please feel free to contact Jennifer Means, Eastern
District Oil and Gas Manager, by e-mai! atjenmeans@pa.gov or by telephone at 570.321.6550.
Sincerely,
Michael L. Krancer
Secretary
Enclosure
ec: Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region 3
Diana fisher. Air Protection Division Director, U.S. EPA Region 3
Michael D'Andrea, U.S. EPA Region 3
Lora Werner, Regional Director, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry,
U.S. EPA Region 3
Representative Tina Pickett
Vince Brisini, Deputy for Waste, Air and Radiation and Remediation, PA DEP
Muhammad Zaman, Environmental Program Manager, PA DEP
-------
D-64
Pennsylvania
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
News for Immediate Release
May 21, 2012
DEP Statement on Leroy Township Gas Migration Investigation
Williamsport - DEP's Oil and Gas Program and Chesapeake Energy are currently
investigating a possible methane gas migration issue in Leroy Township, Bradford
County, first reported to DEP on Saturday evening, May 19.
Two private drinking water wells have methane in the headspace and have been
vented. A mobile water treatment unit has been set up at one residence and a
methane monitor installed in the home; a temporary water supply tank has been
set up at the other residence.
There has also been gas bubbling documented in nearby wetlands. Chesapeake's
Morse well pad contains two wells and is about one-half mile from the impacted
private wells.
DEP has sampled four private wells in the area. Chesapeake's consultant is
screening all private wells within a 2,500 foot radius of the Morse pad. The
investigation is continuing and no determination has been made as to the source or
sources of the methane.
###
-------
Appendix E Supplementary Reference Data/Maps, Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix E
Supplementary Reference Data/Maps
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/088
E-l
-------
E-2
NMV
.Ill-II
f 11 : I 111
Chetmfkg
ah
erl)
Br-672
5 'in,
i i
Br-752
limil'i.i
i- i. I .,
Br-202
Br-209
—Or
JS .8 — Burli
., ., in.
• ml
S .8 — Burlington
:•-:,
Nl U \ «KK
PENNSM VANIA
Ih Hum
I I
Little
II. i I
ill. li
Fwp
Illl.
Ill I
> in-
i in
Br-85
POM! I .-.(.
L-- f , ill
iTcv, anSa
Br-92
Br-271
[*r'\
" 9
' • i I
Hanck
9gH3?>3l3S (flfiypA,
ou
A I'm,
-'
>, 33fi Dasjeai, &&$h'*&rt aJaOaa fldsag
Figure E-l Locations in Bradford County with Na-Cl type water as identified by Williams et al. (1998).
-------
E-3
„
Br-271 (USGS-414451076182001)
si,,,,,!,,,,..
NEPAGW08
Br-92 (USGS-414330076280501)
Figure E-2 Pre-2007 NWIS database locations (also in Williams et alv 1998) with Na-Cl type water in vicinity
of homeowner wells NEPAGW17 and NEPAGW08 sampled in this study.
-------
E-4
[n <1 for other water types Ca-CI, Ca-Na-HCO3-CI, Ca-SO4 and Ca-HCO3-CI in this study.]
100
Na-HCO3
Ca-HCO3 [Na-CI] + [Na-CI-HCO3]
Water Type (based on Deutsch 1997 criteria)
• This Study Molofsky et al. 2013
Ca-Na-CO3
Figure E-3 Percent detections of methane >1 mg/L per water type in this study compared to observations of
Molofsky et al. (2013) study in Susquehanna County using water-type criteria of Deutsch (1997).
Note: No Ca-HCOs type waters (n=281) showed methane >1 mg/L in Molofsky et al. study.
-------
E-5
NORTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE
I'nils -nif>'L
ttflit'XS OihtT.H'ix?-
noicd
-A;O XuiiDfln-l
-/i/a: Not
Anaiv:ed l-'or
Chloride
TSS
Magnesium
Strontium
Barium
Potassium
'IDS
Manganese
pH (pH Units)
Sodium
Turbidity (n/ii)
Ml) AS
SFCfuniftos/cm
Calcitim
Alkalinity
Iron
Hardness
Methane
Ethane
Kthene
Propane
Chloroform
Brumodicljl-
nrom ethane
Place Predrill
- i2/4/2tM)8
& 12/11/2008
Benchmark
18 6
n/a
5,80
a/a
0.414
n/a
1 77.0
< 0.002
7.4=)
10.0
n/a
iVa
n/a
44.4 • 53.0
122 i)
• . CK'5
122
f I 0 1 i
r/ 1
OOl'JX
- (mi qg
hM
Bohbtiider --
4/1/2010
OEP
4.9
6
4.95
1.41
0.486
1.75
PO.O
--0.010
8.2
16 X
•'-{
<-.0.20
301.0
44.2
Hf> 8
• 1 (120
131
' 'OH
M(lll>
• 00198
•0019X
i/.i
n/s
Place-
4/1/2010
DEP
1.5.7
1 14
( 9
1 U
0 51')
2.92
860
0 *>"
s 1
p 1
259.25
- (i 2(i
322!)
50.4
129.0
8.83
114
1').2
U ^
-0010S
0 (. 1%
Il'l
n'l
Place-
4/7/2010
Cliesspeitke
9.86
215
i '1
n/i
U ^'j2
2.96
189
0.0337
7.1
10,4
5.8
0,0775
3IX
46.1
125
1.02
Nl)
13. s
0'IS»
,i/,i
ND
n/,i
n'a
Place -
4,'21/2010
I>I;P
13.9
n.'a
S SIM
1 ?4
0 "'87
I t>53
70f 0
i 1(1
8.0
10.5
5.76
<0.20
327.0
48.4
126.6
n.ioo
!4->
•> i)
0 i'O
-00198
00198
n/u
:i/u
Placc-
6/23/1010
Chesapeake
'l/H
;]/a
44^
rVa
0,345
1.66
n/a
0.1.31
7.3
9.5
Ei/a
0.0973
282
39.2
n/a
Nl)
1 16
1.58
ND
i. a
NI3
n,a
tl 4
Plaec-
10/13/2010
DKP
46-1
i/r.
* 929
I 39')
0417
1 73 f!
>* j
H 'i,S
7.5
2S.7
20.29
- i 2 1
134 n
50.7
127.6
0.449
151
1.8X0
0.0459
-------
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Appendix F
Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for
Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC
May 2015
EPA/600/R-14/088
F-l
-------
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Statistical Evaluation of Ground Water Data for Bradford
County, Pennsylvania
General
All of the statistical evaluations except the post-hoc tests were performed using the US Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) ProUCL program version 5.0 (US EPA, 2013). The post-hoc tests were performed
using Statistica, version 12 (StatSoft, 2012).
F.I Data Sources
Ground water data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania, was obtained from three sources:
• Geochemical analyses of water samples collected by the hydrogeochemical and stream sediment
reconnaissance (HSSR) phase of the National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) program.
Analytical data for well water samples from this source were downloaded from the United States
Geological Survey's (USGS) Mineral Resources On-Line Spatial Data portal
(http://mrdata.usgs.gov/nure/water/find-nurewtr.php). Water samples from this source were
collected during October 1977.
• National Water Information System (NWIS). Data from this source were downloaded from the
National Water Quality Monitoring Council Water Quality Portal
(http://www.waterqualitydata.us/portal.isp). Water samples from this source were collected prior
to January 1, 2007.
• Data from the present study were obtained from the EPA's Office of Research and Development.
Samples from the NURE and NWIS datasets were collected before hydraulic-fracturing activities began in
Bradford County and are considered background samples.
The three studies included data on a large number of parameters but not necessarily the same parameters
or the same sample types (total or dissolved). Therefore, data were not available from the NURE and NWIS
studies for all of the parameters and sample types analyzed in this study.
F.2 Statistical Analyses
F.2.1 Preliminary Data Evaluations
A preliminary review of the data was performed to determine the statistical distributions of the data using
ProUCL's Goodness of Fit tests. This was done to determine the most appropriate group-wise comparison
test - parametric or nonparametric. One of the assumptions underlying parametric statistical procedures is
that the data are normally distributed or can be transformed to a normally distributed form. A summary of
the findings is provided in Table Fl.
As shown in Table Fl, most of the data sets did not exhibit common distribution patterns (normal, log-
normal, or gamma) with greater than 95% confidence; therefore, parametric methods may not provide
reliable hypothesis test results. However, parametric methods are sometimes more powerful than
F-2
-------
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
nonparametric equivalents, so it was decided to provide hypothesis tests using both parametric and
nonparametric procedures.
Table F1
Summary of Results of Goodness of Fit tests at 0.05 Significance Level
Study > NURE NWIS This Study
Parameter I Normal I Gamma I Lognormal Normal I Gamma I Lognormal Normal I Gamma I Lognormal
Alkalinity
Alkalinity COS
Barium,total
Bromide, dissolved
Bromide, dissolved - outliers
Calcium, dissolved
Calcium, total
Chloride, dissolved
Inorganic Nitrogen
Iron, dissolved
Iron, total
Magnesium, dissolved
Magnesium, total
Manganese, dissolved
Manganese, total
PH
Potassium, dissolved
Potassium, total
Sodium, dissolved
Sodium, total
Specific Conductance
Specific Conductance - outliers
Strontium, total
Sulfate, dissolved
Temperature
Total Dissolved Solids
Yes
Yes
-
No
No
-
-
No
-
-
-
--
--
No
-
No
-
--
No
-
No
No
-
-
No
-
No
No
-
No
No
-
-
No
-
-
-
-
-
No
-
No
-
--
No
-
No
No
-
-
No
--
No
No
-
No
Yes
--
-
No
-
-
-
-
-
No
-
No
-
-
No
-
No
Yes
-
-
No
--
Yes
Yes
No
-
-
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
-
No
Yes
Yes
No
-
-
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
--
No
No
No
No
-
-
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
-
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
The data distributions also were examined graphically using Q-Q plots. If the original data are normally
distributed, a Q-Q plot with original values on the y-axis should yield a pattern approximating a straight
line; if it is log-normally distributed, a Q-Q plot with a logarithmically scaled y-axis should yield a straight
line. All of the parameters except pH yielded straighter lines when plotted on a log scale; pH, which is
already a logarithmic function of the hydrogen ion concentration, was best plotted using a linear scale.
From inspection of the Q-Q Plots, some datasets appeared to include possible outlier values. As noted in
the ProUCL Technical Guidance Manual (US EPA, 2013b), the presence of outliers in a data set can distort
the results of statistical tests and lead to incorrect conclusions. Therefore, datasets that appeared to
include potential outliers were formally tested for outliers using the Rosner's test included in ProUCL. The
tests indicated that a small number of observations in a number of the datasets were statistical outliers.
Even though these values are statistical outliers, they may still be actual high-end values drawn from the
populations under investigation. Therefore, subsequent analyses were run with and without the outlier
values. Because the datasets were relatively large and there was only a small number of outliers, their
presence appeared to have only minor effects on the results of the analyses of variance.
F-3
-------
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
Since comparisons among 2 or 3 data sets were desired, a One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), a
parametric procedure, and the Kruskal-Wallis Test, the nonparametric equivalent, were selected as the
most appropriate statistical test procedures. Since a few of the datasets to be compared appear to be
normally distributed while others exhibit a log-normal or gamma distribution, the classic parametric ANOVA
was run on both the original reported values and log-transformed values. A summary of the results of
these tests is provided in Table F2. The P-values shown indicate the probability that the datasets are NOT
different from one another (the null hypothesis). If the P-values are less than 0.05 (less than a 5% chance
that the null hypothesis is true - values shown in red), the null hypothesis is rejected, and the alternate
hypothesis—that the data sets in question are different from one another—is accepted.
Significant differences were found among the datasets for many of the parameters. Generally, the most
significant differences were seen in the tests of the log-transformed values and in the nonparametric tests.
This is probably because most of the data sets appeared to be more nearly log-normally distributed than
normally distributed in the Q-Q plots, even if they did conform to a particular distribution with 95%
confidence in the Rosner's tests, or they did not conform well to any of the common distributions (normal,
log-normal, or gamma). Because most of the data sets appear to be more nearly log-normally than
normally distributed, the results of the parametric ANOVAs for the log-transformed values and the
nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis ANOVAs are probably more reliable than the results of the parametric
ANOVAs for the original untransformed values.
When only two datasets are involved in a comparison, the nature of any significant difference detected in
the ANOVAs is clear—the two datasets involved are different from one another. However, when three
datasets are involved, it is not clear from the overall ANOVA results which datasets are different from one
another. Post-hoc tests were performed to resolve this uncertainty. A number of parametric and
nonparametric tests are available for this purpose. Among the parametric tests, the Scheffe test, which is
one of the more conservative methods (less prone to false positive results) and is considered most
appropriate when all possible pair-wise comparisons among datasets are of potential interest, was
selected. The Scheffe test looks for significant differences between the mean values of datasets. For
nonparametric comparisons, the Kruskal-Wallis Multiple Comparison test (K-W MCT) was used. The K-W
MCT looks for significant differences between the median ranks of the values comprising the datasets but
does not use the average numerical values or the variances of the datasets to identify significant
differences among the datasets. The results of the Scheffe tests are shown in Table F3 and those of the
Kruskal-Wallis Multiple Comparison tests are shown in Table F4. Post-hoc test results are only shown for
parameters that showed significant (p < 0.05) differences among the datasets on the overall ANOVA or
Kruskal-Wallis tests. In Table F3, Scheffe results for original parameter values are shown in the left-hand
panels; results for log-transformed values are in the right-hand panels. In Table F4, z' values, the test
statistic (like a t-value), are shown in the left-hand panels; the corresponding p values are shown in the
right-hand panels. The median rank for each group is shown as the second line in each of the column
headers. As with the ANOVA results, the p-values shown indicate the probability that the data groups are
NOT different from one another (the null hypothesis). However, if the p-values are less than 0.05 (less than
a 5% chance that the null hypothesis is true - values shown in red), the null hypothesis is rejected, and the
alternate hypothesis—that the data groups in question are different from one another—is accepted.
F-4
-------
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania May 2015
F.2.2. Summary of Multiple Comparison Test Results
Significant differences (p < 0.05) between datasets found in the multiple comparison tests are summarized
in the accompanying Tables F3, F4, and F5. Because the Scheffe test looks for differences between the
mean values and the K-W MC looks for differences between the median ranks of the values, one dataset
may have a higher mean value but a lower median rank than another, especially if the distribution of values
in one dataset is more skewed toward higher values or has more high outliers than the other. Therefore,
which dataset appears to be "higher" or "greater" than another may differ between the Scheffe and K-W
MC tests.
F.2.3. Barium and Strontium Evaluation by Water Type
Since Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water types in this study were observed to generally exhibit the higher barium
and strontium concentrations relative to the other water types, and since there was a larger proportion of
Na-CI and Na-HCO3 water types in this study (10/38) than in the NWIS dataset (12/62), it was possible that
uneven representation of these water types in the two datasets could account for any differences
observed. To test this possibility, barium and strontium concentrations in only the Na-CI and Na-HCO3
water types for the two datasets were compared. Goodness of fit testing at the 0.05 significance level and
analysis of variance for the parametric test and nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test are provided in Tables F6
and F7.
F.3 References
StatSoft, Inc. (2012). STATISTICA (data analysis software system), version 12. www.statsoft.com.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 2013a. ProUCL Version 5.0.00, Statistical
Software for Environmental Applications for Data Sets with and without Nondetect Observations, EPA
Technical Support Center, Las Vegas, Nevada, September 30, 2011.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 2013b. ProUCL Version 5.0.00 Technical Guide,
Statistical Software for Environmental Applications for Data Sets with and without Nondetect Observations,
EPA/600/R-07/041, EPA Technical Support Center, Las Vegas, Nevada, September, 2013.
F-5
-------
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table F2
Summary of Analysisof Variance and Kruskal-Wallis Results for Bradford County, Pennsylvania Groundwater
,„_
Alkalinity
Barium .total
Bromide, dissolved
Bromide, dissolved - outliers
Calcium, dissolved
Calcium, dissolved - outliers
Calcium, total
Calcium, total - outliers
Chloride, dissolved - outliers
Inorganic Nitrogen
Iron, dissolved
Iron, total
Magnesium, dissolved
Magnesium, total
Manganese, dissolved
Manganese, total
PH
Potassium, dissolved
Potassium, dissolved - outliers
Potassium, total
Potassium, total - outliers
Sodium, dissolved
Sodium, dissolved - outliers
Sodium, total
Sodium, total - outliers
Specific Conductance
Specific Conductance - outliers
Strontium, total
Strontium, total - outliers
Sulfate, dissolved
Sulfate, dissolved - outliers
Temperature
Total Dissolved Solids
Number of Observations
NURE 1 NWIS 1 This Study
N 1 N 1 N
164
—
112
110
--
--
--
—
164
161
—
—
--
--
--
161
--
164
—
—
—
—
163
163
--
--
164
163
—
—
—
164
--
122
62
--
--
60
60
64
63
116
115
72
50
72
60
63
37
71
44
45
44
72
70
45
44
72
71
58
55
62
61
121
121
--
120
38
38
38
36
38
37
38
37
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
37
38
38
Degrees of Parametric ANOVA Nonparametric ANOVA
Freedom Original Values 1 Log Transformed (Kruskal-Wallis)
(Between/Within) F Stat | P | F Stat | P DoF | K-W (H-Stat) | P
2/321
1 /98
1 / 148
1 / 144
1 /96
1 /95
1 MOO
1 /98
2/315
2/311
1 / 108
1 /86
1 / 108
1 /96
1 /99
2/233
1 M07
2/243
1 /81
1 /80
1 / 108
1 / 106
2/243
2/242
1 M08
1 M07
2/257
2/253
1 /96
1 /95
1/ 157
1 / 156
1 /200
1 M56
0.457
0.497
53.97
142.4
0.371
4.604
0.172
2.235
2.958
6.55
2.126
4.61
0.566
0.411
0.0772
2.925
0.0679
1.33
7.444
21.56
0.252
8.254
5.429
11.78
0.386
0.0407
8.094
11.66
0.0118
7.18
0.838
7.864
50.39
0.0289
0.634
0.483
1.267E-11
0
0.544
0.0344
0.679
0.138
0.0534
0.00164
0.148
0.0346
0.454
0.523
0.782
0.0556
0.795
0.266
7.81 E-03
1.33E-05
0.617
4.91 E-03
4.94E-03
1.31E-05
0.535
0.841
3.90E-04
1.43E-05
0.914
8.66E-03
0.361
5.68E-03
2.15E-11
0.865
1.098
7.886
198.1
269.5
0.999
2.289
0.112
0.301
2.132
1.352
0.219
19.7
2.461
4.193
0.481
19.25
0.891
1.246
25.8
27.27
6.304
12.66
15.48
14.14
0.125
0.416
11.27
16.4
22.44
31.14
17.94
28.09
47.09
0.0145
0.335
0.00601
0
0
0.32
0.134
0.739
0.584
0.12
0.26
0.641
2.67E-05
0.12
0.0433
0.489
1.83E-08
0.347
0.29
2.38E-06
1.37E-06
0.0135
5.61E-04
4.70E-07
1.55E-06
0.724
0.52
2.03E-05
2.01E-07
7.32E-06
2.17E-07
3.88E-05
3.88E-07
8.32E-11
0.904
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.562
11.93
73.2
76.5
2.55
3.42
1.265
1.579
0.217
0.0648
0.0574
20.26
2.52
6.949
2.075
14.17
1.025
3.298
22.3
21.42
10.93
13.16
26.52
25.32
0.423
0.607
36.35
35.58
23.43
25.41
18.92
21.82
61.88
0.0448
0.755
5.53E-04
0
0
0.11
0.261
0.209
0.897
0.968
0.811
6.75E-06
0.112
0.00839
0.15
8.39E-04
0.311
0.192
2.33E-06
3.70E-06
9.47E-04
2.86E-04
1.75E-06
3.17E-06
0.515
0.436
1.28E-08
1.87E-08
1.29E-06
4.63E-07
1.36E-05
3.00E-06
3.664E-15
0.832
F-6
-------
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table F3
Scheffe Parametric Multiple Comparison Tests
Cell No.
1
2
3
Scheffe test; variable Chloride, Dissolved mg/l
Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS 65170., df 315.00
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (14.1 29)
0.053444
0.767802
{2} (89.440)
0.053444
0.680577
{3} (47.553)
0.767802
0.680577
Scheffe test; variable Log Chloride, Dissolved mg/l
Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS 1.7839, df 315.00
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (2.1 707)
0.120781
0.887415
{2} (2.5050)
0.120781
0.686323
{3} (2.2883)
0.887415
0.686323
^^^^^H Scheffe test; variable Chloride, Dissolved - outliers mg/l
Cell No.
1
2
3
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (12.972)
0.002887
0.132559
{2} (53.043)
0.002887
0.953499
{3} (47.553)
0.132559
0.953499
Scheffe test; variable Log Chloride, Dissolved - outliers mg/l
Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS 1.5322, df 311.00
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (2.2061)
0.261534
0.934420
{2} (2.4541)
0.261534
0.774084
{3} (2.2883)
0.934420
0.774084
Cell No.
1
2
3
Scheffe test; variable Manganese, Dissolved ug/l
Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (149.33)
0.094194
0.360170
{2} (273.92)
0.094194
0.832302
{3} (230.13)
0.360170
0.832302
Scheffe test; variable Log Manganese, Dissolved ug/l
Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS 1.2578, df 233.00
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (4.8175)
0.510026
0.000000
{2} (4.5799)
0.510026
0.000570
{3} (3.5624)
0.000000
0.000570
• Scheffe test; variable Sodium, Dissolved mg/l
Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS 17354., df 243.00
Cell No.
1
2
3
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (17.475)
0.006038
0.437415
{2} (89.143)
0.006038
0.368417
{3} (48.044)
0.437415
0.368417
Scheffe test; variable Log Sodium, Dissolved mg/l
Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS .97339, df 243.00
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
Cell No.
1
2
3
Scheffe test; variable Sodium, Dissolved - outliers mg/l
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (17.475)
0.001188
0.000901
{2} (45.71 5)
0.001188
0.972649
{3} (48.044)
0.000901
0.972649
{1} (2.4566)
0.000016
0.001187
{2} (3.2547)
0.000016
0.820969
{3} (3. 11 81)
0.001187
0.820969
Scheffe test; variable Log Sodium, Dissolved - outliers mg/l
Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS .89758, df 242.00
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (2.4566)
0.000113
0.000684
{2} (3. 1559)
0.000113
0.983896
{3} (3. 11 81)
0.000684
0.983896
Cell No.
1
2
3
Scheffe test; variable Specific Conductance uS/cm
Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS 2969E2, df 257.00
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (317.80)
0.000883
0.106524
{2} (634.31)
0.000883
0.637535
{3} (526.32)
0.106524
0.637535
Scheffe test; variable Log Specific Conductance uS/cm
Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS .50366, df 257.00
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
{1} (5.5913)
0.000245
0.007073
{2} (6.0406)
0.000245
0.958076
{3} (5.9973)
0.007073
0.958076
• Scheffe test; variable Specific Conductance - outliers
uS/cm Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS 73300., df 253.00
Cell No.
1
2
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
{1} (319.72)
0.006863
{2} (454.31)
0.006863
{3} (526.32)
0.000172
0.452782
Scheffe test; variable Log Specific Conductance - outliers
LuS/cm Probabilities for Post Hoc Tests
Error: Between MS .29552, df 253.00
Study
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
{1} (5.6157)
0.000008
{2} (6.0350)
0.000008
{3} (5.9973)
0.000629
0.947260
F-7
-------
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May2015
Table F4
Kruskal-Wallis Nonparametric Multiple Comparison Tests
Depend.:
Chloride
Dissolved
moA
•iLP£ 1677
•.v. i; • ;c37
This Study
Multiple Comparisons z* values; Multiple Comparisons p values (2-taied);
Chloride, Dissolved mg/1 Chloride, Dissolved mg/1
Independent (grouping) variable: Study Independent (grouping) variable: Study
Kruskal-Waiis test: H ( 2, N= 318) =.2174655 p =.8370 Kruskal-Wallis test H ( 2, N= 318) =.2174655 p =.8370
NURE 1977
(R: 157.42)
0 464747
0063632
NWIS < 2007
(R: 162.61)
0464747
0.211464
This Study
(R: 158.07)
3 063632
3211464
^^^^^^^B Multiple Comparisons z' values;
^^^^^^^H Chlonde, Dissolved - outliers mg/l
^^T*^^^^B Independent (grouping) variable: Study
• KnjskaHflMis ,«,. H ( 2, M= 314) =.0647831 p =.3681
Dissolved
mg/l
NURE 1977
NWIS « 2007
~his Study
NURE 1977
(R: 158.43)
3253ese
0 028660
NWIS < 2007
(R:159.20)
0.250666
0 135358
This Study
(R:158.80)
0 028660
3 135653
^^T^^^^^^B Independent (grouping) variable: Study
i ' '""^ KniskaHWaiis test: H( 2. N= 236) =14.16710 p =.0008
Dissolved
ug.1
NURE 1977
NWIS < 2007
This Study
NURE 1977
(R: 128.52)
1 372487
:-. 7 c :>?;.•:
NWIS < 2007
(R: 11 1.43)
1.372487
1.806507
This Study
(R:82.047)
3700836
1 806507
NURE 1977
(R:157.42)
1.000000
1.000000
NWIS < 2007
(R:162.61)
1 OC30CO
1.000000
This Study
(R: 158.97)
1.000000
1.000000
Multiple Comparisons p values (2-taied);
Chloride, Dissolved - outtters mp/l
Independent (grouping) variable: Study
Kruskal-Wallis test H ( 2, N= 314) =0647831 p = 3681
NURE 1077
(R:156.43)
• DOCDO:
1 OOC300
NWIS < 2007
(R: 159.20)
1 OCOOOO
1 OOOOCO
This Study
(R: 156.89)
1. 000000
• 30C3DD
Multiple Comparisons p values (2-taried);
Manganese, Dissolved ug/l
Independent (grouping) variable: Study
Kruskal-Wallis test H ( 2, M= 236) =14.16710 p =,0008
NURE 1677
(R:128.52)
0.506736
_:-345
fiWVIS<2007
(R: 11 1.43)
0509738
0212517
This Study
(R:82.047)
OOOOMfl
0.212517
IB^^^^^^B Multiple Comparisons z* values;
^^^^^^^^^1 Sodium, Dissolved mg/1
^^F^™_^B Independent (grouping) variable: Study
• KruskaMWalis test: H ( 2, N= 246) =26.51503 p = 0000
Dissolved
mg/l
NURE 1677
NWIS < 2D07
This Study
Depend.:
Sodium
Dissolved
mo/1
NURE 1677
NWIS «' 2007
This Study
NURE 1977
(R-106.B4)
4:?2?i4
;7_3:jj
NWIS <- 2C07
(R:157.56l
••• : . -
0.186512
This Study
|R:154.63)
D 186512
Multiple Comparisons p values (2-taied);
Sodium, Dissolved mg/1
Independent (grouping) variable: Study
Kruskal-Wallis test: H ( 2, N= 246) =26.51503 p =0000
NURE 1677
o.xcv;-.
C. DC 0578
NWtS < 2007
(R:157.5«)
: . : : -: '
1 000000
This Study
(R:154.63)
1.000000
Multiple Comparisons z* values; Multiple Comparisons p values (2-taried);
Sodium, Dissolved - outliers mg/1 Sodium, Dissolved - outliers mg/l
Independent (grouping) variable: Study independent (grouping) variable: Study
Kruskal-Walts test: H ( 2, N= 245) =25.32440 p =.0000 Kruskal -Wallts test H ( 2, N= 245) =25.32440 p =.0000
NURE 1077
(R; 108.84)
4 045277
3 743471
NWIS < 2007
(R: 155.55)
4.045277
0.058229
This Study
(R: 154.63)
374J47I
3055226
NURE 1077
(R:106.84>
0.000157
C DCC544
NWIS < 2007
(R:155.55)
CCC3-57
! OC30CC
This Study
(R:154.63)
C DCC544
• DCCDOD
^^^^^^^B Muftipte Comparisons Z* values; Multiple Comparisons p values (2-taried);
^^^^^^^H Specific Conductance uS/cm Specific Conductance uS/cm
^^^^^^^^B Independent (grouping) variable: Study Independent (grouping) variable: Study
1 Kruskal WaBis test: H ( 2. N= 260) =36 34579 p =.0000 KruskaMWalls test H ( 2, N= 260) =36 34579 p =.0000
Conductance
uS'cnn
NURE 1977
NWI3< 2007
This Study
NURE 1077
(R_H>928)
5 534715
i .- ^ -. - .^ -
NWIS < 2007
(R4172.80)
5.5347-5
0983314
This Study
(R:157.43)
j5fe&st
3683014
••••••••• Multiple Comparisons z1 values;
^^^^^"^'J Specific Conductance - outliers uS/cm
NURE 1077
(R: 106.28)
C.30C303
C JL ! 'I';
(R:17Z8C)
0 676802
This Study
(R: 157 .43)
0.001126
0.976802
P Multiple Comparisons p values (2-taded);
Specific Conductance - outliers uS/cm
^^MIM^^I Independent (grouping) variable: Study Independent (grouping) variable: Study
1 Kruskal-Walis test: H ( 2, N= 256) =35.58465 p =.0000 Kruskal-Wallis test H ( 2. N= 256) =35.58465 p =.0000
outliers
uS/cm
NURE 1677
NWIS < 2C37
This Study
NURE 1977
(R 107.04)
5 447C23
3561006
NWIS < 2007
(R:170.84i
0.986361
This Study
(R:155.43)
0686091
NURE 1077
(R:107.64t
r ~ —
0.001108
NWIS<2007
IR 170.84)
- r ;
0972265
This Study
(R: 155.431
C JL 1 'C8
0.972265
-------
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Table F5
Summary of Multiple Comparison Test Results
Values
Parameter Test Tested Significant Differences (P < 0.05)
Chloride
Chloride - outliers
Manganese
Sodium
Sodium - outliers
Specific
Conductance
Specific
Conductance
- outliers
Scheffe
K-W MCT
Scheffe
K-W MCT
Scheffe
K-W MCT
Scheffe
K-W MCT
Scheffe
K-W MCT
Scheffe
K-W MCT
Scheffe
K-W MCT
Cl
LnCI
Cl
Cl
LnCI
Cl
Mn
Ln Mn
Mn
Na
LnNa
Na
Na
LnNa
Na
SpC
Ln SpC
Spc
SpC
Ln SpC
Spc
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
(NURE & NWIS) > This Study
NURE > This Study
NWIS > NURE
(NWIS & This Study) > NURE
(NWIS & This Study) > NURE
(NWIS & This Study) > NURE
(NWIS & This Study) > NURE
(NWIS & This Study) > NURE
NWIS > NURE
(NWIS & This Study) > NURE
(NWIS & This Study) > NURE
(NWIS & This Study) > NURE
(NWIS & This Study) > NURE
(NWIS & This Study) > NURE
Table F6
Goodness of Fit Tests for Ba and Sr in Na-CI and Na-HCO3 Type Waters
Only - 95% Confidence
Parameter
Barium
Strontium
Study
NWIS
This Study
NWIS
This Study
Fraction
Recoverable
Total
Recoverable
Total
Normal
No
No
No
No
Gamma
No
Yes
No
Yes
Log Normal
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
F-9
-------
Appendix F Statistical Evaluation of Groundwater Data for Bradford County, Pennsylvania
Retrospective Case Study in Northeastern Pennsylvania
May 2015
Barium
Table F7
Summary of Analysis of Variance and Kruskal-Wallis Results for Na-CI and Na-HCO3 Water Types Only
Parameter N Mean SD
This Study
N Mean SD
Parametric
ANOVA
Degrees of Original
Freedom Values
(Between/
Within) F Stat
12
10,391
28,005
10
1,876
1,805
1/20
0.914
0.351
Log
Transformed
0.884
uon parametric
AN OVA
(Kruskal
Wallis)
0.358
KW
(H Stat)
0.436
0.509
Strontium
12 8,245 22,935 10 3,059 2,400
1/20
0.503
0.487
3.87
0.0632
5.326
0.021
Highlighting Key: P < 0.05; 0.05 < P < 0.1.
F-10
-------
4>EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
PRESORTED STANDARD
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT NO. G-35
Office of Research and Development (8101 R)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
------- |